I agree with you that communication is a problem, in fact one of the recommendations I have made in my Green Papaer comments is that the MSA needs to be more explicit in their communication.
However, I do see that explaining the rationale about any decision can be very difficult, because there is a wide range of understanding and experience among karters, So some people will assume one thing and others will assume another from reading the same words.
Indeed, if you recognise that the people who wrote the Green Paper are at least as intelligent and savvy as we are, then the Grren Paper allows wide ranging discussion. Yet there have been accusations that the document could have been thrown up in the first 5 minutes of reading this forum. ( I know, I was initially disappointed by it and said so). However, if one tries to answer the problems meaningfully it becomes clearer that the simple answers carry a lot of bias and prejudice, even from things as which kart one drives or to whom one has been talking.
But can teh MSA really spend hours documenting the arguments that lead up to a certain decision, or even summarising them? And isn't there more than a suggestion that the MSA know and appreciate this, that club's should have an unbiased 'information officer' who, if the system works correctly, would not only be able to help newbies choose a kart class, but also help explain to their club members why this or that decision has been taken.
Now, I agree the system has to work. People have to be able to go to their information officer and get an explanation, which means the information officer has got to be available (on race day ?), well briefed to start with, capable of dealing with questions from people with strong and fixed opinions and a deal less experience with the politics of negotiated settlements.
I know of at least one well qualified person who has refused to take part in this kind of thing because they cannot be bothered with 'the politics'.
|
|