Driven Class Trailering

"First you have the crowd with the deep pockets that have had all their cars professionally restored. They buy trailers and attend shows with a ÔÇ£see what I gotÔÇØ attitude just to win prizes and score points. ÔÇ£DrivingÔÇØ seems to be a real dirty word to these guys. Unfortunately they also seem to be the group that has the upper hand on everything within JCNA"

Pete, you couldn't be more wrong about that. Sure, there are the deep pocket guys that use professional restorers, but this is true with any car marque, be it American, British, or German. I know exactly the "kind" of car owner you are talking about. But these guys take just as much pride in their perfect ride as anyone else, and go to great lengths and expense to keep them that way....and many do their own work. And if you spend anytime at all talking to these owners, you will find they are ordinary people and do not have a snobbish aire to them.

I know just as many owners who own "drivers" that drive the crap out of their car, but don't have a clue how to do much more than change spark plugs and put gas in the tank. And when it breaks down, they call a mechanic. And often times, these people drive them hard and put them up wet. They don't flush the hydraulic system or coolant or oil on a regular basis, and often leave old gas in the tank. You know this to be true yourself. It's also interesting that BOTH of your cars "are in the shop right now". Both? You seem quick to criticize those that use "professionals", but then turn around and use them yourself.

There are all kinds of owners with different habits, knowledge, and capabilities in regards to their Jaguars, and for you to perpetuate the stereotype that the trailer queen guys are wussy snobs, and the drivers are all "good guy mechanics" is just plain wrong and ignorant.

Speaking for myself, I own one of those trailer queens, but I did most of the work myself (save painting) over a 25 year period. I invite you to read the story of my E-Type's restoration at www.mcload.com. And while you're at it, read the restoration of the Venus, my current car project, that again, I am doing all of the work on.

Because my cars end up being transported in an enclosed trailer should tell you that I am intereseted in the PRESERVATION of my cars. Yes, the E-Type gets a bit of exercise now and then, but for the most part, I don't want 25 years of work to go down the tube by beating the crap out of it every weekend or to have it broad-sided by an uninsured driver. And I'll bet a dollar to a donut that the guys with showcars spend just as much time on their cars, if not more, than the drivers do with their cars.

I was sorry to see your post and how close-minded you are. Best of luck to you and the two cars "that are in the shop".

Peter,

Sadly Patrick is correct. We have enough trouble getting people interested enough to join and participate, much less take an interest in the governance of JCNA and the local clubs. Of 120 possible AGM delegates, 74 showed up. Kudos to those who participated. We have another couple dozen or so who are interested enough in what happens with the clubs to take part in this dialog. No matter which side of the issue they're on, at least they care about the future of JCNA. We definitely don't represent the vast majority of JCNA members.

Basing a decision about concours participation on this discussion would be like trying to decide if you wanted to live in the U.S. based on what happens in Congress.

If you aren't sure, enter non-judged Display/Enthusiast Class and see what happens.

As I have said before Peter, it depends on the club and the personalities of its members. Don't go by what you see here, it is not Representative of what goes on. As I go for national points, I go to most if not all of the Florida events. We, my wife and I, always have a good time. We have made many friends over the years and get to see them if only once a year at those events. Go to your closest club and see what it is like. If you don't like what you see, go to the next closet one. Remember, you are at the most only going to three or four concourse a year, while you will be with your club members at least once a month. That is what you need to look at. At concurs if you don't want to interact with those there, don't. You'll be loosing a lot of the fun, but that's your choice. The vast majority of club members never log on to the JCNA website, much less participate in these forums. I hope you reconsider about not participating.

Edited on 2008-04-20 22:05:45

Can't say that I blame you Peter....but in all fairness, these guys do not represent the rest of JCNA membership.

Dear all,
I have been gone for the weekend(where else, but to a car show) and I have just had the catch up on all the latest.
First, let me make a correction to one of my earlier posts. I stated that there were driven cars trailered to the Gainesville Concour and I should have said the CC at Chateau Elan. My sincere apologies to the NGCA.

William Jenkins, it seems that you don't particularty care for me and I could really care less. Am I joking about my statement about asking DRIVEN participants if they drove or trailered their car? I guess you will just have to figure this out for yourself. And BTW, enough of all this badgering. I graciously agreeded to not participate any longer in your "Why do you Concours?" post. So how about keeping to the subject yourself.

Edited on 2008-04-20 15:55:36

Geez, Whithead, talk about "childish" responses! Once again, you prove my point that you are once again only adding fuel to the fire. If you look at your posts here, you are NOT being "mature" and very little of what you post has any real "point" at all other than to create yet more controversy and engage in namecalling because that's exactly what you're doing yet you refuse to see that.

Get that huge chip off your shoulder and grow up!

You never did tell us how you're search for Lata clubs is going.....

Jenkins,

Your childish response just proves my point.

Funny, but I only see the one entry from Cusick yet at least 12 from you so I;m not sure how be became "one of the biggest whiners in this thread" as you put it

I kept my response mature and to the point - as numerous others have.

It's those attitudes (and responses) such as yours that bring down the club.

You do not warrant any further responses from me so don't bother trying to egg me on. I'm with Daniel - - No more posts until the Crap stops! How many other will follow our lead?

I'm done . . . .

Mark, as you may know, I have succeeded Doug as the Chairman of the Membership Committee. My approach will be a bit different. I don't believe there is much that JCNA on a national level can do to encourage new or old membership.Its the individual clubs that have that burden. The fact is that when people join the local club, most are not even aware of JCNA when they join. Instead, I have begun to retransmit ideas between the various club presidents and membership chairs. Most club presidents have much more power in recruitment then their chairs, or at least that was the case when I was the JCOF president. We Will have to see how much I can get going. I have had a lot of passive responses to my emails, so time will tell if this works.

Lou,

Good points, including the waxing. Has there been a list of clubs attending, attending by proxy, and not attending published anywhere?

If there's a silver lining to this rumbling thunderhead, it's that it has brought a number of problems within JCNA to the surface. The proxy voting system has to be examined and changes made. We have a year to do that. The driven trailering issue is a detail that hopefully will be resolved sooner than later.

The problems with membership and participation have been floating on the surface for quite a while. Having worked with the past president on JCNA matters for most of his tenure, I can tell you that increasing membership and participation was his top priority. I don't need to re-list the ideas he implemented with the BoD (see his last President's message in the Jaguar Journal), or recount how many thousands of hours he put into the last three Challenge Championships. But it had no effect -- membership and participation remained flat. I do believe Doug Ingram (JCOV) has the right formula and his success bears that out.

I won't repeat Doug's approach because it, too, was in the last issue of the Jaguar Journal. It should be required reading for every club's Concours Director and if they don't have one, the club President. 160 Jaguars can't be wrong.

Doug's success points us in a direction that requires a re-evaluation of JCNA from the top down. I'm not talking about jobs and titles but the mission statement and goals. We've tried adjusting around the edges. We've tried adding areas to broaden our appeal. We've succeeded in creating events that those who have attended have proclaimed were the best they've ever attended. Yet membership and participation have remained flat, and in some cases have declined. That indicates to me that what we're doing at a continental level isn't working. Part of the problem, as you point out, is that we're a decentralized club. We can pass all the edicts we want at the top, but if they don't inspire the local clubs to implement them, the effects will be minimal. Still, I think that's where we have to start.

Go to the JCNA home page and try to find our mission statement. If you do (and it won't be easy), you'll eventually find this:

JCNA VISION STATEMENT
The Jaguar Clubs of North America is the friendliest and best association of Jaguar enthusiasts fulfilling the needs and interests of the members.

I know these things are supposed to be broad, but this is so broad as to be meaningless. It could be the vision statement of a wildlife organization, because it doesn't even mention automobiles. Friendly is good but this doesn't indicate any sort of direction. No wonder we're floundering.

The preface of the Concours Rule Book provides a much better mission statement although it's not stated as such. "The Jaguar Clubs of North America (JCNA), founded on January 16, 1958, exists to promote and encourage a spirit of mutual interest and assistance among owners of Jaguar automobiles, to assist in the formation of local Jaguar owners' clubs and to charter these groups, to provide a means for the exchange of information concerning Jaguar automobiles, and to publish periodic bulletins and magazines containing material of interest to members."

Neither mission statement is found in any other competition rule book and it certainly isn't easy to find on the web site. BTW, if you haven't found it yet, it's at the very end of the JCNA history in the library. Even it's placement as part of the history would seem to indicate that it doesn't have current relevance.

Those of you who are still following this thread (which I'll post anew in the General Issues section) might be saying, "That's kind of nit-picking, we all know what the purpose of the JCNA is." Well, do we? Some might think it's for the fun of getting with other Jaguar owners, others may think it's the competition, others may look at it as excuse to get their Jaguars out on the road. If there's not an overarching mission that includes all those groups, we might as well be a bunch of separate clubs. Moreover, what does it say about the emphasis we place on the concours and competition, if JCNA's best mission statement is part of the Concours Rule Book and nowhere else. I won't say that's the anthesis of friendly, but it certainly seems to conflict with the Vision Statement.

You know, someone mentioned this before, and I won't mention his name for fear of having people reject this suggestion outright, but perhaps we need a top-down re-evaluation of JCNA, it's goals and purposes, how those are implemented, and how we can reinvigorate the affiliate clubs and their members. It doesn't mean we throw everything out and start over, but that we actually review everything and honestly ask ourselves if no change, tweaks, adjustments, or big changes wouldn't benefit JCNA and the clubs. We have a new President and a new board, all of whom are a very dedicated bunch. We have a handful of wildly successful clubs in various parts of the country to inspire us. Perhaps now is the time for new ideas.

If working within the existing framework hasn't made much of a difference; perhaps it's time to re-examine the framework.

Edited on 2008-04-20 13:48:33

keith whithead, you whine about people being "pi$$y" and the "bickering" and engaging in "stone-throwing" yet you engage in the exact behavior which you purport to abhor and then go on sing the praises of one of the biggest whiners in this thread (Cusick). I do agree with Mr. Cusick though that Judges shouldn't be cheating and teaching bias when they train other judges. Now THAT is indeed a very serious concern.

You should have followed your own advice and resisted the urge to throw fuel on the fire because that's all you're really doing at this point.

How's your search going for the Gigolo car clubs? I'll bet there's TONS of them in the USA.

Daniel,

Thank you for adding your post to the thread ÔÇô I am in 100% agreement.

I have followed this thread from the beginning and have refrained from making any substantive postings for two reasons:

1. IÔÇÖve been a member for less than a year and donÔÇÖt fully understand the inner workings of the organization.

2. Just as important (perhaps more so) I donÔÇÖt want to perpetuate the puerile denigration of fellow club members.

The endless rehashing, stone-throwing and (often juvenile) bickering does absolutely nothing to enhance the clubÔÇÖs image or to encourage membership or active participation. As you aptly stated, it certainly serves to give ÔÇ£this entire Organization a bad nameÔÇØ.

Supposedly, the idea behind the rule change (which I, for the record, also oppose) was to encourage greater participation in Concours events. What about NOT discouraging potential members from joining the organization in the first place. Surely, any potential member following this thread would have second thoughts about joining.

Thank you again, Daniel, for your level-headed thinking and the addition of your post. You give me hope ÔÇô For the time being, at least, IÔÇÖll reconsider trading in BLEUKAT for a LADA . ;-)> =^. .^=

Well, two things do help. Lots of wax (I currently have four layers on the car) and to keep it garaged. You'd be surprised how much that helps. One thing that you did not mention, is how many clubs did not even bother to give proxies, and did not have any voice at all. Also from what I understand, many of the proxies were prompted by the proxies holder, not the club. That needs to change. How can we attract and hold members, if the clubs don't have enough interest in running the club? Its the individual clubs that do the recruiting, and if they are as enthusiastic about recruiting as they are about running the club, we are in trouble.

why don't we go one step further and contact every driven entry and tell them to withdraw from the JCNA.

Aren't all of you putting the carriage in front of the HORSE!

Why don't you all just shut up and stay home this year and see if that helps out for next year.

So much bitching about what if.. My god get in your cars and take a drive so you cool down.

Talk of Judges Cheating, and teaching new judges to be bias.
PLEASE your giving this entire Organization a bad name.

What 's next? 200 picketers in front of every Concours event in North America.
You still have time to organize that!

If you really hate this Change then stay home and save your money to attend next years AGM to have it changed .

I can't take all the whinning in at least five different threads.

This is the last post I'll make to the JCNA site until this Crap stops.

I Feel like all the work that went into winning last years
D08B is tarnished by all this bickering.

Good luck to those of Us that worked hard and drove our cars.

George,

I hope your experts are right. I'm certainly not an expert on Robert's Rules of Order, I was just interpreting what I read. To get this overturned on a rules technicality would be the fastest, easiest, best solution.

Then we can let the JCRC solicit input from the membership and present a proposal at the next AGM. (That seems so simple! ;->)

Louis,

That's beyond impressive. Have you or Mike revealed any of your secrets to keeping a driver in perfect condition? The threat of stone chips alone would worry me. I consider them almost unavoidable if you put more than a few miles on a car. The again, living in Arizona, there's not a lot of moisture to hold the soil in place, so they may be more common here.

I agree with you that clubs not sending delegates is a big part of the problem. Not the entire problem, but a big part. I've only carried proxies for another club one time, but I contacted the club president and asked him to check with the members and let me know how they wanted me to vote. I voted their wishes on a number of items, even though that put me in the unenviable position of voting against myself on a couple issues. Of course, if you're blind-sided with a new proposal in the form of an amendment, you have no direction at that point. IMHO, clubs who just hand over proxies without passing their wishes on to the proxy holder are a bigger problem that clubs who forfeit their votes. At least they're admitting that they haven't studied the agenda, don't have an opinion, and aren't aggregating power in the hands of a few individuals.

Trailering might not be an issue if clubs had forfeited their votes. Honestly, I think that if clubs lost their voice if they didn't attend the AGM, that might encourage a few more of them to make the effort to get there. It's an issue for the AGM thread, but I'd like to see the By-Laws amended to prevent a delegate from carrying votes for any club other than his or her home club.

To disagree with you on one point. Both Mike Kruel and I had perfect cars last year (Mike had 3 one hundreds in C-16a and I had 3 tens in D9b). Those cars are our daily drivers. I admit, I don't put much mileage on my car as I am retired, I am not driving to work, but I would not consider trailering it. BTW, I will be in C-16b this year, not because of that rule, but the one that says I cannot take first in class two years in a row. I am a judge and I train new judges. I also administer the test for my club, so I guess I know the rules fairly well, and that might be one way that I can stay ahead of the crowd.

William,

You and I are not far different on our views. I agree that more people should enter their Jaguars in Champion Division. In fact, given that the major distinction between Driven and Champion Divisions has been eliminated, I'd encourage all drivers to enter their cars in Champion (or Enthusiast/Display) this year.

I'm not sure if you are disagreeing with my opinion that the trailering rule is an "Improper Amendment" per the RONR or my position on alternate ways to reverse this decision.

Regarding participation in Champion Division, we don't disagree. I didn't say that there aren't people who drive their cars and enter them in Champion Division. I said that pure concours and driving were "almost completely mutually exclusive." JCNA does not have a "pure concours" in the strict sense of the word, even in Champion Division. The undercarriage and suspension parts aren't judged so that owners can enjoy their cars to a limited extent. However, the fact remains that someone who drives their car regularly is not going to compete effectively in Champion Division, especially against trailer queens. Yes that person may take a first in a local concours against little or no competition, but on a regional or continental level, the trailer queens will always win. Surely you agree with me on this point.

Driven Division used to give an area of overlap where drivers could enter the world of the show-ers and show-ers could appreciate the contributions of the drivers without concern that they were futilely competing directly against the show-ers. If you remember Venn Diagrams from high school math, JCNA without a Driven Division would be two circles, one subset representing each group and a sliver of an overlap between the two. The addition of Driven Division slid the centers of the two circles closer together creating much larger lens of commonality. Drivers could feel pretty confident that they were competing against similarly prepared cars. Yes, there is a little resentment toward the fellow who drives his Champion Jaguar a half mile from his house to the event site and takes a Driven first, but there really isn't that much competition at local concours. The competition lies in regional or JCNA rankings, which require a person to show their car at two or three concours. That would be at least 200 or 500 miles of driving, respectively, in nearly all cases. Most trailer queen owners (no disrespect intended) are not willing to risk driving their cars that far on the open road. Any specific disagreements there?

I don't think a reasonable person can disagree that with the Champion-Lite version of Driven Division, drivers no longer have a reasonable expectation that they'll be competing against people who are willing to drive their cars to events.

I'm certain that the individuals behind the amendment to remove the driving requirement in Driven Division had the best of intentions to increase concours turnout. I'm almost as certain that they came up with this idea at the last moment, hence the apparently pre-planned end run around the usual AGM protocol. The problem is that a decision borne of a know-best attitude, devoid of input from the people it affects, is likely to backfire, and this certainly did.

I hope the decision can be reversed on a technicality or by a special meeting of JCNA before we alienate JCNA's most enthusiastic drivers.

A little more than that my friend . . . . . . . . . . . . .

So Keith, how much do you want to sell your Jaguar for since you're all butt-hurt now an' all?

I'll offer you $3,000.00.

Good Grief - - I was beginning to think this thread was turning into a discussion by reasonable adults - - looks like some folks are gonna start getting Pi$$y again.

You are doing nothing toward encouraging me to remain an active member

What kind of club have I joined? I'm about ready to sell my 'DRIVEN' BLEUKAT and seen if there is a LADA owners club

Edited on 2008-04-19 10:09:11

Mark Stephesnon, I very much disagree with your assessment regarding the difference between Championship and Driven.

I drive both of my Jaguars regularly and show in Championship and my cars are very competitive in that class. Regarding my X300, by "regularly" I mean that I put over 20,000 miles on it last year. This is also the case with MANY other people as well who show in Championship.

You also draw a whole lot of conclusions and make far too many assumptions about the entire JCNA membership as a whole that I also very much disagree with. I'm not sure you know where the line is between your personal biases/opinions and simple facts are.

I'd still like to know if Mike Fulton and Stew Cleave were wearing their clown make up when they said they would deliberately discriminate (specifically Stew, what are your "unwritten rules?") against those who trailer their cars and enter them in Driven.

Louis correct! That is exactly why JCNA had adopted the policy of NOT putting NEW unknown motions on the floor at the AGM. In the past this had happened and many times it became the source of rancor and frustration.

To go a bit further... George and I have talked about this in the past. If you or your club did not send a delegate, then the problem is with your club, not the AGM. For the record, I voted against, but I was outvoted. I know that many voted with five, ten, even twenty-five proxies. I have my club contact me months ahead of time, to get their ideas on how I should vote. I have proposed two things in the last few years that have both passed (family membership and the splitting of the preservation class). Both of those originated with my members and both have passed. Unfortunately, many of the delegates are not active participants in the events and/or have little knowledge of the inner workings of said events. This is entirely the individual club's fault, not the BOD, Executives, or for that matter the AGM as a whole. I would never vote a proxy if I did not know how they wanted me to vote for them. Better yet send someone who is knowledgeable. Don't complain about bad rules if you opted out of the vote in the first place. One final point. at the time of the vote, I believe there was a lot of confusion about for what we were voting. That is no excuse (and the minutes will not clarify fully what happened), but that is the change and I for one will follow it in my judging and judge's training that I perform.

There were a few typos in the above and Mark I was only addressing the first part to you. The "questioning" part was directed to other post--sorry.

Mark as in anything with "Law" there are opinions--I sat down last week with 3 "experts" and let them look at all the documents available (yes still no mins.) and their opinion was that the move was not germaine. In fact they used the non-Roberts' phrase "hi-jacked". You are correct that someone with a better knowledge of RROR is at a great advantage but then this was never a contest to most. Your comments of a "scheme" and disturbing but perhaps well stated. That should be the most unsettling part of these discussions and in my feeble mind lead me back to the quest for stopping large block proxys.. As far as Mike--Stew--and Bob I am glad to consider all 3 gentlemen, friends, and very dedicated JCNA members and hard working JCRC members. Stew and Bob are responsible for the bulk of the judging guides which represent thousands of hours of work that they could have used for their own purpose--give that a little consideration when you question their motives. As I write this Stew Bob and I are working on Appendix E to the JCNA judging guide-(which by the way I have asked for imput from JCNA membership and have hade none)---for the most part we do not agree with the guide--hell I hate it--but I am (as they are) doing the very best job I (we) can to make it happen. So add my name to theirs when you slam them. I will be proud if they let me stand beside them.

Dick,

I believe it's faint hope, because I don't know of anything in the By-Laws that permits them to reverse a decision of the delegates at an AGM. As far as a parliamentary challenge goes, I reviewed that and it doesn't look too hopeful.

Per RONR (Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised ) Section 33:

Improper Amendments. An amendment is not in order which is not germane to the question to be amended; or merely makes the affirmative of the amended question equivalent to the negative of the original question; or is identical with a question previously decided by the assembly during that session; or changes one form of amendment to another form; or substitutes one form of motion for another form; ...or is frivolous or absurd....

While one could argue that not placing any requirement that Driven Division entries be driven is absurd, the real question is, is the amendment removing the driving requirement from Driven Division at all germane to the original proposal to require judges to witness all judged entries being driven into position?

RONR illustration following section 33:"Suppose a resolution pending directing the treasurer to purchase a desk for the secretary, and an amendment is offered to add the words, "and to pay the expenses of the delegates to the State Convention;" such an amendment is not germane to the resolution, as paying the expenses of the delegates is in no way related to purchasing a desk for the secretary, and is therefore out of order."

However, because the amendment allowing trailering of Driven Division entries to the concours site is part of the same rule to which the JCRC rule clarification attached, I fear that it would have to be considered germane. There's a lot of talk in the RONR Amendment section about amending paragraphs, and I suspect that once you open up a paragraph for modification, anything in that same paragraph would be open to amendment. (Something to think about when you do the next Rule Book rewrite.) ;-)

It appears whoever concocted this scheme did their homework and effectively piggybacked on the JCRC proposal in such a way that when they had their votes lined up, they were beyond challenge. RONR are powerful weapons in the hands of those who know how to wield them.

An alternate avenue of remediation, contrary to one of the board members statements early on, is that per the JCNA By-Laws, a majority of the membership, of the clubs, or of the Board of Directors, can ask the President to call a special meeting to address specific issues. Unfortunately it would have to be an AGM like meeting, which would be a little unwieldy, but perhaps, with agenda items published well in advance, the requirement that the delegates only deal with the specific items, and the admonition that they get the clubs' input along with their proxy, the proxy system might work.

The only reason I bring up the "nuclear option" of boycotting Driven Division (certainly not concours, however) is that two board members couched the success of the trailering amendment on participation. The unspoken conclusion is that if it's up (e.g. a bunch of trailer queens enter Champion-Lite Division along with the regular drivers) then there won't be any changes or the changes won't be as close to the original rule as we would like. However, if participation in Champion-Lite Division plummets, that will be a clear indication of the breadth and depth of the dissatisfaction and we'll have a much better chance of reverting to the original intent of Driven Division. Call it sabotage if you like, but we didn't make the rule that participation is the yardstick of success or failure. If we want the rule changed, I don't see any logical alternative but to boycott Champion-Lite Division.

By the way, William, I agree that drivers are hung up on the word "driven." Your suggestion to rename Driven Division is good. A and B work, but I'm kind of partial to Champion and Champion-Lite (half the judging of regular Champion, but with all the same competition).

As always, Dick, your efforts are incalculable and very much appreciated.

I still have hope that JCNA BoD or the Executive committee will find cause to suspend or otherwise reconsider the precipitious AGM decision which allowed trailering in all JCNA concours divisions. A full transcript of the AGM proceedings has not yet been released and, when it is, the concerns which follow may change. This opinion is offered with an accurate knowledge of what JCRC presented. It does not represent a committee position or recommendation.

1. Robert's Rules.
The initial JCRC AGM, new business proposal, added language emphasizing the need for the Chief Judge, or his designee, to observe that all Entries were moved to their assigned parking positions under their own power. Trailering was not the subject of this or any other JCRC AGM proposal or motion.

After this JCRC motion was seconded, a Director/delegate? made a motion to amend the language, prohibiting Driven Division trailering, found in a (separate) part of the rule. The trailering aspect of the rule was neither being changed nor being discussed.

Point of Parliamentary Order? (Help welcomed.)
In that "trailering" was not the subject of the (seconded) motion under discussion, it is believed that a "motion to amend the trailering language" was improper and should have been denied. It wasn't.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Failure to notify and represent the membership?
Since being introduced, 15 years ago, JCNA's Driven Division has been defined by its trailering prohibition and its allowance that the Engine compartments and Boots will not be judged. These allowances were made with the understanding that Driven Division Entries were being driven regularly.

Removal of the trailering prohibition represents a major change to the overall concept of the JCNA Driven Division. The impassioned (mostly negative) reaction, to this change, gives strong support to the understanding and general enforcement of the term "driven" when identifying the division and its Entries.

Whether or not the by-laws require it, it is inconceivable to me that such a significant change could have been proposed or made without any advance notice and without any of the delegates having first conferred with their parent clubs or the clubs for which they held proxies. Lacking such communication, when this change was voted on at the AGM, the delegates had to be representing themselves and no one else. That's not the way representative organizations are supposed to reflect the majority wishes of their constituents when making major decisions.

For the time being, I advise all JCNA Judges and Chief Judges to "chill out", live with the new rule and (sorry) "don't ask, don't tell". JCRC will solicit your input and figure out how to restore the intent of Driven Division.

Illegitimus Non Carborundum!

Dick Cavicke
JCNA, Chief Judge,
Chair, JCRC

William,

I was being facetious, but the point remains that this was a very divisive decision, the ramifications of which the crowd (for want of other, less complimentary synonyms) behind it had no concept, although they should have gotten a clue based on the debate that took place.

Driven Division plays a pivotal role in the JCNA community. There are basically two large subsets of JCNA membership -- the show-ers and the drivers. Each has it's own set of priorities, and the two groups have a generally pleasant sort of rivalry. "Jaguars were meant to be driven, not trailer queens" vs. "Jaguars are works of art; I wouldn't dare drive them."

Objectively, both viewpoints are correct, but each group seems a little wacky to the other. Show-ers must consider drivers reckless to the degree they play in traffic and drivers consider the show-ers obsessive-compulsive.

The two groups are almost completely mutually exclusive. You can't drive a Jaguar regularly and expect it to be competitive in a pure Concours d'Elegance. The only place where these two ownership philosophies overlap is in Driven Division. Drivers get a tase of what Champion Division entrants endure and show-ers can admire a very nicely prepped Driven Division entry even if wouldn't do well against trailer queens. If Driven Division becomes a place for trailer queens with unkempt engine compartments and boots (or perhaps with a detailed ones, but not quite show-winning quality), you've eliminated the only link between the two factions. We really become two separate clubs, under one banner, for now. That's why I called the decision short-sighted.

P.S. Pascal and I exchanged e-mails. Refreshing a page does resend the message, so I've stopped doing that. Also, if your session times out because you got sidetracked or whatever, you'll lose are your personal information in the post. When I've been waylaid, I copy the text, logoff, logon, and paste the text back into the reply box. It seems to be working.

William,

I was being facetious, but the point remains that this was a very divisive decision, the ramifications of which the crowd (for want of other, less complimentary synonyms) behind it had no concept, although they should have gotten a clue based on the debate that took place.

Driven Division plays a pivotal role in the JCNA community. There are basically two large subsets of JCNA membership -- the show-ers and the drivers. Each has it's own set of priorities, and the two groups have a generally pleasant sort of rivalry. "Jaguars were meant to be driven, not trailer queens" vs. "Jaguars are works of art; I wouldn't dare drive them."

Objectively, both viewpoints are correct, but each group seems a little wacky to the other. Show-ers must consider drivers reckless to the degree they play in traffic and drivers consider the show-ers obsessive-compulsive.

The two groups are almost completely mutually exclusive. You can't drive a Jaguar regularly and expect it to be competitive in a pure Concours d'Elegance. The only place where these two ownership philosophies overlap is in Driven Division. Drivers get a tase of what Champion Division entrants endure and show-ers can admire a very nicely prepped Driven Division entry even if wouldn't do well against trailer queens. If Driven Division becomes a place for trailer queens with unkempt engine compartments and boots (or perhaps with a detailed ones, but not quite show-winning quality), you've eliminated the only link between the two factions. We really become two separate clubs, under one banner, for now. That's why I called the decision short-sighted.

P.S. Pascal and I exchanged e-mails. Refreshing a page does resend the message, so I've stopped doing that. Also, if your session times out because you got sidetracked or whatever, you'll lose are your personal information in the post. When I've been waylaid, I copy the text, logoff, logon, and paste the text back into the reply box. It seems to be working.

What about those people who enter in Driven who drive their cars to the show but never anywhere else?

(Just to be perfectly clear, I'm now putting on my clown make up, my red nose and funny big shoes from this point on in this post)

I tell ya, that's just plain not fair. You wouldn't believe it, I was at a concours two years ago and there was this cheater who had a 1985 XJ6 that only had 4,000 miles on it. He even told me that he ONLY drives it to and from the concours and he only lives a few miles from the show field.

We need a new rule, if you're going to enter in the old "Driven" class which is now Class A, you MUST provide written documentation that you drive your car at least 10,000 miles per year dammit! Not only that, you must certify that at least 2,000 of those miles were driven when it was raining and just to be fair, you should drive on at least one dirt road in a twelve month period.

Hi Mark, Stew and I thank you for the compliment and I promise that I'll never again kid you about talking to much at an AGM or writing messages that take 15 minutes to read!! You mentioned giving up, or trying to, the CJ job and it made me think about addressing your club about judging on a least one occasion, probably 15 years ago, which raises the question of have you been the CJ ever since then? Please don't try to discourage people from entering the new driven class as it would only be hurting your club and not who you are upset with.

Mark, are you part of the circus or are you serious? Honestly, it's really hard to tell with some of you guys because quite frankly, part of me finds most of your most recent post to be just plain laughable.

So a rule gets passed that you don't agree with and now you're going to actively engage in undermining the entire JCNA organization. Either you're being a jokester here along with the rest of the clowns or you're acting like a six year old who didn't get his way and now you're going to throw a temper tantrum.

Way to be a "team player" there Mark! I'm not fond of the new rule change either but I'm certainlly not going to engage in sabotaging my club's concours this year or the other ones across the country either.

I hope you're mature enough to reconsider your position OR it's not too late for you to use the chucklehead defense as well, nyuk, nyuk.

Regarding Mr. Smale's comments, I think some people are reading too much into the NAMES of the separate classes here. Instead of calling them "Driven" and "Championship" how about "Class A" and "Class B." Heck, just so you hyper-sensitive driven class clowns don't get all pushed out of shape, you get to be "Class A" and us Championship schmucks will accept "Class B" as our new place in life. I mean after all, in your minds those who trailer their cars just aren't up to your standards are they?

So from now on the only difference between Class A and Class B is that in Class B, your engine compartment and boot are judged and in Class A, you don't have to have the factory radio or factory wheels and tires. Entrants in both classes are allowed to trailer their cars to the concours until such rule is changed at a future AGM but until then, no whining about it. How's that sound?

If the trailering rule does change for Class A, entrants can go back to the old system of unloading their trailered cars in a parking lot down the road and around the bend so no one will see that you did that.

Perhaps the solution is for all the judges who vehemently disagree with this rule, and who feel they can't honestly judge or preside over judges in a fair and unbiased manner, should resign their posts and let the clubs fill their posts with people of similar competence (not likely in the case of people like Stew and Bob).

I was not going to Chief Judge this year, a decision I made prior to the AGM. To date I've not been replaced. I've been reconsidering so I could actively dissuade club members from entering Driven Division.

To me it is really quite simple Driven Class is driven.

If it is trailered it is not driven.

Someone who cares enough to drive a Jag to an event and show it in the best possible light still has the general risk of the dings, chips and scuffs of using a car on the road. That way the owner has the fun of entering a car that at least is driven to some degree and is on as level a playing field as can be expected.

It does not seem very fair to me to compare that, to something that is trailered and could well be pulled out of someones personal museum and never used on the road.

This would only discourage participation.

Edited on 2008-04-18 16:42:53

I see Robert is now using the ole "chucklehead" defense! It's all just a big joke, right? SURE, we ALL knew THAT!!

You guys are all just a big bunch of goofy ole clowns with funny noses and make up!

If you, Fulton and Cleave are all just funnin' us then so am I there you little jokester, I'm just playing along with the big gag, I'm sure you knew that you silly boy!

My money is still on Fulton being dead serious with his plan to discriminate against those who show in Driven and trailer their cars, "chucklehead" defense notwithstanding.

Sigend,

The funny ole lighthearted, jokester and stand-up comedian from the JCSNE who was just joshin' you fun-lovin' jokesters all along!

Nyuk, nuyk, nyuk....

William, I guess that you don't recognize tongue in cheek, I'm sure that Stew did. I certainly hope that the JCNA event held the last of July attracts enough cars to the new trailered/driven class to make up for all of the hard feelings created at the AGM. I would greatly appreciate if someone with authority would address the question that I asked Steve on 4-11.

Said the President to his Board of Directors one day: ÔÇØIÔÇÖve got it! IÔÇÖve studied our By-Laws carefully, in particular, ARTICLE I, Section 1, and I know how we can best promote interest in motoring and at the same time promote enhanced driving standards and encourage skillful driving on the public highways ÔÇô all three part of its stated objects and purposes.ÔÇØ His Board of Directors cried: ÔÇ£How, Mr. President, tell us how?ÔÇØ And the President said: ÔÇ£WeÔÇÖll let everybody trailer their cars to all Concours events.ÔÇØ ÔÇ£Brilliant! Brilliant!ÔÇØ exclaimed his Board. Then the Delegates, those present and others by proxy, voted in the affirmative and the meeting was adjourned. And so it came to pass.

The one before McLoad was me.

I agree with Mr. McLoad, JCNA won't attract members if Chief Judges are allowed to blatantly violate rules and instruct their judges to openly discriminate just because they don't agree with certain rules then we certainlly won't attract new members and we will discourage people from particiapting in concours.

If you don't like a rule, lobby to have it changed. Chief Judges ARE NOT above the rules and DO NOT have authority to make up their own rules.

Fulton has no right or business to ask a driven entrant if he trailered his car or not. If I were at a show and he asked me this discriminatory question, I would immediately report him to the Chief Judge. Unfortunately if the Chief Judge were someone with a mindset like Cleave who not only sanctions discrimination and unfair treatment but actually encourages it, then we REALLY have a problem here.

Every Chief Judge I have worked with would NEVER do this no matter what his personal views were.

It absolutely amazes me that some people refuse to understand this.

I think Pascal should delete this whole damned thread. No wonder JCNA can't attract new members.

Oops, meant to say Stew! If you knew Stew you sure wouldn't be doubting his integrity, regardless of what he says here! Please explain and give me an example of what you mean by personal agenda? On second thought forget as I do not wish to continue this conversation with you!

Edited on 2008-04-18 11:27:12

Robert, who is "Steve?" I'm talking about Stew Cleave and Mike Fulton.

My comments are not "insults." Fulton claims to be a judge and is openly admitting he will violate the rules and what's worse is Cleave is a Chief Judge who has an even larger responsibility to maintain the integrity of the rule book and follow ALL of those rules no matter what his personal biases or prejudices are.

Just because these two don't like a rule, that does NOT give them the right to blatantly and openly violate the JCNA rule book AND punish unsuspecting entrants just because they have an axe to grind and a personal agenda.

That is the real "insult" here. Don't you dare whine and point the finger at me for pointing out the obvious.

William Jenkins
JCSNE

William, That post was pretty insulting which leads me to believe that either you woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning or do not know Steve or anything about his integrity! Is he pis-ed about how this, what amounts to a new class, was pushed through at the AGM, damn right, and many of us believe rightfully so!

I can't believe what I'm reading here from Fulton & Cleave. What you two are promoting borders on criminal. What's worse is Cleave is supposedly a "Chief Judge." So Stew, do you regularly make up your own rules and instruct your judges to just do as they damn well please and ignore the rule book just because you have a personal agenda or an axe to grind? If that's the case, you have no business being a Chief Judge. Don't count on Doug Dwyer supporting your blatantly violating the rules, unlike you Stew, he has integrity.

Just because Fulton and Cleave don't agree with a rule that was voted on and PASSED at the AGM, they have told us all publicly and right out here in the open that they are going to deliberatly violate the rules and make up their own and then go on to unfairly punish entrants who are indeed playing by the rules.

You two make me sick and there is absolutely no excuse for your behavior and attitude.

Stew & Mike, Shame on you! Are you really going to be extra critical when judging a driven?? class car that arrives on a trailer? It's rather funny that this comes up as one of the very first times that I ever judged an old timer told me that he considers the 1st small paint chip a freebee on any car that is driven to a Concours but if the car is trailered, especially in an enclosed trailer, that wasn't the case.

Dan,

Thanks for the quote and attribution. The only reason I'm suggesting a boycott of Driven Division is because some of the folks who supported the rule change have taken a wait-and-see attitude, as in "Let's see if it affects turnout."

Well, if it doesn't, it will be harder to convince anyone to change the rule back. If, however, we feel strongly that this rule rips the soul out of Driven Division and we want it changed, our best strategy is to sit out a year -- not sit out of concours participation, just Driven Division. Maybe you can convince Jane to sacrifice the bling for one year, in order to preserve Driven Division for future generations. ;-)

Our only other immediate option is to call a special JCNA meeting, by organizing a petition drive of nearly 3000 members or 33 clubs or 8 Directors (assuming there are 15 BoD members).

Any Directors out there want to see if you can get seven of your colleagues to call for a special session to re-examine the trailering rule?

Mike ,
Your approach has got to be the best solution I've seen so far and you can bet your sweet bibby that it will be taught at JOCO's Judges' School on the 27th of April in at MacTarnahan's in NW Portland starting at Noon. Sometimes the unwritten rules are the best rules!

Doug Dwyer,
Contact me - JOCO would be proud to have you at our Judges' School!

Doug,
AMEN. George is right on. I admire those that drive their cars, sometimes great distance, to attend shows. I only wish that I was brave enough to do the same.
Mike

Edited on 2008-04-17 23:35:10

Some good discussion here. After all the point and counterpoints, pros and cons, speculations about what will or won't happen....at the end of the day I think it all comes down to what George said:

"It's contrary to the objective and spirit of the Driven Class"

And while one may dispute objectives, the "spirit" aspect unquestionably takes a beating at the hands of the rule changers.

Cheers
DD

When judging driven division cars, I will now make it a point to ask the owner if he drove or trailered his car. Will it make a difference ? You bet your sweet Bibby it will!
Mike

Edited on 2008-04-17 20:15:31

Edited on 2008-04-17 19:54:32

Edited on 2008-04-17 19:54:07

1. I agree with Jane -- D-Class should be a mindset ... and Jane should know that she IS more a car-euthusiast than my wife insofar as my wife would NEVER read any of these posts (EVER!).

2. Our new and vexing rule change should have had some sensible restrictions like the local CJ's pre-approval on criteria like: vehicle-age, distance travelled, special vehicle provenance, safety, driver disability ... whatever.

3. I did not think to even worry about this new rule change because I could NOT even fathom getting a trailer and towing vehicle (!) to show our XJ-S in D08-A or that anyone else would unless he/she had an EXTREMELY RARE CAR (I'm thinking SS-100 owned by Sir Lyons' mom or the like).

4. I never gave a second thought to D-Class participants running-out to buy/rent/steal trailers ... I know I won't .

5. I ain't gonna knock a guy/girl who tows a Jaguar with another Jaguar to enter both cars in D-Class either ... he/she would be a super-trooper and super-supporter in my books.

6. And Mark said:

"Let me be very clear that I'm not saying don't attend concours. That hurts the clubs
and all the people who volunteer to organize the events. Either proudly enter your
driven Jaguar in Champion Division (because really, what's the difference?) or kick
back, relax, and enjoy the concours as part of the display contingent."

... Whoa - I flat out disagree with that comment.
Our XJ-S will enter locally in D08-A as usual (and maybe squeeze in an out of town show). Our XJ-S will be driven and I don't care what the next guy/gal does/does not do in his/her trailer or with his/her trailer, in any class.

7. I also don't care about a fellow entrant's shammies, potions and other tricks of the trade.

8. More importantly, I won't smeck the local or area judges for an AGM decision by boycotting the D-Class and I am not interested in being UNjudged OR judged in C-Class in the company of the (very nice) zippo mileage trailer queens THAT ARE in the C-Class where they SHOULD BE .... my engine will be staying greasy...

BTW, in 2006 we saw two cars score 100.000 points in championship classes and I believe both cars drove to the show and one of the cars drove from Ontario to Michigan (was that year it was raining?).

D Lokun

'90 XJ-S, etc. (NC Regional Champ in 2005 and 2006, Class D08A ... no trailer!)