anonymous:I cant
believe the majority of the members voted for one long series.
No one ever said the majority of the members voted that way. All that we can say is that the majority of the votes were for one series. You should put yourself in our shoes Mr. Anonymous
![Wink [;)]](/emoticons/emotion-5.gif)
. We provided a means to gather rider feedback after the series concluded and publicised it as much as possible. I'm not saying that I disagree with your feelings, but I am saying that we put it up to a vote and we constructed the series around the way the votes turned out. Where were your comments when we were voting? What would you have us to do, put it up to a vote and then do it differently than the votes dictated?
I agree that it may be better for some to have two series. If we do anything about this, our first step would be to vote on whether we should vote on splitting the series. I know that sounds redundant, but that's the only fair way to do it. We would also need to publicise it at as many races as possible prior to the voting. Rest assured, this was already a hot topic and is currently being "re-evaluated".
anonymous:Another thing, you have too many races scheduled and their too close
together. Most folks cant afford to race every week. Every two to three
weeks is plenty.
Again, the votes were for 18-20 races with a break in the middle. That's 20 weekends out of 50 or so that are available for races. Then, we had to plan around the other series/holidays. Again, where were these comments when others were voting?
.brit
When in doubt, more gas!!!