[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
  • Thread Index
  • Date Index
  • Subject Index

    • Re: Conflicting view of definitions

    Mark,

    They will never be considered "good enough" by those who have an opposing agenda.

    I have studied both the various renditions of the SL definitions and the incomplete ones the FFF Glossary committee has been working on.

    Each uses a different but not fallacious thought process.

    In my humble opinion, neither are perfect.  Both are quite usable, depending on how an instructor wishes to use them.

    Gordy





    On Apr 30, 2011, at 5:54 PM, Mark Surtees wrote:

    Hi Bruce
    To be honest I don't see why the FFF should give any consideration to opinions outside that of its own membership. I have no affiliation to any other instructing organisation other than the FFF, I'm only concerned with what the FFF choose  to put out.

    If they are good enough to do the job for which they have been created then a CBOG endorsement should be a formality and they can be published. There is no obligation on the part of the FFF to take a blind bit of notice of SL or anyone else in this part of the process.

    Post publication is a different matter.

    The question is..are they good enough ?

    Mark

    From: Bruce Richards
    Sent: 30 April 2011 19:12
    To: Mark Surtees; Guy Manning; 'Paul Arden'
    Cc: 'charles easterling'; 'gordy hill'; thegammelfamily@xxxxxxxxx; dksimo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; timr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; flycast90@xxxxxxx; stefan.siikavaara@xxxxxxxxx; simbirsw@xxxxxxx; grunde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
    Subject: Re: Conflicting view of definitions

    ï
    Hi Mark!
    First, many people have seen the FFF definitions, Paul certainly has and I assume shared with the SL group. In the past we certainly discussed them at great length. We haven't publicly published them because they have not been officially accepted by the CBOG.
     
    At this late date, and with the wisdom of hindsight, it would seem that the best plan regarding fly casting definitions would have been to put together a committee of experts from all the various fly casting instruction groups. Each group having their own definitions based on their particular needs/desires will be devisive I'm afraid. First the group would have to agree on a common goal, that is one reason there is division between SL and FFF defs. Then we'd have to make sure that all were equally informed re: fly casting dynamics, the science, not the folklore. I'm not sure this would be possible now since so much work has been done by two groups at least, and sides have been drawn. But I like to dream...
    Bruce
    ----- Original Message -----
    [The entire original message is not included.]