Timeslip Database Moderator.

[Tallboy]

I would like to humbly suggest we appoint a Timeslip Database Moderator. You want to post a timeslip? Fine. Send a copy to the moderator who will post the actual info. You should not be allowed to post there without a timeslip. Period.

Another idea would be to make it impossible to post without first scanning a timeslip.

[Rider90]

I would like to humbly suggest we appoint a Timeslip Database Moderator. You want to post a timeslip? Fine. Send a copy to the moderator who will post the actual info. You should not be allowed to post there without a timeslip. Period.

Another idea would be to make it impossible to post without first scanning a timeslip.

Just ask gagfish to remove his if it bothers you so much :D

[Tallboy]

Just ask gagfish to remove his if it bothers you so much :D
I know Gagfish. I've met him and hoisted a few beers with him. I do not doubt his car's capability, as both my friends who run Nitrous have turned faster E.T.s than me.

When I view the database I click on "Cars with proof of E.T."

This was just a suggestion.

[CRUZTAKER]

Or we could continue to video tape our really really good runs....;)

Timeslips...we don't need no stinkin' timesplips....we got video!!!:P

[merc]

Or we could continue to video tape our really really good runs....;)

Timeslips...we don't need no stinkin' timesplips....we got video!!!:P

I got a video tape of your run Barry.

[Rider90]

I got a video tape of your run Barry.
Post it :D

[merc]

Post it :D

I don't have the disk space on this site.

[martyo]

Timeslips...we don't need no stinkin' timesplips....we got video!!!:P


MMmmmmmmm.....video! :P

[SergntMac]

We have been over this before, and once again IMHO, no timeslip scan is necessary. Honor system is fine, you have seen what happens when the numbers don't match, and what good is it to post a time that you can't replicate real time? Slips can be photochopped anyway, and no moderator, or, additional safeguards change that. IMHO, it should be for Marauders only too, just my .02c...

[Bradley G]

At this point it would be nice to be able to update it at all.:alone:

I'm stuck on page five,despite a .65 better E.T. and just under 4 mph faster.I could move up 20+ spots if the site allowed me to update.
I promise not to post a slip that was "simulated":D
Bradley G

[Smokie]

Nothing with Timeslips will change unless Logan approves and finds the time to make the change. Having said that....these are my thoughts.

This is a Mercury Marauder Club. I would like to see the DEFAULT display MARAUDERS only. ALL ENTRIES should be a display option for those that care.

We have times entered where the DETAILS of the Mods. do not match the ACTUAL mods at time the run was generated, so we don't know what exact mods. produced the stated run. To list all current mods and dynos and whatever you want to disclose about your car we have the GARAGE. The TIME should match the mods for that run.

I don't have a problem with the honor system, we all know our cars well enough to spot numbers that don't match.

Ok, I'm done, off to work.

[Bradley G]

Thanks Smokie I was not aware of that.
And thank you for your suggestion.
How does one motivate Logan to update the time slips page?
If he is too busy,Maybe one of the moderators could help?
Or, if they are too busy, maybe Logan could appoint someone to keep this forum current.
I agree with a forum for just Marauders cause that is what I look there for.And maybe If you no longer own a Marauder:confused: ,the info could be accurate.


Nothing with Timeslips will change unless Logan approves and finds the time to make the change. Having said that....these are my thoughts.

This is a Mercury Marauder Club. I would like to see the DEFAULT display MARAUDERS only. ALL ENTRIES should be a display option for those that care.

We have times entered where the DETAILS of the Mods. do not match the ACTUAL mods at time the run was generated, so we don't know what exact mods. produced the stated run. To list all current mods and dynos and whatever you want to disclose about your car we have the GARAGE. The TIME should match the mods for that run.

I don't have a problem with the honor system, we all know our cars well enough to spot numbers that don't match.

Ok, I'm done, off to work.

[CRUZTAKER]

Yeah...what ^^^ they ^^^ said.

Rider...I can't post video here either. I have alot of my runs.

Bradley...you're right man!

Mac, your'e so right ....

Smokie....right on as well...

You too Marty, video gooood...

[MM03MOK]

Brad - spell out your changes exactly and let me see what I can do. Since I don't have a timeslip (but I will soon!!!!), I've never paid attention to how the page works.

LOGAN: when you go to this link, the page is blank: http://www.mercurymarauder.net/forums/profile.php?do=edittimeslip
Nor do the timeslips show when you click on Slip.


At this point it would be nice to be able to update it at all.:alone:

I'm stuck on page five,despite a .65 better E.T. and just under 4 mph faster.I could move up 20+ spots if the site allowed me to update.
I promise not to post a slip that was "simulated":D
Bradley G

[MikesMerc]

IMOHO I don't understand the point of a "timeslips" page without timeslips :rolleyes: I think you should have a timeslip to post. My 2 cents.

[mpearce]

I'll throw in also.

Just add a new search criteria to the drop down list. "Marauder Only" That makes it quick and easy. It might force people to add the word "Marauder" into their ride section, but thats not hard to do.

Don't really care for Chevys (Impalas etc) being listed in our timeslips page. I'm sure they have plenty of pages of thier own to post on. Those entries are just "clutter" to me. Panther types, mustangs, machs...good comparisons...I dont mind them.

As far as posting actual timeslips...whatever. My timeslip magically turned into my icon, not much I can do about that.

-Mat

[MM03MOK]

Brad-lee! You move from 75 to 52!! Until it's "fixed," if anyone wants to PM me your new data, I'll edit your timeslip. :D

[Bradley G]

Mary thank you,Now if you are very slow in updateing all those that PM you,I can stay @ 52nd for a moment.

Bradley G


Brad-lee! You move from 75 to 52!! Until it's "fixed," if anyone wants to PM me your new data, I'll edit your timeslip. :D

[Merc-O-matic]

Just for the record, How do you Post a Time Slip anyway?
Everytime I go to the Timeslips Thread, I get a blank screen
whichs says "done".....This has happend for the past month.
Any help will be appreciated. Thanks.

Gotta Love It! :P

[Smokie]

Just for the record, How do you Post a Time Slip anyway?
Everytime I go to the Timeslips Thread, I get a blank screen
whichs says "done".....This has happend for the past month.
Any help will be appreciated. Thanks.

Gotta Love It! :PGo to quick links, choose Edit Profile..... and lie to us.:D

[MM03MOK]

Go to quick links, choose Edit Profile..... and lie to us.:DYou beat me to it, Javier! :bows:

[Smokie]

You beat me to it, Javier! :bows:Only temporarily Mary, with your S/C Blackbird I will be...way behind you from now on....:D :beer:

[Merc-O-matic]

Smokie, Thanks...I'm in. 15.404 at 93.05 MPH
and I'm legit!

Gotta Love It! :P

[MARAUDER S/C #5]

Timeslips are :bs:, like Serg said they can be altered so they don't prove anything. I will rely on my Beltronics Performance Timer-Accelerometer and the honor system. The BPT-A is the most accurate accelerometer- based performance computer available to within 50 milliseconds after fine-tuning setup items for the specific car. With this unit I don't have to travel all the way to a track and have to pay to get timed runs. I can do it on my "private track" close to home, and anytime I want. I know alot of you need to have an audience to try to impress so you choose the track, but I don't. I also don't want to travel 2 hrs to get a timeslip when I can make an accurate run in my own backyard for free. So go ahead and tell me that my computer isn't accurate and I will ask you what makes you think the timers at the track are any more accurate?
http://www.beltronics.com/fx.html
:neener:

Btw, this is a Marauder site and the .25 mile times page should be for Marauders only.
:P

[King Fubar]

Is that outside of the garage on a street or do you put it on jackstands in your back yard??






j/k :poke:

[MARAUDER S/C #5]

Is that outside of the garage on a street or do you put it on jackstands in your back yard??






j/k :poke:

:stupid:




n/k:rolleyes:

[Bradley G]

Probably had to play in the sandbox alone!:D

Bradley G

[mpearce]

Rick, no flame on you at all, just a different side to the coin. :)

I don't know about other peoples agendas here, but for me this is how I see it.

I go to the track because I grew up loving the track. I grew up watching people race the cars they owned, built...whatever. I don't go to the track to pay for a time slip. I don't go to the track to impress an audience. I also don't go to the track impress anyone here. I go because I finally have a car that I can take to the track and have fun with. Not some beater truck like in high school, so I could watch everyone else have fun. The track is nothing but fun for me. It's a hobby, and something thats shared by my fiancee as well. In fact only 3 MM's on this board run faster times than she does, and her car has 2 less cylinders. The track I go to is used by the pros, and is a pro track. The IHRA world nationals are held at Norwalk raceway. Because they run 3's and 4's in the 1/4 mile @ over 300mph...I assure you their clock isn't off.

-Mat

[FordNut]

I go to the track to run it too. But posting timeslips based on an estimate instead of a real timeslip is a lie.

[Merc-O-matic]

Timeslips are :bs:, like Serg said they can be altered so they don't prove anything. I will rely on my Beltronics Performance Timer-Accelerometer and the honor system. The BPT-A is the most accurate accelerometer- based performance computer available to within 50 milliseconds after fine-tuning setup items for the specific car. With this unit I don't have to travel all the way to a track and have to pay to get timed runs. I can do it on my "private track" close to home, and anytime I want. I know alot of you need to have an audience to try to impress so you choose the track, but I don't. I also don't want to travel 2 hrs to get a timeslip when I can make an accurate run in my own backyard for free. So go ahead and tell me that my computer isn't accurate and I will ask you what makes you think the timers at the track are any more accurate?
http://www.beltronics.com/fx.html
:neener:

Btw, this is a Marauder site and the .25 mile times page should be for Marauders only.
:P
What the hell is a "private track" close to home?....using Beltronics :bs:
Let's tell "Big Daddy" Don Garlits the timers/
computers at the track are no good....his runs don't count.
BTW Mr. Gasket called and said he don't need no Mickey Mouse Timer
to impress his fans.

Gotta Love It! :D

[Bradley G]

Now that racing season is in full swing,I need the fastest :bunny: to help me update my time slip once again:help:

What do you say?:bunny2: will you help me again?:sunshine:
Bradley G

[MM03MOK]

Now that racing season is in full swing,I need the fastest :bunny: to help me update my time slip once again:help:

What do you say?:bunny2: will you help me again?:sunshine:
Bradley GBrad-lee! Can you get to this page? http://www.mercurymarauder.net/forums/profile.php?do=editprofile

If not, sure, I'll do it!

[Bradley G]

Linky no workie:cry: Page opens info posted no sticky?

Bradley G


Brad-lee! Can you get to this page? http://www.mercurymarauder.net/forums/profile.php?do=editprofile

If not, sure, I'll do it!

[MM03MOK]

Linky no workie:cry: Page opens info posted no sticky?

Bradley G52 >>>>>> 36!!

[BillyGman]

Some people simply miss the point.......posting timeslips, and the ability to do so isn't about bragging (atleast not for some of us anyway). It's about giving various board members the privilage and the ability to compare modification combinations to one another and their results, such as power adders running with different rear end gear ratios.


I've explained this before, but it just doesn't sink into some skulls out there....

Look at mine and "Jet's" car. Both are S/Ced, while one car has more boost, and the other has a taller gear ratio. With all the timeslips numbers (including the 60' times, 330' times, 1/8mile ET, quartermile ET and trap speeds, people can tell who's car jumps out to take an early lead (which is particularly of interest to traffic light racers) and who's car is stronger in the initial 1/8th mile, and who's car comes on stronger in the second 1/8th mile. All that info is a direct result of our choice of modifications, and people can gain alot of knowledge about how both of our cars accelerate differently simply by viewing ALL the info that the TIMESLIPS provide.

Some people like having far superior acceleration on the highway at crazy top end speeds, while others place a stoplight stand-off as more of a priority. Timeslips info can answer questions for each group as to what certain modification combinations can do for their Marauders as opposed to others. I don't know how else I can explain this to get some people to understand that. What is so difficult about this to understand?

[Bradley G]

Hey BillyGman!
That is precisley why I go to the time slip page,look who is ahead, check thier mods and deceide if those are practical/attainable.:D
As far as the Brag-a-dosha is concerned,that is entirely based on intent.Hard to make that call from the keyboard;) .Bracket racing eliminates the Mine is faster than yours syndrome.
At the strip yesterday, the bracket winner had a SRT-4 running low 14's:P
Bradley G
ps. thank you Mary!
Some people simply miss the point.......posting timeslips, and the ability to do so isn't about bragging (atleast not for some of us anyway). It's about giving various board members the privilage and the ability to compare modification combinations to one another and their results, such as power adders running with different rear end gear ratios.


I've explained this before, but it just doesn't sink into some skulls out there....

Look at mine and "Jet's" car. Both are S/Ced, while one car has more boost, and the other has a taller gear ratio. With all the timeslips numbers (including the 60' times, 330' times, 1/8mile ET, quartermile ET and trap speeds, people can tell who's car jumps out to take an early lead (which is particularly of interest to traffic light racers) and who's car is stronger in the initial 1/8th mile, and who's car comes on stronger in the second 1/8th mile. All that info is a direct result of our choice of modifications, and people can gain alot of knowledge about how both of our cars accelerate differently simply by viewing ALL the info that the TIMESLIPS provide.

Some people like having far superior acceleration on the highway at crazy top end speeds, while others place a stoplight stand-off as more of a priority. Timeslips info can answer questions for each group as to what certain modification combinations can do for their Marauders as opposed to others. I don't know how else I can explain this to get some people to understand that. What is so difficult about this to understand?

[SergntMac]

I've explained this before, but it just doesn't sink into some skulls out there...I don't know how else I can explain this to get some people to understand that. What is so difficult about this to understand?What makes you think your not understood?

[MikesMerc]

I go to the track to run it too. But posting timeslips based on an estimate instead of a real timeslip is a lie.

Agreed. If you haven't run on a real 1/4 mile track, then you don't have a real timeslip.

And for all those that beleive a timeslip is just too much trouble for a "timeslip data base" then the page should be changed to the "performance data base." That way everyone can just make up their numbers, make educated guesses, or use little electronic gimmicks to make really educated guesses without having to post a timeslip. Like I said in another thread, this "timeslip" page we have here is a joke without timeslips :rolleyes:

Don't get me wrong, the honor system is fine. Posting about what we think our cars can do is fine. I just don't get why we call it a timeslip database :confused:

Why is it called a "timeslip" database if you don't have timeslips? Can anyone answer that?

[Bradley G]

Hey Mike!,

Because you can tell by looking if it is legit or not.I don't agree that posting what we feel our car should run is ok.If thier is a descrepancy, the members seem to have a handle on the legitimacy of the data.If the numbers don't make sence the members can police the accuracy.This has already occured several times that I have seen.If you claim is so outragous maybe it could be that a slip is necessary.
Otherwise I don't have a scanner or copier.
And posting what a Gizmo says your car does is not worth the effort.:twocents:
Bradley G

Agreed. If you haven't run on a real 1/4 mile track, then you don't have a real timeslip.

And for all those that beleive a timeslip is just too much trouble for a "timeslip data base" then the page should be changed to the "performance data base." That way everyone can just make up their numbers, make educated guesses, or use little electronic gimmicks to make really educated guesses without having to post a timeslip. Like I said in another thread, this "timeslip" page we have here is a joke without timeslips :rolleyes:

Don't get me wrong, the honor system is fine. oPosting about what we think ur cars can do is fine. I just don't get why we call it a timeslip database :confused:

Why is it called a "timeslip" database if you don't have timeslips? Can anyone answer that?

[SergntMac]

We're posting the same arguments we posted last time we discussed this, and almost word for word. It's didn't get us anywhere last time, just more database abuse since then. Somebody write a short list of basic rules we can vote on, and run past Logan. If not, see y'all back here in six weeks.

Bracket racing eliminates the Mine is faster than yours syndrome. At the strip yesterday, the bracket winner had a SRT-4 running low 14'sWay I see it, bracket racing is more driver skill and control over the machine, than it is machine performance. When you think about how bracket racing is structured, it's more like each driver competes against himself. Dial in your ET, launch, drive, and get as close to your dial-in as possible without breaking out, and then, it's the faster car that wins.

Don't get me wrong, the honor system is fine. Posting about what we think our cars can do is fine. I just don't get why we call it a timeslip database :confused: Why is it called a "timeslip" database if you don't have timeslips? Can anyone answer that?Nope. I'm thinking maybe it's a generic label, called a timeship database because it's a plug-in to web site software that manages drag racing data, like a gallery manages photos? Whatever, why not change just the name?

[Bradley G]

Mac,
I agree with your statement on skill in bracket racing.

As Far as it surfacing again and again,maybe this gets the grease!:P
Bradley G
PS great Idea on the "fly it passed Logan "
Cause it ain't going to change without:D
Bradley G

[BillyGman]

What makes you think your not understood?Because some people who've debated with me before on other threads in the past about the need for timeslips are still making statements about there being an absence of any value of having people post timeslips on here.

[TechHeavy]

Bunny, PM sent. If you can't post the slip, at least the info for now? Thanks! :)

[BillyGman]

I don't understand why we just can't have the ability to post our timeslips by ourselves like we used to be able to. Why was that option removed?

[TechHeavy]

I don't understand why we just can't have the ability to post our timeslips by ourselves like we used to be able to. Why was that option removed?
Billy, I just chatted with Bunny and she's reporting the problem to the "boss". I wasn't aware that the info is automatically added when your profile is updated. The problem right now is posting timeslips, but has been noted.

[BillyGman]

Billy, I just chatted with Bunny and she's reporting the problem to the "boss". I wasn't aware that the info is automatically added when your profile is updated. The problem right now is posting timeslips, but has been noted. Thanks for your reply Dave, and for your efforts.

[duhtroll]

Right - I'm one of those people.

Every aspect of a timeslip can be included in a database without me having to buy a scanner. It ain't even the cost that stops me - it's the waste of only ever using it for this one-time event and figuring out what to do with it afterwards.

I don't even think I know of someone who *has* a scanner. My school used to have a few of them, but they break within 3 weeks of purchase. But I digress.

Every single bit of info -- except the actual slip itself, which some people see as some sort of holy grail, can be included.

I'll give you any info you want about the car, but until I have easy access to a scanner I ain't posting no slip. I'll even give you witnesses from this board that saw the car make the run.

If you want the database info that was missing, it's easier for the mods to simply add 2-3 fields to the database than it is to add more graphics to the site. Text takes less space and less effort.

Of course, then there's the whole argument that I keep coming back to, and I'll repeat it.

The only reason for folks "demanding" timeslips is because they want proof that numbers happened the way they did. It's the only reason. Everything else can be typed into the DB as easily as I just typed this post.

Either we trust each other or we don't. On that note, I am certain I can find a way to doctor a timeslip if I had to -- even one that is undetectable. A timeslip means literally nothing.

Heck, I'll just grab some guy's discarded ones that read 12s. Then I'll have a 12-sec N/A Marauder.

Besides, if I ever get a decent one I'm framing it and it's going on the wall. If you want to see it make a visit.

Bring donuts.

-A

[BillyGman]

can you tell me what your 330' times are? And what about your 1/8th mile trap speed amd 1/8th mile ET? And if so, why is it that most people haven't listed their 330' times in the "timeslips" data base? And while we're at it, pleae tell me why I should have to write to you to ask you for such info when it can be listed on there along with all the other info in one shot by posting a timeslip? As it stands now, there aren't any provisions in the "timeslips" datavase for people to list their 330' times, nor their 990'/1,000' times. And a timeslip includes all of that.


And I know plenty of people who DO have scanners such as myself. they're not all that expensive anymore. You make it sound like they're all $1,000 or something.

[duhtroll]

Everything you just posted is addressed in my last post, so I won't bother here.

See above ^^^^^

-A

[Tallboy]

The reason I started this thread was because I see a need for someone to "oversee" the data entered, regardless of whether or not a slip is posted.

However, the membership here has proven it is able to "police itself" by :bs: when we sense something is just not right. It doesn't mean some folks don't "approximate" their car's performance and post info.

I still say you should have to post a timeslip. A real one. Could you doctor a timeslip or grab a discarded one, as duhtroll suggested? Sure. That's where the mods list comes into play, my guess is :bs: would be called if things didn't add up.

Anyone who posts incorrect or approximated numbers is only fooling themselves and doing a disservice to this community.

These are my thoughts. Yours may differ.

[I don't own a scanner. My timeslip was posted by a friend who does.]

[FordNut]

The reason I started this thread was because I see a need for someone to "oversee" the data entered, regardless of whether or not a slip is posted.

However, the membership here has proven it is able to "police itself" by :bs: when we sense something is just not right. It doesn't mean some folks don't "approximate" their car's performance and post info.

I still say you should have to post a timeslip. A real one. Could you doctor a timeslip or grab a discarded one, as duhtroll suggested? Sure. That's where the mods list comes into play, my guess is :bs: would be called if things didn't add up.

Anyone who posts incorrect or approximated numbers is only fooling themselves and doing a disservice to this community.

These are my thoughts. Yours may differ.

[I don't own a scanner. My timeslip was posted by a friend who does.]
I have argued the other side in the past, but am leaning more toward the "must post a timeslip" school of thought these days. It just never occurred to me that anyone would post "simulated" data instead of actual track data. I thought we were above that type of behavior.

That being said, I do not have a timeslip posted but I will get one in there soon. I think Logan has a full plate at the moment with the Gallery!

[BillyGman]

Everything you just posted is addressed in my last post, so I won't bother here.

See above ^^^^^

-ASo your solution to this is to have people have to write to everyone on the timeslips database simply in order to find out their 330', and 990'/1,000' times? That isn't very efficient to say the least, and defeats the whole purpose of having a "TIMESLIPS" list in the firstplace.:rolleyes:

Like I previously stated, I don't see what is so difficult for some people to understand about this.

[duhtroll]

No, Billy. That is most definitely NOT my solution.

Read the post again.

-A

[Paul T. Casey]

Got mine in finally. It's a good way for me to check if there are any quicker N/A, stock geared, 90K Marauders. There are none. I'll scan it in when I get home.

[Bradley G]

I think the same format as the slip itself is neat.I like to compare each catagory,as Billy said the 330' time and 1000' is useful too.If you can't be honest with yourself and the board, you should have your privilages removed.
I looked at my 1/8 mi. stats and they are backwards from time/speed.
I don't want to bother the moderators for each little correction.
Bradley G

[MikesMerc]

Because you can tell by looking if it is legit or not.

Bradley, unfortunately this doesn't answer my question of why we even bother calling the database a timeslip page. If it doesn't require a timeslip, then its just not a timeslip page...period.




The only reason for folks "demanding" timeslips is because they want proof that numbers happened the way they did. It's the only reason.


Wrong. There is another much more basic reason that simply eludes you. Its called posting timeslips on the timeslip page....what's hard about that to understand? Just look around at some of the other automobile enthusiast websites that have a timeslip data base...there are plenty. And what do you see when you look at them?....that's right...timeslips...what a shock. :rolleyes:

If getting a simple slip scanned is that major of an event for anyone, my deepest sympathies. But, frankly, posting a timeslip should simply be the price of admission for entering data on a timeslip page rather than lowering the bar for those who don't want to be bothered to stop at the local Speedy printers for a 25 cent scan.

*sigh* I don't think I've ever seen an enthusiast site that was so wishy washy on this type of stuff. I think this could be the only place where an arguement could develop on whether timeslips should be posted on a timeslip page. Go figure.

Mac has the right idea. We should just change the name to the "this is what I think my car can run" database. At least that would more accurately describe it:)

Oh well, this thread is doomed to go nowhere. I'll retire from this fun topic:)

[MARAUDER S/C #5]

Everything else can be typed into the DB as easily as I just typed this post.

Either we trust each other or we don't. On that note, I am certain I can find a way to doctor a timeslip if I had to -- even one that is undetectable. A timeslip means literally nothing.

Heck, I'll just grab some guy's discarded ones that read 12s. Then I'll have a 12-sec N/A Marauder.
I agree. Lets rename it, The .25 Mile Times Page.
No timeslips required. List all your other data and if no one believes it or likes it thats fine. I believe alot of timeslips are altered so they don't prove anything. Its all based on whether you trust/believe the person.
If my perf. comp. data means nothing to some, thats fine because their timeslip means nothing to me. Your only real proof is to see the car run in person. The gizmos they use at the track are no more accurate than the perf. comp. I have which may be more accurate, they are all made by the same companies. I don't have to go to a track to get an accurate .25 mile time with my :canada: built muscle car. :P

[duhtroll]

Scanners are totally obsolete for anything other than archaic media such as scanning old photos into analog/digital archives and the like. I will never buy one as I will never need one. It's about as pointless as copying all my home movies to VHS.

So, your beef is that we're calling it a "timeslip" page, even though people are not required to have a timeslip posted in order to show their times?

In another word, semantics?

Or is it that I'm (or others are) unwilling to drive to the local shop and pay for/wait for a scan just to prove to you my time is valid? You're kidding, right? (assuming anyone gives a flying rat's patootie about my time, which no one here does)

I have a digital camera and my timeslip sitting basically right in front of me. It would take all of 2 minutes to take a pic of it and post it. It's still not worth my time to do it. Why? The information is already posted. Once the database is expanded for additional data the entire contents of the timeslip will be posted.

This is a Marauder site which happens to not require the purchase of a Marauder in order to post, or even be a member. As long as we're being exclusionary . . .

A Marauder site shouldn't lower the bar for anyone who doesn't have the decency to stop by the local used car lot and buy a Marauder. :D

There should be no argument about timeslips - in that you are absolutely correct. The only problem is that there should be no argument because requiring a slip of paper as proof is really, really pointless.

-A



Bradley, unfortunately this doesn't answer my question of why we even bother calling the database a timeslip page. If it doesn't require a timeslip, then its just not a timeslip page...period.




Wrong. There is another much more basic reason that simply eludes you. Its called posting timeslips on the timeslip page....what's hard about that to understand? Just look around at some of the other automobile enthusiast websites that have a timeslip data base...there are plenty. And what do you see when you look at them?....that's right...timeslips...what a shock. :rolleyes:

If getting a simple slip scanned is that major of an event for anyone, my deepest sympathies. But, frankly, posting a timeslip should simply be the price of admission for entering data on a timeslip page rather than lowering the bar for those who don't want to be bothered to stop at the local Speedy printers for a 25 cent scan.

*sigh* I don't think I've ever seen an enthusiast site that was so wishy washy on this type of stuff. I think this could be the only place where an arguement could develop on whether timeslips should be posted on a timeslip page. Go figure.

Mac has the right idea. We should just change the name to the "this is what I think my car can run" database. At least that would more accurately describe it:)

Oh well, this thread is doomed to go nowhere. I'll retire from this fun topic:)

[FordNut]

I agree. Lets rename it, The .25 Mile Times Page.
No timeslips required. List all your other data and if no one believes it or likes it thats fine. I believe alot of timeslips are altered so they don't prove anything. Its all based on whether you trust/believe the person.
If my perf. comp. data means nothing to some, thats fine because their timeslip means nothing to me. Your only real proof is to see the car run in person. The gizmos they use at the track are no more accurate than the perf. comp. I have which may be more accurate, they are all made by the same companies. I don't have to go to a track to get an accurate .25 mile time with my :canada: built muscle car. :P
Force, Kalitta, Garlits, Amato, etc would be surprised to find their records are no more significant than could be achieved with a ten cent toy.

[MikesMerc]

I agree. Lets rename it, The .25 Mile Times Page.
No timeslips required. List all your other data and if no one believes it or likes it thats fine.


This would be better than what we have now. At least people wouldn't waste thier time looking in there for timelsip info that doesn't exist.




The gizmos they use at the track are no more accurate than the perf. comp. I have which may be more accurate, they are all made by the same companies.

Unfortunately the technologies are completely different. On one hand its a simple timer from beam to beam. On the other, some g force sensing gizmo that interprolates your distance, speed, and time to distance. Its pretty simple to see that there are far more variables involved that can influence the result in the second technology.

Not saying those gizmos don't work...its just that they MUST be set up perfectly to produce any trust worthy results. In fact, I've seen first hand how "off" those things can be. We had a G-tech Pro at the NHRA sanctioned track last year that was .3 to .5 sec off every single run...some too slow...some too fast. Always wrong though. IMO those devices are nice for approximation but that's about it.

But, I digress. I agree that we should just lower the bar so everyone can get thier numbers in:)

[FordNut]

Scanners are totally obsolete for anything other than archaic media such as scanning old photos into analog/digital archives and the like. I will never buy one as I will never need one. It's about as pointless as copying all my home movies to VHS.

So, your beef is that we're calling it a "timeslip" page, even though people are not required to have a timeslip posted in order to show their times?

In another word, semantics?

Or is it that I'm (or others are) unwilling to drive to the local shop and pay for/wait for a scan just to prove to you my time is valid? You're kidding, right? (assuming anyone gives a flying rat's patootie about my time, which no one here does)

I have a digital camera and my timeslip sitting basically right in front of me. It would take all of 2 minutes to take a pic of it and post it. It's still not worth my time to do it. Why? The information is already posted. Once the database is expanded for additional data the entire contents of the timeslip will be posted.

This is a Marauder site which happens to not require the purchase of a Marauder in order to post, or even be a member. As long as we're being exclusionary . . .

A Marauder site shouldn't lower the bar for anyone who doesn't have the decency to stop by the local used car lot and buy a Marauder. :D

There should be no argument about timeslips - in that you are absolutely correct. The only problem is that there should be no argument because requiring a slip of paper as proof is really, really pointless.

-A
I don't think it is so much a matter of posting a copy of the piece of paper as it is in the fact that some members don't think it's even necessary to go to the track to get a timeslip, they just post up what they THINK their car will run IF they ever get the cajones to take it to the track. That's hogwash.

[MARAUDER S/C #5]

Force, Kalitta, Garlits, Amato, etc would be surprised to find their records are no more significant than could be achieved with a ten cent toy.You're right about them being surprised, but would they feel the need to post their timeslips to validate their times? And its not a ten cent toy, its a $200.00 perf. computer.

:fishslap:

[MikesMerc]

So, your beef is that we're calling it a "timeslip" page, even though people are not required to have a timeslip posted in order to show their times?

In another word, semantics?

Yep. Its pretty much that simple.


Or is it that I'm (or others are) unwilling to drive to the local shop and pay for/wait for a scan just to prove to you my time is valid?

Its not about validity, its about posting a timeslip on a timeslip page.



I have a digital camera and my timeslip sitting basically right in front of me. It would take all of 2 minutes to take a pic of it and post it. It's still not worth my time to do it. Why? The information is already posted.

Then it is clear you are not familiar with what a timeslip database is. And if you don't understand the point of it, it isn't worth trying to explain it to you.



This is a Marauder site which happens to not require the purchase of a Marauder in order to post, or even be a member. As long as we're being exclusionary . . .

If you think you have a good analogy here, then, like I already said, it's quite clear you are not familiar with what a timeslip database is.




There should be no argument about timeslips - in that you are absolutely correct. The only problem is that there should be no argument because requiring a slip of paper as proof is really, really pointless.

Unfortunately this comment again goes straight to the point about you being very unaware of what a timeslip database is. Did you go look at a few other sites to see what one really looks like? I thought not.

It sad that all you want to do is point to the "validity" argument instead of opening up your mind to what others think may be important. To many of us that visit the track frequently, we take our racing and performance with a certain level of seriousness. Although we have fun at the track, we also enjoy the mental aspect of comparing facts and figures provided by timeslip. It's a shame that just because you do not share that common level interest you are so quick to disreguard it as unimportant.

You should try checking out a few other site's timeslip's dbase. You might learn something.

[nomad]

I'm confused. I always thought guys like Ford Nut, Zach, Techheavy, BillGman and MI2QWK4U[twice] were upstanding people?
None of them have their slips posted,what's that all about?
P.S. Capers made me even fatter than I was. :rolleyes:

[FordNut]

You're right about them being surprised, but would they feel the need to post their timeslips to validate their times? And its not a ten cent toy, its a $200.00 perf. computer.

:fishslap:
I know what it costs, I have one too. However I would never use it as a source of data for the timeslips page.

[MARAUDER S/C #5]

Oh well, this thread is doomed to go nowhere. I'll retire from this fun topic:)

:dunno:......already out of retirement?

[MARAUDER S/C #5]

I know what it costs, I have one too. However I would never use it as a source of data for the timeslips page.
:rolleyes: Didn't you hear, it isn't an actual timeslips page. :bop: :lol:

[MikesMerc]

:dunno:......already out of retirement?

Yep:) Can't leave the thread hanging in the sorry state its in:)

[MARAUDER S/C #5]

You just did.................:D

[MikesMerc]

I'm confused. I always thought guys like Ford Nut, Zach, Techheavy, BillGman and MI2QWK4U[twice] were upstanding people?
None of them have their slips posted,what's that all about?



I don;t know what the "other guys" think, but this has NOTHING to do with the integrity of those that post on the timeslip data base in my opinion. Slips can be photchopped anyway.

My point is simply that a good timeslip data base has TIMESLIPS in it! That's the whole point to a timeslip dbase.

I guess my opinion is jaded by the fact that I frequent a few other sites that have real timeslip dbases. I find them fascinating to review and compare. The data is great and the level of "beleive-ability" is improved. Its all around a great thing to have if your an enthusiast into that kind of thing.

But, here on MM.net, I can see that we need to water things down a bit and lower the bar so as to keep our less inclined members happy. So be it:)

[MikesMerc]

You just did.................:D

Yes I did! Oops! I did it again :fishslap:


EDIT - and BTW, PLEASE don't misconstrue my passion for the hobby as a personal attack on anyone here. I'm just picky about stuff like this becuase its my "thing" and I take it seriously...probably too seriously:D But, in the end, friendships here are far more important than some stupid timeslips, so my apologies to anyone offended by my posts:)

[FordNut]

:rolleyes: Didn't you hear, it isn't an actual timeslips page. :bop: :lol:
Gee, the link I clicked on to get there says "timeslips" not gadget data.

[Tallboy]

I'm confused. I always thought guys like Ford Nut, Zach, Techheavy, BillGman and MI2QWK4U[twice] were upstanding people?
None of them have their slips posted,what's that all about?
P.S. Capers made me even fatter than I was. :rolleyes:
TechHeavy posted his slip in his thread. Billy has been unable to post his slip because the database is screwed up right now.

[FordNut]

TechHeavy posted his slip in his thread. Billy has been unable to post his slip because the database is screwed up right now.
And I just scanned mine, it'll be posted soon.

[mpearce]

How about we make 2 databases?

A "timeslips" database, and the...

"Beltronics Performance Timer-Accelerometer honor system database"

That way everyone is happy.

BTW, (no flames meant) but a 13.3 is a pretty good estimate with a perf. timer, but I bet that Trilogy could do much better than that at a real track. Just my opinion though.

-Mat

[maraudernkc]

I have not posted on the Timeslip page because I don't have a timeslip.

I think the heading says it all. I think you should have a timeslip to post on the timeslip page. Can you make one up? Yea but who in the heck would waste there time making up a timeslip?

I would like to think that no one on this board would.

I feel that the timeslip page should also be for Marauders only!

Some people have stated that it's not that important to be up close to the top but who are you kidding.

I will be out at Kansas City Inernational Raceway this Week to get my timeslip and I would love to be in the top ten but my time will be what ever it will be. :burnout:

[BillyGman]

I'm confused. I always thought guys like Ford Nut, Zach, Techheavy, BillGman and MI2QWK4U[twice] were upstanding people?
None of them have their slips posted,what's that all about?
P.S. Capers made me even fatter than I was. :rolleyes:Yes, you're very confused as well as uninformed too. Because the fact of the matter is, that I had a timeslip posted on there (in fact I posted two of mine on there) and then when I managed to run a better time several months later, I deleted the old timeslips so that I can post a new one with a slightly better time, only to find out that I'm no longer able to post any timeslips on the part of this board that is still called a "TIMESLIPS" database. So why don't you tell us what else you're so informed about?

I agree with what Mike said. I cannot believe such a lack of enthusiasm that this board has about Marauders on the dragstrip, that we're actually having an argument and objections to timeslips having to be posted on a "Timeslips" list. The very least that we should have if some people are just too cheap to take a ride downtown to pay for their timeslip to be scanned (IF they really have one) is the ability to input all of the info in this "timeslips" list that our timeslips include (such as 330' times, and 1,000' times).

True drag racers will understand the need and value for all of that info to be listed for comparisants sake. Because otherwise, that list must only serve as some quartermile ET bragging rights page. And I for one had no intention of simply bragging when I posted my timeslip. I mean what's there to brag about? So I have a low 12 second car. Big deal. There are cars at the track that are much faster than mine is.

[Rider90]

JuJu's make my teeth sore, who wants to trade for popcorn w/ light butter?

[duhtroll]

It sad that all you want to do is point to the "validity" argument instead of opening up your mind to what others think may be important. To many of us that visit the track frequently, we take our racing and performance with a certain level of seriousness. Although we have fun at the track, we also enjoy the mental aspect of comparing facts and figures provided by timeslip. It's a shame that just because you do not share that common level interest you are so quick to disreguard it as unimportant.

You should try checking out a few other site's timeslip's dbase. You might learn something.

The "validity" argument is the only one left in the hopper.

The information can be there with 2 or 3 fields added to the database (I think that's the third time I've stated this) and it would be easier than forcing people to add graphics.

Therefore, the information will be *identical* to that of an actual timeslip.

I've seen a few other sites' timeslips databases. So what? We have to do exactly what they do?

I am not saying that *you* wanting *your* timeslip (posted) is unimportant. You are entitled to do whatever you like with your timeslip. I am saying you requiring *my* timeslip is unimportant.

You made the point I am trying to make - some of us don't take this as seriously as do others. Maybe we should have a separate site for "Real Serious Marauder Owners," and leave "us" here on the obviously watered-down site.

I suggest www.mercurymaraudersandnoriffr aff.net.




I agree with what Mike said. I cannot believe such a lack of enthusiasm that this board has about Marauders on the dragstrip, that we're actually having an argument and objections to timeslips having to be posted on a "Timeslips" list. The very least that we should have if some people are just too cheap to take a ride downtown to pay for their timeslip to be scanned (IF they really have one) is the ability to input all of the info in this "timeslips" list that our timeslips include (such as 330' times, and 1,000' times).


And yes, Billy, I do have several timeslips. I will have a few more in a couple weeks after the Cedar Falls meet. I am far above being goaded - gave that up in high school. :)

At least you've made it clear that validity is the concern. I just want people to know the crux of the matter. It has nothing to do with information and everything to do with "I don't believe your times." (which is also moot as I could make or borrow one)

I am perfectly OK with some people believing that my times are "less valid" than others because I didn't scan the slip. It doesn't say anything about me. It does, however, say something about those who complain.

Were I a serious competitor, I'd be sure to have slips up there for my own bragging rights. Hell, I'd post them just to show I have two consecutive runs with cut times of 0.05 and 0.04, respectively. (regardless of ET that's pretty cool IMO) I just don't care if folks believe me that badly.

-A

[SergntMac]

The "validity" argument is the only one left in the hopper. The information can be there with 2 or 3 fields added to the database (I think that's the third time I've stated this) and it would be easier than forcing people to add graphics.

I am perfectly OK with some people believing that my times are "less valid" than others because I didn't scan the slip. It doesn't say anything about me. It does, however, say something about those who complain. -A
I agree, and one of the reasons I have not entered this "race."

I agree that 1/4 mle data has a scientific value to others here, but I disagree that posting an image of the actual slip is necessary. Maybe I'm just too old to get it, but IMHO, this is silly macho *****, again. I've said this before, but I don't think many of you caught it. Perhaps now you will?

I don't post my timeslips, or, dyno graphs for one reason. I can't.

I can't because they do not exist as documents I can scan.

They don't exist because I average all my stats from one day's activities, and later by the season as the season matures. There have been exceptions to this for special reasons, but by and large, when I post a stat, it's an average of all performance data from that day's activity, or, cumulative to that day in the season. Even my "before and after" mod testing, is three pulls each, and averaged. Whether it be 60' times, or, RWTQ, it's an average, because I want my friends to get the most true 411, not my best ever on a lucky day.

My first MM was a solid 14.2x performer, and when I sold it, I promised the new owner 14.2x, or better, depending on his driving skill. I told him it had 275 RWHP and 301 RWTQ because I knew he could take it to any dyno in the country, and see those numbers, or better. This is fair, and valuable for both of us. With X mods, you get a 14.2 or better, and it's not dependent on air temps, humidity, track preparation, or, questionable timing.

When I took over the Kenny Brown 1x, I got two packets of timeslips I do not include in my averages, because they are not my slips. One packet has slips stating 11.86 and 11.78 with Top Fuel driver Brendan Bernstein at the wheel for the SpeedChannelAutoWeek presentation. The second packet was from testing during development at the IRP, best of which is 12.79. When the BunnyChick brought my 1x home from MV-II, she handed me a handful of slips, she's a solid 13.3 driver behind my wheel (you go Girl, anyone want to bet against her?). I could brag of these times, but don't because I didn't earn them. My first season produced solid 12.8x performance, and today, it's a 12.4x car, at this time.

My point is, is that the best times the 1x has earned, are not reliable, repeatable consistent times. Could anyone buy a KB Marauder S and run 11s? No, they wont. Could they run 12s on the way home from Kenny's shop in Indy? No. But, if they were to buy my 1x right now, today, they could run 12.4x all day long anywhere in the country, depending on driver's skill. I like the rationale of "do this mod = get this performance", this is what our database should be about, but we won't get there by sticking to the data from our best ever performance, we're just sticking it to each other.

I've said ^ there that we'll be having these discussions until we agree upon rules, and I think honor among men will have a lot to do with this. Yes, I have visited other timeslip databases, and I see folks who wish to, 1) elbow their way to the front of the line, or, see their "team" hold the top ten positions, or, b) exclude others from their earned position in that line, and use what ever reason available at the time to sustain the argument, and I've seen "lack of timeslip" elsewhere. Until we get past that, we will not agree.

We have held these discussions several times now, the first discussion was stimulated by who in the top ten did not have an actual slip scanned in. The second discussion erupted when a member listed an 1/8th mile time on a bowtie gasser that landed his entry in the #1 spot. After that, it was non-Marauder times mixed in (an argument that remains today), which was followed by discussions of times that were just made up by the member because he felt his car would someday produce them, and now it's "simulated" times produced by a gadget. Furthermore, I have seen among us, members who now dis gadget timing when they once swore by it themselves, and members braging of running "consistent" times, just find out it was only twice. Ditto when we turn to dyno stats. IMHO, we will not come to any agreement on how to treat this data, until we agree on what purpose and value this data represents to us.

Personally, I'd love to see a turn around, knock off posting the best time ever on a lucky day, and replace that with average seasonal performance. At least this is closer to the truth, about all of us.

Oh and BTW, my last batch of timeslips are from US. 41, where they just installed a whole new timing system. Anyone want to compare "ET @ 594 feet"? 7.445 thank you!

PS. Nothing personal meant towards anyone here, I'm just reflecting on history, and my own personal experience.

[Tallboy]

^^^ This why my posted timeslip is actually not my car's best run. It's my car's best run with me behind the wheel. Two other drivers have turned faster times in my car than I have. My car has run consistent 13.1X 1/4 mile times on multiple runs on three different days with three different drivers.


I fear this discussion stands little chance of reaching a successful resolution.

[martyo]

^^^ This why my posted timeslip is actually not my car's best run. It's my car's best run with me behind the wheel.

Hmmmm....I assumed that everyone's slip was their own personal best. Is that not the case?

[Tallboy]

Hmmmm....I assumed that everyone's slip was their own personal best. Is that not the case?I was referring to the 13.1 1/4 mile timeslip. I have turned 13.1 in my car several times. I personally do not include hundredths of a second in my discussions of 1/4 mile times. I included the hundredths of a second info in the database because that is the format here.

13.1 is my own personal best.

I cannot speak for others.

[BillyGman]

Hmmmm....I assumed that everyone's slip was their own personal best. Is that not the case?Which is just one of the reasons why I'm glad to see you running your own car now Martin.:D

[martyo]

Which is just one of the reasons why I'm glad to see you running your own car now Martin.:D


Billy: My plan always was to run my own car. I just know that there are some guys that are better shoes than me. Meanwhile, I am pleased to note that I still have the best time in my car (literally and figuratively). A few of my friends/mechanics have been making passes to get data on the car and that makes sense to me too.

On an unrelated note, I took the car out this weekend and went cruising by myself to a Friend's house outside of Atlanta. I have to say, that I really felt like a bad ass! This car is just plain fun!! :cool:

[Tallboy]

Billy: My plan always was to run my own car. I just know that there are some guys that are better shoes than me.
Must be nice. Both my buddies can run my car faster than me. Maybe one of the reasons I don't drag race too often is that I'm not very good at it. Or, maybe I'm not very good at it because I don't drag race too often.:dunno:

[BillyGman]

Billy: My plan always was to run my own car. I just know that there are some guys that are better shoes than me. Meanwhile, I am pleased to note that I still have the best time in my car (literally and figuratively). A few of my friends/mechanics have been making passes to get data on the car and that makes sense to me too.

On an unrelated note, I took the car out this weekend and went cruising by myself to a Friend's house outside of Atlanta. I have to say, that I really felt like a bad ass! This car is just plain fun!! :cool:And I know that you will continue to get better times out of that animal with the passing of the months. My hopes and expectations are high for you pal.

[MikesMerc]

The "validity" argument is the only one left in the hopper.

The information can be there with 2 or 3 fields added to the database (I think that's the third time I've stated this) and it would be easier than forcing people to add graphics.

Therefore, the information will be *identical* to that of an actual timeslip.

Wrong again I'm afraid.

Many timeslips include the Race Track name, date, weather conditions (such as temp, bar pressure, and humidity), as well as the altitude of the track. This is VERY pertinent information that seasoned racers know to look for when making comparisions and drawing conclusions. Not all slips have this info, but many do...and its important information to have when it is available.

So, we can spend a bunch of time re-writing the data base to accomodate all this info, or we can just simply have the time slips posted.

I guess I just do not understand why you, or anyone else, would want to go through MORE effort just to avoid posting the slips :confused:



I've seen a few other sites' timeslips databases. So what? We have to do exactly what they do?

Nope. We don't have to do anything. Point is, though, what's the point of a timeslip database without timeslips?

And if you have seen a good timeslip dbase on another site, and you STILL do not recognize the value, then it is obvious that you're just not enthusaistic about Marauders on the dragstrip.



I am perfectly OK with some people believing that my times are "less valid" than others because I didn't scan the slip. It doesn't say anything about me.

Sure it does. It clearly demonstrates that your enthusiasm level for Marauder performance on the drag strip is low. Not that being less enthusiastic about this is bad. Its just a shame that those who are more enthusiastic have to see the bar lowered for those less inclined to want to participate.

Enthusiastic participants (here and on other sites) are far more apt to want to post their slips because they understand the value of doing just that.




I cannot believe such a lack of enthusiasm that this board has about Marauders on the dragstrip, that we're actually having an argument and objections to timeslips having to be posted on a "Timeslips" list.

True drag racers will understand the need and value for all of that info to be listed for comparisants sake. Because otherwise, that list must only serve as some quartermile ET bragging rights page. And I for one had no intention of simply bragging when I posted my timeslip. I mean what's there to brag about?

Billy, sadly enough, it seems that those of us who are passionate about Marauder performance on the strip are few in number. Those that do not have the same level of passion just do not see the value of a good timeslip database. It's a shame but that's what we have here.

[Bradley G]

I agree with mikes point that all the info is valueable,not just the cars #'s.
My car ran .5 better than the last time I ran it only a month ago.The only thing that I did different is remove the drivers side Headlamp.
The other differences,A different track, cooler temps,? ect.
I am so new to this That I posted(asked :bunny2: to do it for me)my best and last run of the day only.Not an average like Mac suggested, would I use this # for Bracketing ? No, I would deciede that on more factors.
This was achieved after ten previous passes that day.
It was a hotlap, cause I had to wait a few minutes between runs(the track was emptying out)
Will I be able to duplicate? I hope so but:confused: who knows for sure?Did removing the headlamp get me .5 better ET?
I don't think it is possible.
It must be superior driving.:D J/K
I guess my point is: Please don't confuse passion, with talent/experience!
All I want is accurate info, I don't care about packageing.It's all good thanks for caring:P
Bradley G

[duhtroll]

Wrong again I'm afraid.

Not so much. :P


Many timeslips include the Race Track name, date, weather conditions (such as temp, bar pressure, and humidity), as well as the altitude of the track. This is VERY pertinent information that seasoned racers know to look for when making comparisions and drawing conclusions. Not all slips have this info, but many do...and its important information to have when it is available.

Again, this can be included without requiring scans. Track location is ALREADY included (when it was working) and temp, etc. is a simple add. All a creator has to do is just type a few lines of text in addition to what's already there - takes about a minute of time to add to an existing DB.


So, we can spend a bunch of time re-writing the data base to accomodate all this info, or we can just simply have the time slips posted.

I guess I just do not understand why you, or anyone else, would want to go through MORE effort just to avoid posting the slips :confused:

Because it's LESS effort for me, and no more effort for the admin., and again probably less effort than having everyone post graphics. I've already been told twice (or more) that it's worth my time to go down to CopyWorks and pay for a scan, gas to get there, time invested. It takes me a fraction of that to type times into the DB, and it's free. Text is easier.

We already have questions about the gallery every other week. Adding timeslip graphics will just add to the workload of the admin. with "how can I post my timeslip, or change it, or delete it, etc.." Text is easier as the user can update it him or her self.

The more graphics a site has, the more money it costs to run via webspace. Not that timeslips would be a huge drain on resources, but they won't make it any better. Text is easier to store and maintain.

If you want more people to participate, you make it as easy as is humanly possible.

Requiring scans absolutely *will* get you fewer participants. On that I place a guarantee. I just finished a graduate thesis. Rule zero (i.e. before rule #1) was make the survey as easy and as understandable as possible if you want good participation.



Nope. We don't have to do anything. Point is, though, what's the point of a timeslip database without timeslips?

And if you have seen a good timeslip dbase on another site, and you STILL do not recognize the value, then it is obvious that you're just not enthusaistic about Marauders on the dragstrip.

I see nothing that cannot be duplicated through text, 'cuz that's all a timeslip is. Unless it is being used as proof of time, that is.


Billy, sadly enough, it seems that those of us who are passionate about Marauder performance on the strip are few in number.

On that I agree, and it is yet another good reason why making a requirement for a small minority apply to everyone is not a good idea.

Being passionate about Marauder performance on the strip and not seeing the need for required timeslips are not mutually exclusive ideas.

Irrefutable point: There are no factual data on a timeslip that cannot be easily and more quickly reproduced in text format.

All that's left is proof, and proof is a relative term as we have already shown how it can be circumvented.

-A

[TooManyFords]

Being passionate about Marauder performance on the strip and not seeing the need for required timeslips are not mutually exclusive ideas.

Irrefutable point: There are no factual data on a timeslip that cannot be easily and more quickly reproduced in text format.

All that's left is proof, and proof is a relative term as we have already shown how it can be circumvented.

-AAndrew, don't sweat it. I'm with you 110% on this and for once I think Mac and I are on the same page [so this thread wasn't a total loss!!]

If someone wants to challange what I post as a timeslip in the database, then drive right on over here and we're pull the paper. Otherwise it is a Trust situation and I for one want to trust everyone else. Heck, I do already!

But, I will not lose sleep over it nor call someone to the carpet because I think they lied. For those that are more "enthusiastic" than I about real scanned slips should head on over to www.dragtimes.com (http://www.dragtimes.com) and go for it!

Cheers!

John

[BruteForce]

One thing that scanned image advocates may be overlooking is that you can't base a database query on the content of a scanned image. You *can* query based on text. This opens up huge potential as far as searching by specific fields.

[TechHeavy]

One thing that scanned image advocates may be overlooking is that you can't base a database query on the content of a scanned image. You *can* query based on text. This opens up huge potential as far as searching by specific fields.
This is true.

[MikesMerc]

One thing that scanned image advocates may be overlooking is that you can't base a database query on the content of a scanned image. You *can* query based on text. This opens up huge potential as far as searching by specific fields.


Frankly if memebrs would be so inlcined to enter all of this information into a database, it would indeed be the preferred method. The reason I really like to see the actual slip is that I tend to pick out things of importance that tend to be overlooked by others at times. duhtroll is a perfect example. It is likely that if his timeslips contained weather and altitude information, he would have left it off as he obviously didn't see it as important information.

If you can get folks to enter everything, that's just as good though.

EDIT-

I'll expand a bit here so more folks will know where i am coming from. I keep all my timeslips in my own database on excel. Not only do I have all the relevant information discussed so far (speeds, times, etc), but I also log the weather, tire pressure, fuel used, tune used, etc, etc.

Datalogging is the only clear way to identify what is, and is not, effective for the car. Many drag racers that I know do this religiously.

Obviously, my "enthusiasm" for this stuff is a far cry from those that don't wanna be troubled with anything that hints of required effort.

[MikesMerc]

Irrefutable point: There are no factual data on a timeslip that cannot be easily and more quickly reproduced in text format.


That point can be refuted easily. I can definitely scan and submit the image much faster than keying in the info. Takes about 40 seconds. So, if you want to qualify your comment to say that for YOU typing it in is faster, well okay.

Also, you're asking the person to know what is important and what is not. If I didn't point out you were ignoring weather and location information, you wouldn't have even known that you were leaving off relevant data :P

And as far as setting things up for a "minority" group, why would those that are less "enthusaistic" even care? Why does it even bother those who are admittedly less "enthusaistic" if there was a time slip requirement?



Because it's LESS effort for me

Some good things in life actually require some effort.


This whole thread is just another example of the lowering of the bar syndrome. Let's not make anyone be responsible for anything. Let's not ask for too much effort. Everyone is entitled. Kinda sad really.

But, oh well:) No need to keep a good data base for those that actually use it if those that don't use it aren't happy with the effort it takes to assemble one:)

[MikesMerc]

For those that are more "enthusiastic" than I about real scanned slips should head on over to www.dragtimes.com (http://www.dragtimes.com) and go for it!


Why should we have to do this? Why can't the mm.net timeslip page offer this? Talk about exclusionary :rolleyes:

I still don't understand why a timeslip requirement for a timeslip database would offend those folks who obviously don't care much about timeslips :confused:

[SergntMac]

duhtroll is a perfect example. It is likely that if his timeslips contained weather and altitude information, he would have left it off as he obviously didn't see it as important information.
Ummm...You may want to hold on a sec here, Mike, what's "likely" doesn't appear to be so likely.

I have over 100 timeslips on my desk right now, from 4 race tracks I visited last year. The IRP in Indy, (site of MV-II) and Route 66 in Joliet, are big time NHRA owned race tracks, where national events are staged. You'll see these tracks on television hosting some of the fasted race cars in history. The other two are more tailored to local traffic, Great Lakes Dragway in Union Grove WI., and US. 41 in Morocco, IN., what you may consider "hobby" tracks. None of the four I've been to provide weather/altitude data on their timeslips, and US.41 just bought a whole new timing system over this past winter break.

Then, (and I know it's broken right now) I went to our timeslip database and did some poking around. 32 of the 95 entries in this database indicate that timeslips have been posted. So, approximately 1/3 of our present membership agrees with you. Nonetheless, I went on to examine what slips I could find, noting that some are hosted off site and are still visible. I found slips from Atlanta, another big time track I believe, and Firebird, Moroso, and Napierville, tracks I know nothing about, but did not find any weather/altitude data present on those slips either.

If what you say is true about this data, Mike, I agree it could fill in some blanks on the performance being reported. However, it doesn't look like this data is reported on a timeslip as often as you suggest.

Y'all...I really hope what we're doing here, is constructive brainstorming with intent to improve this feature, and if so, I can see many improvements at our fingertips right now. All we need to do is agree on some topics and take it one step at a time. It's a new season, and I expect to see a lot of valuable 411 posted by so many new members who joined over this past winter. However, if all we're doing here is busting balls, I give.

We could decide one issue right now with a poll. Are timeslips necessary? Should they be required? Fashion the question any way you wish, because at the present time, our past practice is telling, and seems to indicate no. However, we do have a lot more member now, and in fairness to them (having a say), and us (getting what we want), I suggest a poll in in order, let's put this question to a vote, and move on to the next? I think it's important, because once the timeslip database is repaired, everyone will have to repost their slips, when the vote goes that way.

Moderators? Any opinion?

[MikesMerc]

Good post Mac...I must concur. I'll drop the topic at this point (again :) )

As you know, my "style" of posting gets me in trouble, so although I am trying not to be argumentative, I'm sure it comes out that way at times like this. So I'll do more good by letting this go without more banter.

Second, you have a valid point about what info may or may not be on timeslips. Most tracks probably lack the weather data. Some do have it though. I actually write all that data on my own slips so perhaps I over estimated how many others have that info:)

I'm just having a hard time letting the topic slide because everyone against time slips wants to hang thier hat on the "validity" argument. As I said, I don't give a puh-tooty about validity. Timeslips can be photochopped easily.

My point is that I am more of a throw back hardcore "purist" I guess. I love sifting through my own timeslips looking for keys to performance. I enjoy looking at others' timeslips looking for more information for myself, to help the other person, or, yes, perhaps to scrutinize. As a hardcore track guy, I cannot imagine anything less than producing a timeslip to verify the run and provide the appropriate details. I'd get laughed off the track making performance claims that I couldn't back up. I just grew up in an environment where the slip was key.

But, I can see I am in the minority here. It does make me feel better knowing that there is certainly a hardcore contingent here that understands what I'm getting at. But, for the sake of peace, I'll drop it.

Thanks for the reality check Mac :beer:

[FordNut]

That point can be refuted easily. I can definitely scan and submit the image much faster than keying in the info. Takes about 40 seconds. So, if you want to qualify your comment to say that for YOU typing it in is faster, well okay.

Well, I spent about an hour getting my timeslip posted last night. I can type the data in a whole lot faster than that.

First, the printer at the strip was not too good, so the timeslip was quite dim.
I set the scanner up to compensate, which gave me a 4mB bitmap file. Too big to upload.
I then used photoshop to crop and reformat the image to a jpg file which was about 100kB.
Then I had to find a place to upload it for posting since the timeslips page doesn't work for this anymore.
The fact that I'm not a computer guy and don't use any of those devices or programs meant that I had to spend quite a bit of time learning all those things just to post a stupid timeslip (not to mention having to download and install a driver for the all-in-one print/scan/copy/fax machine). So yes, it IS a hassle.

BUT, since we have grown to the point that people feel free to falsify timeslip data, I felt that I should post mine to back up what I posted in the timeslip database. Wouldn't want to be accused of inventing data.

[MikesMerc]

Well, I spent about an hour getting my timeslip posted last night. I can type the data in a whole lot faster than that.


Well, I appreciate your efforts to post the timeslip. I haven't had that kind of trouble, so I guess I'm under estimating the effort level for others as well.

Like I said above, I'm done explaining my point. If the members want "soft" data cause its too much trouble otherwise, then so be it. Its just not worth the hard feelings.

[duhtroll]

Just a few things:

1) Anyone who knows me knows that while I lack *experience* in racing, it does not mean I lack *intelligence.*

I know exactly what weather does to the performance of a car. Why? I asked people here. I asked mechanics. I asked folks who have been racing cars longer than I have been alive, and THEN I looked it up. I'm pretty thorough that way.

Please give me a break on the "if I didn't tell ya you wouldn't have included it" crap. The simple fact is I haven't been to the slips page in a while and don't remember what it included and what it didn't.

And regardless, it wouldn't take long to make it include ALL RELEVANT INFO TO EVERYONE. Car color, Zaino vs. Meguiar's, gas type, slicks vs. drag radials vs. street tires, paper or plastic, boxers vs. briefs vs. thongs, less filling vs. tastes great, etc.. "Etc." means "and all the rest," BTW.

2) I'll race ya scanning/uploading vs. typing any day. :P

3) I am not responsible to anyone here. Since I am not an example for others as I am not one of the more knolwedgeable nor am I one of the faster MMs out there, no one looks to me for such information. Therefore, I am not beholden to anyone for facts.

4) This is a leisure activity for everyone here save a very scant few. Everyone does so with the time, energy, cash, and effort they have to spend on it. Telling me I need to expend more effort in my leisure activities kinda just rolls right off my back.

"Lowering the bar" is just not an applicable argument. This is for FUN, regarless of the level. Some people take their "fun" more seriously than others. Everyone most certainly *IS* entitled to participate. It's what a friendly, non-exclusionary site is all about, and I'm betting what Logan had in mind. Otherwise, see my previous (and accurate) analogy of requiring everyone to buy a MM before becoming a member.

If I'm not serious enough, feel free to snub me.

How many people here require their results to put food on the table?

Bueller?

5) "Less" enthusiastic does not mean "not" enthusiastic. I obviously have spent enough time here that if I didn't enjoy it to some degree I would be either very stupid or very bored.

I understand everything you are saying. I'm saying this is not a "one size fits all" site. If it is to be so, about 90% of the members need to find other sites, I guess.

6) No one said we aren't willing to make the best dang kickbutt database of Marauder times out there. I am, however, saying it does not require scans of slips.

Besides, this is all up to Logan, anywho.

-A


That point can be refuted easily. I can definitely scan and submit the image much faster than keying in the info. Takes about 40 seconds. So, if you want to qualify your comment to say that for YOU typing it in is faster, well okay.

Also, you're asking the person to know what is important and what is not. If I didn't point out you were ignoring weather and location information, you wouldn't have even known that you were leaving off relevant data :P

And as far as setting things up for a "minority" group, why would those that are less "enthusaistic" even care? Why does it even bother those who are admittedly less "enthusaistic" if there was a time slip requirement?




Some good things in life actually require some effort.


This whole thread is just another example of the lowering of the bar syndrome. Let's not make anyone be responsible for anything. Let's not ask for too much effort. Everyone is entitled. Kinda sad really.

But, oh well:) No need to keep a good data base for those that actually use it if those that don't use it aren't happy with the effort it takes to assemble one:)

[MikesMerc]

6) No one said we aren't willing to make the best dang kickbutt database of Marauder times out there. I am, however, saying it does not require scans of slips.



You are totally 100% correct in all that you say! Good work :beer:

We can certainly have the bestest darndest timeslip dbase in the whole world that includes EVERYTHING! ....except the timelip.

Sorta like Pecan Pie without the Pecans! Rock On :banana:

[duhtroll]

Nope, more like the video store without the reel-to-reel movies.

More like the mall without the roller-skates.

In other words, the absence of something totally outdated and useless.

Live in the now, man.

:P

-A



You are totally 100% correct in all that you say! Good work :beer:

We can certainly have the bestest darndest timeslip dbase in the whole world that includes EVERYTHING! ....except the timelip.

Sorta like Pecan Pie without the Pecans! Rock On :banana:

[FordNut]

Gee, over 100 posts and the timeslips don't even work. Anybody clicked on a timeslip on the timeslips page?

[BillyGman]

You are totally 100% correct in all that you say! Good work :beer:

We can certainly have the bestest darndest timeslip dbase in the whole world that includes EVERYTHING! ....except the timelip.

Sorta like Pecan Pie without the Pecans! Rock On :banana:LOL!!!!:rofl:

[martyo]

Anybody clicked on a timeslip on the timeslips page?

Mine works. I click on it like 15 or 20 times a day. :D

[Bradley G]

Bad memory?:D

Bradley G


Mine works. I click on it like 15 or 20 times a day. :D

[FordNut]

Mine works. I click on it like 15 or 20 times a day. :D
I'll bet you do!

Only 3 or 4 of the timeslip icons actually take you to a timeslip, though.

[martyo]

I'll bet you do!

Only 3 or 4 of the timeslip icons actually take you to a timeslip, though.

Mine is hosted on my LK site and then I hot link it.

[MikesMerc]

Nope, more like the video store without the reel-to-reel movies.

More like the mall without the roller-skates.

In other words, the absence of something totally outdated and useless.

Live in the now, man.


Nope. Its more like you and a few others that cannot keep up with technology, or cannot be bothered to learn. I was floored by your "scanners are obsolete" comment a while back, and dropped it as I didn't want to coninue to argue. But you continuing on about it in pure ignorance needs to be addressed.

If you are an "intelligent" man, then you should know that document imaging as a technology hasn't even nearly reached its peak. In fact, more businesses, schools, medical providers, and governments world wide move to paperless processes through the use of document imaging today then any time previously. The pace of conversion grows every day. Optical Character Recognition software, image clean up and enhancement technology, improved scanning technology, original document handling processes, image storage and retreival processes, and image workflow applications are only now reaching the level of providing a solution that fits most of the mainstream.

New scanners come out evey day with better image reproduction and document handling. Even most new office copy machines and faxes have the ability to scan now. These machines can range from relatively inexpensive home office gear, to $25,000 high volume scanning monsters.

Here's a link to a company that provides maging solutions to the world's top companies. Read and learn grasshopper: http://www.realvisionsoftware.com/

RVI was the contractors we used to implement the document imaging solution at our company last year. I was lucky enough to be the project manager on this enormous undertaking. As fate would have it, I picked up a thing or two about "scanning" technology.

I'll certainly let the argument drop about whether this site needs to ask for timeslip scans. But I'm certainly not going to let uneducated blatantly false statements about imaging technology just hang unaddressed.

If you want to say you just don't feel like putting in the effort to scan a timeslip...fine. That's your perogative. But don't blame it on obsolete technology. It only makes you look very foolish.

[duhtroll]

Funny. I work at a school that doesn't use scanners, and we seem to be doing better than most areas as to what level of technology is available.

We have had broadband for over 10 years. We were the first (or at least one of the first) in the entire nation to braodcast home sporting events live on the web 9 years ago.

We don't use scanners because students do not produce anything that isn't digital save art and music projects, and even then some of those are digital or digitally enhanced. Example - kid wants to use a pic from a magazine as a visual for a presentation. They don't scan the pic from the magazine. It takes too long. They go online and copy/paste it into their project (we have subsciptions online now and are getting rid of hard copies).

Their everyday assignments are read by teachers on their wireless laptops, and to turn them in they access the server from anywhere in the district or at home and drop them in the assignments folder.

Our media center has fewer and fewer books each year, because everything is available more quickly and easily in digital format. (Personally I would like to see more books, but it ain't gonna happen). Soon the textbooks will be gone.

The students have extensive online educational databases at their fingertips for their research projects, and yes even the 6th graders can do all of this to some degree. They don't need scanners except in rare cases -- for the purpose of taking old material and making it usable.

I've done the same thing in all of my school work - never had to produce a hard copy except for the 65-year-old lady who wants a copy to preview.

Sooo, you can give me all the theory you want. I'm saying scanners are pretty much outdated for practical use - unless you are taking some form of hard media (that is not already digital somewhere, which is a rarity these days) and converting it to digital use.

I'll make a prediction. By the time character recognition software is "perfected" it will be largely unnecessary. Things move too quickly to wait for a development like this that is over 10 years in the making already.

So you're correct in that we are moving to paperless, but it is largely due to producing original digital work. Scanners only serve to make that which is not digital, digital. Once that is done, they will not be necessary.

We're past the use of scanners for printed media, and we are a small Iowa school district. I would think many businesses should be ahead of us on the technology curve.

Now, scanners for medical/scientific purposes, that's totally different. Those have just begun their refinements. However, we are discussing printed media technology - that is currently moving beyond the need for scanners in everyday use.

-A




Nope. Its more like you and a few others that cannot keep up with technology, or cannot be bothered to learn. I was floored by your "scanners are obsolete" comment a while back, and dropped it as I didn't want to coninue to argue. But you continuing on about it in pure ignorance needs to be addressed.

If you are an "intelligent" man, then you should know that document imaging as a technology hasn't even nearly reached its peak. In fact, more businesses, schools, medical providers, and governments world wide move to paperless processes through the use of document imaging today then any time previously. The pace of conversion grows every day. Optical Character Recognition software, image clean up and enhancement technology, improved scanning technology, original document handling processes, image storage and retreival processes, and image workflow applications are only now reaching the level of providing a solution that fits most of the mainstream.

New scanners come out evey day with better image reproduction and document handling. Even most new office copy machines and faxes have the ability to scan now. These machines can range from relatively inexpensive home office gear, to $25,000 high volume scanning monsters.

Here's a link to a company that provides maging solutions to the world's top companies. Read and learn grasshopper: http://www.realvisionsoftware.com/

RVI was the contractors we used to implement the document imaging solution at our company last year. I was lucky enough to be the project manager on this enormous undertaking. As fate would have it, I picked up a thing or two about "scanning" technology.

I'll certainly let the argument drop about whether this site needs to ask for timeslip scans. But I'm certainly not going to let uneducated blatantly false statements about imaging technology just hang unaddressed.

If you want to say you just don't feel like putting in the effort to scan a timeslip...fine. That's your perogative. But don't blame it on obsolete technology. It only makes you look very foolish.

[Bluerauder]

I'll bet you do!

Only 3 or 4 of the timeslip icons actually take you to a timeslip, though.
It's been like that for a couple months. Mine and most of the other posted timeslips just take me to the avatar for the timeslip poster. :( I loaded mine directly to the MM.Net site. It appears that those hosted at another location are still working properly. :dunno:

[MikesMerc]

Funny. I work at a school that doesn't use scanners

LOL...well, no offense, but that's just another example the problem with academia...living in its own little plastic bubble world without actually having to be accountable for much.

In the real world where businesses must meet performance objectives and deal with mutliple third party entities, and do so efficiently, there is no room for such a narrow minded approach. Whether you personally want to recognize it or not, the paper document will continue to be a significant part of media world for at least two more decades (as estimated by top CIOs of most fortune 500 companys....see CIO Magazine September 2004).


We don't use scanners because students do not produce anything that isn't digital save art and music project

Again, this narrow view of the technology and how you do not have a need for it does not apply too much to the rest of the world. In addition, I doubt that if I went to the school's records office they could hand me purely digitalized transcripts. In fact, I would bet your school is still choc full of filing cabinets and file rooms.



Sooo, you can give me all the theory you want. I'm saying scanners are pretty much outdated for practical use - unless you are taking some form of hard media (that is not already digital somewhere, which is a rarity these days) and converting it to digital use.

Wow...talk about being in the academic plastic bubble :shake: Sorry to say but you are the one living in the thoery world. In the real world imaging technology is still in its infancy and continues to explode globally. Businesses are spending hundreds of millions annually on scanning and imaging. That's an undeniable fact that can be backed up with just a tiny amount of research. I find it frightening that an educator wouldn't know this or even bother to do research before spouting something off as fact.

Would you like some links as to the current state of imaging technology and the direction the industry is taking? I'd be more than happy to provide them for you to bring you up to speed.

[SergntMac]

Gee, over 100 posts and the timeslips don't even work. Anybody clicked on a timeslip on the timeslips page?
I covered this ^ there, it's down right now due to problems with the Gallery. The slips on hand are images, and the only images that are visible, are those stored off site. Doesn't anyone read my posts? But, I expect it's to be fixed soon, and while we're waiting...

I'll certainly let the argument drop about whether this site needs to ask for timeslip scans. But I'm certainly not going to let uneducated blatantly false statements about imaging technology just hang unaddressed.

If you want to say you just don't feel like putting in the effort to scan a timeslip...fine. That's your perogative. But don't blame it on obsolete technology. It only makes you look very foolish.
Gentlemen, please. About the poll I suggested...

I've done the same thing in all of my school work - never had to produce a hard copy except for the 65-year-old lady who wants a copy to preview. -A
Guys! OMG...So, this is all about busting balls, eh?

Jeeze!

Look, while the timeslip database is down, we have a chance to ask for some changes, and we should be asking on behalf of all members here. There are several questions pending, one of which is about requiring participants to post a scanned image of their time slip, or, not.

The questions are simple, getting answers is likewise simple, and this will give us some direction for the next season. Nothing is in stone, if we don't like the results, we can work on it from there. But, let us get off our azzes and move in one direction, or, not. Matters little to me about the "why" of it anymore, let's put it to a vote. Additional topics remain to be covered, let's move forward, or, give it up.

Questions pending:
1)Should the posting member be required to post a scanned image of their timeslip, or, will a members word be sufficient.
2)Should the database be for Marauder automibiles only.
3)Should we allow/accept "simulated" data, such as that gathered by a G-force like meter.
4)What data fields should be included that would be valuable to the member seeking to mod his Marauder, i.e. altitude and humidity, 330' data, and so on.
5)Anything else in question by anyone, at the present time, one of which may be the original question...Do we need a moderator to review the data prior to posting?

Moderators...Can we get a poll or two going?

Is this worth the effort, or, are we just blowing smoke up each other's azzes. Over 110 posts now, and not one step forward.

This is my last word on this, y'all are just making another supercharger war out of this, and if we don't get back on track, we won't have anything at all, which is fine with me at this point.

[Macon Marauder]

It's amazes me how some people just cannot stomach another opinion! If you disagree with me, then you're wrong! Or, if you have a different opinion, then you're just not into Marauders as much as I am! Dang! That's the type of crap I expect to see on <b>other</b> sites - not our beloved mm.net!

My 2 cents: can't we have a little honor among thieves, um err, MM enthusiasts?
:)

[MM03MOK]

Let's do this.......

Please express your opinions in the Poll at the top of this thread. Your vote is important.

Please read all the statements before voting. Most likely, any changes will only appear in the Profile and not in the sortable database.

:thanks:

[SergntMac]

Thank you, Mary!

Now we're doing something more than exchanging opinions. Everyone please check in and vote. The outcome depends on your vote, and you should express yourself whether you use this database or not. It requires time and money to maintain, and if we are not going to use it for our own benefits, why bother? Please vote all, thank you.

[MM03MOK]

Slight SNAFU. I had to redo the poll. ;) Please vote again if you've already voted.

The poll will run for 14 days, ending May 18.

[MikesMerc]

It's amazes me how some people just cannot stomach another opinion!

My 2 cents: can't we have a little honor among thieves, um err, MM enthusiasts?


Yes....and we should.

As far as whether or not we want time slips to be part of the requirement to post on the timeslip page...well that is indeed opinion. So let the poll decide. Like I said, I know I'm in the minority here, so I know where it will lead....but I'm quite happy to abide by the results. I dropped timeslip issue 2 pages back in the name of peace.

But, when it comes to blatantly incorrect statements about imaging technology that I use and consult on professionally every day, I'm not going to let that kind of misinformation go unchecked. That's not disagreeing about opinion, that's about getting the facts right. Everyone can dream up any number of excuses they want to not have to post timeslips, but using obsolete technology isn't one of them.


Furthermore, in the name of peace, and because my professional expertise in information technology gives me an unusually close perspective on scanning capabilities which others may not have been aware of, I am willing to give duhtroll a real rebuttal to my arguement. And that rebuttal is that the technology is still too young and has not matured to the point of allowing casual home users the "ease of use" factor they demand. This is exactly the opposite of the lame "obsolescence" arguement, but it is the only valid one there is. Fordnut struggling to get his timeslip up is good proof of this.

As a seasoned CIO that has held numerous positions in the information technology field, I cringe when I hear "I'll just key punch the info" or "keypunching is fast." That's usually a signal from someone afraid of technology or just doesn't undertsand it. The truth of the matter is that with the progress of OCR software, soon we'll have the ability to just scan the timeslip, and all of the relevant information will be automatically read and indexed into the data base. No key punch whatsoever. This is coming to the home level user in about 2 or 3 more years.

Anyway, sorry for the digression, and the blathering post about imaging technology. I just wanted everyone to be crystal clear that technology for capturing, sorting, summarizing, and retireving images is going to be with us and continue to improve and mature over the next 20 years...probably longer:)


Thanks for the poll Mary. And thanks yet again Mac for keeping things on track.

[TechHeavy]

Hi guys. I've got some comments I'd like to add to this thread, and then I'll probably not have any more... having spoken my heart and then I'll be done.

I really didn't want to get caught up in this debate, since I'm kind of on the fence, and can see both sides here. Each member who has met me will probably attest that I'm a pretty laid back, easy going guy. I'd like to say that I'm a friend to everyone here, and I believe we can all learn from one another without bickering. I've been thinking about this all night at work... so here goes.
Having said all that, I voted that timeslips SHOULD be required, (the score is 6 to 6 at the moment).
Here's the reason I voted this way. We live in an entire world of validation, authentification, and certification, (Marty can probably add a few more here that rhyme).
When you get your parking ticket validated at your event to give to the parking attendant afterwards it's not because the attendant wouldn't believe you, but because it's proof that the ticket was validated.
When you buy that artist engraved plate from the home shopping network for your grandmother who decorates her house with plates and it comes with a "certification of authenticity" it's not because you're calling the company that produced the plate a "liar" if the plate does not come with one... it's simply proof that the plate is authentic.
So, how does all this banter relate to us as MM.net members, or more specifically, timeslips? I'm not sure, because as BillyGman put it, "...you're a trusting soul".... and I am. If a member here claimed stats from a track run but didn't have his slip posted and didn't care to, I would still believe him. Why wouldn't I? I know that if someone called me a liar and demanded my timeslip I'd show the timeslip followed by a punch in the eye, (or at least I'd want to... probably couldn't get away with that kind of behavior now that I'm 40!).
My point is I don't think there is another plausible solution to this debate. SergeantMac has already said that this has already been a long-going and not soon solved dillema. It's simply a matter of validation if that's the way we make it. If we make it a rule, then that's the way it is.... just like when the IRS wants a copy of your W2 with your taxes. Your federal government isn't calling you a "liar", but they need proof of your income, (or validation, if you will).

I don't feel there's anything wrong with asking for timeslips to be posted.
Now, I do feel that Logan is probably reaching his limits of patience with this and other "hot" topics. I don't know Logan personally, but if I were running this website, I'd have taken away the toy from the kids fighting over it a long time ago. If we can't agree on a timeslip format then maybe we shouldn't have one at all! Neither kid gets the toy then! :(

Ok, that's just my simple, Forrest Gump view of this debate.
Thanks for viewing! :rolleyes:

[duhtroll]

Mike -

I find it interesting that on the one hand you criticize me for drawing conclusions about the business world, and then you turn right around and make even broader conclusions about the acedemic world. You have even completed it with catch phrases like "bubble world" and "real world."

People who use those terms most often know nothing else, so they use catch phrases to cover up ignorance. When you say those in academic fields are accountable to no one, you show me that you don't know anything about what we do. It sounds to me like you should home school your own kids rather than leave it up to those of us in the "fake bubble world."

Please. :rolleyes:

You mentioned schools, so I corrected you. Of the two of us, I'll wager that I am the only one who has worked in both "worlds."

Our school is certainly not full of filing cabinets. The entire office has none. The principals each have a small 2-drawer. I asked our tech guy at lunch today. Hmm, he's a guy with a business background but seems to concur that scanners are a bit outmoded.

What we do have are several servers full of data. And then there are the backup servers. The even funnier part of your estimate of our grading system is that everything has been digital for a minimum of five years, and much of it longer than that.

The only paper files I keep are the music the kids play, and that's only because they don't all have their own screens to read from yet. That's a few years out. I haven't even kept a paper gradebook in the last 8 years. Starting next year, their lesson books will be replaced by software.

The only reason we do not email all of our report cards is because not every single parent has an email address. We only print where necessary, (well, supposedly, there are a few dinosaurs) and those documents are digital from inception.

And I love how your example is the *real* world and everything else is therefore *fake*. I have never needed a scanner. Every single project I have done since their inception (my silly academic world or in "real life" :rolleyes: ) I could complete without one. Presentations included. I suppose that makes my own experience, and that of all the other folks who don't need scanners "fake" as well. :rolleyes:

Businesses that use paper documents are getting farther and farther behind in profit and productivity. Less paper=money saved. I have a question for you. What are all these businesses scanning with all of those scanners? Images they create are either CG or from digital cameras/recorders. Even professional photographers (where I have also worked) are almost totally digital now. So why scan?

To digitize OLD MEDIA.

I just spent some time with a friend who owns her own marketing and advertising company. She uses a scanner rarely, and that's only to digitize old media. She is now in the "theoretical world" too I guess.

What I am offering are things that have actually *happened* and are not part of some research company's (or businesses) PR scheme. You think the paper industry doesn't have a stake in your claim of two more decades? You don't think they will be dragged kicking and screaming all the way? Nah! They'd *never* impede progress just to make money . . ..

When I walk into my chiropractor's office and ask for my yearly records, they don't hand me a folder. They show me the file on screen. When I get my hair cut, they ask me for my phone number and get all of my information off their computer. Pizza guy does the same. All the people I pay on a monthly basis I pay electronically - done it for years.

I've never seen a scanner in any of the places I do business, though I know a few of them probably have one. They just don't seem to use them very often. Sounds to me like all this scanner technology is lost on the service sector as a whole. I suppose they are now by definition "fake" as well.

Throw all the websites you like at me. As far as I'm concerned, you're talking out your a:censor:. The "real world" is where I *don't* see scanners being used.

-A







LOL...well, no offense, but that's just another example the problem with academia...living in its own little plastic bubble world without actually having to be accountable for much.

In the real world where businesses must meet performance objectives and deal with mutliple third party entities, and do so efficiently, there is no room for such a narrow minded approach. Whether you personally want to recognize it or not, the paper document will continue to be a significant part of media world for at least two more decades (as estimated by top CIOs of most fortune 500 companys....see CIO Magazine September 2004).



Again, this narrow view of the technology and how you do not have a need for it does not apply too much to the rest of the world. In addition, I doubt that if I went to the school's records office they could hand me purely digitalized transcripts. In fact, I would bet your school is still choc full of filing cabinets and file rooms.



Wow...talk about being in the academic plastic bubble :shake: Sorry to say but you are the one living in the thoery world. In the real world imaging technology is still in its infancy and continues to explode globally. Businesses are spending hundreds of millions annually on scanning and imaging. That's an undeniable fact that can be backed up with just a tiny amount of research. I find it frightening that an educator wouldn't know this or even bother to do research before spouting something off as fact.

Would you like some links as to the current state of imaging technology and the direction the industry is taking? I'd be more than happy to provide them for you to bring you up to speed.

[FordNut]

The "real world" is where I *don't* see scanners being used.
-A
Then you're so far away from the "real world" that you can't see it.

[MikesMerc]

Mike -

I find it interesting that on the one hand you criticize me for drawing conclusions about the business world, and then you turn right around and make even broader conclusions about the acedemic world. You have even completed it with catch phrases like "bubble world" and "real world."

That's because i have experience from both sides of the fence and I draw my conclusions based on my own experiences. Deny it if you want (most folks in education do), but academia has low accountability. Just like most governement agencies. Its all the same. I've been there, I know.


People who use those terms most often know nothing else, so they use catch phrases to cover up ignorance.

Most cliche's are founded in truth. But, more importantly, folks can relate to these terms as they have heard them before when describing the academic world.



It sounds to me like you should home school your own kids rather than leave it up to those of us in the "fake bubble world."

No need to go that far. But if I had my child in a class with a teacher that ignored the realities of the world around them in order to make a foolish arguement I'd certainly have them pulled from that class.



You mentioned schools, so I corrected you.

No need for correction, I was right.

Document Imaging & Management for School Districts (http://www.laserfiche.com/resources/basics/schools/)

Bring Document Imaging To Schools (http://www.businesssolutionsmag.com/Articles/2004_09/040905.htm)

TEMPLE UNIVERSITY SELECTS FEITH FOR DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT (http://www.feith.com/web/index.jsp?level=3&item=56)

Suffolk County Community College: Imaging Goes to College (http://www.campus-technology.com/article.asp?id=7367)

And the list goes, on, and on, and on.....


Of the two of us, I'll wager that I am the only one who has worked in both "worlds."

Wrong yet again! You must be going for the record of how many times you can be wrong in a single thread:)

I've taught Accounting and Business Finance at the local college level, Finance and Macro Economics at the university level, and Information Technology at 2 different business schools.


I asked our tech guy at lunch today. Hmm, he's a guy with a business background but seems to concur that scanners are a bit outmoded.

Ahhh, the old vague reference "ask someone I know" trick. Nope. Let's see some cold hard links to information on the net that indicates imaging is a dead technology please. Can you do that?



What we do have are several servers full of data. And then there are the backup servers.

Nothing special about this. Kind of irrelevent really. In fact, most high end document imaging systems employ much more hardware than that.



The even funnier part of your estimate of our grading system is that everything has been digital for a minimum of five years, and much of it longer than that.

The only reason we do not email all of our report cards is because not every single parent has an email address. We only print where necessary

Oh my god, we hit on reality!! This is the whole point you chose to ignore in previous posts. So you are admitting that dealing with the world around you requires the use of paper. Interesting.



I have never needed a scanner. Every single project I have done since their inception. I could complete without one. Presentations included. I suppose that makes my own experience, and that of all the other folks who don't need scanners "fake" as well.

Nope....just limited. Your "presentations" is not the same as a company that has to process THOUSANDS of forms. This is your whole problem, you cannot see beyond your own office.

How do you think insurance companies handle hundreds of thousands of claims forms?
How do you think the IRS handles hundreds of thousands of tax returns?
How do you think Hospitals store medical records?
How do you think Banks handle billions of checks?
What about mandatory paper documents that require legal signature?
What about broker and custom bonds that are required to be paper?
What about the world's manufacturers that really on purchase orders, deliver receipts, Bills of lading, Invoices, debit and credit memos, etc etc?

Man, you are out of your league here and have no idea what you are talking about. If you think the world can waive a magic wand and instantly begin producing all source documents digitally than you really are quite uninformed.

Skip asking your "school IT guy" and get out on the internet and see what's going on in the world.



Businesses that use paper documents are getting farther and farther behind in profit and productivity. Less paper=money saved.

Wow...that was enlightening...really :rolleyes:

Trouble is, unless the whole world simultaneously goes with digital production of all source documents, business MUST learn to deal with paper. The whole idea of imaging is to eliminate the paper, but if that's what your customers and vendors provide you with, you better be able to deal with it. And if you want to stay in business, you better be able to deal with it efficiently.



I have a question for you. What are all these businesses scanning with all of those scanners?

Paper source documents generated by customers, vendors, and third parties, as well as historical records and other source documents generated by the company itself. Yes, that's right, the company does still need to generate paper source documents. Perfect examples are employee applications, inspection forms, and a thousand other forms that need to be completed but might not be readily completed on a PC (or something similar).




I just spent some time with a friend who owns her own marketing and advertising company. She uses a scanner rarely, and that's only to digitize old media. She is now in the "theoretical world" too I guess.

Nope she is just someone who does not have a need for an imaging solution. How much paperwork does she receive from here customers and vendors? Does she actually process thousands of documents daily?



What I am offering are things that have actually *happened*
in your own limited world. Again, go out on the net and do some research. you'll find thousands of companies that have gone with imaging, or are in the process of doing so.



You think the paper industry doesn't have a stake in your claim of two more decades?

Ahhh, the old conspiracy theory...Right. I suppose we really need to get the magic wand out and eliminate all paper...poof!

Hey, maybe if the wand is strong enough, you can get Mexico, India, the far east, and other less developed business enviroments to magically eliminate thier paper too. Maybe the wand will buy them all brand new PCs where they can create source documents digitally!



When I walk into my chiropractor's office and ask for my yearly records, they don't hand me a folder. They show me the file on screen. When I get my hair cut, they ask me for my phone number and get all of my information off their computer. Pizza guy does the same.

What is your point? What kind of document processing do these mom and pop shops do?

Better examples:
Call your bank and ask for a copy of a cancelled check.
Call your insurance company and ask for a copy of a claim form.
Call you hospital and ask for a copy of your medical records.

Your examples are just lame.


I've never seen a scanner in any of the places I do business

LOL...now this is funny! :laugh: Sorry, but getting your hair cut, getting your back rubbed, and ordering pizza is NOT "doing business".



Sounds to me like all this scanner technology is lost on the service sector as a whole.

yes, excluding hospitals, banks, insurance companies, transportation and brokerage companies, credit unions, schools, governmental agencies, the utilitity companies and a bunch of others, yep....it pretty much looks like imaging is lost:D



Throw all the websites you like at me. As far as I'm concerned, you're talking out your a:censor:. The "real world" is where I *don't* see scanners being used.

So, what you're saying is that if you have not seen it with your own eyes, it does not exist. Wow...that's pretty open minded for an educator :rolleyes:

Bottom line is that you don't want the links because you don't want the truth.

[duhtroll]

That's because i have experience

So when *you* do this, it's ok, but when others do it, it's "fake?"


academia has low accountability. I've been there, I know.

Another sweeping generality. I noticed you get to ignore certain arguments when you cannot refute them, and pick and choose the things you fabricate.


Most cliche's are founded in truth.

OK, so go perpetuate falsehoods somewhere else. Do you have an acutal education degree (and if so, from what catalog did it originate) or do you just play teacher from time to time?

Merely standing in front of students does not make you a teacher.


But if I had my child in a class with a teacher that ignored the realities of the world around them I'd certainly have them pulled from that class.


Suuure you would. Now you know education better than real teachers do, also. How smart you must be!


I was right.

Really? All I see are scanners being used for reproducing OLD DATA, and companies that haven't figured out how to make digital souce data yet, which btw is a point you have not even addressed, because you are incapable of proving me wrong. Sources for most things are digital today.


And the list goes, on

And you keep repeating the same tired old point that was blown to smithereens long ago. OLD DATA.


Ahhh, the old "ask someone I know" trick.

Why not? "Real world" experience is *your* argument. I'm just proving you wrong with it.


Kind of irrelevent really.

Not irrelevant at all. You made grand conclusions about a school YOU HAVE NOT EVEN SEEN, and I told you that you had no clue. Now it's irrelevant because it doesn't suit your argument anymore. Where *are* those file cabinets anyway?


So you are admitting that dealing with the world around you requires the use of paper.

About 1% of it does. The other 99% doesn't. You think that makes you correct? You're really, really reaching here, and no one is buying it.

Go right on believing that. :rolleyes:

Since when is this argument about paper? I said scanners are not very useful and they are outdated. I never said "lalalalala paper doesn't exist anymore."


you cannot see beyond your own office.

Which office? The printing shop I worked for, the advertising company my friend owns, the photography studio at which I interned, or my current one?

Every example shows you to be incorrect - pick one.



How do you think insurance companies handle hundreds of thousands of claims forms?

Last one I made was over the phone. Claims agent came out and had a PDA with him, and all I had to do was sign the pad.

How about you?



How do you think the IRS handles hundreds of thousands of tax returns?

We do ours electronically. How about you?



How do you think Hospitals store medical records? Electronically. No more room for files, as your own friggin' websites state rather clearly.


How do you think Banks handle billions of checks?

Again, I get mine ELECTRONICALLY. Where are you going with this?


What about mandatory paper documents that require legal signature?

Like when I sign for payment on a computer screen? Hmm. Toughie.


What about broker and custom bonds that are required to be paper?

This is the only example where there is a shred of truth, and it is fleeting. Give it a few more years.


What about the world's manufacturers that really on purchase orders, deliver receipts, Bills of lading, Invoices, debit and credit memos, etc etc?

See above. Same answer - or hadn't you guessed? Technology is wonderful. Too bad your idea "top of the line" is locked on 1994.


If you think the world can waive a magic wand and instantly begin producing all source documents digitally than you really are quite uninformed.

Not all. Most, and *soon* all. Point is, things are changing - or did you miss that the last few times I typed it?


Skip asking your "school IT guy" and get out on the internet and see what's going on in the world.

Yeah, the internet. Right. Where intelligence reigns supreme, like this argument you keep stretching. :rolleyes:

I'll take the guy with three degrees and 25 years exp.. Or anyone else I asked. "Real world," that is. You know, the point you were trying to make?

You're showing me websites. I'm using actual businesses. Which is more real, spunky?



Trouble is, unless the whole world simultaneously goes with digital production of all source documents, business MUST learn to deal with paper. The whole idea of imaging is to eliminate the paper, but if that's what your customers and vendors provide you with, you better be able to deal with it.

I never said simultaneously. I never said *all*. And dealing with paper is on the way out, I say for the 45th time. I never said the entire world. Quit making :censor: up. I merely said digital source is better, faster, and easier, and you went on a tirade about how teachers don't know anything. All because you want me to scan in a timeslip.

Feel better?


Paper source documents generated by customers, vendors, and third parties, as well as historical records and other source documents generated by the company itself. Yes, that's right, the company does still need to generate paper source documents. Perfect examples are employee applications, inspection forms, and a thousand other forms that need to be completed but might not be readily completed on a PC (or something similar).

Again, moot. I never said these things don't exist. I'm saying for most (if not all in my case) of them there's ways around paper if you so choose. Ways that are quicker and easier, and cheaper. Last job I applied for was done online.


Nope she is just someone who does not have a need for an imaging solution. Does she actually process thousands of documents daily?

Nope. She doesn't have thousands of customers, I'm guessing. My guess is that if she did, she's have electronic sources at the ready, like any good business should. It's less work than dealing with all that paper. Which BTW is a point I made earlier, and you said dealing with the scanner is easier. Now you're showing the perfect example of why a digital source is better - thousands of customers using paper require thousands of scans. Why not just enter the information digitally instead of with a pen?

Maybe you should really try to decide what your point is *before* you type.


go out on the net and do some research. you'll find thousands of companies that have gone with imaging, or are in the process of doing so.

Again with the Internet. The Internet is not reality, bucko. Try some fresh air and sunshine.


Ahhh, the old conspiracy theory...Right. I suppose we really need to get the magic wand out and eliminate all paper...poof!

Who said this? I suppose it's easier to win an argument if you get to make up both sides. Which side were you on again? You keep trying to put words in my mouth. My point still stands, and dragging in 47 tangents, 100 websites, and insulting professsions isn't going to change that.



Better examples:
Call your bank and ask for a copy of a cancelled check.
Call your insurance company and ask for a copy of a claim form.
Call you hospital and ask for a copy of your medical records.

1) I have a copy of *every* cancelled check record (last several years) anytime. It's done online. Been doing that for about ten years now.

2) Already explained that I filed a claim in person, and it was immediately converted into digital format without scanner or paper.

3) Never had the need. They are all *in their electronic records.* If I need them transferred somewhere, it's not even necessary - the'yre already there!

4) Even receipts I get at stores are redundancies. The records are digital.


Sorry, but getting your hair cut, getting your back rubbed, and ordering pizza is NOT "doing business".

You ignoring other exmaples does not make them fictitious. Even the guy who fixes my MM has everything in *gasp* digital format.

And since when are regular service sector jobs "not doing business?" now you're insulting all of them too? Do you ever read what you type? I suppose you don't need any of them yourself. That's the height of arrogance, yet it does not surprise me in the least coming from you.


So, what you're saying is that if you have not seen it with your own eyes, it does not exist. Wow...that's pretty open minded for an educator

Nope. You said that. Just like a lot of other stuff you've made up that I've supposedly said.


Bottom line is that you don't want the links because you don't want the truth.

I've read some of the links. They mean nothing. What I see are specific examples for specific situations, all of which can be done digitally should they so choose.

Now, are you going to get back to topic, or are you going to continue to drag this out further and further in the hopes that I'll forget what point it is you're actually trying to make?

Scanners are old tech in reference to printed media.

Give it a rest, already.

-A

[FordNut]

All I see are scanners being used for reproducing OLD DATA, and companies that haven't figured out how to make digital souce data yet, which btw is a point you have not even addressed, because you are incapable of proving me wrong. Sources for most things are digital today.

If you're teaching your students that they can get all the information they need electronically, you are doing them a great disservice. I recently finished my Engineering degree, and there were numerous examples of technical literature that was needed to complete research projects that could only be found in paper print versions. Found in the library, reference section. Possibly already scanned by the librarian into some electronic form, but most likely not.

Sorry, but we're nowhere near a paperless world these days. They've been preaching that for 10 years (and the USA was going metric 30 years ago, too) and our company spends more money annually on printers than on computers.

[Bigdogjim]

So now I must be lost here?

I thought this thread was about something called ?? Oh yeah timeslips.

Must be the buttermilk thread:dunno:

Carry on please!

[duhtroll]

Nope, it's the "digital vs. physical" buttermilk thread. :)

-A

[martyo]

http://www.atldragracing.com/boards/images/smiles/beatdeadhorse5.gif

[SouLRioT]

This poll needs to be on the HOMEPAGE to get the most votes.

I've voted so I'm not going to state my opinons, but what about having a sole person set up to feild complaints of abuse? That's part of the main reason that this thread was started in the first place. I couldn't do the job since I have no freaking clue what times should match up with what speed, but I'm sure there are members that are able to and willing to do this job. And are the questions posed in the poll able to be followed through once we have the results?

[Bradley G]

I beg to differ Marty,

wanna start a thread over it!:D
If change is inevitible, let the chips fall!
It's all good!
Thanks for the efforts All!
Bradley G

[SergntMac]

This poll needs to be on the HOMEPAGE to get the most votes. And are the questions posed in the poll able to be followed through once we have the results?
I agree with you that it needs more attention, but I'm not sure on how to garner that. We have over 500 posting members, and whether one races, or, not, here is a rare chance to have your voice heard in how this website functions. I hope more than 24 members are listening, if there is not enough interest, it may be shut off rather than repaired.

EVERYONE PLEASE VOTE!

With respect to the second half of your question, yes, changes suggested can be carried out by an Administrator, once voting is closed. There are limitations in the database, some data will be visible as you see it now, other data must be read from the "details". I would imagine that 330' and 1000' times would not be visible from the main screen, but logged in details. However, if we vote for "Marauders only", seems to me that the column calling for make of vehicle can be redirected to display another piece of data, perhaps one of these two times., or, "simulated, yes/no". Depends on how the vote comes out, but the questions are based on what is possible.

[Mike Poore]

I got a video tape of your run Barry.
:eek: Hey, that's when he beat me! And with my poor leg in a cast & all. I'll teach him a thing or two about taking unfair advantage of the elderly, next time. ;)

[Bigdogjim]

EVERYONE PLEASE VOTE!

Agreed, just vote, now :banana:

[Bluerauder]

.... My point is I don't think there is another plausible solution to this debate. ..... I don't feel there's anything wrong with asking for timeslips to be posted.
I think that TechHeavy's comments ^^^^ above are probably the most lucid and non-emotional within this entire thread. And, I think that he has hit right at the root of the matter. :D

Personally, I feel that this discussion is Much ado about Nothing and that it really doesn't matter to me. Maybe that's because I know my "unmodded" Blue MM will very likely never match the performance of 90% of the cars on this site. :(

Post what you will on the Timeslips page. The MM.Net Membership has a keen eye for when the numbers appear "out of whack" with what they have seen or experienced. A copy of a timeslip just adds to the measure of validity. If one is not there -- the hairy eyeball tends to look more skeptically if the numbers just don't seem to jive with past performers. :rolleyes:

I trust all my fellow Marauder owners implicitly. I have hoisted drinks and broken bread with several of them on numerous occasions. There is no reason for any of them to boost their claims of performance because we are honorable people. :up:

Remember that Trust is a fragile entity ... once lost it is hard to regain. :alone:

[Bigdogjim]

Personally, I feel that this discussion is Much ado about Nothing
Remember that Trust is a fragile entity ... once lost it is hard to regain. :alone:

Well written my friend. I think the best way to go forward is to vote:up:

[woaface]

I voted that timeslips should not be needed if humidity, temperature and modifications are included.

This isn't just one or two of the same car, there are tons of these cars, and if you're smart enough to figure what a car SHOULD +/- with the conditions I stated, then a timeslip isn't important.

If you're running under 13 naturally aspirated, or you've got something else that's special, then yeah, I want to see a timeslip. But you know whether or not you should post one and if people ask, provide it.

Other than that, everyone knows about what a car runs given the mods and conditions and people state it here all the time "Oh, a stocker runs about 15.0 give or take and a supercharged runs 12-13.4 give or take."

You know what I mean. There's enough cars here to figure it out.

[woaface]

The database should also include ALL cars because the Marauder isn't the only car to use that platform or engine or transmission, and those cars, including the Crown Victoria, the Lincoln Marks and the T-Birds, all started modding before Marauder's did.

That knowledge gave Marauder owners a head start, and their ideas are still used all the time today, especially considering the transmission.

I think the timeslips for other cars using the same platform, engine or transmission should be considered for just this reason.

If the car has no major sharings with a Marauder, then it's really not important and should be disregarded.

[martyo]

The database should also include ALL cars because the Marauder isn't the only car to use that platform or engine or transmission, and those cars, including the Crown Victoria, the Lincoln Marks and the T-Birds, all started modding before Marauder's did.
[/color]

Well, Yugos also use tires and our cars use tires too. So, why not include Yugos as well?

[MENINBLK]

We have been over this before, and once again IMHO, no timeslip scan is necessary. Honor system is fine, you have seen what happens when the numbers don't match, and what good is it to post a time that you can't replicate real time? Slips can be photochopped anyway, and no moderator, or, additional safeguards change that. IMHO, it should be for Marauders only too, just my .02c...

If you feel that way, why even have a database at all ??
Then according to you, we can never tell if the slips are genuine or not.
Videos can be altered as well.

[gonzo50]

Well, I voted for Marauders only, Track times only, and Members can post, thats just me, maybe one day I'll make it to the track and take a run at the 1320. :burnout:

[MARAUDER S/C #5]

The database should also include ALL cars because the Marauder isn't the only car to use that platform or engine or transmission, and those cars, including the Crown Victoria, the Lincoln Marks and the T-Birds, all started modding before Marauder's did.

That knowledge gave Marauder owners a head start, and their ideas are still used all the time today, especially considering the transmission.

I think the timeslips for other cars using the same platform, engine or transmission should be considered for just this reason.

If the car has no major sharings with a Marauder, then it's really not important and should be disregarded.
The other type cars can go post their .25 mile info on their own sites.
I wouldn't post my info on another cars site. :rolleyes:

[MARAUDER S/C #5]

I voted that timeslips should not be needed if humidity, temperature and modifications are included.
If you don't own a Marauder you should not be allowed to participate in the poll.

:bs:

[SergntMac]

If you feel that way, why even have a database at all ??
Then according to you, we can never tell if the slips are genuine or not.
Videos can be altered as well.
True. Agreed. But, you seem to make my point stronger too.

A timeslip, or, (as you now suggest) a video, as proof of anything, is really value-less to us because both can be manipulated to show anything the author desires.

I'm ROTFLMAO now, from my own personal mental "video" of my last visit to the 1320 "caught on tape" in the hands of some wheel-stand crazed 14 year old video-edit master. LOL...I can only imagine!

I'm pasted all over this thread, with one opinion, or, another on specific topics. Sorry I didn't get into the "paperless office" stuff, it's too close to home for me, but I believe I have been consistent in my thoughts. Yet, you highlight comments from me that are in some way meaningful for you in this discussion, and I'm not sure why.

It's cool, my point ^ there, was that the resources we consider as "proof", are not really proof of anything at all in the hands of a skilled surgeon. Of course, why anyone would go to this extreme, and how would they benefit from such surgery, remain a mystery. Nonetheless, the fact that a skilled surgeon can impact this proof makes "proving it" proof-less on it's own merit.

If you agree, then why bother embracing such proof as "required"? The "honor" of it all is probably our best path. If someone tries to smoke us, I'm fairly confident that one of us will catch on, and pull a rip cord that places it in the hands of an Administrator for a call.

That said, this is my opinion, and you have me nailed down on these issues. My words explain how I feel about this stuff, and illustrate what real value this database holds for me, personally. I can have many opinions, and opinions change with the tides. But, I have only one vote, and since I am not the master of the MM.Net, only my one simple vote counts in moving this forward. I do not administrate, moderate, design, approve, or, control anything here. Like you, I wear a JAFO cap, just another fu*king observer, until it's time to vote.

[Petrograde]

My 2 cents...

Marauders and any other Panther platfom car should be allowed.

..and I don't mind G-Force type meters,.. as long as it annotated. :poke:

[MikesMerc]

If you're teaching your students that they can get all the information they need electronically, you are doing them a great disservice.


Scary isn't it. Thank god he's only teaching music.



Sorry, but we're nowhere near a paperless world these days. They've been preaching that for 10 years (and the USA was going metric 30 years ago, too) and our company spends more money annually on printers than on computers.

Don't bother trying to explain it to him. LOL...He's backed himself into a corner but is still willing to argue the point even if it makes him look completely foolish. He obviously knows very little about the business world, or, more likely, he is simply too embarrassed to admit he's dead wrong about the current state of imaging technology. Next stop will be him arguing the world is flat :lol:

[Captain Steve]

My opinion:

This is a Marauder site, the timeslips page should be just for Marauders.

Uploaded pictures of the actual physical timeslip should be optional. The people that want to see the pretty picture can feel free to ignore the postings without one.

The database should reflect all of the common timeslip fields.

I really wish people would stop getting into pissing contests about every little thing.

[woaface]

Maybe if they use the same tires, but I didn't include tires.

Any car that uses a MARAUDER Engine or transmission or is on the panther platform.

A Yugo meets none of those requirements.

For a Lawer who reads fine print, you certainly missed my point:P ::runs off in fear::



Well, Yugos also use tires and our cars use tires too. So, why not include Yugos as well?

[woaface]

Well considering we've not yet limited the database to Marauders only, your point is moot. I've been around here a while and I know Marauders well.

The Marauder isn't the only car that uses the same engine or transmission or body and again, many of the mods and ideas available to us come from the past. If a t-bird comes in with great timeslips, someone might want to know how his transmission will keep up, and do the same to theirs.

I don't think it should be open to ALL cars as stated, but all cars that share something SIGNIFICANT (not tires) with our car. Engine, transmission, body-style/platform.

That's reasonable and shouldn't be a problem and I believe it's far better evidence to support it than to simply say "Nothing but Marauders because."



If you don't own a Marauder you should not be allowed to participate in the poll.

:bs:

[duhtroll]

Yep, Mike. You go right on thinking that . . .

I think everyone here has seen how petty you can be. Your best argument is nothing but an insult.

Your reputation is just as good as it was before. :D

-A


Scary isn't it. Thank god he's only teaching music.

[Tallboy]

Guys, listen...


My intent was to see actual timeslips posted. But, whatever happens is OK with me. like I said, I click on "cars with proof of E.T." whenever I view. You don't have to view it the same way. Or agree with me. I'm cool with it, and you should be too.

I HATE it when these discussions "go south" and get personal. We all have different views and opinions, that's what makes it [and life] interesting. This has clearly gotten out of hand. Let's be civil to one another or leave this one alone, 'K?

Whatever the powers to be decide is fine. As long as I have the option to view only "cars with proof of E.T.", I'm a happy camper.

We're all on ths ship together. Let's enjoy the ride.

[mpearce]

http://www.atldragracing.com/boards/images/smiles/beatdeadhorse5.gif
Hahahahaha!!!

[woaface]

Tru. Tru.

I don't mean to get personal, but I think my opinion is worth at least considering.

Whatever it may be, it's up to the majority and the moderators.

[SergntMac]

Just a quick reminder to all...

In case y'all havent noticed, we have been kicking this around for a while. We have heard all the rationale for change, the whys and wherefores, and we're chock full opinions too. This is where the questions in the poll came from, our arguments.

Go ahead and post your thoughts if you wish, but don't waste time with wiseazz remarks. Turn your opinion into a vote for improvement the way YOU want it, and be done with it. When the poll closes, changes will follow.

[mpearce]

The other type cars can go post their .25 mile info on their own sites. I wouldn't post my info on another cars site. :rolleyes:
This I agree with. Other cars can go to the recently popular www.dragtimes.com (http://www.dragtimes.com) thats what it's for.

If it ends up not being MM only...there's nothing I can do about that.

Thats why I like the MM selection idea. Make it a "sort-by" criteria. Drop down box style.

-Mat

[MM03MOK]

Since we're getting pretty close to 100 Members voting, we can see the trend in answers. Don't look at the percentages on the right because it's totaling all the votes together, based on Members voting.

Approx. 63% of 97 Members voting think the database should be Marauders only.

38% say timeslips should not be required and 24% say timeslips should be required.

Actual track data is ahead of simulated data - 39% to 25%.

The additions to the database are fairly even....25-30%.

Finally, 24% of 97 Members have no preference.

[MikesMerc]

I think everyone here has seen how petty you can be. Your best argument is nothing but an insult.



Well, after thinking about the exchange that took place above, I don't think that I was the only one out of line. But, I probably did let things get personal and it shouldn't have happened. You only followed suit.

Everyone is free to have their own opinion, and that certainly includes you. I shouldn't have even bothered to convince you otherwise. I'm quite sure the folks on this board are bright enough to make up their own mind. If the PMs I received are any indication, then it was obvious that my point was made a long time ago without the need to flame anyone.

I'm not really worried about my reputation here at all. Those that know me personally understand this. Even so, I do apologize for questioning your integrity as an educator...that was out of line. Along with all my other bad shots I took. I should never let the heat of any debate supercede respect.

Thanks to those who PM'd me saying they knew what I was talking about, but more importantly, reminded me of what was more important.

I hope everyone votes on this so we can bring some peace to the issue quickly.

[SergntMac]

I hope everyone votes on this so we can bring some peace to the issue quickly.
Thank you, Mike.

[MM03MOK]

:bump: :bump:

[Bradley G]

Hey you don't have words typed?

Bradley G
Get ready for an update!:banana2:

:bump: :bump:

[SergntMac]

Bump...

Bump, with a preview of the tally to date. 4 days to go, please vote?

Out of 110 voting members...

29 members vote that posting a timeslip should be required.
42 members vote that a timeslip should not be required.

73 members vote that the database should be for Marauders only.
5 members voted that it should be open to all cars.

46 members voted that only actual race track data be allowed.
29 members voted to accept simulated data too.

This poll included voting for changes/additions to the data collected. Of the three suggested changes...

31 members voted to include track temperature and humidity at the time the data was collected.

31 members voted to include 330' and 1000' times. (Note-1000' time not available from 1/8 mile tracks)

32 members voted to include reaction time (not standardized among all tracks)

Finally...
27 of 110 members voting express no preference.

Thank you all for participating.

This poll closes 18 May, 2005, and it will establish the parameters for our new MM.Net timeslip database, TBA.

If you have not yet voted, get busy.

[Smokie]

This poll closes 18 May, 2005, and it will establish the parameters for our new MM.Net timeslip database.Sarge, do you mean that Logan has agreed to actually change the current timeslip page ?

[MM03MOK]

Sarge, do you mean that Logan has agreed to actually change the current timeslip page ?Bunny's in control of this one and will do as much as she's able to. At this point, any data field that is added in the Profile, will only be seen in the Profile since adding or changing columns requires rewriting the underlying PHP files, which sucks and is time consuming. I'll do what I can.

[Smokie]

Bunny's in control of this one and will do as much as she's able to. At this point, any data field that is added in the Profile, will only be seen in the Profile since adding or changing columns requires rewriting the underlying PHP files, which sucks and is time consuming. I'll do what I can.Mary, I know that anything done by you will be done right.:D

[MarauderMark]

Mary, I know that anything done by you will be done right.:D


Bunny you sure are one in a million gald your here.RF and Logan are surely lucky.:up: