RWF: Rejects World Federation

In honour of our fallen comrade. Archive of all previous canon series across all disciplines.

What is your opinion of the canon restructuring proposal?

Poll ended at 28 Mar 2015, 12:46

This is definitely the way forward
10
77%
It has potential but needs reworking
3
23%
I agree that tweaks are needed, but this idea isn't how to do it
0
No votes
Everything is fine the way it is
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 13

User avatar
AndreaModa
Posts: 5806
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 17:51
Location: Bristol, UK

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by AndreaModa »

Ataxia wrote:AndreaModa, you gave your blessing for it to use the Jones name, what chassis number would you like to give it?


Ah yes, you're spot on. The 114 will be the 2018 AR1 car which means the F3 car will be the Jones 115.
I want my MTV...Simtek Ford

My Motorsport Photos

@DNPQ_
User avatar
Nuppiz
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 5922
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 12:10
Location: Vantaa, Finland
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Nuppiz »

To anyone thinking "but how should the 2018 Canon restructure be explained", here's something: http://formularejects.com/wiki/Formula_ ... _backstory
Eurosport broadcast for the 1990 Mexican GP prequalifying:
"The Life, it looked very lifeless yet again... in fact Bruno did one, slow lap"
User avatar
dr-baker
Posts: 15429
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 17:30
Location: Here and there.

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by dr-baker »

Nuppiz wrote:To anyone thinking "but how should the 2018 Canon restructure be explained", here's something: http://formularejects.com/wiki/Formula_ ... _backstory

So... does this mean F1RWRS is dead? Will the 2017 season be completed? What are the immediate implications?
watka wrote:I find it amusing that whilst you're one of the more openly Christian guys here, you are still first and foremost associated with an eye for the ladies!
dinizintheoven wrote:GOOD CHRISTIANS do not go to jail. EVERYONE ON FORMULA ONE REJECTS should be in jail.
MCard LOLA
User avatar
tommykl
Posts: 7062
Joined: 07 Apr 2010, 17:10
Location: Banbury, Oxfordshire, UK

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by tommykl »

dr-baker wrote:
Nuppiz wrote:To anyone thinking "but how should the 2018 Canon restructure be explained", here's something: http://formularejects.com/wiki/Formula_ ... _backstory

So... does this mean F1RWRS is dead? Will the 2017 season be completed? What are the immediate implications?

F1RWRS isn't dead. The season will finish as planned, and F1RWRS will simply change name to ARWS for 2018.

At least that's what I've gathered.
kevinbotz wrote:Cantonese is a completely nonsensical f*cking alien language masquerading as some grossly bastardised form of Chinese

Gonzo wrote:Wasn't there some sort of communisim in the East part of Germany?
User avatar
Salamander
Posts: 9570
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 20:59
Location: trapped on some prison island

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Salamander »

tommykl wrote:
dr-baker wrote:
Nuppiz wrote:To anyone thinking "but how should the 2018 Canon restructure be explained", here's something: http://formularejects.com/wiki/Formula_ ... _backstory

So... does this mean F1RWRS is dead? Will the 2017 season be completed? What are the immediate implications?

F1RWRS isn't dead. The season will finish as planned, and F1RWRS will simply change name to ARWS for 2018.

At least that's what I've gathered.


That is exactly what is happening.
Sebastian Vettel wrote:If I was good at losing I wouldn't be in Formula 1.
Everything's great.
I'm not surprised about anything.
User avatar
AndreaModa
Posts: 5806
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 17:51
Location: Bristol, UK

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by AndreaModa »

I can't believe it's that hard to work out!
I want my MTV...Simtek Ford

My Motorsport Photos

@DNPQ_
User avatar
dr-baker
Posts: 15429
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 17:30
Location: Here and there.

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by dr-baker »

AndreaModa wrote:I can't believe it's that hard to work out!

Sometimes I can be a bit slow on the uptake, as I am sure regulars on here have worked out by now.... :oops:
watka wrote:I find it amusing that whilst you're one of the more openly Christian guys here, you are still first and foremost associated with an eye for the ladies!
dinizintheoven wrote:GOOD CHRISTIANS do not go to jail. EVERYONE ON FORMULA ONE REJECTS should be in jail.
MCard LOLA
User avatar
Salamander
Posts: 9570
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 20:59
Location: trapped on some prison island

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Salamander »

So, if you've seen the ARWS Pre-Qualfying results from Bathurst, you'll probably note that 4 drivers failed to set a time. Not because of a crash, or mechanical failure, or anything that a team owner could control in any way, but simply because GP2 did decide not send those drivers out until it was too late for them to set a time. Maybe I'm alone in this, but quite frankly, this is a ridiculous and unacceptable situation.

It's obvious that the time allotted for Pre-Q needs to be extended. Who agrees with me?
Sebastian Vettel wrote:If I was good at losing I wouldn't be in Formula 1.
Everything's great.
I'm not surprised about anything.
User avatar
Nuppiz
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 5922
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 12:10
Location: Vantaa, Finland
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Nuppiz »

Salamander wrote:It's obvious that the time allotted for Pre-Q needs to be extended. Who agrees with me?

*Raises hand*.

My cars suffered from this a couple of times last season, so I know how frustrating it is.
Eurosport broadcast for the 1990 Mexican GP prequalifying:
"The Life, it looked very lifeless yet again... in fact Bruno did one, slow lap"
User avatar
pi314159
Posts: 3660
Joined: 11 Aug 2012, 12:12

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by pi314159 »

Salamander wrote:So, if you've seen the ARWS Pre-Qualfying results from Bathurst, you'll probably note that 4 drivers failed to set a time. Not because of a crash, or mechanical failure, or anything that a team owner could control in any way, but simply because GP2 did decide not send those drivers out until it was too late for them to set a time. Maybe I'm alone in this, but quite frankly, this is a ridiculous and unacceptable situation.

It's obvious that the time allotted for Pre-Q needs to be extended. Who agrees with me?

I hopefully won't have to bother with PQ again this year, but I agree anyway. It's just frustrating if you DNPQ because the game didn't send out your car in time. Please extend the pre-qualifying time to avoid this.
pasta_maldonado wrote:The stewards have recommended that Alan Jones learns to drive.
User avatar
DemocalypseNow
Posts: 13185
Joined: 17 Aug 2009, 09:30
Location: Lost, send help
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by DemocalypseNow »

My suggestion, if we are to go ahead and push this, is to mandate that all sessions must be at least 30 minutes. We saw the same thing happening in qualifying for Adelaide too, and I really don't care at all that there is an extra session - the back of the grid was populated almost entirely by the cars which didn't manage to set a time in both sessions.

So I say if we are going to do this, we push through a rule that affects both PreQ and Q.
Novitopoli wrote:Everytime someone orders at Pizza Hut, an Italian dies.
Novitopoli wrote:Juve's Triplete: Calciopoli, doping & Mafia connections.

Image Image
User avatar
CaptainGetz12
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1848
Joined: 06 Mar 2013, 03:19
Location: Sacramento, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by CaptainGetz12 »

pi314159 wrote:
Salamander wrote:So, if you've seen the ARWS Pre-Qualfying results from Bathurst, you'll probably note that 4 drivers failed to set a time. Not because of a crash, or mechanical failure, or anything that a team owner could control in any way, but simply because GP2 did decide not send those drivers out until it was too late for them to set a time. Maybe I'm alone in this, but quite frankly, this is a ridiculous and unacceptable situation.

It's obvious that the time allotted for Pre-Q needs to be extended. Who agrees with me?

I hopefully won't have to bother with PQ again this year, but I agree anyway. It's just frustrating if you DNPQ because the game didn't send out your car in time. Please extend the pre-qualifying time to avoid this.


I did notice this problem when I tested qualifying for my own series in Grand Prix 2. I would reccomend to set the time to at least 30 minutes, though I would check each course beforehand to see if 30 minutes will be enough.
Klon wrote:What did poor André do to you for him to be insulted like that?
User avatar
tommykl
Posts: 7062
Joined: 07 Apr 2010, 17:10
Location: Banbury, Oxfordshire, UK

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by tommykl »

Salamander wrote:So, if you've seen the ARWS Pre-Qualfying results from Bathurst, you'll probably note that 4 drivers failed to set a time. Not because of a crash, or mechanical failure, or anything that a team owner could control in any way, but simply because GP2 did decide not send those drivers out until it was too late for them to set a time. Maybe I'm alone in this, but quite frankly, this is a ridiculous and unacceptable situation.

It's obvious that the time allotted for Pre-Q needs to be extended. Who agrees with me?

I also agree with this. It wasn't much of an issue last season, as Gillet weren't even close to prequalification anyway, but now that Walsh is regularly in the top eight but Moll can't set a single lap time, it's getting extremely frustrating.
kevinbotz wrote:Cantonese is a completely nonsensical f*cking alien language masquerading as some grossly bastardised form of Chinese

Gonzo wrote:Wasn't there some sort of communisim in the East part of Germany?
User avatar
Ataxia
Not Important
Posts: 6860
Joined: 23 Jun 2010, 12:47
Location: Sneed's Feed & Seed (formerly Chuck's)
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Ataxia »

Yeah, I'm in agreement here. I can imagine it's supremely frustrating, and the interests of fairness the session should be longer.
Mitch Hedberg wrote:I want to be a race car passenger: just a guy who bugs the driver. Say man, can I turn on the radio? You should slow down. Why do we gotta keep going in circles? Man, you really like Tide...
User avatar
DemocalypseNow
Posts: 13185
Joined: 17 Aug 2009, 09:30
Location: Lost, send help
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by DemocalypseNow »

Well, there's enough interested parties at this point that a serious, structured plan for a vote can be put into place.

What I am looking for a straight answer to is this;

Should the lengths of pre-race sessions in ARWS be extended?

A. Both pre-qualifying, and both qualifying sessions, should be extended to at least 30 minutes.
B. Just Pre-Qualifying should be extended to at least 30 minutes.
C. No changes are required to the length of pre-race sessions.

I will consider the motion for B passed if the combination of votes for A & B reaches at least 11, so feel free to vote for A without worrying that neither of the proposals will be successful.

Option A
10 - Voeckler, Gauthier, Jones, PAE, MRT, NRE, Rosenforth, Venturi, Blokkmonsta, RLR

Option B
4 - Fusion, Kjellerup, Gillet, Mecha

Option C
0
Novitopoli wrote:Everytime someone orders at Pizza Hut, an Italian dies.
Novitopoli wrote:Juve's Triplete: Calciopoli, doping & Mafia connections.

Image Image
User avatar
Salamander
Posts: 9570
Joined: 29 Mar 2009, 20:59
Location: trapped on some prison island

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Salamander »

I vote for motion A.
Sebastian Vettel wrote:If I was good at losing I wouldn't be in Formula 1.
Everything's great.
I'm not surprised about anything.
User avatar
Ataxia
Not Important
Posts: 6860
Joined: 23 Jun 2010, 12:47
Location: Sneed's Feed & Seed (formerly Chuck's)
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Ataxia »

I vote for option B, because I feel having two qualifying sessions cancels out the need to make them longer.
Mitch Hedberg wrote:I want to be a race car passenger: just a guy who bugs the driver. Say man, can I turn on the radio? You should slow down. Why do we gotta keep going in circles? Man, you really like Tide...
User avatar
tommykl
Posts: 7062
Joined: 07 Apr 2010, 17:10
Location: Banbury, Oxfordshire, UK

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by tommykl »

I vote for option B. Not setting a time isn't that much of a problem with two combined sessions.
kevinbotz wrote:Cantonese is a completely nonsensical f*cking alien language masquerading as some grossly bastardised form of Chinese

Gonzo wrote:Wasn't there some sort of communisim in the East part of Germany?
User avatar
pi314159
Posts: 3660
Joined: 11 Aug 2012, 12:12

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by pi314159 »

Option B for me as well, keeps the grids a bit mixed while ensuring a fair pre-qualifying session.
pasta_maldonado wrote:The stewards have recommended that Alan Jones learns to drive.
User avatar
AndreaModa
Posts: 5806
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 17:51
Location: Bristol, UK

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by AndreaModa »

A for me.
I want my MTV...Simtek Ford

My Motorsport Photos

@DNPQ_
User avatar
V8fan12
Posts: 1167
Joined: 26 Nov 2013, 21:39
Location: The Dotcom Mansion, New Zealand

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by V8fan12 »

Option A for me
Owner of the Peak Motorsport Group.

Biscione wrote:I mean, Renaldo Jimenez, could you ask for a more world class pay driver? Who even is Alexey Buyvolov, amirite?
User avatar
TomWazzleshaw
Posts: 14370
Joined: 01 Apr 2009, 04:42
Location: Curva do lel
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by TomWazzleshaw »

I vote option A
Biscione wrote:"Some Turkemenistani gulag repurposed for residential use" is the best way yet I've heard to describe North / East Glasgow.
User avatar
Nuppiz
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 5922
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 12:10
Location: Vantaa, Finland
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Nuppiz »

I vote A.
Eurosport broadcast for the 1990 Mexican GP prequalifying:
"The Life, it looked very lifeless yet again... in fact Bruno did one, slow lap"
User avatar
the Masked Lapwing
Posts: 4204
Joined: 10 Sep 2010, 09:38
Location: Oran Park Raceway

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by the Masked Lapwing »

I vote for A.
R.I.P.
GM HOLDEN
1948-2017
User avatar
FMecha
Posts: 5145
Joined: 04 Jan 2011, 16:18
Location: Open road
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by FMecha »

I'll pick Option B. :)
PSN ID: FMecha_EXE | FMecha on GT Sport
Normal32
Posts: 1516
Joined: 12 Mar 2014, 17:48
Location: Pampas

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Normal32 »

I vote option A.
Pasta_maldonado wrote:I think normal32 is an old English farmer re-incarnated
User avatar
CaptainGetz12
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1848
Joined: 06 Mar 2013, 03:19
Location: Sacramento, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by CaptainGetz12 »

I vote for option A.
Klon wrote:What did poor André do to you for him to be insulted like that?
User avatar
DemocalypseNow
Posts: 13185
Joined: 17 Aug 2009, 09:30
Location: Lost, send help
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by DemocalypseNow »

Still waiting for the seven following teams to make their opinion heard regarding the poll above;

Simpson Motorsports (MinardiFan)
Plus One Kingfisher (pasta_maldonado)
Revolution Engineering (Shizuka)
Kamaha Motorsports (SuperAguri)
Rob Lomas Racing (roblomas)
Tassie Racing (HawkAussie)
Union Saver Developments (SeedStriker)

Two more votes for Option A would see it pass. Can the collective effort of the AutoReject Teams Association see it over the line?
Novitopoli wrote:Everytime someone orders at Pizza Hut, an Italian dies.
Novitopoli wrote:Juve's Triplete: Calciopoli, doping & Mafia connections.

Image Image
User avatar
roblo97
Posts: 3847
Joined: 16 Sep 2012, 16:42
Location: my house \M/ (Brent Knoll)
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by roblo97 »

I vote option A.
Mexicola wrote:
shinji wrote:
Mexicola wrote: I'd rather listen to a dog lick its balls. Each to their own, I guess.

Does listening to a dog licking its balls get you excited?

That's between me and my internet service provider.

One of those journalist types.
270 Tube stations in 18:42:50!
User avatar
DemocalypseNow
Posts: 13185
Joined: 17 Aug 2009, 09:30
Location: Lost, send help
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by DemocalypseNow »

The poll has been open for a week now, and given how unlikely it will be for the scores to draw level at 10-10 (the vote has been open for an appropriate length of time to establish which teams will vote in the end at all), I feel comfortable in declaring that Option A has won the vote.

Therefore, the AutoReject Teams Association recommends to the ARWS organising body that pre-qualifying and both qualifying sessions should be extended to at least 30 minutes each. Given that 100% of those who voted did so at minimum in favour of extending Pre-Q to 30 minutes, we expect this section of change to be implemented in time for the next race at Monza.
Novitopoli wrote:Everytime someone orders at Pizza Hut, an Italian dies.
Novitopoli wrote:Juve's Triplete: Calciopoli, doping & Mafia connections.

Image Image
User avatar
SeedStriker
Posts: 1288
Joined: 02 Jul 2012, 19:51

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by SeedStriker »

Sorry I didn't reply earlier. Me too go for option A.
User avatar
SuperAguri
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2026
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 01:27
Location: Rio, Brazil

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by SuperAguri »

In the past we have managed to do tests between races in ARWS1, now Aerond sneaked in a rule change a few weeks ago asking that we give at least one races notice before we do this. As this is quite a big ruie change and not on the rules in the Wiki, do you think it should have been run past ARTA?
<@Ataxia> these people are making a mess of their crepe suzettes
User avatar
Nuppiz
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 5922
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 12:10
Location: Vantaa, Finland
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Nuppiz »

SuperAguri wrote:In the past we have managed to do tests between races in ARWS1, now Aerond sneaked in a rule change a few weeks ago asking that we give at least one races notice before we do this. As this is quite a big ruie change and not on the rules in the Wiki, do you think it should have been run past ARTA?

I don't test often, and even when I do I'm not doing it on a short notice. As a fellow series organiser I also understand Aerond's point behind this rule change.

However, it's still a major rule change and Aerond should've at least consulted the teams before implementing it.
Eurosport broadcast for the 1990 Mexican GP prequalifying:
"The Life, it looked very lifeless yet again... in fact Bruno did one, slow lap"
User avatar
CaptainGetz12
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1848
Joined: 06 Mar 2013, 03:19
Location: Sacramento, CA, USA
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by CaptainGetz12 »

SuperAguri wrote:In the past we have managed to do tests between races in ARWS1, now Aerond sneaked in a rule change a few weeks ago asking that we give at least one races notice before we do this. As this is quite a big ruie change and not on the rules in the Wiki, do you think it should have been run past ARTA?


I think he should have consulted the teams first before implementing it as well. For people who barely have time to post their testing schedules this is unfair.
Klon wrote:What did poor André do to you for him to be insulted like that?
User avatar
Ataxia
Not Important
Posts: 6860
Joined: 23 Jun 2010, 12:47
Location: Sneed's Feed & Seed (formerly Chuck's)
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Ataxia »

I don't see the problem; having the tests this way ensures that there's a clear cut-off point to organise things. It saves Aerond from a barrage of people asking "wait can I just organise this test first..." a few minutes prior to a race weekend. We don't need to be consulted on something so trivial.
Mitch Hedberg wrote:I want to be a race car passenger: just a guy who bugs the driver. Say man, can I turn on the radio? You should slow down. Why do we gotta keep going in circles? Man, you really like Tide...
User avatar
SuperAguri
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 2026
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 01:27
Location: Rio, Brazil

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by SuperAguri »

Although the rules on the Wiki should be updated (at the first possible moment) to reflect such a change.So it is not something buried on page 17 of a 32 page thread.
<@Ataxia> these people are making a mess of their crepe suzettes
User avatar
Nuppiz
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 5922
Joined: 30 Mar 2009, 12:10
Location: Vantaa, Finland
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Nuppiz »

Due to semi-official canon master Salamander buggering off the forums for an unspecified amount of time and the way how certain canon series are being run coming under fire, it has been brought up that we need someone or something to control what is canon. One idea that has been brought up in the IRC channel is a three- or four-man commission representing the different facets of the canon with an additional "neutral" member.

Before this is planned any further, I'd like to hear the people's opinion about the matter, including how said members should be chosen. Of course you can also suggest other forms of canon control.
Eurosport broadcast for the 1990 Mexican GP prequalifying:
"The Life, it looked very lifeless yet again... in fact Bruno did one, slow lap"
User avatar
Ataxia
Not Important
Posts: 6860
Joined: 23 Jun 2010, 12:47
Location: Sneed's Feed & Seed (formerly Chuck's)
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Ataxia »

Nuppiz wrote:Due to semi-official canon master Salamander buggering off the forums for an unspecified amount of time and the way how certain canon series are being run coming under fire, it has been brought up that we need someone or something to control what is canon. One idea that has been brought up in the IRC channel is a three- or four-man commission representing the different facets of the canon with an additional "neutral" member.

Before this is planned any further, I'd like to hear the people's opinion about the matter, including how said members should be chosen. Of course you can also suggest other forms of canon control.


Agreed, really. If we take ARWS and F1 as the main canonical attractions, then I believe that Aerond and Klon would be good fits for the panel, as well as someone independent with a good head; someone like pi314159, tommykl or kevinbotz would work, since none own present-day series and are very capable.
Mitch Hedberg wrote:I want to be a race car passenger: just a guy who bugs the driver. Say man, can I turn on the radio? You should slow down. Why do we gotta keep going in circles? Man, you really like Tide...
User avatar
Klon
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 7184
Joined: 28 Mar 2009, 17:07
Location: Schleswig-Holstein, FRG
Contact:

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by Klon »

I am very much in favour of a small council deciding the direction of the canon, that is the best route. As I have been "nominated" by ataxia, I will not talk about its potential members - although I want to stress it should have at least one member who has an eye for details.
User avatar
kevinbotz
Posts: 1142
Joined: 08 May 2013, 21:36
Location: True North

Re: RWF: Rejects World Federation

Post by kevinbotz »

I'd certainly be inclined to second the sentiments expressed thus far regarding the formation of a canon oversight panel.
Klon, on Alt-F1 wrote: I like to think it's more poker than gambling, though.
Post Reply