Pulse of your club…

[Cornpanzer]

Sorry,
I feel that the "S" moniker is simply an excuse for peeps who dont want to join. I have never seen ANY prejudice to those who drive T' and E's when it comes to this board just as there has never been a prejudice towards the RS owners.
Basically what is being said is......"yes, I use the board to learn about my car, I participate in the posts, I buy and sell on the classifieds board, but because I have a T or an E I dont have to buck up and pay the dues."

Seems pretty Bogus to me. And yes Chuck you can quote me next time I let my membership lapse.........LOL

[SWBS]

Sorry,
I feel that the "S" moniker is simply an excuse for peeps who dont want to join. I have never seen ANY prejudice to those who drive T' and E's

Dave, Your magnanimous feelings (which we all share) toward T's & E's, not withstanding, it is the PERCEPTION of non-S owners that this is an exclusive conclave, which needs to be addressed. Jim was correct in his earlier post; if the 356 Registry was called the S90 Registry, I wouldn't have joined ......who wants to be a second class member?

Jim

[pwd72s]

Why heck, you guys with SWB cars ARE second class members...you haven't figured that out??? (tongue firmly in cheek here...no flaming, okay? )

[nullh20]

Dave, Your magnanimous feelings (which we all share) toward T's & E's, not withstanding, it is the PERCEPTION of non-S owners that this is an exclusive conclave, which needs to be addressed. Jim was correct in his earlier post; if the 356 Registry was called the S90 Registry, I wouldn't have joined ......who wants to be a second class member?

Jim

...and also remember that the moniker 'Early 911S Registry' is actually pretty accurate in its exclusion of 911T, 911E, 911L & 911 cars. The 'Registry' itself only includes 911S models in its scope, and I think is only provided to 911S owners?

[HughH]

...and also remember that the moniker 'Early 911S Registry' is actually pretty accurate in its exclusion of 911T, 911E, 911L & 911 cars. The 'Registry' itself only includes 911S models in its scope, and I think is only provided to 911S owners?

If that is the case there must be a paperwork screwup somewhere
as I thought I got a full list that included L, T and E and even (gasp) RS cars as well as some people with no cars (looking) from memory............ and the last time I looked my car was an "E"

[nullh20]

hmm... maybe I was supposed to get a list
I have only joined recently though- maybe the list is on its way!

[HarryD]

Kenikh said what I was thinking...

We all live in the same house, why not make it official and marry them all together? There's strength in numbers, there’s $$$ in numbers and there’s more opportunity in numbers. I think it's time that the heads of the three great powers (T, E and S registries) to come together and figure out LONGHOOD strategy moving forward, whether that be a unified club or not. United we stand, divided we...keep having conversations like this one.

I think the answer is that we, as a group need to evolve. It is not about S's, E's, T's, L's, SWB's, and LWB's but about LONGHOODS. We should make an earnest attempt to put under ONE ROOF the various registry's that support our interests. Like it or not, among the registrys I see, this is the most active. We need to provide the leadership and the way.

[Cornpanzer]

Let me look up magnanimous and I will get back to you on that.

[SWBS]

Let me look up magnanimous and I will get back to you on that.

Dave - Check the garage; you may have a magnanimous engine case!

Jim

[sodly]

I wholeheartedly agree. As a member who is still looking for that perfect car (i.e. an outsider looking in), I agree that the Early 911 S Registry has a discriminatory connotation to it. Whether intended or not, it's a fact. We can say all day long that everyone's welcome, but at the end of the day we must put our money where our mouths are. It's like the confederate flag controversy. If you really want to be inclusive, you'll take down the flag to show that you mean it.

Regarding the logo, I, too, hate to see a cool logo get screwed up. As mentioned previously, the apostrophe S is not gramatically correct. So, I would vote to simply remove the S and leave the logo otherwise unchanged. The only problem is that the years 64, 65 and 66 aren't represented. Hmmmm. Not sure how to address that one.