and status quo (creates the most confusion and dissent).
Alright Mike, this one made me roll my eyes right out of my skull.
The status quo seemed to be working okay in the fastest growing division, pre-hammergate.
The rules were more or less evenly applied, and they struck a fair balance between inclusiveness and exclusiveness of equipment.
Most guys who are not cheating dirtbags followed the rules. Every now and again a guy not in compliance would get bumped to open, creating a reminder and incentive to follow the rules. The rules were enforced as much by fellow competitors as by formal RO staff, through an informal overlapping oversight model.
Unfortunately for production division, leadership created (and continues to fuel) a perception that the rules were unsettled and up for debate, prompting every guy with a pet modification wishlist to come with his hand out. This has morphed into a full blown debate on production, and it becomes increasingly unclear where production is headed and what it will look like.
The perception that the rules are flexible or up for debate has trickled down through the sport. I recall a certain match that substituted the popper calibration rules for their own. What do you think emboldened them?
This is doing very public, and very real damage to the credibility of the USPSA ruleset, which historically enjoyed a good reputation on the objectivity of rules, especially relative to some competing .orgs.
Bottom line, I think it's disingenuous to upset the production apple cart, and then blame the confusion and dissent on the status quo.