I posted my magazine article purely for its historical reasons and to answer the many enquiries as to what it was all about.
Are you saying only your version is right and only you can answer questions about this?
I had to bear every bloody BMCC meeting after another discussing this POS - that is one of the main reasons QVMX was started - lets not make ride dates or discuss track options, lets use the whole meeting talking about Vern's forking bike. As I said, I was there and you were not.
SuperSenor50, contact Vern and ask him if he actually gave a shit the effect his bike was having on others? Lets go for a 3rd denial in a row ....
You and I know very well that that was far from the case don't we Mark?
The only person on this thread showing "pedantic, vitrolic and bitter" behaviour is you my friend. .
Umm no "I don't know" - you've got me there, what case?
If you mean Vern didn't like that I stood up and supported the rulebook against his bike well, tough shit. If Vern is embittered towards me to this day because I supported the rule book against his bike - again, tough shit. All my conversations with Vern at the clubrooms and trackside were always friendly and amicable and on occasion Vern would come out to Veresdale on the Saturday to see where the track was going and as I mentioned he was there on the Sunday sometimes as a Steward so I don't know where your info is coming from. Again, as I said, I was there and you were not.
This is a forum and you raised the topic, I have every right to discuss it and I have no problem with my position on this bike, a position that was backed up by the rulebook and MA - it was illegal and you can huff and puff your guts out all day long along with calling me all the names you want to and that fact won't ever change.
See when you lose a debate you turn to personalities.