(I don't know if this is the best place to argue on proposals but until told otherwise...)

Are you proposing a ban on actuating control surfaces on the rudder or more generally all T-foil rudders?

What's your definition of "variable trim"?

I think banning packing of the rudder pintles on the transom is going to be impossible to police.

There are so many possible solutions for changing the lift characteristics of a T-foil on a rudder that your proposal needs to be refined a bit.

That cost of an actuating t-foil system seems a little extreme. The solution that the bladeriders are now incorporating, which many moths are now following, is very simple. The parts that make hydrofoils expensive are the actual foils, the actuating mechanism is a small percentage of that. It isn't that difficult for an amateur to build one with a little education.

There are three options:
- Ban T-foils outright. (Simple)
- Allow any arrangement or configuration of T-foils. (Simple)
- Have a compromise between the two. (Opening up a huge can of worms)

My personal preference is for allowing them with any configuration. Everyone is becoming convinced that they are better. The International 14 is booming since they introduced them, mainly because they are apparently much easier to sail than without them.

Second preference is for fixed blades that only actuate about a vertical axis while sailing (ie. a standard rudder with the option of a horizontal foil solidly fixed to it)

Argument against banning T-foils is that they will be something that will distinguish the class from F18's. To new sailors, F16's and F18's look very similar. Basic marketing strategy involves distinguishing yourself from the competition, whether actually or just in appearance. It's not a big difference when sailing because you won't regularly see them, but on land they will draw attention.

I don't like the current rule about mast tip weight either, but I do like having a structural check on these relatively flimsy masts...I'm assuming that's the reason it was introduced.

I don't think there is any other way to have the best of both worlds for this one. Unrestrict the mast weight and the fear is that there will be numerous lightweight expensive carbon masts built, then broken. Have the tornados gone to carbon masts?

I'd just like to also point out that your two proposals have one argument in common, cost, except that for one proposal it is used as a negative in the argument (T-foils) and for the other it is ignored (Masts)! Cost is a negative of both proposals, few ppl would want to buy an extra mast sometime in the future because the rules changed.

Anyway, these are just my opinions. I guess we'll see what is proposed for the vote.