Well, thanks Wouter, very kind of you. I have though only commented on the topic of this thread - relative stiffness of platforms. I don't wish to get involved in F16 class politics. As our US friends would say - I have no dog in that fight. I agree with Klaus's comment about keeping to the thread topic and cetainly enjoy the range of views there. A nice summary has been provided and it seems to have been done to death.
I'm not on any "sides" and have stated twice on this thread my strong support for formula racing. I have no issue or comment to make on F16 class rules.

One thing which occurs to me while reading this thread and some others is that perhaps not everyone in F16 has fully grasped the concept that it is a development class, and the implications which arise from that. While there are restrictions in some areas, there are many others for individuals and manufacturers to explore. This in my view is a wonderful attribute and ensures the class will remain fresh and close to state of the art. Otherwise you remain one design and miss out on exploring exciting developments over the years. The downside is that costs may increase from time to time.

Let's try "tolerance and understanding" of different viewpoints and get on with the sailing. May it include over-stiff, sloppy or just right platforms.

Cheers