First of all I don't think this is the year we should change rules that may increase the cost of OD racing.
Allowing mains without reef points will make all existing mains absolete (except "Better Moustrap"s main from 2007, see pic down the class page).
In addition if we have a windy regatta (30+) and a few rigs came down because of lack of reefs, we hurt the class for a long time.
Personally I think it's foolish to think the sailmakers will pass on the the savings to us for the lack of reef points.

What is 5.15.3 Rule? Can the logo's I now have on my mains become illegal?

Tom - here is the link to the 2008 Class rules from the J/30 web site: http://www.j30.org/html/rules.html

Scroll down all the way to the bottom. That J/30 scaled logo is what has always been in the rules. It was there from day one when J/Boats first assembled the rules. What happened is that the original rules in booklet form had some of the images on adjacent pages, and this was one of them. Over time when the pagination was redone, this image got moved. Nothing really changes other than to restore what the figure was with the original rules.

Now - if you bought a J/30 one design sail from a sail maker, they probably already had the J/30 logo template and used it. I doubt that any sail makers took the time to come up with their own funky J/30 logo. So, you'll just need to verify that your logo looks like what is in the specs.

I was not sure what the language meant, thanks.

Finally looking carefully at these in advance of upcoming meetings and taking them one at a time with comments.

6.4 Safety Gear and Equipment:
Proposed items are exactly the same as the original, except reorganized to Coast Guard/Class/Optional. I wouldn't think most of the optional items (first aid kit, soft wood plugs, flashlights, buckets, heaving line) should be optional, though I could live without the radar reflector. Also with a couple boats in North America and Caribbean a generic Coast Guard is probably a better term than USCG.

Paragraph 5.12.2.4 (headboard)
I think it unnecessary to include in class rules what is covered in ISAF's Equipment Rules of Sailing, as it opens the door for technical protests. ISAF doesn't use the term headboard, but G.1.4(n) 'corner board'. This change is better left to a technical ruling or advice to measurers.

Paragraph 5.12.2.6 (reef points)

On to personal beliefs. What happens when you are sailing an overnight distance race and storms bring winds over 30? Time to reef. Same goes for cruising or racing short handed and you want to keep the boat on its feet. I've seen plenty of bogus reef points on sails I've measured, but that doesn't make me think we should get rid of them. If they are optional, those in breezy locations and those who actually use their boats as racer-cruisers will be at a disadvantage to light air round the buoy daysailers.

Bob - I think you read the earlier version of the proposed change at the beginning of this thread. The revised wording is an interpretation and keeps the current rule unchanged. Here is what the proposed wording (changes are the bold / italic text added):

Paragraph 5.12.2.4 rules - proposed
5.12.2.4 The width of the headboard measured at right angles to the mast shall not exceed 158 mm.
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
It is intended that the dimension at the head of the sail measured perpendicular to the mast be generally controlled by the maximum specified size of the headboard insert. This measurement excludes variability due to any extension provided by luff tape, track slugs or minor additions of sail cloth around the perimeter of the headboard for finishing.
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________

I tend to agree with Bob and also I think this type of rule change really starts to reduce the J/30 down to a one dimensional OD windward / leeward race boat - which from what I understand was NOT the design goal of the J/30. It is a race/cruiser and if you cruise you must have reef points.

David

I saw that, but if anything the interpretation makes it more complicated, then just referring to ISAF.