Mr. Rice on the other hand along with NFL owners tried to cover it up, get the legal system to look the other way.

I am a volunteer, I signed no morality clause and I have paid fully for my mistake.

Everyone makes mistakes, some more drastic than others. Lord knows I have made my own and have had to deal with the repercussions. What, I think, most people want to hear, is something along the lines of contrition and an acknowledgement of responsibility. I'd guess you maybe feel this way, but your post sounds defensive, and possibly threatening, which may not be the tone to strike as it only makes the target on you bigger. I'm glad you got counseling, I hope it helped you understand how you got to wherever you were in the past and have learned how to avoid getting there again. You don't owe anyone other than those directly affected an apology, certainly not Slowtwitchers, but conveying a sense of regret would go a long way to restoring confidence in the organization that runs our sport.

Everyone makes mistakes, some more drastic than others. Lord knows I have made my own and have had to deal with the repercussions. What, I think, most people want to hear, is something along the lines of contrition and an acknowledgement of responsibility. I'd guess you maybe feel this way, but your post sounds defensive, and possibly threatening, which may not be the tone to strike as it only makes the target on you bigger. I'm glad you got counseling, I hope it helped you understand how you got to wherever you were in the past and have learned how to avoid getting there again. You don't owe anyone other than those directly affected an apology, certainly not Slowtwitchers, but conveying a sense of regret would go a long way to restoring confidence in the organization that runs our sport.

Everyone makes mistakes, some more drastic than others. Lord knows I have made my own and have had to deal with the repercussions. What, I think, most people want to hear, is something along the lines of contrition and an acknowledgement of responsibility. I'd guess you maybe feel this way, but your post sounds defensive, and possibly threatening, which may not be the tone to strike as it only makes the target on you bigger. I'm glad you got counseling, I hope it helped you understand how you got to wherever you were in the past and have learned how to avoid getting there again. You don't owe anyone other than those directly affected an apology, certainly not Slowtwitchers, but conveying a sense of regret would go a long way to restoring confidence in the organization that runs our sport.

Please let me personally respond. Yes I pled to a misdemeanor and not a felony as you so inaccurately state, which was part of the entire procedure. The fact is I was offered and accepted deferred adjudication and if you read further, I have no conviction. Unlike Mr. Rice, there was no effort on my part or of the federation "to cover this up". The Federation was aware of it within 72 hours of the incident and monitored my progression thru the justice system. I did 80 hours of community service, I was on probation for 8 months and under Texas law was removed and case closed as a result of my good behavior and counseling. I did 8 weeks of group counseling and then another year of individual counseling. The Board had sessions on this in 2013 and one in 2014 which discussed this and the USOC was well aware of my issues.. Under the USAT By-Laws and the Code of Ethics I violated no rules or by-laws. My record is legally clean. Mr. Rice on the other hand along with NFL owners tried to cover it up, get the legal system to look the other way. I am a volunteer, I signed no morality clause and I have paid fully for my mistake. So unless you personally are without any mistakes in your life, I suggest you let this go. I do note that I am posting by my real name and ID, you on the other hand are not telling us who you are, so let me ask you, who's the real coward here??

Everyone makes mistakes, some more drastic than others. Lord knows I have made my own and have had to deal with the repercussions. What, I think, most people want to hear, is something along the lines of contrition and an acknowledgement of responsibility. I'd guess you maybe feel this way, but your post sounds defensive, and possibly threatening, which may not be the tone to strike as it only makes the target on you bigger. I'm glad you got counseling, I hope it helped you understand how you got to wherever you were in the past and have learned how to avoid getting there again. You don't owe anyone other than those directly affected an apology, certainly not Slowtwitchers, but conveying a sense of regret would go a long way to restoring confidence in the organization that runs our sport.

I don't get the use of the word "mistake". Hitting woman or anyone for that matter is NOT a freaking "mistake". It is a choice.

Please let me personally respond. Yes I pled to a misdemeanor and not a felony as you so inaccurately state, which was part of the entire procedure. The fact is I was offered and accepted deferred adjudication and if you read further, I have no conviction. Unlike Mr. Rice, there was no effort on my part or of the federation "to cover this up". The Federation was aware of it within 72 hours of the incident and monitored my progression thru the justice system. I did 80 hours of community service, I was on probation for 8 months and under Texas law was removed and case closed as a result of my good behavior and counseling. I did 8 weeks of group counseling and then another year of individual counseling. The Board had sessions on this in 2013 and one in 2014 which discussed this and the USOC was well aware of my issues.. Under the USAT By-Laws and the Code of Ethics I violated no rules or by-laws. My record is legally clean. Mr. Rice on the other hand along with NFL owners tried to cover it up, get the legal system to look the other way. I am a volunteer, I signed no morality clause and I have paid fully for my mistake. So unless you personally are without any mistakes in your life, I suggest you let this go. I do note that I am posting by my real name and ID, you on the other hand are not telling us who you are, so let me ask you, who's the real coward here??

Ok Slowman,

Here is what I have to say.
1. I am aware that Jack is still a part of USAT in some capacity, perhaps the wording of my post was not the best
2. If you or anyone else think that cheating on your wife is even close to being on the same level of evil as spousal abuse you are a very ignorant, misinformed, and perhaps not real smart individual with some very distorted perspectives.
3. As a member of USAT I plan to make my voice heard on this issue and will be contacting friends, teammates, and acquaintances who are also USAT members to contact our organization and speak out about this man.
4. Based on your post here on this issue I don't think I will be participating on any more discussions or viewing this website ever again.

I hope that you can get some better perspective on this issue, our society is far too dismissive of domestic violence. Actually, we are far to permissive of all violence. It is a sad state of affairs in America when we just casually dismiss evil, heinous acts of violence as if they are simply routine mistakes that anyone can make. Violence isn't a mistake, it isn't a discussion point, and those who commit violent acts need to face more serious punitive measures.

How would you feel if this ended up as a Felony, which is what it started as. Guess what, crimes have punishment. Felons DO NOT get the same rights as the rest of us. Would you be ok with your local Representative beating his wife and lobbying for issues you care about? Would you still feel this way if she was your mother?

Not to make light of the situation (and I know its not the same severity) but if we substituted performance enhancing drugs for spousal abuse these same arguments would be made. EPO or spousal abuse is 2 year, 4 year or lifetime ban enough?

Expecting that USAT refuse help from anyone with a crime in their past is absurd and hypocritical.

UNLESS you're a perfect human being, you can't throw a damn thing. Period!

UNLESS you're a perfect human being, you can't throw a damn thing. Period!

"Beating on a woman is not a mistake as you might have us believe. It is a despicable, hate filled, act committed by misogynistic bullies. You have no business being involved in our sport, you belong in jail. I am glad you are no longer part of USAT. Words can't express what a disgraceful, loathsome individual you are. Don't ever associate yourself with our sport in any capacity ever again."

i know i'm going to catch hell for this, but, here goes.

first, jack was in jail. at least, that's my understanding. are you saying he should be there forever?

second, jack is a part of USAT. still, he's on the board. which tells me really how closely you've been following this.

so, look, i understand that you hate the act of spousal abuse. as do i. but, whereas i really really really hate it, you really really really really hate it. is that helpful? is your extra "really" helpful?

let me tell you why you're very glad i'm not in charge of the code of conduct at USAT. i am kind of old school, i guess, because i stick cheating on wives right up there not too far below beating on wives. maybe even with it. so, if somebody who committed spousal abuse should never be involved in triathlon, at any level - on the board, as a race director, as a participant - if there's a lifetime ban for anyone who's hit his wife (as you seem to think appropriate), from my perspective what ought the ban to be for someone who's cheated on his wife? because, in my book, that's right up there.

the internet in general, and this forum in particular, is where flawed people get to let fly on other flawed people with all the righteous indignation that can be mustered. i don't think your post was helpful because, based just on the statistics on spousal abuse, something like 50,000 of our sport in the united states have been spousal abusers sometime in their lives, and double or triple that have cheated on their spouses. my view, there ought to be some way back from our sins. jack's wife would absolutely hate what you wrote. she would like some way back for her husband. that's her choice.

is there not a way to both abhor the act, abhor the behavior, require remorse, require recompense, protect our sport and our sport's federation adequately, and reasonably, soberly discuss what really ought to be our sport's posture toward lines that are crossed? your post sounds just so much like what has been written about meredith kessler. brett sutton. just waaay over the top text, where there's nothing other than binary choice between jail, hanging, lifetime ban on the one hand, which polarizes folks on the other side. this means whoever is responsible for the reasonable way forward can't include you in the discussion.

at some point somebody is going to have to come up with changes in our sport's code of conduct. and what really ought to happen to jack weiss as re his involvement in the future in triathlon and in the board of directors. grown ups will have to make these determinations. my question, do you really want to be a part of that discussion? or do you just want to be righteously indignant?

Has he failed you in any sort of way? Did your USAT card not get mailed to you in time? Are your results screwed up? IF his actions cause him to not be able to do his job, then ok, but if they didn't, quit your bitching. If you want to throw a 3rd grade tantrum about something, why don't you call the Whitehouse and demand something be done about ISIS or healthcare issues. Something that is in SERIOUS need of help.

Has he failed you in any sort of way? Did your USAT card not get mailed to you in time? Are your results screwed up? IF his actions cause him to not be able to do his job, then ok, but if they didn't, quit your bitching. If you want to throw a 3rd grade tantrum about something, why don't you call the Whitehouse and demand something be done about ISIS or healthcare issues. Something that is in SERIOUS need of help.

Agreed. We need to take a look at our rules/laws and make sure their appropriate. If they're not, we need to change them. In the meantime, if people are paying the punishment that the rules dictate, then attacking that individual is misguided.

Wow. I just never understand how any male can hit a female. Never ever any excuse for this other than these folks have some big issues.

.

Cheating on wives right up there with beating on wives???? That is an insane way of thinking ... Yikes.

Has he failed you in any sort of way? Did your USAT card not get mailed to you in time? Are your results screwed up? IF his actions cause him to not be able to do his job, then ok, but if they didn't, quit your bitching. If you want to throw a 3rd grade tantrum about something, why don't you call the Whitehouse and demand something be done about ISIS or healthcare issues. Something that is in SERIOUS need of help.

UNLESS you're a perfect human being, you can't throw a damn thing. Period!

"Cheating on wives right up there with beating on wives???? That is an insane way of thinking ... Yikes."

to you, and to the fellow who told me to go fuck myself, i think you misunderstand. you assume i'm bringing wife beating down to the rather (i suppose) minor level of cheating on your wife. it's really the other way around. beating your wife is just unconscionable to me. it's just, so is cheating on your wife. to me, to my thinking, i just think it's a way worse act than a lot of other people consider it. but i'm not going to castigate you, or the go fuck yourself guy, for being so cavalier about cheating on your wives.

wait. did i just accuse you of being cavalier about cheating? that wasn't very nice of me, was it? i'll bet that made you mad. i apologize.

probably best if we don't accuse each other of "insane ways of thinking," or tell each other to go fuck ourselves. or for me to assume that you don't take your marriage vows seriously. it's probably better to try to soberly discuss an issue, each assuming that the other is a man (or woman) of goodwill.

It's about perhaps having some perspective if you have been in the same boat, not about having an opinion.


I think you have come to the heart of the disagreement. Some of us have not, nor will we ever be "in the same boat"; while it appears that some of you have been. I'm relatively certain that the perspective (and tolerance level) of someone who has committed something like domestic violence differs significantly from someone who never would/could.

ironjack,
You owe no one but your wife, family and your God an explanation and a mea culpa, certainly not the self-righteous moral crusaders on a triathlon forum who have never succumbed to the frailties of being human. Don't bother posting anything further on the subject, it will only provide further fodder for you to be criticized.

"Snowman, what is your advice to jack on the resignation decision?"

i was wondering if anyone was going to get around to asking me that. not that i was hoping to be asked, and, i hope you'll give me a few more hours before i answer it. do you mind if i defer the answer for a little while?

and i'm not snowman ;-)

"i am kind of old school, i guess, because i stick cheating on wives right up there not too far below beating on wives. maybe even with it.

"It's understandable to defend a friend but to dismiss the actions and continue to support his role in a governing organization while holding up the woman he battered as a reason he should get a pass is incredibly low. Even for you."

just, to be clear, i'm not defending anyone (nor did anywhere in this thread), nor am i supporting his role in a governing organization (nor did i ever in this thread). if you could step down from that high place and read what it is others are writing, it would help us understand each other. if that's of any interest to you.

this is what mystifies me about reader forums. how does my view that cheating on your wife is a really bad thing translate to woman, get your ass in the kitchen? can you help me with how you made that leap? other than, wow just wow?

Dan, you're an industry leader. Or at least you are in the position to be one. Some of the things you've said on this thread in regards to women and the treatment of women are incredibly tasteless and troubling. For better or worse both you and Jack, if he's in a leadership position, have a greater responsibility in their words and actions than any simple card carrying USAT member. You're only statement on this thread should have been to note Jack was a friend, that his actions were deplorable and that he should remove himself from a leadership position. Instead you've tried to interject your personal feelings for a friend into the discussion and in the process painted yourself as someone who on some level can rationalize and condone punching a woman in the face until she's bruised and bleeding. You've completely failed in your position as someone who should be setting the standard of how the leaders of this sport and industry should behave.

" Some of the things you've said on this thread in regards to women and the treatment of women are incredibly tasteless and troubling."

travis, you keep writing this. but if you could give me an example of what it is to which you refer, what i wrote that is incredibly tasteless and troubling, maybe i'd see the error of my ways, offer a retraction and an apology.

"painted yourself as someone who on some level can rationalize and condone punching a woman in the face until she's bruised and bleeding."

is it possible that you're just reading that, even though i haven't written that?

"Just too bad you brought in cheating to this topic. It can be seen as trying to divert away from how serious assaulting a female is."

i underestimated the ability of a threshold number of slowtwitchers to hold multiple ideas in their heads. my bad.

"BUT, if Jack is this changed person who you defended him as, then clearly, he would understand this is a BIG deal and should resign."

again, dave, i laid down some facts as i saw them (and see them) for consideration, but what do you mean by "defended him." because, if i've actually made a call on whether i think jack should fight to stay, or resign his seat, i don't remember doing so.

"I again ask, how was this hidden from the membership before the last vote?"

i don't know. i'm still trying to get my arms around what happened back then, and what the board is doing today in hindsight and looking forward. it's going to get uglier before it gets less ugly. but i don't know the answer to your question.

Dan, you are a man who never once in the history of this website has been able to admit he was wrong about something so why should this time be any different. The list of people both on here and social media that have been troubled by your reaction to this is extensive. At the end of the day nothing really changes for you, you're still king of your ST castle, but stuff like this isn't forgotten quickly. This is going to spread beyond the tiny triathlon market very soon and even more eyeballs will be viewing the response of those at the top. You've made your position crystal clear.

" Some of the things you've said on this thread in regards to women and the treatment of women are incredibly tasteless and troubling."

travis, you keep writing this. but if you could give me an example of what it is to which you refer, what i wrote that is incredibly tasteless and troubling, maybe i'd see the error of my ways, offer a retraction and an apology.

"painted yourself as someone who on some level can rationalize and condone punching a woman in the face until she's bruised and bleeding."

is it possible that you're just reading that, even though i haven't written that?

Dan, you are a man who never once in the history of this website has been able to admit he was wrong about something so why should this time be any different. The list of people both on here and social media that have been troubled by your reaction to this is extensive. At the end of the day nothing really changes for you, you're still king of your ST castle, but stuff like this isn't forgotten quickly. This is going to spread beyond the tiny triathlon market very soon and even more eyeballs will be viewing the response of those at the top. You've made your position crystal clear.

travis thomason, when you simply insult people you give courage to the other side of whatever it is you're fighting against. you and i may, in fact, be on the same side, broadly speaking. i just don't think that constantly insulting, without adding anything of texture or value or elucidation, serves a purpose, if an identifiable end result is the aim.

Dan, you are a man who never once in the history of this website has been able to admit he was wrong about something so why should this time be any different. The list of people both on here and social media that have been troubled by your reaction to this is extensive. At the end of the day nothing really changes for you, you're still king of your ST castle, but stuff like this isn't forgotten quickly. This is going to spread beyond the tiny triathlon market very soon and even more eyeballs will be viewing the response of those at the top. You've made your position crystal clear.

How about this: answer Dan's serious and honest question (highlighted above for your convenience), or shut up. You made the statement, so back it up. At the least, it will tell us where you stand on things tasteless and troubling.

As I indicated earlier, my wife of 18 years had a hard time last night determining which of spousal abuse or marital infidelity is worse. She's highly educated and a black belt in karate (no shrinking violet her!). So if you are referencing the suggestion of cheating on your spouse being comparable to spousal abuse as tasteless and troubling, be assured that not everyone agrees with your view.

[
That's fascinating. My wife has a Phd and runs ultras. Her opinion is that much of what Dan was written here is extremely troubling. Who cares. That's her opinion and it differs from your wife's. There are people who are troubled by Dan's response to this and those who aren't. Doesn't really matter in the end. This is going to play out in the public and the fallout will be what it is. People's opinions of public figures will be based on their response to events. You can continue trying to shout down people who don't agree with you instead of getting at the real issue of why Jack is still in a position of leadership and why another public figure is supporting him. You're insignificant to the end result as am I.

It's been made abundantly clear by myself and others. Carry on.

Yeah, right. So clear that Dan has to ask you to be specific. He (and I) must be really dense.

I have shown regret and remorse to my Wife, my family, my friends and USAT when confronted. I don't know most of you, a post was made, I responded, am I sorry I did this, hit my wife you're all absolutely correct on that, I am deeply sorry for my actions but I don't need to display that to you or anyone else on the forum. I thought I was being rather upstanding in not dodging the post but responding to it which talked about the charges and what I had done. This happened 18 months ago and we have BOTH tried to move on. The victim here for the second time is my wife.


I certainly am responsible and must deal with my mistake everyday for the rest of my life but I am lucky my Wife of 37 years has seen my efforts and stands by me. The Law sees my efforts and I am a citizen with full rights. I work everyday to make sure I never do this act again. This was a private moment that happened in our home. And after 30 years in this sport I have no intention of resigning. My actions on a personal note have nothing to do with my official duties as an elected Board member. We could go on with this but no matter what I say some of you will never be satisfied, so in the words of a Rick Nelson, many years ago: "You can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself". But again I will say: "Those without sin, let them cast the first stone!" I am not religious but this one certainly fits the thread.

Jack, you should resign for two reasons,

1. You are not an asset to the organization at this point, you are an anchor.

2. Resigning from this high profile position will allow you and your wife the opportunity to work on your relationship and your anger issues outside of the public eye.

You have to know it's the right thing to do, for the USA Triathlon organization, your wife and your relationship.

Okay, I'll bite. Slowman, I'm with you on a lot of what you've said here with one huge exception. Drawing ANY parallel between physical spousal abuse and cheating on a spouse was a mistake, in my opinion. If you want to rant about cheating spouses (men and women) that's fine. It would just be better to do it in another thread. If statistics are to be believed a huge number of posters on this site, men and women, have cheated. Yet, the overwhelming number of those people would likely never strike someone else, let alone their spouse. Probably all of us have friends who have cheated at one point in their long lives. Usually, they're still friends. Most of us probably wouldn't stay friends with a man who beats his wife (or a woman who beats her husband.) By saying you think spousal cheating is perhaps on par with spousal physical abuse you unwittingly diminish the seriousness of spousal physical abuse. At least that's my opinion and probably the opinion of many others.

UNLESS you're a perfect human being, you can't throw a damn thing. Period!

I'm against men hitting women.

"still, my guess is that somebody would have come on the forum asking how i dare equate spousal abuse with a race DQ. "

That could be very easily avoided by not making any comparison at all.

It all could be easily avoided by simply stating (and recognizing) that Jack's actions were deplorable and noting that he should step down from his leadership position. That is the only response to be made here from anyone. Whether they are an insignificant card carrying USAT member or a recognized industry leader. There's no need for anything else.

"That could be very easily avoided by not making any comparison at all."

yes, you're right. but is that what you want, going forward? analogies and examples serve us well in the course of conversation. if you're saying that we just ought to strike the use of analogy, metaphor, parallel, simile, from discourse i think that's giving into the baser element. can you and i not use figures of speech at all, because the reader will force an equivalency irrespective of our clear intention to the contrary?

if you have a problem with anything i write, i'm happy to hear what that problem is. i just am not going to write as if i'm running for political office and must closely parse every word to inoculate and scrub it for any possible attack.

might i digress to the actual theme of thread? i think a lot of people - perhaps jack as well, certainly members of the board of directors - are reading this. i suspect they're all interested in the sober opinions people have on the future of jack weiss as well as what the federation's posture toward felony convictions should be going forward. as an aside, in this case, i think it's possible (i'll have to check) that there is no current felony conviction. a person in this same parallel situation in the future could, reasonably, claim that an expunged conviction is no conviction, legally speaking, making him or her eligible for board service. when we do establish our code of conduct it would be wise to anticipate this.

"Drawing ANY parallel between physical spousal abuse and cheating on a spouse was a mistake, in my opinion."

i suspect i'm going to regret even the attempt, but, i'll give it one last try.

when we all sit down in a room, and we decide where we're going from here - which we must do when we visit the code of conduct for athletes, RDs, directors, officers, etc., going forward - i'm going to have to lay aside my own "code" in order to agree with my fellows as to the proper sportwide code of conduct and penalties for breaking the code. you don't want my own personal code enshrined into law, or into the USAT bylaws. i don't want yours. you and i together want to come up with a path forward that is enforceable, defensible, reasonable, fair.

in my own view, my own code, cheating on one's wife is such an affront to the trust and partnership in a marriage as to raise it to a level of offense that it sits up there in the heirarchy of bad deeds roughly within spitting distance of hitting one's wife. however, it's not reasonable, or healthy, or fair, for me to lay my own trip on you. i have to leave much of my own personal code at the door when i sit down with you and decide what our community of athletes should adopt as a code.

maybe i should have used a completely different analogy. maybe i should have written that my own code says that anybody who's ever been DQd from a race for 3 drafting penalties should not be allowed to sit on the board. however, that view might not be shared by others, and maybe i'll have to give on that in order to find common ground with everybody sitting in the room coming up with a code of conduct.

my mistake for writing at 12th grade level when 8th grade was clearly called for. but, probably also my mistake for coming up with a bad analogy in consideration of the charged atmosphere created by a very, very bad act. had i to do it over i'd have worked harder to produce a way of making my point differently. still, my guess is that somebody would have come on the forum asking how i dare equate spousal abuse with a race DQ.

A simple Morality Clause

I'm against violence between any sex. I wonder what the public perception would be if it was same-sex partner abuse or female abuse of a male.

Who's concept of morality? If this dude was Islamic and invoked the Surah about beating one's wife... well... awkward...

"It all could be easily avoided by simply stating (and recognizing) that Jack's actions were deplorable and noting that he should step down from his leadership position."

i sympathize with this view. on a certain level i would like to associate myself with it. were you and i sitting at a table, rather than at keyboards a thousand miles away from each other, i doubt there'd be any disagreement between us. i've spoken to a number of USAT board members today as well as others in the industry, and i did yesterday, and the day before. this issue has pretty much cannibalized the entire time and attention of the board of directors for the past 10 or so days. further, it's going to get worse before it gets better. i know what's coming. it's going to get ugly. you're not going to like it.

in the 18 months since jack committed spousal battery a lot of people have asked jack to resign. they have, in my view, failed to acknowledge and respect the 15 or so years of service to USAT. nor to his attempt to work at rehabilitating himself since that very regretful episode. none of the appeals and demands has convinced jack to resign. none of that has worked. so, you can yell at jack, and you can yell at me, you can yell at the moon, but, when you're done yelling, jack is still going to be sitting on that board.

because i hold a different tactical posture does not mean i disagree with your view. that guttural response you get to what you've read probably mirrors mine. my own sense, my own wisdom, my own instinct, tells me that if i (we) keep doing what we're doing, we'll keep getting what we're getting, and what we're getting is no change on the constitution of the board of directors. what i would like is to be granted the freedom to explore how we get from where we are to where we want to be, and for that to happen sooner rather than later.

I thought my post was pretty clear, 2/3 of the board of directors.

This is an excellent post. Why wasn't it the first? The only thing any sort of analogy drawn to spousal abuse does is serve to trivialize or rationalize it. I couldn't believe what I was reading from you. At every point in the conversation the tone from the top (you) seemed to be on some level a defense of Jack. Or maybe it was a defense of the lack of action on the part of USAT. I probably come back over the top too harshly but I want to leaders of my sport to condemn this type of behavior and not trivialize it. Knowing Jack I'm sure he is fighting this tooth and nail and making it extremely difficult for USAT to act and maybe that is part of the reason for your response. I was just extremely disappointed in the tone of almost every post you made in regards to his actions.

So if the board of directors was mostly fundamentalist Christians, then being gay or having an abortion would constitute an immoral action?

Best to stick to criminal code offenses and stay away from morality.

Totally agree with you, however sexist it may sound though, I still have a very big problem with a male hitting a female. It comes down to nature I guess. As much equality as there is in the US and a few other places, I still feel a man should not abuse his natural physical attributes to be aggressive to women.

Now, we can lump in mental abuse and such, but I feel women are much more readily equipped to match men, therefore I don't make the distinction of "men should not be mentally abusive to women". I would stand by your statement of "I'm against mental violence between any sex".

Does that make sense?

I guess I also still believe a man should hold a door open for a woman and give up his seat to a woman. Maybe I'm too old.

"Cheating on wives right up there with beating on wives???? That is an insane way of thinking ... Yikes."

to you, and to the fellow who told me to go fuck myself, i think you misunderstand. you assume i'm bringing wife beating down to the rather (i suppose) minor level of cheating on your wife. it's really the other way around. beating your wife is just unconscionable to me. it's just, so is cheating on your wife. to me, to my thinking, i just think it's a way worse act than a lot of other people consider it. but i'm not going to castigate you, or the go fuck yourself guy, for being so cavalier about cheating on your wives.

wait. did i just accuse you of being cavalier about cheating? that wasn't very nice of me, was it? i'll bet that made you mad. i apologize.

probably best if we don't accuse each other of "insane ways of thinking," or tell each other to go fuck ourselves. or for me to assume that you don't take your marriage vows seriously. it's probably better to try to soberly discuss an issue, each assuming that the other is a man (or woman) of goodwill.

Honestly, I feel like there will be no reasoning with you but, the board of directors is charged by the membership (us card carrying dues paying triathletes) to provide the services stated. All of the board of directors take an oath (presumably) to carry out the duties of their office as it pertains to the by-laws. I think for most people, those on the board, they will be putting the USA Triathlon's best interest before their personal religious beliefs. If they can't A. they shouldn't have been elected in the first place. B. they should be removed at election time. Most of the people I've sat on boards with, you wouldn't know what their personal beliefs were on the topics you mentioned. We were concerned with the organization first and foremost.

@ Tri-Banter: you don't understand what a "witch hunt" is. Witches weren't real and innocent people paid the price. Jack Weiss is an admitted abuser. There is no "witch" in this scenario.


It's less of a witch hunt and more of a mob mentality justice against Weiss. One person spouts something and the masses jump on the bandwagon. Apparently, according to the ST brethren, there is nothing more for Jack Weiss to do other than step down. He's paid his price in the terms of the law. He's paid his price in terms of his family. He owes me absolutely nothing. You neither. Nor anyone else. Yet, this thread seems to think otherwise. There are some who would interpret my opinion as support of Jack or spousal abuse. That's hardly the case. I'm not in any situation to stand in judgement of the man or his actions. I don't believe that people should be removed from professional positions due to mob justice/ "I'm offended" mentality.

Further, the sputum that seems to be emanating from people due to slowman's opinion is further evidence of the mob mentality. The guy gave the thread a window into his own personal moral compass and he's getting hammered. I'm not sure why. He's certainly innocent of any wrong doings, yet seem to be paying the price. So, by your definition, he's the target of a potential witch burning.

This is a reply to the whole thread.

I get it that many of you want Rice to resign from his position. I get it that you are all against spouse abuse. But here it the rub:

What if you, yes you, were in a situation that caused you to lose your cool and hit your wife. Or even find yourself in a situation where you were accused of doing so and then you were unable to defeat that false accusation. Would you be happy to have a clause in your employment contract that forced you to resign? Right after facing that time in the courtroom, that time in a jail cell, right when you have been struggling to pay your bills due to the loss of a few weeks or months without income, add in the additional expenses of lawyers and depositions and suddenly you are unemployed.

How many of YOU, YES YOU, would be happy about that outcome for yourselves, regardless of whether or not you actually committed the crime or were falsely accused? Do you REALLY want to have all of your sins be used to determine whether or not you keep your job? What about the others who depend upon YOUR income, like your children and the abused spouse?

I was falsely accused of spouse abuse when I was in the Navy, and thank God in Heaven that my now ex-wife failed to know my duty schedule because the time she gave the detectives was exactly the time when I was on duty and signed into a log book on the Quarterdeck of a ship. If I did not have that alibi, your opinions would be that I should lose my job. That outcome would happen today because the military generally discharges people who are found guilty of spouse abuse because they are prohibited from handling weapons after that conviction.

So many people gleefully pick up the stones to throw at others, yet they never remember that those very stones could as easily be thrown right back at them. So many people who sincerely believe they would NEVER do something have found that they can do exactly that, and rue the vehemence that they inflicted on others as they reap that harvest for themselves.

This is a reply to the whole thread.

I get it that many of you want Rice to resign from his position. I get it that you are all against spouse abuse. But here it the rub:

What if you, yes you, were in a situation that caused you to lose your cool and hit your wife. Or even find yourself in a situation where you were accused of doing so and then you were unable to defeat that false accusation. Would you be happy to have a clause in your employment contract that forced you to resign? Right after facing that time in the courtroom, that time in a jail cell, right when you have been struggling to pay your bills due to the loss of a few weeks or months without income, add in the additional expenses of lawyers and depositions and suddenly you are unemployed.

How many of YOU, YES YOU, would be happy about that outcome for yourselves, regardless of whether or not you actually committed the crime or were falsely accused? Do you REALLY want to have all of your sins be used to determine whether or not you keep your job? What about the others who depend upon YOUR income, like your children and the abused spouse?

I was falsely accused of spouse abuse when I was in the Navy, and thank God in Heaven that my now ex-wife failed to know my duty schedule because the time she gave the detectives was exactly the time when I was on duty and signed into a log book on the Quarterdeck of a ship. If I did not have that alibi, your opinions would be that I should lose my job. That outcome would happen today because the military generally discharges people who are found guilty of spouse abuse because they are prohibited from handling weapons after that conviction.

So many people gleefully pick up the stones to throw at others, yet they never remember that those very stones could as easily be thrown right back at them. So many people who sincerely believe they would NEVER do something have found that they can do exactly that, and rue the vehemence that they inflicted on others as they reap that harvest for themselves.

I'm against violence between any sex. I wonder what the public perception would be if it was same-sex partner abuse or female abuse of a male.

When you deal with morality, people's have very different ideas of what is moral and what is not. Best not to leave that up to a bunch of volunteer board members...

Honestly, I feel like there will be no reasoning with you but, the board of directors is charged by the membership (us card carrying dues paying triathletes) to provide the services stated. All of the board of directors take an oath (presumably) to carry out the duties of their office as it pertains to the by-laws. I think for most people, those on the board, they will be putting the USA Triathlon's best interest before their personal religious beliefs. If they can't A. they shouldn't have been elected in the first place. B. they should be removed at election time. Most of the people I've sat on boards with, you wouldn't know what their personal beliefs were on the topics you mentioned. We were concerned with the organization first and foremost.

Going on the cheating thing (not sure why after I told myself wouldn't), I can understand where Dan was coming from. He clearly stated he was not bringing physical abuse down he was bringing cheating up. This is important as there are very real and severe long lasting mental issues (PTSD for example) with this in many cases just as there are with physical abuse. I have been in relationships with a number of women who have been physical abused, sexually abused (and/or cheated on), and verbally abused. All of them would put them on the same level as the long lasting mental affects are similar, one in fact left when the mental abuse and cheating got too much, not the physical.

In reality the issue with cheating, physical abuse, or any of the above is not so much the act but it is the fact that someone is being manipulative and attempting to show they have power over the other person. The victim is the one who gets to decide if they are the same to them not any of you.

Remove Triathlon from that bolded part and maybe make board into congress or state legislature.

How is that working out for us?


What makes you think a private board would be any different?

Remove Triathlon from that bolded part and maybe make board into congress or state legislature.

How is that working out for us?


What makes you think a private board would be any different?

Right, so because we can't make an immediate fix to our federal government, we shouldn't try to fix anything else.

The biggest difference is private enterprise vs government.

but since you are apparently in fight mode you want to make it that way.

All I did was point out that your utopia doesn't exist.

I would be interested to hear what you would propose?

I have a lot more faith in private enterprise than I do our government.

Hobby Lobby, FTW!

I currently serve in a volunteer capacity on a couple nonprofit boards.

In a situation where they bylaws don't cover or allow for the removal against my will, I would still resign if:

1. I could not longer effectively fulfill my role or meet my fiduciary responsibilities as a board member, or
2. My continued service created an unacceptable distraction or a disruption in the organization's operations and objectives.

In making that decision, the opinions of other board members and people involved in and served by the orginazation would be given significant weight.

It is about the good of triathlon, and your ability to work toward that end. You've lost that ability, whether deservedly or not. For you to cling to your position is to pretend that no one else in the entire country is more capable of performing those duties.

I believe he was referencing fixing or removing members that don't put the good of the represented organization and the organizations members first, above personal individual self.

Yes, let's avoid having an intelligent and mature discussion on a topic. It would be such a shame for people to have differing opinions, voicing them, and then listening to why another viewpoint might have merit. /pink

A simple Morality Clause in the by-laws is all that would be necessary with a 2/3 majority of the board voting on it to remove a member who has done something as beating his wife or other actions that would cause USA Triathlon Partners http://www.usatriathlon.org/...urrent-partners.aspx to consider dropping their partnership of an organization who had morally corrupt individuals or individuals who have done morally corrupt things running the organization they are partners with.

Page 29


"Section 6. Any officer may be removed from his/her position as an officer by
a majority vote of the Board, with or without cause."

One of my big flaws is I love to debate. I love to hear others opinions on any topic. This allows me to consider if an opinion I have at the moment may need
to be changed with new data.
.

Page 29


"Section 6. Any officer may be removed from his/her position as an officer by
a majority vote of the Board, with or without cause."

Except Powercranks, right? ;-)

If they allow Jack to stay in office, they are supporting the actions of this individual.

"Cheating on wives right up there with beating on wives???? That is an insane way of thinking ... Yikes."

to you, and to the fellow who told me to go fuck myself, i think you misunderstand. you assume i'm bringing wife beating down to the rather (i suppose) minor level of cheating on your wife. it's really the other way around. beating your wife is just unconscionable to me. it's just, so is cheating on your wife. to me, to my thinking, i just think it's a way worse act than a lot of other people consider it. but i'm not going to castigate you, or the go fuck yourself guy, for being so cavalier about cheating on your wives.

wait. did i just accuse you of being cavalier about cheating? that wasn't very nice of me, was it? i'll bet that made you mad. i apologize.

probably best if we don't accuse each other of "insane ways of thinking," or tell each other to go fuck ourselves. or for me to assume that you don't take your marriage vows seriously. it's probably better to try to soberly discuss an issue, each assuming that the other is a man (or woman) of goodwill.