Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Matthew] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"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.


Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"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.
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [TrekGeek] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TrekGeek wrote:
UNLESS you're a perfect human being, you can't throw a damn thing. Period!

Does not throwing a damn thing include calling another poster a hypocrite and telling him to shut up?
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [TrekGeek] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
. . . quit your bitching. If you want to throw a 3rd grade tantrum about something . . .

The irony.


Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dan....I am glad that you find BOTH spousal abuse and cheating to be reprehensible. It shows that you have set high moral standards for yourself. However, I'm certain that you can understand that some people, while not making light of infidelity, find physical violence to be more severe.

--------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by: bhc: Oct 15, 14 9:56
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [prattzc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
prattzc wrote:
I'm against men hitting women.

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.
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Trirunner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Trirunner wrote:
"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.

Twitter
Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Trirunner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"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.


Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [travis_lt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
travis_lt wrote:
Trirunner wrote:
"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.

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



-Andrew
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [travis_lt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I personally agree with you on that. Slowman, I believe, did find the actions deplorable and asked for time to think over the resignation question. I was merely pointing out that the comparison itself created the whole objection to Slowman's statements. Bjorn, actually stated it more eloquently in his post # 115.
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [bhc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"However, I'm certain that you can understand that some people, while not making light of infidelity, find physical violence to be more severe."

i understand that. in so doing, i am not jumping to the conclusion that they are cavalier about infidelity. were i to do that i would be guilty of jumping to a moral inequivalency they were not making. i try to honor the thoughts of others, to give them the benefit of the doubt, to assume they are men and women of goodwill, and to read what they're writing rather than filter it through my own prism, generating a meaning that was not reflected in the text they wrote.


Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
"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.


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.

************************
#WeAreTheForge #BlackGunsMatter

"Look, will you guys at leats accept that you are a bunch of dumb asses and just trust me on this one? Please?" BarryP 7/30/2012
Last edited by: CruseVegas: Oct 15, 14 10:16
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have been impressed with your restraint while being attacked. I think you are wrong when you put a moral equivalency between infidelity and domestic violence, but the measured responses are good and to the best of my knowledge you have allowed people to vent without censorship. And in contrast to a forum that many of us here once visited, I don't believe anyone has been banned for disagreeing with you (no matter how vehemently).

"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."

I don't believe that it is USAT's business to punish behavior that has nothing to do with the functioning of the board. So I would say that Jack should not be removed by the board. But I would tell him the same thing I would have told Bill Clinton in the Lewinsky scandal. What you did is not so heinous that you should be removed (or impeached). However, you should do the right and honorable thing and resign.

Jack serves on the BID. That is a high profile position whose purpose should be the betterment of triathlon. This situation has made it such that he is no longer able to serve that purpose in a satisfactory manner.

He should not be denied his career or the ability to live his life in peace. He simply should do the right thing towards USAT and withdraw himself from serving in this high profile position.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Of course I have no objection to the use of comparisons and metaphors in general. However, I can also recognize in this thread people have focused on a comparison you made which clearly distracted from the topic originally discussed. I found that unfortunate and it made me wonder whether there was a need for comparison in the first place. Bjorn pointed that out more eloquently than me on his post # 115.

I couldn't agree more that I hope this situation will prompt an examination of the current code of conduct.
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
"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.

I was with you until you hurled the insult. There is no need to insult the intelligence or education of those of us who disagree with some of the things you've said. Although, I appreciate your acceptance of making a bad analogy.
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [travis_lt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"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.



Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [CruseVegas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
CruseVegas wrote:
A simple Morality Clause

Who's concept of morality? If this dude was Islamic and invoked the Surah about beating one's wife... well... awkward...
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [NordicSkier] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
NordicSkier wrote:
prattzc wrote:
I'm against men hitting women.


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.

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.
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [NordicSkier] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
NordicSkier wrote:
CruseVegas wrote:
A simple Morality Clause


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

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

************************
#WeAreTheForge #BlackGunsMatter

"Look, will you guys at leats accept that you are a bunch of dumb asses and just trust me on this one? Please?" BarryP 7/30/2012
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Power13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
@ 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.






Take a short break from ST and read my blog:
http://tri-banter.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
"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.


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.

Twitter
Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
" 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."

They don't acknowledge it because being on the BOD is not simply a reward for past service or for attempting to better himself.

I don't know Jack, I don't know his wife, and I don't know the details of this case. But all of those are irrelevant at this point. The question is whether or not he can serve the purpose for which he was elected. It has become very apparent that he cannot.

We don't need to purge him from the history of triathlon like Joe Paterno at Penn State. But going forward he needs to make way for someone who is better positioned to serve the sport of triahtlon.


I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [Matthew] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"I was with you until you hurled the insult."

you have a fair point. i apologize. it's just been a little frustrating - no excuse - to have a goal in mind, to try to see around the corner, and be stymied in the attempt to get there because of an analogy that inflamed those properly skin-sensitive to the subject (my fault); to give trolls bait to use (my fault); and to have the text of what i'm writing just not read (maybe still my fault).

probably not widely know, i wrote and published the first commercial bike-industry site on the world wide web.
one month before specialized. and the first commercial wetsuit-industry site. in 1993. so i've been at this awhile. and from that time 'til this, from the days of the rec.sport.triathlon usenet newsgroup, my hope has been for us to exist around a virtual kitchen table, where all in a common cohort assume we're people of goodwill and we move forward from that. instead, the internet has always been drug down by the heavy weight of entropy. talking in a civil fashion is like pumping air into a tire that's got a leak roughly equal to your ability to pump. i just do not understand why we cannot fix our eyes on solutions to problems. instead, though we are all fellows of goodwill, we think we detect a lack of honor or moral compass in our counterpart, even though we well know in our saner moments these perceptions are unfairly ascribed.


Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Post deleted by OakCliffTri [ In reply to ]
Re: USAT's Ray Rice [CruseVegas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
CruseVegas wrote:
NordicSkier wrote:
CruseVegas wrote:
A simple Morality Clause


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


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

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.
Quote Reply

Prev Next