As to point 1. That was not in the original article.

As to point 2. I direct you to the last point of their demand list.

http://www.somerandomthursday.com/imlp7th-jeff-edwards-and-speaking-out/

Damn it. I just disagreed with you on a different thread, and now I have to agree with you on this one.

This is where you're losing most of us. This is a very big deal in the grand scheme of things.

It's not like this is some random local hater venting to a friend. Jeff Edwards is one of the single most influential people in non-drafting triathlon. Who else has the pull this guy has? Anyone at USAT (or any other national federation)? Doubtful. Anyone at ITU? No. Anyone in the media? No. Maybe a popular pro athlete? LOL no. I can think of precisely one man on the entire planet who can exert as much influence over the direction non-drafting triathlon takes for the next couple decades as Jeff Edwards, and that's his boss Andrew Messick.

The fact that Edwards is apparently a raging dickbag and Messick seems to be OK with employing said dickbag is not something we as the athletes and customers should be willing to just shrug off.

This is gets into semantics but he said "personally harm" not "personal harm." I read that to be he would personally carry out the DQ's etc not that he would harm their person.

This might be true. In my industry I am surrounded by sociopathic assholes so I might be tempered to things like this much more so than other people. I respect other people's opinions but to me I just don't think it's a big deal, just a lot of bluster.

Dude I don't know why you're stretching so hard to defend him but come on..."I will personally harm them if I see their stupid bike jerseys ... – no matter where I see them.” is in no way a reference to a retroactive DQ

---

Me: https://carnivoreendurance.blogspot.com/...ever-comes-next.html

Latest: Colorectal Cancer is in the News Again. Don't Blame Red Meat
https://carnivoreendurance.blogspot.com/...news-again-dont.html

I agree with you in that his INTENT when he wrote this email might have been in jest, or simply his temper getting the better of him. Maybe he never intended to ACTUALLY carry out these actions (personal harm or otherwise). However, in my experience (in HR with a Fortune 3 company), had this email been sent and subsequently discovered (internally or externally would not matter) there would have been serious implications. We had a saying at our company, "Write every email as if it will appear on the front page of the newspaper tomorrow".

Now WTC may have taken actions to correct this issue/behavior internally, and they have no obligation to disclose this to the author of the article, or anyone else outside of internal stakeholders in the company. As an isolated event, its wrong and shows poor decision making. That said, even if they did take action it appears that the behavior that he has exhibited in the past has not been corrected, and potentially has escalated. He is showing a pattern of behavior now. He is a representative of WTC, and WTC is going to end up being responsible for his actions. Anyone exhibiting such a pattern of behavior during work in a group that I support would be looking for new employment already.

How can you say "she did nothing wrong" when the words on the road clearly broke WTCs request for chalk that cleans up not chalk the lasts over 30 days. The point is that people who live on those roads don't want to read crap on the roads for months after event.

I'm no defending WTC heavy handed approach but this is not a one sided issue.

In corporate banking environment, we go to seminars on how to properly document client files and how to discuss client topics via email. The main point: These items can be subpoena. Assume everything you write in an email, say on a voicemail or put in a file will show up in court. Thus we are very very careful before we hit send or print. Executives at WTC should know better. These emails, plus AM post on IMC, reveal the true dysfunction of WTC executives.

---

_________________________________
The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.

I agree with you that they were not in the right here, but the WTC is not the Albany PD. WTC can notify athletes and spectators that it can be a punishable offense, but WTC does not create law nor carry out sentence. They can't act on behalf of the authorities. They don't own the roads, the public does. So if the local authorities felt this warranted them going after these individuals, then have at it. But this guy and the Corporation cannot pretend to supersede and dole out fines (in the form of donations). **Sidebar on donations: in college I tried to ask (aka demand) donations for another keg at our house party and I ended up at the police station**

I am sure the actions of these people are stressful and annoying to Edwards et al, as it makes it more difficult to deal with local governments when organizing races, but it in no way warrants the reaction.

And if there was so much public outcry about this, why was it WTC and not the PD looking into this? Maybe there's too much back office overhead in the WTC that they could cut if they have all this time to go after people chalking roads. Then they could afford bigger purses. /sortapink

I do not have any proof. I am just an observer of this story like everyone else here.

Like I said in my post, IF THE BELOW EMAIL IS TRUE.........

They should have cleaned it up without an issue BUT like I said earlier IF the e mail is true this Jeff Edwards if an absolute ass.

What a way to disenfranchise the public.

I think it is a bit cavalier to say they don't need to worry about writing internal emails like this. I work for a major corporation. We have leaches who try to sue us on a weekly basis based on things that they deem possible cases. There are people who make a living off of our settlements, whether we are at fault or not. There are very specific subjects and terms that we are not allowed to discuss over email because they can (and do) get subpoenaed by judges from third parties to create another lawsuit.

I say this because it is not wise for you to say "It can't be used against them" when emails like this DO get used against companies on a daily basis. Will it? Probably not....But, some lawyers are like seagulls and this email is like a bread crumb. Either way, *IF* something did occur to anybody in the club in a reasonable timeframe, this email can be used to prove intent, whether they are guilty or not.

I'm not trying to defend him (read my other posts), I just think people are blowing things way out of proportion and reading bodily harm into what he said when it's not there.

Is there any that is not spoiled?

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

He undeniably vows to harm strangers on sight, without regard to circumstance. Your idea of what that entails clearly differs from that of the rest of the people on this forum

---

Me: https://carnivoreendurance.blogspot.com/...ever-comes-next.html

Latest: Colorectal Cancer is in the News Again. Don't Blame Red Meat
https://carnivoreendurance.blogspot.com/...news-again-dont.html

It's WTC business because they are the ones that the city will go after to clean up the paint. Let's say I rent a vacation house and invite some friends over. Despite specifically being told not to, one of my friends uses spray chalk on the driveway thinking it will be gone in a few days. When the spray chalk doesn't go away the rental agency goes after me for the damages/clean up. Now I'm pissed at my friend and I expect them to take care of the mess they made.

/

---

Gary Mc
Did I mention I did Kona

Rumor is that after the road was cleared, Jeff Edwards went back out and spray painted this as a warning of how he'd harm the cyclists.

I'm failing to understand your vested stake in this. Are you getting hung up because you think that we are interpreting Jeff Edwards's threats literally?

I don't think for a second that he was actually going to hurt anyone, or that his threats about DQ'ing had any substance at all. Could you imagine the pandora's box of pure shitstorm that such an act would unleash if he were actually to do that, the notion that you could be retroactively be DQ'd for once belonging to a club that happened to piss off WTC at some event that you weren't even at?

I can't speak for everyone else here, but I for one don't think Jeff Edwards is anything more than a blowhard with a massive ego. He's not a menace to society, it sounds like he's just an asshole.

Is this him?

Legally, that bold part is a threat. Seriously. Words have consequences, especially once written down.

---

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.

What business is it of WTC to ask for the club to clean up property that didn't belong to them?

I can't speak of the current contract or situation but I am guessing the situation is similar, in the days of Graham Fraser, there was a clean-up crew that would go over the WHOLE COURSE in the early hours of the morning, and pick up every last gel wrapper and piece of discarded litter from the Ironman Lake Placid course. Most of that illegally discarded by athletes i might ad!

Again my guess is that it was part of a contract or promise from the WTC to the town to leave the roads in a clean state. Sort of like the leave-no-trace when you are hiking in the back country!


I've also had the misfortune of being in Lake Placid on some training weekends from years ago, and seen a disgraceful amount of litter on the bike course from . . . guess who?

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

This is the most blown out of proportion grand stand posturing shit ever. Plain fucking non-sense all around. WTC should have just cleaned the chalk up, sent out a warning email to the offenders and then outlined a policy about road markings going forwards [per other comments it seems like there is a policy already?]. Job done.

2000 dollars sounds like a punitive fee to clean chalk off the roadway. You could fly up there, rent a vehicle, buy a powerwasher/tank, gas, lodging... and still come under that charge.

This has nothing to do with whether wtc has any authority to "force" people to clean up roads.

I really don't have a stake other than people took swipes at me that were either unfounded in the facts or illogical. I said originally I didn't think this was a big deal and is blown out of proportion.

Your post pretty much sums up my position, I wish you had made it as early as I made mine, so maybe people would have gotten on your case instead of mine.