USFA BoD Agenda

[Feltan]

Why did Eric Dew warrant so many mentions in the report? What is the issue?

Regards,
Feltan

[oiuyt]

I'm back from Chicago (finally... delays with my flight which was a late one to begin with).

Referring to the Agenda in these notes....

Sam Cheris was appointed Parlimentarian.

Previous minutes had a few minor adjustments and were approved.

Officers and Directors reports were approved (1 dissenting vote).

EC actions were approved.

Committee reports were approved.

Financial report was approved (with a fair amount of discussion).

Urgent Items:
*inadvertantly omitted* motion that the EC can act between BoD meetings (yadda, yadda, there's some boilerplate language used every time, refer to some official minutes if you want it) was approved.

Both other urgent motions were approved.

Second Hearing Motions:
Motion 1:
* motion to amend motion removing Y14 from the list of events to be affected was passed with 1 opposing vote.
* motion to amend motion removing veterans events from the list of events to be affected was not passed (4 in favor, ~9-10 against, for reference, this motion was proposed by me, I was one of the 4 in favor of the amendment, in large part due to sentiments expressed here on f.net and to me via PM and in person).
Motion, as amended, passed.
Result of the motion is that Div IA, II, III, and Veterans events at summer nationals now have the same format as Div I, Junior, and Cadet events (1 round of pools, 80% promotion to straight DE). Y10, Y12, Y14, wheelchair, and team events (Div I, Senior, Junior) remain unchanged. Just to be completely clear, this only affects events at summer nationals, there have been no changes to formats at NACs at any level as a result of this motion.


Motion 2:
Failed. 2 in favor, ~12 against.

Motion 3 (proposed by myself), was amended to reflect the TC's suggested language change and passed.

Motions 4 and 5 were withdrawn with the understanding that the subjects would be referred to a Task Force which is already in the process of being named that is going to be looking at all aspects of national tournament organization, structure, qualifying paths, etc., etc.

First Hearing:
Motion 1, moved to urgent, passed.

Good and Welfare:
Discussion of concerns raised regarding 2005 Congress Meeting
Next BoD meeting will be held 2/19/06 at 7:30am in Hartford, CT (location of JO's)
In the wake of Katrina the USFA will be listing some relief charities on the website, the grant committee will give priority to club in the affected areas this season, and the USFA, nationally, will act as a clearinghouse for information about members (health, locations, etc.), and donations, either financial or of equipment.

This meeting contained considerably more semi-structured informational and planning discussion than any other BoD meeting I've attended. Likely a large factor in that was that the format of the weekend was somewhat different than typical with Saturday afternoon being a facilitated strategic planning session, with the actual Board meeting Sunday morning. Most of that discussion is hard to capture in a quick set of notes or a minutes-like structure, and the discussions and planning were not constrained merely to the first day, but continued during the standard meeting portion of the weekend. I felt that the meeting was less contentious and more productive than most, if not all, previous Board meetings I've attended. While there were disagreements (unsurprisingly), the discussion, in my opinion, stayed productive throughout.

After the meeting Andrea Lagan gave a demonstration of Dartfish software. This is some really cool stuff that allows for ways of tagging digitized footage that can be used for a number of things, including helping with scouting, helping with teaching, and with general understanding of how touches are being scored. It will take a considerable amount of time to best determine how to use the power of this program to get useful results that can be translated into additional victories on the strip, but it's some cool stuff. Somewhere between really cool toy and amazingly helpful coaching/scouting equipment. Translation into actual results looks (VERY) non-trivial, but if the right methods can be developed, this could be useful.

Originally Posted by oso97

Seeing as how our Men's epeeists don't have a prayer

That's far from a fair statement. Seth Kelsey is currently ranked 13th in the world (higher than ANY of the US MF or MS). He was 15th last season and 9th in 03-04. Soren Thompson was a finalist in Athens. Seth won a world cup last season, Ben Solomon took a bronze medal in one, Cody Mattern won a silver in another. The team placed 4th at a team world cup. As a team the US is ranked 7th (one spot behind where we're ranked in MF, incidently). As good a shot of winning a medal in Beijing as we have in sabre (either gender)? No, probably not. A prayer? Absolutely.

-B :)

[KD5MDK]

Thanks for the report.

[edew]

Originally Posted by Feltan

Why did Eric Dew warrant so many mentions in the report? What is the issue?

Regards,
Feltan

'Cuz I'm a popular guy who needs to see my name all over the place.

Seriously, I was accused of sexual harrassment during the Summer Nationals. While it was made in jest, the incident did indeed occur and can legitimately be considered as such. As such, the incident and the accusation traveled through the usual USFA channels for deliberation and resolution such issues.

At the moment, I would like to personally apologize to the fencing community for my behavior at Nationals and request, as I did from the plaintive, that I may regain your respect as a fellow fencing member.

Oh, and I am also to acknowledge that without doubt, the strongest and most concentrated, deepest, and greatest of breadth in fencing in the whole of the US (and to some degree, the world), is centered no where else but in NY, NY.

[oso97]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

That's far from a fair statement. Seth Kelsey is currently ranked 13th in the world (higher than ANY of the US MF or MS). He was 15th last season and 9th in 03-04. Soren Thompson was a finalist in Athens. Seth won a world cup last season, Ben Solomon took a bronze medal in one, Cody Mattern won a silver in another. The team placed 4th at a team world cup. As a team the US is ranked 7th (one spot behind where we're ranked in MF, incidently). As good a shot of winning a medal in Beijing as we have in sabre (either gender)? No, probably not. A prayer? Absolutely.

-B

A good point. Okay, so there is a prayer . Especially, since, given that we're talking about EPEE, anything can happen!

[DHCJr]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

That's far from a fair statement. Seth Kelsey is currently ranked 13th in the world (higher than ANY of the US MF or MS). He was 15th last season and 9th in 03-04. Soren Thompson was a finalist in Athens. Seth won a world cup last season, Ben Solomon took a bronze medal in one, Cody Mattern won a silver in another. The team placed 4th at a team world cup. As a team the US is ranked 7th (one spot behind where we're ranked in MF, incidently). As good a shot of winning a medal in Beijing as we have in sabre (either gender)? No, probably not. A prayer? Absolutely.

-B

This was taken out of context. Oso97 was responding to my post about the choice of teams for the next Olympics. Seth does have a good chance of getting an individual medal, but does he have has much chance of getting a team medal as the Lady Foilist, if they were to compete? It is in the USFA best interest to push to have the competiton rotate fairly as the USOC bases a lot on the medals won. Seth would still have his chance to make a medal, even if there is no Men's Epee team and the US would have a better chance to get more medals if Foil Team for the ladies was included.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by DHCJr

This was taken out of context. Oso97 was responding to my post about the choice of teams for the next Olympics. Seth does have a good chance of getting an individual medal, but does he have has much chance of getting a team medal as the Lady Foilist, if they were to compete? It is in the USFA best interest to push to have the competiton rotate fairly as the USOC bases a lot on the medals won. Seth would still have his chance to make a medal, even if there is no Men's Epee team and the US would have a better chance to get more medals if Foil Team for the ladies was included.

I won't argue that the WFT wouldn't have a better chance than the MET (although I would suggest MET has a better shot than WET, for example). As a response to your post (which oso's was), the discussion was limited to WFT vs M*T (and in this case MET). That said, it's the kind of statement which tends to imply further meaning.

Casual statements of this type can easily lead to incorrect assumptions about the level of demonstrated excellence on the part of our men's epeeists. Especially combined with other information (such as the list of which 11 athletes the USOC is directly funding (4 MS, 4 WS, 3 MF)). I believe that what oso said: that MET doesn't have a prayer of medalling is incorrect. That's (somewhat) independent of whether or not WFT would have a better shot, given the opportunity. Given oso's response to my post, I believe that he agrees.

Emotion doesn't always carry well through a textual medium. I wasn't upset by oso's post, and I gather he wasn't upset by my response. So, good enough.

-B :)

[oso97]

*chuckle* absolutely Brad!

Although, I'd still say that the USA WFT would stand a better chance of medeling in Bejing than the USA MET. But I could be wrong too. Not to take anything away from the results of Soren and company, or anything, but our WFT is both comparatively deeper and stronger with respect to the field of competition they would face.

LOL - are there enough caviats now? this horse is almost dead!

[fluidfencer]

A Task Force? I have a million questions. The first relates to the way the Task Force will be selected. I have some very serious concerns about the USFA's history of selecting people who may be good fencers or good coaches, but are not capable managers and decision-makers.

Assuming that the recommendation of this Task Force will be taken seriously, there is NOTHING more important than this issue with respect to the future of the USFA.

Is there a nominating process? A contact person regarding questions? A deadline of any kind?

Originally Posted by oiuyt

I'm back from Chicago (finally... delays with my flight which was a late one to begin with).

*SNIP*

Motions 4 and 5 were withdrawn with the understanding that the subjects would be referred to a Task Force which is already in the process of being named that is going to be looking at all aspects of national tournament organization, structure, qualifying paths, etc., etc.

That's far from a fair statement. Seth Kelsey is currently ranked 13th in the world (higher than ANY of the US MF or MS). He was 15th last season and 9th in 03-04. Soren Thompson was a finalist in Athens. Seth won a world cup last season, Ben Solomon took a bronze medal in one, Cody Mattern won a silver in another. The team placed 4th at a team world cup. As a team the US is ranked 7th (one spot behind where we're ranked in MF, incidently). As good a shot of winning a medal in Beijing as we have in sabre (either gender)? No, probably not. A prayer? Absolutely.

-B

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

motion to amend motion removing veterans events from the list of events to be affected was not passed (4 in favor, ~9-10 against, for reference, this motion was proposed by me, I was one of the 4 in favor of the amendment, in large part due to sentiments expressed here on f.net and to me via PM and in person).
Motion, as amended, passed.
Result of the motion is that Div IA, II, III, and Veterans events at summer nationals now have the same format as Div I, Junior, and Cadet events (1 round of pools, 80% promotion to straight DE).

Any chance of finding out who that "~9-10 against" were? I am SO going to be writing some letters. Plus, it's always good to know who has your "best interests" at heart. Grrr.

( PM would be fine if you aren't comfortable posting names, but I'd like to know to whom to address my impending "remarks". )

[KD5MDK]

According to the rules of order, in a counted vote the count should be given, while in a roll call vote the names and vote of each person should be recorded.

[oiuyt]

The BoD hasn't, in my experience, used roll call votes. Generally voice vote followed by counted vote if the voice vote indicates more than about a single person minority.

In any case, I can't tell you who was in either group, nor how large the majority was (at the time it was quickly characterized as "considerably more than 4", although Linda might have a more accurate number for the official minutes (note that my notes are just that, my unofficial notes)). I can tell you I was one of the 4. I can't name even a single additional member of the 4, nor any member of the "considerably more than 4". Sorry, I knew prior to the actual vote which way the count was going (from the discussion) and didn't bother to pay attention to who was on each side of the (clearly) decided issue. I raised the motion to amend the motion because I felt that it was the correct thing to do, even though I knew it wouldn't pass and therefore my doing so would have minimal impact.

Note that in many of the votes there are a number of abstensions. The BoD has (IIRC) 27 members currently, not all of whom were present (for example, the representative of my section, the Mid-Atlantic, was not present). There are also a number of people present that are not voting members (Michael Massik, who is present in his role of executive director, several committee chairs, legal council, etc. are all typically present without a vote). Certainly don't take my recollection of voting numbers as gospel (although the 4 was counted and I do remember it given as a specific number, so that one's accurate). If you want to know how people voted, ask them. Sorry I can't be more helpful, but blame my faulty recollection rather than my unwillingness to provide the information publically or otherwise. Even the people who I THINK I remember the direction of their vote I am in no case certain, and, in that case would prefer not to try to float my guess-like and unreliable memories.

-B :)

[Inquartata]

OK...any ideas regarding to whom I should address my indignant letters? I wouldn't want to scold anyone who either didn't vote or actually voted against...just the guilty parties ( if they haven't concealed their identities so well that they're invisible ).

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

OK...any ideas regarding to whom I should address my indignant letters? I wouldn't want to scold anyone who either didn't vote or actually voted against...just the guilty parties ( if they haven't concealed their identities so well that they're invisible ).

I really don't remember, I'm sorry. I'd suggest talking to other people that were present and find out a) which way they voted, and b) if they recall any better than I do how other people voted.

-B :)

[Inquartata]

I would, if I knew anyone else who was present...

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

I would, if I knew anyone else who was present... :(

That I can help on. Hopefully this'll be accurate... :)

USFA Officers present:
Nancy Anderson
Sam Cheris
Ro Sobalvarro
Derek Cotton
Linda Merritt

Athlete's Reps:
Jessie Burke
Felicia Zimmerman
Michael D'Asaro Jr
Scott Rodgers (not sure if Scott officially has a vote yet as wheelchair athlete rep, or if that will have to wait until the USFA officially gets USOC approval to be the NGB)

Congress Reps:
myself (Brad Baker)
Dave Michanik
Greg Dilworth
Andrea Lagan

Sectional Reps:
Gerrie Baumgart (RMS)
Jon Moss (NAS)
Jerry Benson (SWS)
Joseph Streb (GLS)
Paul Soter (PCS)

I remember there being one person listed on the sign-in sheet as a presidental selection for the Board (the president is entitled to make up to 4 selections), but I don't remember who it was.

There were a number of other people present who aren't members of the Board. These people don't have a vote, and because I don't have categories for them I'm much more likely to omit people here. Don't know if one of these people was the person who I'm missing as presidential selection. Best recollection...
Stacey Johnson
Donald Alperstein
Jane Carter
Steve Sobel
Michael Massik
Russ Wilson
There were probably about a half dozen more, I remember there being close to 30 people in the room. Can't recall anyone else in particular right now.

Apologies for anyone I omitted or miscategorized.

-B :)

[oso97]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

I remember there being one person listed on the sign-in sheet as a presidental selection for the Board (the president is entitled to make up to 4 selections), but I don't remember who it was.

Unless this person was appointed as a "National Level Coach" in order meet the USOC governance guidelines, don't they need to be approved by either the Congress or the BOD?

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by oso97

Unless this person was appointed as a "National Level Coach" in order meet the USOC governance guidelines, don't they need to be approved by either the Congress or the BOD?

Yes. And it's unlikely that it was a national-coach appointment as Paul Soter (ME, PCS Rep) and Andrea Lagan (WE, Congress Director) are both national coaches already on the Board through other means.

Possiblities:
* I misread/misremembered the sign-in sheet
* The person was approved, although I don't remember that happening, then again I missed the end of both the Congress and Board meetings in July due to needing to get over for report times as a referee and fencer (respectively)
* The by-laws weren't followed and the appointed directed is not yet qualified

The minutes of the July '05 BoD meeting don't seem to include such an approval, based on my quick skim of them now.

Adding to my list of people present:
Sherry Posthumus
Kalle Weeks
Ron Herman

I'll post other additions if I recall them.

-B