Petition to recall USFA President

[jdoiv]

The problem is not registration or taking money online. It's having the signed waiver. Now that is not a difficult thing to work around though. The USFA could easily have a payment option on the website that gives you a receipt of your payment with a waiver at the bottom. You print out the receipt and fax it with the signed waiver to the HQ and they send out your membership card. Same thing with the tournament. Have a fax number for waiver's to be sent to (efax even) and people could be truly preregistered. Just show up with your copy and they check you off a list. Digital signatures (faxed) have been legal for quite while now.
Not sure what the hold up has been on this. Pretty simple and straight forward.

just an observation...

[fencerX]

Hmmn. This topic has over 1,000 posts and 27,000 views to date. Is that a record for the board? I wouldn't be surprised if those numbers eventually doubled.

This is bad for the USFA. It is pitting fencers against fencers.
Work to make the USFA better for everyone not worse.

Exactly.

Now wake up, smell the coffee and think realistically about the facts on the ground.

Whether one is of the opinion Ms Anderson is the bee's knees, totally ineffectual, or somewhere in between, the fact is her presidency has become an deeply divisive issue. That means her presidency has become very, very costly to the USFA.

The current state of affairs is costing the USFA far more than the $15,000 figure many people are concerned about. Fund raising efforts sound, to be polite, "suboptimal". I've even heard of donations that are being withheld until the recall matter is "resolved'. Put aside any potential cost of mailing out and dealing with ballots, etc, which might or might not happen. Concentrate instead on the much larger costs to the USFA *is* incurring by having so much member and leadership time and effort spent on this. Sadly, whether one supports the recall or not, the most expensive case for the USFA could very well be if the recall effort doesn't succeed quickly.

Thinking that the recall effort or the people behind it will "just go away" is delusional. Thinking that someone can somehow talk or type the proponents in to giving up their quest is also totally unrealistic. The best outcome for the USFA would be to somehow "harness the anger', and use the passion, energy, time, and opportunity to work to improve lots of things. Being pragmatic and thinking realistically, it's obvious that can't happen effectively as long as Anderson is such a distraction. It really doesn't matter what her strengths or weaknesses are for dealing with the issues the USFA faces, when she (rightly or wrongly) has become the issue the USFA has become preoccupied with.

A change in presidents may be initially a totally symbolic act, but if it provides the possibility of shaking the USFA's institutional lethargy, or even just simply moving on, then that's a good thing.

[jjefferies]

You can register for DitD online but you still have to pay and sign waivers by mail or in person. So while there is no doubt Tanya and Evan will run a great, 1st class event as they always do, fencers can look forward to waiting in the check-in line while your fellow competitor in front of you (a) fishes around the bottom of their fencing bag for their USFA card, (b) fishes around the bottom of their bag for their checkbook, (c) finds a pen to write the check for their entry fees, (d) reads the waiver, (e) signs and dates the waiver in 3 places (or worst case, is 16 and now has to call mom on the cell phone to come down from the hotel room to sign it). *sigh* Be sure to get there early!

In the absence of online payment and waivers, all online registration gets us is a good preview of who's coming. So . . . which tournaments in the U.S. are ACTUALLY allowing online waivers right now???

Uh, I paid online via paypal. Got the receipt as well. And if you look at the list of who is attending I believe you will find that some folks still owe while others have just "waiver" annotated by their name. Meaning they need to hand over a signed waiver before being fully registered.

[keith]

A change in presidents may be initially a totally symbolic act, but if it provides the possibility of shaking the USFA's institutional lethargy, or even just simply moving on, then that's a good thing.

....which brings us back to the question, yet again, of what the 'new improved USFA' is going to achieve? All I hear from the supporters is that it will be better - but how

- dismiss and reform all the current committees?

- simply dismiss the current committees and rule by decree?

There has not been any real addressing of what seems to be the central problem; to many blocs fighting each other to to many stalemates on to many committees over to little money.

Also your logic is flawed re the quick resolution and replacement of Nancy Anderson - does this mean that next time a President should resign as soon as a suitably large cabal demands it?

[midi]

Yes, things ran very well for Long Beach, although it is early in the season and there are a lot of people who choose to join the USFA at the tournament.

Everyone is emailed a waiver and asked to print it, complete it at home and bring it to the tournament. That is the weakest link; my estimate is that fewer than 10% of the fencers bring the waiver. This should not be a problem for the the NACs, because they could have everyone sign the tournament waiver with the membership. At local tournaments, like the Junior PCCs/SYC coming in San Jose, we are required to include Team San Jose and the City of San Jose in the waiver by name. But there must be a way around that. It seems to me that I had a "registered" digital signature at least 15 years ago. Unfortunately all these waiver things didn't catch up and it wasn't worth renewing the registration since I used it about 2 times.

As to Long Beach, I do check every person entered against the list of USFA members and we contact anyone who has tried to give us a different rating or who is not a USFA member. I know that many fencers have benefitted from this process (which I use for the Junior PCCs/SYC and Senior PCCs) because they are able to get the tournament organizers to submit the results and new ratings in time for the Long Beach Invitational. Bonny and Craig said that this process has reduced the number of memberships that they have to verify after the tournament to near zero.

There are many advantages to online registration. The most important consideration is the creation of a secure system (like you bank has) and to be sure that it is truly secure.

The problem of the kid who has to have their parent sign the waiver is one reason we have not shifted to online registration for the Junior PCCs/SYC. (And about 10% of the entries come with a blank waiver, forcing the registration desk to have fencer and parent sign on checkin.)

There are so many fencers who are involved in various aspects of data management, internet applications, computer software etc industries that I am sure that a "task force" that includes people with technical expertize and those with solid user experience could develop reasonable specifications for an online registration system and present it in such a way that it would meet the insurance requirements (whatever they are).

Midi

Mo, I must disagree with you on this point. My understanding (admittedly based on just a few conversations with interested individuals and not hard negotiations dealing with reqs and money) is that there are several groups or organizations out there who have voluntarily approached the USFA about allowing them to implement this function. I don't want to mention them by name as they have their own agenda's and approach in these matters

But for instance "Ask Fred" charged $.50 per individual to handle registrations for the Long Beach Invitational. My understanding is that they handled the money end and then passed the names and registration information along to the organizers. Perhaps Midi or some other knowlegable person could tell us about the details and problems (I'm sure there must have been some as there always are for new systems).

Bottom line to me is that it is a matter of management making a decision and implementing a contract. Of course there will be caveats and details to be investigated and worked through. There always are. But this is something that Ms. Anderson could do. This is not about implementing a new computer system or even purchasing one. It's about contracting for a service.

[NoFleche]

Uh, I paid online via paypal.

Sorry--my bad! But as you saw too, despite the availability of the paypal option, the DitD website shows that most of the DintD confirmed entrants still will need to either pay or sign their waiver or do both at check-in time.

Online payment availability is not as concerning as the waiver issue. Despite discussion in previous posts, there still does not seem to be any concrete resolution of the key issue of whether an online waiver will be valid for legal/insurance purposes.

[Sciurus-Rex]

... the most expensive case for the USFA could very well be if the recall effort doesn't succeed quickly.

Thinking that the recall effort or the people behind it will "just go away" is delusional. Thinking that someone can somehow talk or type the proponents in to giving up their quest is also totally unrealistic. The best outcome for the USFA would be to somehow "harness the anger', and use the passion, energy, time, and opportunity to work to improve lots of things. Being pragmatic and thinking realistically, it's obvious that can't happen effectively as long as Anderson is such a distraction. ...

You made me smile. Thanks!

Because one could likewise argue, "thinking that the general membership will roll over and passively accept this recall effort is delusional." Or even, "Thinking that everyone else will let a minority's personal agenda go through without any say in the matter is unrealistic."

In conclusion: Being pragmatic and thinking realistically, it's obvious that nothing good can be accomplished as long as the recall cabal is such a destraction.

You're fun!

[oiuyt]

Hmmn. This topic has over 1,000 posts and 27,000 views to date. Is that a record for the board? I wouldn't be surprised if those numbers eventually doubled.

The "Question Game" thread in the WC has 19,677 posts and 97,454 views as of right now.

-B

[dberke]

Sorry--my bad! But as you saw too, despite the availability of the paypal option, the DitD website shows that most of the DintD confirmed entrants still will need to either pay or sign their waiver or do both at check-in time.

Online payment availability is not as concerning as the waiver issue. Despite discussion in previous posts, there still does not seem to be any concrete resolution of the key issue of whether an online waiver will be valid for legal/insurance purposes.

Check-in at last year's DitD took me all of 5 minutes, most of which was spent looking for a t-shirt of the size I ordered... I suspect that most people will have pre-paid by next week. And signing a waiver really doesn't take long since nobody bothers to actually read them.

As for online waivers, I am 99% certain that someone of authority (I am agonizing over trying to remember who) told me that the USFA's current insurance company will accept online waivers. In this day and age, that's not surprising. I buy car insurance online, pay bills online, trade stocks online, etc... all of which require some form of implied digitial signature. I don't think this is a roadblock for getting online registration any longer. Instead, as others have said, it's more an issue of motivation.

Also, the quote of $100,000 to get such a system up and running is insane. I would venture to guess that a system to process registrations could be set up in several months for a whole lot less. Oh, I almost forgot! There already is a system in place that does a good chunk of what is needed... something called AskFRED or something like that...

Dan

[Capt. Slo-mo]

As to regards to the Nominating Committee members, I know at least two are following these conversations. I suspect that most of the rest are as well.

Are the currently out of appointment Nominating Committee members automatically placed back into service, if they're needed before the next quadrennial, or is an entirely new appointment by the Congress needed?

If so, how does that process work?

[yeoldearmourer]

One I would be in favor of online regs if the insurence could be work out but the major hang up seem to be with the under 18 on the wavier. My 0ther question is if Nancy was not doing her job why this was not bought before the congress at summer nationals she had been in office for about a year. if the is holding up money from the USFA then the person behind this recalled is doing damage to the USFA. They say they are for the fencer but take a look at the people behind the recalled. This recalled is tearing the USFA apart and if it cotinure The USOC will step in. Cost of the recalled is coming out of the pocket of regualer fencer.

[Capt. Slo-mo]

I think you are under a misunderstanding here, I spoke to Cathy to find out her reasons for supporting this recall and this is NOT one of them.

You know, not to roll my eyes here, but:

Exactly what did you EXPECT her to admit?

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

How has it cost the USFA money as of yet? How much?

[incider]

You see it every time a corporation is put in play, up for sale, etc. Too many people take their eyes off the real ball and the and organizational effectiveness begins to suffer.

There will be a real cost if we let the distractions of this divisive recall effort result in any further delay in the USFA responding in a timely manner to the USOC's May 2, 2005 letter strongly suggesting we (and all the other NGB's) restructure our corporate governance.

In fact, it has been made clear that our future funding from the USOC will be directly tied to how well and how fast we restructure our corporate governance in line with their new guidance.

(and by the way, IMHO, it will be a fine day when we do. The new USOC guidance offers us a way to clarify roles, transcend this self-destructive blame game and move into the modern era of accountable management and shared responsibility. This bashing of hard working volunteers by equally hard working but overly zealous volunteers is not pretty and needs to stop.)

I asked several hundred posts ago if anyone knows if the USFA BOD is moving on this critical issue? Does anyone know?

[oiuyt]

Are the currently out of appointment Nominating Committee members automatically placed back into service, if they're needed before the next quadrennial, or is an entirely new appointment by the Congress needed?

If so, how does that process work?

As per the By-Laws, the nominating committee is reconstituted with the same members. There are provisions for if the previous people are unwilling or unable to serve again.

-B

[KD5MDK]

It'd difficult to ever know what the BoD is doing, since they communicate so little (Brad excepted). There's a meeting at JOs in Hartford, hopefully that will reveal a lot of progress and plans.

[heretic]

[QUOTE=Mo]Again Heretic, you are resorting to assuming the worst about Nancy. How do you know that this is "the first thing." ? She is a professional woman, speaks many languages including French to Mr. Roche. etc.

Hey, I can speak french, too, and I'm a professional, and Roche respects my opinion about as much as he does Nancy's.

Ms. Anderson is a real person. She is not some ficticious character.

Gee, I was beginning to think she was a hologram or something. Thanks for clearing that up.

You are libeling her. You are making completely unfounded accusations.

The truth is the only defence against accusations of libel. I stand behind every statement I have posted concerning her behavior.

She is a genuinely decent human being and yet you feel free to say whatever pops into your head about her.
Cut the crap.

Language, Mom! There are children present.

The meet in Houston is an excellent reason this whole recall petition should never have been brought forth. The meet had a pall over it. People were mean. Coaches were mean to fencers and referees. The coach from Harvard during a saber bout used profanity like I have never heard at a fencing competition. He wasn't the only one. There was so much fighting going on.

Gee, fighting at a fencing competition; angry coaches; people acting mean toward referees! Good gracious, what has this petition done?

The sides were clearly drawn. If this meet was an example of fencing at it's best it really isn't worth it. The lack of civility and unprofessional behavior just plain sucks.

This is bad for the USFA. It is pitting fencers against fencers.
Work to make the USFA better for everyone not worse.

The Momster

Well send me to bed without supper. (I need to lose some weight anyway

[Inquartata]

When is the last time that there was a contested election for USFA president?

--Philistine

The last ( only ) one I remember was when Michel Mamluk ran an outsider campaign back in...uh...a long time ago. It wasn't a recall, and he at least had a platform which he communicated to the membership ( via individual mailings, I think at his own expense ). But it was similar in style. He alleged that the organization was being misrun, that the incumbent leadership was doing a disservice to American fencing, that we needed a fresh start, someone who could change things in a positive way, etc.

He was elected. I think he only served one term. I don't recall any major improvements to US Fencing, not down at my level, anyway.


Anyone remember the details more completely, or have more intimate knowledge ( or interest ) than I as a rank novice from the fencing hinterlands did at the time?

[Capt. Slo-mo]

Hey, I can speak french, too, and I'm a professional, and Roche respects my opinion about as much as he does Nancy's.

Yes, but you seem to only speak the diminutive branch of the language that requires no capitalization. And, you've tabulated Roche's Sliding Comparative Scale of American Fencer's Opinions cross idexed for you and Nancy from what carefully recorded archive?

Have you ever expressed an opinion, in person, in French to Roche concerning the USFA and its operations?? Or was this just another flippant attempt to at a type-by smearing?

You are making completely unfounded accusations.

In response you proudly proclaim:

The truth is the only defence against accusations of libel. I stand behind every statement I have posted concerning her behavior.

Your honor, exhibit A:

If Nancy wants to contest, she simply has to file her petition on a timely basis - which would be the first thing she ever did on a timely basis. (emphasis added)

She's never renewed her auto registration before it's expired? Or bought milk before the fridge was empty? Arrived at an NAC before it was over? Written a congratulatory e-mail to a fencer immediately after a particularly good result? Managed to get her kid's costume sewn before Halloween?

You stand on your self-erected soap box, place your hand over your heart, and boast that you stand behind every utterance you have made on this board concerning her behavior. We then see that the above statement is an out and out falsehood.

I suggest, sir, that your veracity is severely lacking. This begs the question: what else have you been exaggerating, distorting or lying about during this discussion?

[Craig]

Mo,

I have heard the $100K number before, and I don't buy it.

Maybe you have some insight into this -- and I'd appreciate you sharing. I work software for a living, and my guess is that someone or some organiztion that didn't want this to happen floated a poison pill solution (a solution so awful or expensive that no one would want it) to prevent online registration from happening.

Regards,
Feltan

This deserves a separate thread, but I have seen that the number that was distributed in the RFP is $40k, not $100k.