For everyone planning to attend a tourney in North Carolina

[epeemike81]

Our schools are a for profit company. It may be considered a conflict of interest if we say got all of our instructors elected to office. So, in order to avoid a "pissing" contest we have decided not to have anyone from our organization run for a USFA office.

Is THAT why you're not running for a USFA office... funny, I thought there was another reason...

-m

[KD5MDK]

I guess she'll just have to star in Dukes of Hazzard II to feel better.

[fencergal33]

I think this entire thread is absolutely ridiculous.

No wonder we have trouble making this sport grow and become mainstream. Everyone is so busy pointing fingers and placing blame that they can't do anything to fix the problems. The majority of the people contributing to this thread either live nowhere near NC, or weren't around when any of the "suspicious acts" were being committed, or both.

Amazing how often personal attack go unnoticed by moderators.

[dekko]

Wow, did this explode quickly.

For this past year and next year, so far..., there has not been a division officer from Charlotte on the board, even though one ran but was not elected both times(maybe there should be a revote). I was surprised to see this email from our chair for two reasons, so soon, so drastic.

To unsanction events that were sanctioned to begin with just because none of the division officer feel like showing up is very silly to say the least. Forgot who but someone asked where the division officers are in NC and they are all in the north central part of the state, or will be next year except the chair, which leaves Charlotte out in the cold for sanctioned events next year, or so it seems.

I would think this would be part of their job, since they set the requirement, but I guess I was wrong. I do find it interesting that one idea being pushed for the past couple of years in NC is the circuit. The third of those events has been deemed nonsanctioned. WOW. The small event my club wants to have has been deemed nonsanctioned as well which goes in the whatever catagory as our events are small and has given one rating since we started having them.

I was surprised how quickly this happened but not that it happened. I guess they found something very wrong to do this the way it was done and not bother to show up to any event, other than their own, for the rest of the year.

Not sure how this will bear out or how it will affect other divisions directly or indirectly but I guess this is something the national office and division officers have decided to do, hopefully, with good reason.

On a personal note, this doesn't affect us next year that much anyway. Between smalled events and going to larger events in Atlanta and Virginia, this doesn't do that much for us either way. I guess the bottom line is don't bother coming to tournaments in Charlotte next year as none of us are division officers and none of the officers seem to want to be bothered with 'wasting their time' coming to Charlotte so hard working fencers can potentially be awarded ratings they otherwise earn. Although I hear the Raleigh area will be having some big kickass SANCTIONED events as they have the officers who are willing to drive down the street to make their events sanctioned.

[oiuyt]

I think this entire thread is absolutely ridiculous.

While I agree that this thread is absolutely rediculous, yesterday evening/last night was probably one of the more enjoyable times I've had on f.net recently. A number of threads, this one included, with lots of responses, and lots of joking give-and-take exchanges. More than a bit of thread drift at times.

-B

[Phrogger]

So, after looking at the div webpage, does that mean the RFC event in June is good to go?

(PS does anyone have details on this event? It's not in FRED yet...)

[Mr Epee]

I think this entire thread is absolutely ridiculous.

No, you're a towel!


Ok, moving along.

Like I mentioned before needing a Division officer present at sanctioned events is a fairly common practice, however, there is also commonly a clause that allows the Division EC to name someone as a "Designated Observer". I have seen some Divisions to require this person have at least a 5 ref rating, while others require only faith and trust.

There are many solutions available.

[tbryan]

So, after looking at the div webpage, does that mean the RFC event in June is good to go?

(PS does anyone have details on this event? It's not in FRED yet...)

No idea. I assume that everything is in a state of flux at the moment while everyone adjusts to the new policy. It would have been easier if this change could have been made at the transition between this season and next. As it is, everyone is going to have to reevaluate the rest of this season.

As for FRED....well. RFC is a bit slow in adopting FRED. In the past, our use has been sporadic. I'll see if I can pressure those in charge of running this tournament to put info up when they know for sure what's going to happen.

[EricC]

No, you're a towel!

no you're a towel!

[RebelFencer]

I think this entire thread is absolutely ridiculous.

No wonder we have trouble making this sport grow and become mainstream. Everyone is so busy pointing fingers and placing blame that they can't do anything to fix the problems. The majority of the people contributing to this thread either live nowhere near NC, or weren't around when any of the "suspicious acts" were being committed, or both.

Amazing how often personal attack go unnoticed by moderators.

Boohoo. Either contribute to the thread or go back and play in the water cooler. Quit complaining about the moderators allowing open debate.

[Mr Epee]

no you're a towel!

If I'm a towel, then why would I have this hat and moustache?

[epeemike81]

Ok...

Think of it like a marriage.

Just because a guy is married doesn't mean he's free sex to have sex with your wife.

Nice. I'd rep you if I could...

-m

[Fencergrl]

If I'm a towel, then why would I have this hat and moustache?

You had me at "hat"

[seak]

Led to a couple of humorous (to me) conversations where I repeatedly asserted that they were wrong about having checked everyone's card and they were adamant that they had.

Benefits of either a) being well-enough known, or b) having that sweet innocent look. (where's that smilie with the halo?)

bah course be that you were sitting behind the refs table, as opposed to coming through the line

[smurfette]

Can we please just stop using the word "tourney." SO ANNOYING!

[bigdawg2121]

I think I speak for everyone on this thread (just on GP) when I say:

Tourney. Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.To urney.Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.Tour ney.Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.Tourne y.Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.Tourney.
TOURNEY




Nothing personal I, but I think that you took thread drift to a new level :P

[Craig]

The reasons regarding unsanctioning of events were given at the Divisional meeting for North Carolina. I think NC is a prideful state and they are embarrassed by all of this and therefore have not given out a lot of details so as not to publicly embarass those involved.

Is it hard to get a Division officer at an event in NC? That is all you have to do to be resanctioned.

NC has always been a friendly state to me.

~C

Back when I was an NC division officer, we made sure to have representation at events. We missed out on a couple that were in the Wilmington area, but had pretty good coverage at all of the other ones. (This was back a ways though, 10+ years ago.)

Craig

[tbryan]

Back when I was an NC division officer, we made sure to have representation at events. We missed out on a couple that were in the Wilmington area, but had pretty good coverage at all of the other ones. (This was back a ways though, 10+ years ago.)

I don't know how hard it is to get an officer to show up at events already scheduled this year. I suggest anyone with events already on the schedule to contact the board and ask. I talked to Gerhard this week, and I think they're trying to make an effort to accomodate all such requests since they know that such a policy change in the middle of the season is incredibly inconvenient.

Now, in my opinion if this policy is in force in the future, I'm not sure that the division can accomodate the current schedule load. After a quick count just using the calendar posted on ncfencing.org, I see 54 tournaments between the start of this season (last Aug 1) and today. That's not tournament days. If an event lasts two days, I just counted it once. So, in just under 10 months, there were 54 tournaments. Sometimes with 3 tournaments on the same weekend in different parts of the state. A few tournaments were also scheduled for a Wednesday or Thursday evening.

Maybe it's not unreasonable to ask each officer to give up one weekend a month to go supervise a tournament somewhere in the state. Since this duty wasn't part of their jobs when they were elected, I'm not sure how they're feeling about this responsibility. I haven't had a chance to ask any of them. If it were me, I'd be seriously considering resigning my position on the board. Or figuring out some solution that didn't involve me driving 4 hours to a tournament at the opposite corner of the state a couple of times a year. And do we expect board members to do all of this "work" without at least reimbursement for travel and lodging expenses? On the other hand, how would clubs feel about paying an official to be at their events just to get sanctioning?

I also raised the concern to the board about the conflict of interest if an officer supervises an event at a club where he or she is a member. That seems like a valid concern. I'm also not sure whether the supervising officer is supposed to act as part of the bout committee and whether they are allowed to fence in events that they are also supervising.

I think that the policy is going to take a lot more discussion and fine tuning before next season.

But now we're waaaay off topic for the original thread...which was just an attempt to spread the word to those who might not be in the habit of checking ncfencing.org before attending an event in North Carolina.

If we really want to push this thread into the realm of the policy and the details of its implementation, I don't think we're on the right forum. I'd be inclined to move that discussion to one of the NC division mailing lists or something. It seems silly to clog up fencing.net with that discussion since most of the people here have no interest in the policy's final form and no power to change the policy. In any case, I don't have much more to add to this discussion, so I'm going to try to ignore any further posts to the thread.

[oiuyt]

If we really want to push this thread into the realm of the policy and the details of its implementation, I don't think we're on the right forum. I'd be inclined to move that discussion to one of the NC division mailing lists or something. It seems silly to clog up fencing.net with that discussion since most of the people here have no interest in the policy's final form and no power to change the policy. In any case, I don't have much more to add to this discussion, so I'm going to try to ignore any further posts to the thread. :)

Yeah, but we like kibitzing. :)

More seriously (well, I'll try!), the issues in a generic form aren't unique to NC. Other areas have likely dealt with any issues that you encounter before and have tried various solutions with varying degrees of success. People familiar with those processes can give advice gained from when they were the ones making mistakes, which can allow you to avoid potential pitfalls. Yet other areas will encounter the same problems in the future, and having seen how you dealt with them can help make things easier or faster for them.

It's even possible that some area will use the discussion to help highlight potential trouble areas and act proactively to change structures now such that they never develop (okay, I said I'd TRY, I didn't say I'd be successful).

Lots of smart people on the forum who have a large amount of diverse experience, including extensive experience in how various fencing functions can be administered in a wide range of structures. I think having an open discussion to frame the local decisions is a good idea. Obviously the final decision comes down to what the people in NC (with possible input from the national-level USFA, depending on how poorly the discussions locally go, although the USFA strongly prefers letting divisions sort out their own decisions) choose to do. We're here to help and learn (and entertain and be entertained, but those are less relevant...).

-B

[KD5MDK]

The issue of proper tournament sanctioning has come up in most Divisions, I would imagine.