From the USFA Nominees, "The first 100 days in Office."

[Mr Epee]

Mike,

I was speaking (typing) in terms of the validity of measuring one type of service against another... Elite Athletes, Club Managers, Referees, Coaches, Administrators, and even Politicians all contribute to the sport. They are all part of the whole. If one goes missing, then the whole thing falls apart.

They ALL contribute to the betterment of the sport.

There isn't a point to say that Referee Jack is a valuable contributor, but Club Manager Steve is not. That's silly....

Now, Mike, are you in agreement with Mr Stasinos' statement?

------edit--------

Originally Posted by KShan5[PrFC]

Agreed. Nothing good is going to come from saying being a coach is a more valuable contribution to the sport than being a ref, but being a member of the BOD is more important than being on the BC.

What is important is looking at specific contributions candidates have made, and meaningful qualifications for a position. (Such as having a treasurer who has ever gone to college and learned about business....)

Exactly!!! (your post slipped in front of mine, before I had a chance to read it.)

I couldn't agree more. Which is why I found Mr Stasinos' comment to be in poor taste. Failure to recognize the abilities and contributions of others is a grave mistake. This is especially true when it comes in the same breath as self-praise.

I'm convinced that Mr Stasinos was merely caught up in the moment and failed to see how his comment might be perceived by others. He's a fine citizen and a good friend of fencing.

[gorgie101]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

Don't believe for a second that being a member of a BoD translates directly to positive contribution. That's bad logic.

I never said that being a member of the BOD was an auto positive contribution. Only that it was higher than being a bare bones run of the mill fencer IMHO. In as much as it shows a willingness to be MORE involved. Wether or not the involvement was a Positive or Negative experience would depend on how each individual on the board votes.

Oh and, stating the obvious, not all of the canidates have peckers to measure.

[oso97]

Originally Posted by KD5MDK

Can we consider that ordinary participation as a fencer is not a distinguishing contribution?

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

Um... you do realize that ordinary precludes distinguishing, right?

Moving on.

None of the candidates for office are ordinary, and all have made massive contributions to the sport.

Okay, then can we consider that a Distinguishing Contribution to the Sport would be different than a Distinguishing Contribution to the Association?

The former would include things like being an athlete multiple championship world teams, an athlete with a substantial record of individual medals at the national and international level, the coach of multiple (non-related) world team athletes or a notable history of coaching at developmental or grassroots level. There may be others .

The later would include things like extensive referee or bout committee contributions, substantial service on committees or the Board of Directors, long-term involvement in the leadership of a Section or Division, notable contributions in other volunteer roles, or service over a succession of years of a weapon squad with a dominant presence internationally with substantial contributions during that time being made by athletes other than one's own (ala Ed Korfanty). There may be others .

While Distinguishing Contributions to the Sport are notable and impressive in their own right, they themselves say little about the preparedness and ability of the individual in question with regards to the capacity to serve as an Opfficer of the Association.

[gorgie101]

Originally Posted by oso97

Okay, then can we consider that a Distinguishing Contribution to the Sport would be different than a Distinguishing Contribution to the Association?

Ah as usuall someone says what I want to say in a much better way. From my view being a fencer helps the sport. Being on the BOD or such helps the association. In my view they are two different things.

[Mr Epee]

Athletes comprise the organization.
Athletes represent the organization.
Athletes validate the organization.

According to the USOC, athletes must be involved with the governance of the organization. Apparently, this is an important factor to someone.

Where are you crazy kids trying to go with this argument?

Are you willing to claim that Mariel's Olympic Gold Medal failed to benefit the USFA in any form?

[ivlobane]

Originally Posted by oso97

Okay, then can we consider that a Distinguishing Contribution to the Sport would be different than a Distinguishing Contribution to the Association?

Dear God, yes it is but the Distinguished Contributor to the Association should be a total outsider, someone like Donald Trump or INTEL, otherwise the Association will expand to meet the needs of the expanding Association and not the sport.

[mdstasinos]

I did not try to belittle anybody for their service in any level in our Association. I tired to point out that the individuals on our slate have served at management levels in the Association, along with us being fencers, coaches, volunteer. Pointing out what we have been able to accomplish for the membership, the fencers and competitions is only a point of information. I do think it adds to the ability to serve at a higher level in the Association if you understand how it works and knowing the other individuals you must work.
I have been fencing for nearly 40 years, I was the architect in creating the Utah-southern Idaho Division, I ran a university fencing program for 11 years, I have trained and coached world class athletes, I volunteer on many levels in the association and have done so for years. So, what makes that bad? Yes, it is true non of the other slate have that kind of experience of serving on appointed committees, or as congress reps or as members of the BOD. Does it matter? Probably not for some but I think it sure helps if the experience is there. Most who do serve in different levels have been or are still active competitors, so I think we are not as removed as some of you has asserted.
Again, if you want change then look to those who have experience in creating change and look to our records for what we have done for the Association and do the same for the others and then vote. Remember your vote will make a difference in the direction and focus this Association will under go in the next 4 years and many years to come after that.

Mark Stasinos
http://www.usfanominees.com

[jfarmer]

Originally Posted by KShan5[PrFC]

What is important is looking at specific contributions candidates have made, and meaningful qualifications for a position. (Such as having a treasurer who has ever gone to college and learned about business....)

I think I understand what you are getting at with your slam, but going to college has nothing to do with learning (despite what they tell you at admissions...)

In fact, a very strong case can be made for preferring the candidate that has actually faced the same problems that coaches and club owners have faced...

A college degree is simply a credential signifying that managed to meet some established expectations. 99.99% of the time they have little if any bearing on producing meaningful work. An MBA simply means that you've managed to do that using bigger words and piecharts. (That's not to take anything away from Greg, but I respect the work he has accomplished, not the fact that he has credential X or Y.)

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Originally Posted by jfarmer

I think I understand what you are getting at with your slam, but going to college has nothing to do with learning (despite what they tell you at admissions...)

In fact, a very strong case can be made for preferring the candidate that has actually faced the same problems that coaches and club owners have faced...

A college degree is simply a credential signifying that managed to meet some established expectations. 99.99% of the time they have little if any bearing on producing meaningful work. An MBA simply means that you've managed to do that using bigger words and piecharts. (That's not to take anything away from Greg, but I respect the work he has accomplished, not the fact that he has credential X or Y.)

I'd have to disagree. I want someone defending me in court to have gone to Law School; I want someone operating on me to have gone to Med School; and I want someone who is running USFA finances to have gone to Business School (or hell, even undergrad would be a start).

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by jfarmer

In fact, a very strong case can be made for preferring the candidate that has actually faced the same problems that coaches and club owners have faced...

Coaches like Ro, Mark, Jerry, and myself?

-B

[keith]

I have a stick. It's a marvelous stick, I can measure things and people. Just stand still for a moment, and the most magical thing about my stick? Well if you don't measure up I can hit you with it.

[ivlobane]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

Coaches like Ro, Mark, Jerry, and myself?

-B

Well, you're not being contested, but I won't mind comparing the coaching and competitive resumes of the two slates,

[dcrocket]

Originally Posted by ivlobane

Well, you're not being contested, but I won't mind comparing the coaching and competitive resumes of the two slates,

This certainly adds to the discussion.

[notalent]

Originally Posted by jfarmer

I think I understand what you are getting at with your slam, but going to college has nothing to do with learning (despite what they tell you at admissions...)

In fact, a very strong case can be made for preferring the candidate that has actually faced the same problems that coaches and club owners have faced...

A college degree is simply a credential signifying that managed to meet some established expectations. 99.99% of the time they have little if any bearing on producing meaningful work. An MBA simply means that you've managed to do that using bigger words and piecharts. (That's not to take anything away from Greg, but I respect the work he has accomplished, not the fact that he has credential X or Y.)

We don't need none of that thar booklearnin :eyeroll:

[bigdawg2121]

Originally Posted by dcrocket

This certainly adds to the discussion.

Not really. Also, I'd wager a lot of money (that I don't have) that it's not as lopsided of a discussion as you might think at first glance.

[Jason]

Originally Posted by KShan5[PrFC]

I'd have to disagree. I want someone defending me in court to have gone to Law School; I want someone operating on me to have gone to Med School; and I want someone who is running USFA finances to have gone to Business School (or hell, even undergrad would be a start).

By that reasoning, of course, I expect that you'd like a USFA President with a PhD in Business Management with a specialization in Knowledge Management in the non-profit sector.

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by Jason

By that reasoning, of course, I expect that you'd like a USFA President with a doctorate in Business Management with a specialization in Knowledge management in the non-profit sector.

pwnd-wtf-bbq

I speak the language of the people.

[hpfencing]

Originally Posted by mdstasinos

Dear USFA members,

Here's what the USFA Nominees will do for the organization to manage its growth and support its athletes--What we will do for you and for all fencers across the country during the next quad.

Another reason to vote and look at the USFA nominees, they work together and speak together. Very well written letter!