Usoc & Usfa - B - Page 2 - Fencing.Net Discussion
topleft topright

Go Back   Fencing.Net Discussion > General Fencing > Fencing Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-16-2008, 12:13 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
epeemike81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Dana Hall School, Wellesely, MA
Posts: 3,821
epeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to epeemike81
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexsmom View Post
I understand that some/many on the BOD are not even fencers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KD5MDK View Post
That's extremely interesting. The majority of the people on the Board I know of are fencing coaches, if you were to pick a common trait.
Some of them are merely parents of fencers (or former fencers). Clearly alexsmom is suggesting that parents of fencers shouldn't be involved in leadership.

I defy you to find even one board member without significant involvement with fencing outside of their BOD positions. they are all fencers, coaches, parents of fencers, or multiple of the above.

-m
epeemike81 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
And now for this message...
Go Green members don't see these ads.


Old 07-16-2008, 12:17 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
epeemike81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Dana Hall School, Wellesely, MA
Posts: 3,821
epeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond reputeepeemike81 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to epeemike81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt. Slo-mo View Post
Wow. There's a story in that invective. What is it?
the story is quite simple. this thread, post 136 on: USFA Election 2008 Debate Question #2: Qualification Concerns about Candidates

Her agenda-driven posts were met with some opposition (some of it agenda-driven too, clearly) and she took it personally.

-m
epeemike81 is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2008, 03:56 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
wbowman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 336
wbowman is a splendid one to beholdwbowman is a splendid one to beholdwbowman is a splendid one to beholdwbowman is a splendid one to beholdwbowman is a splendid one to beholdwbowman is a splendid one to beholdwbowman is a splendid one to behold
Whatever the validity of the claims and/or findings, this seems to be a completely unsolicited document. Nor does it seem to state a claim and/or ask specifically for some relief (in the legal sense) -- at least on my cursory reading. So it doesn't appear to me that Mike Massik or anyone else at the USFA had any duty to answer it even if they DID get it. The "you know why we're doing this" business implies that there's something they want, but it would have been more businesslike to re-state the claim (if any) briefly.

I was also a little put off by the "Dear Mike" salutation. I strongly suspect Massik and the lawyer are not sufficiently acquainted to be on a first-name basis.

I also share the concerns of those who found it odd that it was given to Tracy Hurley.

This is not to say that there may not be problems with the USFA's governance, bylaws, adherence to USOC rules etc. And while I've never had any problem getting responses from the National Office, I'm well aware that many people have had such difficulties.

Nevertheless, I tend to agree with those who've expressed the opinion that these folks are up to something.
wbowman is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
USOC and USFencing - Discussion 500gms Fencing Discussion 362 08-28-2008 10:35 AM
USOC Calendar VorpalCat Fencing Discussion 10 08-27-2007 06:23 PM
USOC Grants to USFA 2002 Mr Epee Fencing Discussion 1 10-12-2005 08:36 PM
New USOC poll with Sada in it Army Fencer Fencing Discussion 5 08-11-2004 05:28 PM
USOC poll Peach Water Cooler 3 07-14-2004 06:56 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:36 PM.


(c) 1995 - 2007 Fencing Net; Fencing.Net, fdn, Fencing101, Epee101, Foil101, Sabre101 are all trademarks of Fencing.Net, LLC.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. - Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5 -    Medieval Swords from the online Replica Sword Shop