Train Wreck

[XC]

Dang! Got drawn in again!

I’m ashamed to admit I have been following Sean Fidler’s “why didn’t I get chosen� rants on Facebook. It is hard to look away from a train wreck I guess. I am embarrassed for him. I've never seen someone take a decision so badly. So much misinformation and so little space to refute it!

For those who haven’t heard SF wasn’t chosen to represent the US in the 18m at the 2018 WGC in the Czech Republic. He was chosen to go Poland in the 15m class. Hardly an insult but his insecurities got the better of him, he ungraciously declined the 15m class and ever since the world has not been right.

Let me first say I do not represent the selection committee in any way. They have been working hard at this and deserve our thanks not attacks.

The selection process is different this year. This has been known to all the candidates for some time now. First, a pilot qualifies for consideration by getting a ranking of 90% or better by averaging various comps.

In phase two, the pilot’s fellow competitors who scored at least 85% of the winners score in a US Nationals in the last three years rank order the candidates based on who they think would represent the US best at the WGC. Listed below are the pilots who voted in the 18m class.

Fletcher, Robert W.
Leonard, David
Fidler, Sean
Ittner, Gary N.
Nelson, Erik
Clark, Robin
Alexander, Peter T.
Nichols, Steve
Sorenson, Kenneth G.
Indrebo, Rick
Nadler, David R.
Zimmerman, Sam R., III
Murray, John
Arnold, Sarah Kelly
Gawthrop, Bill
Linnekin, Dennis
Gimmey, Ray
Tyler, Allison H., Jr.
Roberts, Sheridan
Mockler, David R.
Cochrane, John H.
Lee, Jim
Welles, Gillette 'Tim'
Deane, Peter
Martin, David V.
Coggins, David L.
Keene, Mark
Franke, Sean

This is a pretty sharp group. In fact it would be hard to assemble such a good group of decision makers any other way. There was well over 90% participation rate I’m told and more details will follow from official sources. What was put forth was their decision.

After the vote the committee can make adjustments to field a good team. For example they may pair up two people who work well together or select someone with experience applicable to the WGC site. I am told that this was not implemented in any of the classes this year.

I can only guess at why others didn’t rank him well in the 18m class. I ranked him low in the 15m because he doesn't do well in a TAT or a MAT task. If he doesn’t have markers around him he tends not to do so well. MAT task aside, there are still quite a few TAT tasks at the WGC and pilot needs to be able to perform if they find themselves separated from the lead gaggle. On top of all that he doesn't work well with others and is an internet troll. Sorry, but we all know it to be true.

So all this talk about deficiencies in the US rules, MAT tasks being bad, flying primarily racing tasks, "true racing tasks", etc. is smoke and mirrors for one thing, wanting to make sailplane racing about following others around the course in gaggles and not making decisions on one's own, hanging back and leap frogging over the guys in front. The pilot who makes a bold decision is really taking a risk.

IGC racing is what it is. Yes, there is a lot of gaggle flying required but in the end we still need to send brilliant pilots who process a full set of soaring skills.

Sean Fidler didn't make the cut (in 18m) and is having a tough time dealing with the fact.

Sean Murphy

[Retting]

And why do you feel a need to share all of this?

[Retting]

Sorry, I forgot to initial the above.

R

[XC]

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 8:37:55 PM UTC-4, Retting wrote:
> Sorry, I forgot to initial the above.
>
> R

Sorry to bring it to RAS. I replied on Facebook and it was edited out.

Besides it is the Irishman in me. I see a bully, devoid of sense of humor and I have to needle him.

XC

[Kevin Christner]

Or, as you point out below, we need to send pilots who aren't bullies and have a sense of humor...

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 8:18:12 PM UTC-4, XC wrote:
> Dang! Got drawn in again!
>
> I’m ashamed to admit I have been following Sean Fidler’s “why didn’t I get chosen� rants on Facebook. It is hard to look away from a train wreck I guess. I am embarrassed for him. I've never seen someone take a decision so badly. So much misinformation and so little space to refute it!
>
> For those who haven’t heard SF wasn’t chosen to represent the US in the 18m at the 2018 WGC in the Czech Republic. He was chosen to go Poland in the 15m class. Hardly an insult but his insecurities got the better of him, he ungraciously declined the 15m class and ever since the world has not been right.
>
> Let me first say I do not represent the selection committee in any way. They have been working hard at this and deserve our thanks not attacks.
>
> The selection process is different this year. This has been known to all the candidates for some time now. First, a pilot qualifies for consideration by getting a ranking of 90% or better by averaging various comps.
>
> In phase two, the pilot’s fellow competitors who scored at least 85% of the winners score in a US Nationals in the last three years rank order the candidates based on who they think would represent the US best at the WGC. Listed below are the pilots who voted in the 18m class.
>
> Fletcher, Robert W.
> Leonard, David
> Fidler, Sean
> Ittner, Gary N.
> Nelson, Erik
> Clark, Robin
> Alexander, Peter T.
> Nichols, Steve
> Sorenson, Kenneth G.
> Indrebo, Rick
> Nadler, David R.
> Zimmerman, Sam R., III
> Murray, John
> Arnold, Sarah Kelly
> Gawthrop, Bill
> Linnekin, Dennis
> Gimmey, Ray
> Tyler, Allison H., Jr.
> Roberts, Sheridan
> Mockler, David R.
> Cochrane, John H.
> Lee, Jim
> Welles, Gillette 'Tim'
> Deane, Peter
> Martin, David V.
> Coggins, David L.
> Keene, Mark
> Franke, Sean
>
> This is a pretty sharp group. In fact it would be hard to assemble such a good group of decision makers any other way. There was well over 90% participation rate I’m told and more details will follow from official sources. What was put forth was their decision.
>
> After the vote the committee can make adjustments to field a good team. For example they may pair up two people who work well together or select someone with experience applicable to the WGC site. I am told that this was not implemented in any of the classes this year.
>
> I can only guess at why others didn’t rank him well in the 18m class. I ranked him low in the 15m because he doesn't do well in a TAT or a MAT task. If he doesn’t have markers around him he tends not to do so well. MAT task aside, there are still quite a few TAT tasks at the WGC and pilot needs to be able to perform if they find themselves separated from the lead gaggle. On top of all that he doesn't work well with others and is an internet troll. Sorry, but we all know it to be true.
>
> So all this talk about deficiencies in the US rules, MAT tasks being bad, flying primarily racing tasks, "true racing tasks", etc. is smoke and mirrors for one thing, wanting to make sailplane racing about following others around the course in gaggles and not making decisions on one's own, hanging back and leap frogging over the guys in front. The pilot who makes a bold decision is really taking a risk.
>
> IGC racing is what it is. Yes, there is a lot of gaggle flying required but in the end we still need to send brilliant pilots who process a full set of soaring skills.
>
> Sean Fidler didn't make the cut (in 18m) and is having a tough time dealing with the fact.
>
> Sean Murphy

[Retting]

Well, next time resist the urge to be an idiot. If you have to vent .... go out into the woods. Nobody cares what you think.

R

[Retting]

Two idiots now. Great.
Someone smart enough delete this thread.
Must be Holloween.
R

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 9:07:59 PM UTC-4, Retting wrote:
> Well, next time resist the urge to be an idiot. If you have to vent .... go out into the woods. Nobody cares what you think.
>
> R

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 9:07:59 PM UTC-4, Retting wrote:
> Well, next time resist the urge to be an idiot. If you have to vent .... go out into the woods. Nobody cares what you think.
>
> R

Sorry, Dude. He's been pretty hard on several good people and I couldn't resist the urge to call him out. You are right I should show more restraint.

Sean Murphy

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 9:10:10 PM UTC-4, Retting wrote:
> Two idiots now. Great.
> Someone smart enough delete this thread.
> Must be Holloween.
> R

More idiots than you may think
UH

[Roy B.]

The good thing about Facebook is that you can decide to follow it or not. Nobody gets pulled in to a Facebook posting who didn't decide to be there. But when you post something tantalizingly called "Train Wreck" on a public forum then you are deliberately attempting to pull people into your petty squabble. Please take it somewhere else. It demeans all of us and our sport.
ROY

[XC]

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 10:07:38 PM UTC-4, Roy B. wrote:
> The good thing about Facebook is that you can decide to follow it or not. Nobody gets pulled in to a Facebook posting who didn't decide to be there. But when you post something tantalizingly called "Train Wreck" on a public forum then you are deliberately attempting to pull people into your petty squabble. Please take it somewhere else. It demeans all of us and our sport.

[Kevin Christner]

In the past month we've seen media reports about the harassment suffered by many in Hollywood and elsewhere. Fidler's (or should I say Wilbur's) harassment of many in our small community has been just as despicable for many years. He's able to continue with his behaviors because too many remain silent, or as in your case, appear to be an apologist for his behavior. While he attacks with seeming impunity you attack those who call out his sick behavior. Think about that before you attack those who have been his targets.

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 9:10:10 PM UTC-4, Retting wrote:
> Two idiots now. Great.
> Someone smart enough delete this thread.
> Must be Holloween.
> R

[Ron Gleason]

On Tuesday, 31 October 2017 18:18:12 UTC-6, XC wrote:
> Dang! Got drawn in again!
>
> I’m ashamed to admit I have been following Sean Fidler’s “why didn’t I get chosen� rants on Facebook. It is hard to look away from a train wreck I guess. I am embarrassed for him. I've never seen someone take a decision so badly. So much misinformation and so little space to refute it!
>
> For those who haven’t heard SF wasn’t chosen to represent the US in the 18m at the 2018 WGC in the Czech Republic. He was chosen to go Poland in the 15m class. Hardly an insult but his insecurities got the better of him, he ungraciously declined the 15m class and ever since the world has not been right.
>
> Let me first say I do not represent the selection committee in any way. They have been working hard at this and deserve our thanks not attacks.
>
> The selection process is different this year. This has been known to all the candidates for some time now. First, a pilot qualifies for consideration by getting a ranking of 90% or better by averaging various comps.
>
> In phase two, the pilot’s fellow competitors who scored at least 85% of the winners score in a US Nationals in the last three years rank order the candidates based on who they think would represent the US best at the WGC. Listed below are the pilots who voted in the 18m class.
>
> Fletcher, Robert W.
> Leonard, David
> Fidler, Sean
> Ittner, Gary N.
> Nelson, Erik
> Clark, Robin
> Alexander, Peter T.
> Nichols, Steve
> Sorenson, Kenneth G.
> Indrebo, Rick
> Nadler, David R.
> Zimmerman, Sam R., III
> Murray, John
> Arnold, Sarah Kelly
> Gawthrop, Bill
> Linnekin, Dennis
> Gimmey, Ray
> Tyler, Allison H., Jr.
> Roberts, Sheridan
> Mockler, David R.
> Cochrane, John H.
> Lee, Jim
> Welles, Gillette 'Tim'
> Deane, Peter
> Martin, David V.
> Coggins, David L.
> Keene, Mark
> Franke, Sean
>
> This is a pretty sharp group. In fact it would be hard to assemble such a good group of decision makers any other way. There was well over 90% participation rate I’m told and more details will follow from official sources. What was put forth was their decision.
>
> After the vote the committee can make adjustments to field a good team. For example they may pair up two people who work well together or select someone with experience applicable to the WGC site. I am told that this was not implemented in any of the classes this year.
>
> I can only guess at why others didn’t rank him well in the 18m class. I ranked him low in the 15m because he doesn't do well in a TAT or a MAT task. If he doesn’t have markers around him he tends not to do so well. MAT task aside, there are still quite a few TAT tasks at the WGC and pilot needs to be able to perform if they find themselves separated from the lead gaggle. On top of all that he doesn't work well with others and is an internet troll. Sorry, but we all know it to be true.
>
> So all this talk about deficiencies in the US rules, MAT tasks being bad, flying primarily racing tasks, "true racing tasks", etc. is smoke and mirrors for one thing, wanting to make sailplane racing about following others around the course in gaggles and not making decisions on one's own, hanging back and leap frogging over the guys in front. The pilot who makes a bold decision is really taking a risk.
>
> IGC racing is what it is. Yes, there is a lot of gaggle flying required but in the end we still need to send brilliant pilots who process a full set of soaring skills.
>
> Sean Fidler didn't make the cut (in 18m) and is having a tough time dealing with the fact.
>
> Sean Murphy

I have no skin in this game, other being a subsidizer, pilot that has flown in USA contests for fun and experience but not a chance or real desire to win, and one that has part of a group that organizes and runs SSA sanctioned competitions.

XC, I would like to see the selection committee publish the details on the selection process and the data. While I have no reason to believe the information you posted is inaccurate we will only know the facts when the US selection committee speaks up.

Why they have not published anything is baffling. Furthermore an outcome like this should not be a surprise to anyone with the new process put in place. FWIW I do not like the new process.

Ron Gleason

[[email protected]]

> Yes, I realize this is ugly business and shouldn't be put out there but when you see posting with headlines such as this you feel compelled to respond.
>
> "Cronyism permeates the corrupt US International Team Committee selection process for the 18-meter class (and likely others)"
>
> Posts like this simply make your stomach turn. Go ahead and read it. So sad to see somebody unable to recognize their own shortcomings. Bragging is no replacement for actual performance. Rather then work toward improvement, SF lashes out and try to blame others. Sad.
>
> XC

It's about time. Spot on XC; thank you for stepping up!

IMO, internet rantings, first person criticism, "assassinations" of volunteer leadership, and child-like whining only have a negative impact and will never accelerate one's soaring career. Wake up hopefuls; get the message!

And to those crying "ugly", where was your "voice" when the rantings, criticism, "assassinations", and whining first appeared?

[Mike Hendron]

Thanks, Ron and others, for using the thread to discuss the topic raised.

To the annoyed crowd, sure, it was a clickbait title, but the content is fair game for this public forum. If someone doesn't care, they can stop reading and move on. Pushing personal standards for post-worthiness (i.e., venting and/or pettyness not allowed) is counterproductive if other readers may care. Counter-rants are fine (lest I sound like a hypocrite), but best when they have some substance rather than just whining about getting hooked by a thread.

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

It's good to have a discussion of this new selection system on RAS, and it has to include specific cases, hard as that may be.

FWIW, I voted Sean highly in both classes, with a warning -- very talented and young (by our standards) pilot, but tends to be a bit unstable especially behind a keyboard. A true champion has emotional equanimity.

A lot of us would be happy to have to leave our wingtip extensions home and get to fly a WGC!

John Cochrane

[Andrzej Kobus]

On Wednesday, November 1, 2017 at 11:04:56 AM UTC-4, Ron Gleason wrote:
> On Tuesday, 31 October 2017 18:18:12 UTC-6, XC wrote:
> > Dang! Got drawn in again!
> >
> > I’m ashamed to admit I have been following Sean Fidler’s “why didn’t I get chosen� rants on Facebook. It is hard to look away from a train wreck I guess. I am embarrassed for him. I've never seen someone take a decision so badly. So much misinformation and so little space to refute it!
> >
> > For those who haven’t heard SF wasn’t chosen to represent the US in the 18m at the 2018 WGC in the Czech Republic. He was chosen to go Poland in the 15m class. Hardly an insult but his insecurities got the better of him, he ungraciously declined the 15m class and ever since the world has not been right.
> >
> > Let me first say I do not represent the selection committee in any way. They have been working hard at this and deserve our thanks not attacks.
> >
> > The selection process is different this year. This has been known to all the candidates for some time now. First, a pilot qualifies for consideration by getting a ranking of 90% or better by averaging various comps.
> >
> > In phase two, the pilot’s fellow competitors who scored at least 85% of the winners score in a US Nationals in the last three years rank order the candidates based on who they think would represent the US best at the WGC. Listed below are the pilots who voted in the 18m class.
> >
> > Fletcher, Robert W.
> > Leonard, David
> > Fidler, Sean
> > Ittner, Gary N.
> > Nelson, Erik
> > Clark, Robin
> > Alexander, Peter T.
> > Nichols, Steve
> > Sorenson, Kenneth G.
> > Indrebo, Rick
> > Nadler, David R.
> > Zimmerman, Sam R., III
> > Murray, John
> > Arnold, Sarah Kelly
> > Gawthrop, Bill
> > Linnekin, Dennis
> > Gimmey, Ray
> > Tyler, Allison H., Jr.
> > Roberts, Sheridan
> > Mockler, David R.
> > Cochrane, John H.
> > Lee, Jim
> > Welles, Gillette 'Tim'
> > Deane, Peter
> > Martin, David V.
> > Coggins, David L.
> > Keene, Mark
> > Franke, Sean
> >
> > This is a pretty sharp group. In fact it would be hard to assemble such a good group of decision makers any other way. There was well over 90% participation rate I’m told and more details will follow from official sources. What was put forth was their decision.
> >
> > After the vote the committee can make adjustments to field a good team. For example they may pair up two people who work well together or select someone with experience applicable to the WGC site. I am told that this was not implemented in any of the classes this year.
> >
> > I can only guess at why others didn’t rank him well in the 18m class. I ranked him low in the 15m because he doesn't do well in a TAT or a MAT task. If he doesn’t have markers around him he tends not to do so well. MAT task aside, there are still quite a few TAT tasks at the WGC and pilot needs to be able to perform if they find themselves separated from the lead gaggle. On top of all that he doesn't work well with others and is an internet troll. Sorry, but we all know it to be true.
> >
> > So all this talk about deficiencies in the US rules, MAT tasks being bad, flying primarily racing tasks, "true racing tasks", etc. is smoke and mirrors for one thing, wanting to make sailplane racing about following others around the course in gaggles and not making decisions on one's own, hanging back and leap frogging over the guys in front. The pilot who makes a bold decision is really taking a risk.
> >
> > IGC racing is what it is. Yes, there is a lot of gaggle flying required but in the end we still need to send brilliant pilots who process a full set of soaring skills.
> >
> > Sean Fidler didn't make the cut (in 18m) and is having a tough time dealing with the fact.
> >
> > Sean Murphy
>
> I have no skin in this game, other being a subsidizer, pilot that has flown in USA contests for fun and experience but not a chance or real desire to win, and one that has part of a group that organizes and runs SSA sanctioned competitions.
>
> XC, I would like to see the selection committee publish the details on the selection process and the data. While I have no reason to believe the information you posted is inaccurate we will only know the facts when the US selection committee speaks up.
>
> Why they have not published anything is baffling. Furthermore an outcome like this should not be a surprise to anyone with the new process put in place. FWIW I do not like the new process.
>
> Ron Gleason

So where is the announcement who got selected for the US Team? Nothing on the ssa.org website.

[Andrzej Kobus]

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 8:18:12 PM UTC-4, XC wrote:
> Dang! Got drawn in again!
>
> I’m ashamed to admit I have been following Sean Fidler’s “why didn’t I get chosen� rants on Facebook. It is hard to look away from a train wreck I guess. I am embarrassed for him. I've never seen someone take a decision so badly. So much misinformation and so little space to refute it!
>
> For those who haven’t heard SF wasn’t chosen to represent the US in the 18m at the 2018 WGC in the Czech Republic. He was chosen to go Poland in the 15m class. Hardly an insult but his insecurities got the better of him, he ungraciously declined the 15m class and ever since the world has not been right.
>
> Let me first say I do not represent the selection committee in any way. They have been working hard at this and deserve our thanks not attacks.
>
> The selection process is different this year. This has been known to all the candidates for some time now. First, a pilot qualifies for consideration by getting a ranking of 90% or better by averaging various comps.
>
> In phase two, the pilot’s fellow competitors who scored at least 85% of the winners score in a US Nationals in the last three years rank order the candidates based on who they think would represent the US best at the WGC. Listed below are the pilots who voted in the 18m class.
>
> Fletcher, Robert W.
> Leonard, David
> Fidler, Sean
> Ittner, Gary N.
> Nelson, Erik
> Clark, Robin
> Alexander, Peter T.
> Nichols, Steve
> Sorenson, Kenneth G.
> Indrebo, Rick
> Nadler, David R.
> Zimmerman, Sam R., III
> Murray, John
> Arnold, Sarah Kelly
> Gawthrop, Bill
> Linnekin, Dennis
> Gimmey, Ray
> Tyler, Allison H., Jr.
> Roberts, Sheridan
> Mockler, David R.
> Cochrane, John H.
> Lee, Jim
> Welles, Gillette 'Tim'
> Deane, Peter
> Martin, David V.
> Coggins, David L.
> Keene, Mark
> Franke, Sean
>
> This is a pretty sharp group. In fact it would be hard to assemble such a good group of decision makers any other way. There was well over 90% participation rate I’m told and more details will follow from official sources. What was put forth was their decision.
>
> After the vote the committee can make adjustments to field a good team. For example they may pair up two people who work well together or select someone with experience applicable to the WGC site. I am told that this was not implemented in any of the classes this year.
>
> I can only guess at why others didn’t rank him well in the 18m class. I ranked him low in the 15m because he doesn't do well in a TAT or a MAT task. If he doesn’t have markers around him he tends not to do so well. MAT task aside, there are still quite a few TAT tasks at the WGC and pilot needs to be able to perform if they find themselves separated from the lead gaggle. On top of all that he doesn't work well with others and is an internet troll. Sorry, but we all know it to be true.
>
> So all this talk about deficiencies in the US rules, MAT tasks being bad, flying primarily racing tasks, "true racing tasks", etc. is smoke and mirrors for one thing, wanting to make sailplane racing about following others around the course in gaggles and not making decisions on one's own, hanging back and leap frogging over the guys in front. The pilot who makes a bold decision is really taking a risk.
>
> IGC racing is what it is. Yes, there is a lot of gaggle flying required but in the end we still need to send brilliant pilots who process a full set of soaring skills.
>
> Sean Fidler didn't make the cut (in 18m) and is having a tough time dealing with the fact.
>
> Sean Murphy

Sean, since you made a statement in the public forum "If he doesn’t have markers around him he tends not to do so well.", could you tell us how you made that determination?

I actually went to Sean's FB page and then watched some videos Sean produced to show that there was no merit to your claim.

I assume you have done some analysis as well to come up with your statement.. Have you gone over all flight logs and found that this was a pattern? Can you show this to us? I also watched Sean's other videos from previous Nationals and I simply don't think your statement is accurate.

Unless you have proof, based on flight analysis it is simply a character assassination on a public forum.

Also since there was no public announcement about who made the team, you simply created a messy situation.

Andrzej

[[email protected]]

What I said just my opinion as a fellow competitor. I was looking forward to a day 4 at Cordele this year because a TAT was called and cloud bases were low. To me that meant pilots would get separated and I felt that would help me make up points on SF. Unfortunately, the day was cancelled and we ended up a three day nationals with three ATs.

So my assessment is based on flying against the guy and seeing his body language when a MAT or a TAT is called. He actually cringes because he knows it may be his undoing. BB expressed his opinion yesterday and he felt differently. Those other competitors voted their opinions and results were tallied. That is how the selection process went. Again, in the 15m, he was offered a spot.

If you have been to SF’s Facebook page or webpage you know he attacked everyone involved and said a bunch of things that had no basis in fact. Before I said anything here I tried to call him personally. He wouldn’t take my call. I then posted a reply on Facebook to counter some of the misinformation. It and all dissenting remarks have been removed. I wouldn’t put too much stock on any analysis assembled by Sean on his own page.

I stand by my assessment and don’t feel badly commenting on a guy who so freely shares his opinions with the world. If Sean’s your friend and if you want help him out maybe you can call him help him deal with situation in more graceful manner.

Sean Murphy

[Bob Whelan[_3_]]

> Also since there was no public announcement about who made the team, you simply created a messy situation.

Geez Louise - ad-hominem-based ranting on Facebook by someone who failed to
make the US Team he self-proclaims he both wanted and deserved is NOT creating
"a messy situation"??? Facebook ranting isn't a "public announcement"?

My only direct involvement with sailplane racing is as a longtime soaring
pilot/aficionado...not a racer myself, know only a very few top-level racing
pilots, no Facebook account, no skin in the racing game beyond my generic
soaring-based interest in all things soaring, including RAS since the mid-90s.

Through RAS I've gleaned some insights to many soaring personalities I've
never had the pleasure of meeting...and to a very few I don't really care if I
ever meet, based on how they come across to me in print. In my view, the pilot
fundamentally responsible for this "train wreck" isn't the O.P. of this
thread, but the disgruntled FB poster, who chose a very public forum on which
to express his views. It was sufficiently public that - writing as one who
(noted above) lacks a FB account and never intends to get one - was forwarded
a (one of the?) rant(s) by an actual (as opposed to FB) friend, simply because
he guessed it would be of private, personal, interest to me (which it was).

I found it of interest at several levels, the most immediately obvious one the
overall inappropriateness of the expressional tone of the writer's
disgruntlement. I'm not a fan of bullying, self-centered "blinkerism,"
innuendo, generic character assassination, etc.; all of that reflects more on
the author than sheds light on substantive facts. (Sadly, none of that
surprised me, either, given 4+ years of RAS exposure to the author.) I write
that while simultaneously finding myself in questioning sympathy with the
man's fundamental aggrievement, and like (at least two other) previous posters
am of the opinion that the methodology of the Selection Committee (et al)
deserves "somewhat public" self-dissemination (and subsequent discussion). I
hope that comes to pass in a timely fashion.

Why? Having zero insight to the inner workings of the Team Selection
Committee's methods, but "open access" to its results (i.e. names of actual
Team pilots), Team pilot contest records (via the oft-criticized SSA website),
and - sometimes - even minor insight into individual contest activities (via
"the usual suspects"), it seems to me the nature of the selection beast is in
some ways "a kinda-sorta public affair." And as such, were I a member of the
Selection Committee or in some other way directly involved in the selection
process, I would feel a responsibility to publicly convey "rightful elements"
of the selection process...thereby somewhat alleviating the otherwise
predictable hue-n-cry/"bureaucratic cronyism"/etc. endemic to closed-door
decision-making. If that doesn't happen, my working conclusion will be that
someone(s) involved in the selection process have failed to perform at an
"A-level."

Respectfully,
Bob W.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[Ron Gleason]

On Thursday, 2 November 2017 07:51:54 UTC-6, wrote:
> What I said just my opinion as a fellow competitor. I was looking forward to a day 4 at Cordele this year because a TAT was called and cloud bases were low. To me that meant pilots would get separated and I felt that would help me make up points on SF. Unfortunately, the day was cancelled and we ended up a three day nationals with three ATs.
>
> So my assessment is based on flying against the guy and seeing his body language when a MAT or a TAT is called. He actually cringes because he knows it may be his undoing. BB expressed his opinion yesterday and he felt differently. Those other competitors voted their opinions and results were tallied. That is how the selection process went. Again, in the 15m, he was offered a spot.
>
> If you have been to SF’s Facebook page or webpage you know he attacked everyone involved and said a bunch of things that had no basis in fact. Before I said anything here I tried to call him personally. He wouldn’t take my call. I then posted a reply on Facebook to counter some of the misinformation. It and all dissenting remarks have been removed. I wouldn’t put too much stock on any analysis assembled by Sean on his own page.
>
> I stand by my assessment and don’t feel badly commenting on a guy who so freely shares his opinions with the world. If Sean’s your friend and if you want help him out maybe you can call him help him deal with situation in more graceful manner.
>
> Sean Murphy

Sean, you are ranked 5th for 15M. Do you know who has decided to accept their selection? Have you been selected and are you going?

Ron Gleason

[Tom Kelley #711]

On Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 8:55:01 AM UTC-6, Ron Gleason wrote:
> On Thursday, 2 November 2017 07:51:54 UTC-6, wrote:
> > What I said just my opinion as a fellow competitor. I was looking forward to a day 4 at Cordele this year because a TAT was called and cloud bases were low. To me that meant pilots would get separated and I felt that would help me make up points on SF. Unfortunately, the day was cancelled and we ended up a three day nationals with three ATs.
> >
> > So my assessment is based on flying against the guy and seeing his body language when a MAT or a TAT is called. He actually cringes because he knows it may be his undoing. BB expressed his opinion yesterday and he felt differently. Those other competitors voted their opinions and results were tallied. That is how the selection process went. Again, in the 15m, he was offered a spot.
> >
> > If you have been to SF’s Facebook page or webpage you know he attacked everyone involved and said a bunch of things that had no basis in fact. Before I said anything here I tried to call him personally. He wouldn’t take my call. I then posted a reply on Facebook to counter some of the misinformation. It and all dissenting remarks have been removed. I wouldn’t put too much stock on any analysis assembled by Sean on his own page.
> >
> > I stand by my assessment and don’t feel badly commenting on a guy who so freely shares his opinions with the world. If Sean’s your friend and if you want help him out maybe you can call him help him deal with situation in more graceful manner.
> >
> > Sean Murphy
>
> Sean, you are ranked 5th for 15M. Do you know who has decided to accept their selection? Have you been selected and are you going?
>
> Ron Gleason

Backdoor but most likely correct........Mike R and Dave C for Open, Bob F and Eric N for 18 Meter, Boyd W and Mike W for Club. Have no input for 15M. 20 M HW. Information other than it will be shortly announced. Many declined due to many issues why this has taken time.

Best. #711.

[[email protected]]

I qualified 5th I think and was fourth after the voting.

They did ask me after Gary Ittner (brilliant pilot) declined to go this year and 5E (best team player out there) elected to in the 18m class with his spiffy new V3. Unfortunately, I had already bid my vacation time in other months. I didn’t anticipate being asked. We have a very structured vacation system a work. I have already suggested they move the timeline up in future years and they agreed that would be better.

There will be more details about the process published. The document outlining the process requires it. I think they are being very careful about getting it right.

XC

[[email protected]]

I qualified 5th I think and was fourth after the voting.

They did ask me after Gary Ittner (brilliant pilot) declined to go this year and 5E (best team player out there) elected to go in the 18m class with his spiffy new V3. Unfortunately, I had already bid my vacation time in other months. I didn’t anticipate being asked. We have a very structured vacation system at work. I have already suggested they move the timeline up in future years and they agreed that would be better.

There will be more details about the process published. The document outlining the process requires it. I think they are being very careful about getting it right.

XC

[Bojack J4]

Hmmm, not being a member of the "in crowd", nor a facebook user, to me it seems that Scott was extremely disappointed and angered at being denied the position on the 18m squad. Would he have qualified for 18m with the previous non-political system? Maybe that's why?
I mean, the guy did very well in Benella in 18m and was as high as 2nd overall at one point (to accolades of approval and support here on ras).
His effort of shipping glider to Australia et al was a great service to the USA, as was his performance. We all know it takes a combination of equipment, skill and luck to win. So, maybe next time he would get luckier? Can't blame him for wanting to try.
As for declining the 15m spot....maybe he wasn't gracious (anger does that to a person) but many have declined offered spots on the team for various personal reasons so that shouldnt be held against him.
Just wanna say...I hardly know the guy. I'm just a fly on the ras wall, but something seems wrong.

[Kevin Christner]

Dear John,

I agree we should have a discussion about this. One important issue is whether a pilot meets the requirements of the US Team Code of Conduct. I post some relevant sections below:

13.1.3 Courtesy. Courteous accessibility to visiting SSA members, sponsors, dignitaries and the Press.
13.1.4 Respect. Respect for the host organization, the facility, the rules of the airfield and the organization.
13.1.5 Treatment. Fair, considerate, courteous treatment of Team Management, Team Volunteers, and members of the public.
13.2.1 Highest Level. To maintain at all times a high standard of sportsmanship and fair play
13.2.6 Respect. Maintain an attitude of respect and politeness towards competitors both in the air and on the ground.
13.3 To Specifically Refrain From. To refrain from any behavior which might reflect unfavorably on the United States of America, the sport, the Team, its management, or which might bring any other pilot, official or the Team into disrepute

Since you voted for Sean highly, can you please certify that he has met all of these requirements?

On Wednesday, November 1, 2017 at 7:07:22 PM UTC-4, John Cochrane wrote:
> It's good to have a discussion of this new selection system on RAS, and it has to include specific cases, hard as that may be.
>
> FWIW, I voted Sean highly in both classes, with a warning -- very talented and young (by our standards) pilot, but tends to be a bit unstable especially behind a keyboard. A true champion has emotional equanimity.
>
> A lot of us would be happy to have to leave our wingtip extensions home and get to fly a WGC!
>
> John Cochrane

[Steve Leonard[_2_]]

On Wednesday, November 1, 2017 at 6:07:22 PM UTC-5, John Cochrane wrote:

> Snip snip snip... A true champion has emotional equanimity.
>
> John Cochrane

So, does that mean John McEnroe was not a "true champion" tennis player? :-)

Just pulling chains. It is gonna be a long northern winter!

[[email protected]]

Since Sean isn't going can I have his slot? And Sean since you won't need it at the time, and mine isn't fully competitive in 15M, can I borrow your glider for the race?

[[email protected]]

Sean (and I for that matter), would benefit from a Breathalyzer and Interlock attached to our computers. Or a "Wayback" machine a la Professor Peabody from Rocky & Bullwinkle.

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 2:01:22 PM UTC-4, Kevin Christner wrote:
> Dear John,
>
> I agree we should have a discussion about this. One important issue is whether a pilot meets the requirements of the US Team Code of Conduct. I post some relevant sections below:
>
> 13.1.3 Courtesy. Courteous accessibility to visiting SSA members, sponsors, dignitaries and the Press.
> 13.1.4 Respect. Respect for the host organization, the facility, the rules of the airfield and the organization.
> 13.1.5 Treatment. Fair, considerate, courteous treatment of Team Management, Team Volunteers, and members of the public.
> 13.2.1 Highest Level. To maintain at all times a high standard of sportsmanship and fair play
> 13.2.6 Respect. Maintain an attitude of respect and politeness towards competitors both in the air and on the ground.
> 13.3 To Specifically Refrain From. To refrain from any behavior which might reflect unfavorably on the United States of America, the sport, the Team, its management, or which might bring any other pilot, official or the Team into disrepute
>
> Since you voted for Sean highly, can you please certify that he has met all of these requirements?
>
> On Wednesday, November 1, 2017 at 7:07:22 PM UTC-4, John Cochrane wrote:
> > It's good to have a discussion of this new selection system on RAS, and it has to include specific cases, hard as that may be.
> >
> > FWIW, I voted Sean highly in both classes, with a warning -- very talented and young (by our standards) pilot, but tends to be a bit unstable especially behind a keyboard. A true champion has emotional equanimity.
> >
> > A lot of us would be happy to have to leave our wingtip extensions home and get to fly a WGC!
> >
> > John Cochrane

Sounds like "Social Justice" arguments, much like the nonsense from Washington DC. "A lot of us would be happy to have to leave our wingtip extensions home and get to fly a WGC!" sounds like this position is a gift from the selection committee, much like a poor child receiving a broken toy on Christmas from a pious "Santa Claus". The position is not a gift bestowed from upon on high above by the moral superior character judgers, it is a position someone earned on the sacrifice and merits of their recent past achievements. John Cochrane should stick to what he does best: mathematical equations. And if mathematical equations speak the truth, then so should the selection process.

[Scott Williams]

On Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 7:51:14 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Thursday, November 2, 2017 at 2:01:22 PM UTC-4, Kevin Christner wrote:
> > Dear John,
> >
> > I agree we should have a discussion about this. One important issue is whether a pilot meets the requirements of the US Team Code of Conduct. I post some relevant sections below:
> >
> > 13.1.3 Courtesy. Courteous accessibility to visiting SSA members, sponsors, dignitaries and the Press.
> > 13.1.4 Respect. Respect for the host organization, the facility, the rules of the airfield and the organization.
> > 13.1.5 Treatment. Fair, considerate, courteous treatment of Team Management, Team Volunteers, and members of the public.
> > 13.2.1 Highest Level. To maintain at all times a high standard of sportsmanship and fair play
> > 13.2.6 Respect. Maintain an attitude of respect and politeness towards competitors both in the air and on the ground.
> > 13.3 To Specifically Refrain From. To refrain from any behavior which might reflect unfavorably on the United States of America, the sport, the Team, its management, or which might bring any other pilot, official or the Team into disrepute
> >
> > Since you voted for Sean highly, can you please certify that he has met all of these requirements?
> >
> > On Wednesday, November 1, 2017 at 7:07:22 PM UTC-4, John Cochrane wrote:
> > > It's good to have a discussion of this new selection system on RAS, and it has to include specific cases, hard as that may be.
> > >
> > > FWIW, I voted Sean highly in both classes, with a warning -- very talented and young (by our standards) pilot, but tends to be a bit unstable especially behind a keyboard. A true champion has emotional equanimity.
> > >
> > > A lot of us would be happy to have to leave our wingtip extensions home and get to fly a WGC!
> > >
> > > John Cochrane
>
> Sounds like "Social Justice" arguments, much like the nonsense from Washington DC. "A lot of us would be happy to have to leave our wingtip extensions home and get to fly a WGC!" sounds like this position is a gift from the selection committee, much like a poor child receiving a broken toy on Christmas from a pious "Santa Claus". The position is not a gift bestowed from upon on high above by the moral superior character judgers, it is a position someone earned on the sacrifice and merits of their recent past achievements. John Cochrane should stick to what he does best: mathematical equations. And if mathematical equations speak the truth, then so should the selection process.

Since there are some with opinions posting here, is anyone willing to speculate on S.F's potential for ever being considered for future teams?
I am interested in how the selection/culture works, or might work.
I am completely unfamiliar with both competition soaring and S.F.
And certainly have neither approval or condemnation on his response.

Respectfully,
Scott

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 6:10:10 PM UTC-7, Retting wrote:
> Two idiots now. Great.

Three.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 at 8:18:12 PM UTC-4, XC wrote:
> Dang! Got drawn in again!
>
> I’m ashamed to admit I have been following Sean Fidler’s “why didn’t I get chosen� rants on Facebook. It is hard to look away from a train wreck I guess. I am embarrassed for him. I've never seen someone take a decision so badly. So much misinformation and so little space to refute it!
>
> For those who haven’t heard SF wasn’t chosen to represent the US in the 18m at the 2018 WGC in the Czech Republic. He was chosen to go Poland in the 15m class. Hardly an insult but his insecurities got the better of him, he ungraciously declined the 15m class and ever since the world has not been right.
>
> Let me first say I do not represent the selection committee in any way. They have been working hard at this and deserve our thanks not attacks.
>
> The selection process is different this year. This has been known to all the candidates for some time now. First, a pilot qualifies for consideration by getting a ranking of 90% or better by averaging various comps.
>
> In phase two, the pilot’s fellow competitors who scored at least 85% of the winners score in a US Nationals in the last three years rank order the candidates based on who they think would represent the US best at the WGC. Listed below are the pilots who voted in the 18m class.
>
> Fletcher, Robert W.
> Leonard, David
> Fidler, Sean
> Ittner, Gary N.
> Nelson, Erik
> Clark, Robin
> Alexander, Peter T.
> Nichols, Steve
> Sorenson, Kenneth G.
> Indrebo, Rick
> Nadler, David R.
> Zimmerman, Sam R., III
> Murray, John
> Arnold, Sarah Kelly
> Gawthrop, Bill
> Linnekin, Dennis
> Gimmey, Ray
> Tyler, Allison H., Jr.
> Roberts, Sheridan
> Mockler, David R.
> Cochrane, John H.
> Lee, Jim
> Welles, Gillette 'Tim'
> Deane, Peter
> Martin, David V.
> Coggins, David L.
> Keene, Mark
> Franke, Sean
>
> This is a pretty sharp group. In fact it would be hard to assemble such a good group of decision makers any other way. There was well over 90% participation rate I’m told and more details will follow from official sources. What was put forth was their decision.
>
> After the vote the committee can make adjustments to field a good team. For example they may pair up two people who work well together or select someone with experience applicable to the WGC site. I am told that this was not implemented in any of the classes this year.
>
> I can only guess at why others didn’t rank him well in the 18m class. I ranked him low in the 15m because he doesn't do well in a TAT or a MAT task. If he doesn’t have markers around him he tends not to do so well. MAT task aside, there are still quite a few TAT tasks at the WGC and pilot needs to be able to perform if they find themselves separated from the lead gaggle. On top of all that he doesn't work well with others and is an internet troll. Sorry, but we all know it to be true.
>
> So all this talk about deficiencies in the US rules, MAT tasks being bad, flying primarily racing tasks, "true racing tasks", etc. is smoke and mirrors for one thing, wanting to make sailplane racing about following others around the course in gaggles and not making decisions on one's own, hanging back and leap frogging over the guys in front. The pilot who makes a bold decision is really taking a risk.
>
> IGC racing is what it is. Yes, there is a lot of gaggle flying required but in the end we still need to send brilliant pilots who process a full set of soaring skills.
>
> Sean Fidler didn't make the cut (in 18m) and is having a tough time dealing with the fact.
>
> Sean Murphy

This is better than watching the Jerry Springer show.

[Robert Fidler[_2_]]

A soaring friend of mine call me yesterday and asked me if I had been following the drama on Rec Aviation. The answer was no, because I really do not care about SSA drama. Here is my opinion. I do not pay dues to the SSA because I do not think the organization is a group I want to be a part of for a lot of reasons. I am not going to list those reasons on this forum or any other forum for all to see.
I still own and fly my glider(F1)and still enormously enjoy flying a glider.. I made a statement to Sean Fidler, a long time ago, the SSA has been run by a very small and select group (the good old boys) soaring pilots for a very long time. If you want to pick a fight with them, you will not win that battle.
So, to all soaring pilots, if you want to compete on a US National Soaring Team, you best not **** off the boys.

Bob Fidler

[[email protected]]

This thread shows the true colors of the SSA. Look at all you children fighting when you could be supportive instead.

The SSA keeps shrinking year after year! Is anyone surprised?

If the SSA was a business, the controlling shareholders would have everyone fired in management. Starting from the top down.

Seth Higgs

[Steve Koerner]

It's so sad to read this thread.

I do not agree with posters who suggest that there is anything fundamentally wrong at SSA or with the volunteers that are serving the membership. Yet in their efforts, one wrong decision has been taken. It needs to be reversed.

We need to return to objective standards for selection to the US team. The notion that a committee can predict international performance better than actual performance can predict performance, is flawed at the onset. The team committee should never have usurped authority to override the longstanding objective standards. I find it especially inappropriate when considering that the members of the committee are themselves all vying for positions on the various teams.

If the goal were drama and suspense, this would be the ideal way to achieve that. Just like on the TV show Survivor -- you empower the competitors to vote each other off the island. Anger, resentment and name calling are the predictable results. And so unnecessary.

Even if you are on the team committee and you really really believe that you are smarter than the actual contest results, I would urge you to reconsider whether the goodness that you can instill by overriding the objective standards is actually worth the damage that is done to the organization as a whole and the damage done to the credibility of the selections. I urge that we get the politics back out of US team selection?

Hoping we don't have to read a thread like this again next year...

[Tim Taylor]

On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 9:28:14 AM UTC-6, Steve Koerner wrote:
> It's so sad to read this thread.
>
> I do not agree with posters who suggest that there is anything fundamentally wrong at SSA or with the volunteers that are serving the membership. Yet in their efforts, one wrong decision has been taken. It needs to be reversed.
>
> We need to return to objective standards for selection to the US team. The notion that a committee can predict international performance better than actual performance can predict performance, is flawed at the onset. The team committee should never have usurped authority to override the longstanding objective standards. I find it especially inappropriate when considering that the members of the committee are themselves all vying for positions on the various teams.
>
> If the goal were drama and suspense, this would be the ideal way to achieve that. Just like on the TV show Survivor -- you empower the competitors to vote each other off the island. Anger, resentment and name calling are the predictable results. And so unnecessary.
>
> Even if you are on the team committee and you really really believe that you are smarter than the actual contest results, I would urge you to reconsider whether the goodness that you can instill by overriding the objective standards is actually worth the damage that is done to the organization as a whole and the damage done to the credibility of the selections. I urge that we get the politics back out of US team selection?
>
> Hoping we don't have to read a thread like this again next year...

Steve,

Thank you for the best reply in this thread. As you said this could have been predicted before we even embarked on this path.

"Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it."

We learned nothing from the experiences of the 70's that led to the current system that was hard numbers.

In 2013, I had a conversation with Rick Walters at the SSA headquarters during the 15M Nationals. He was worried about any change to the system that would allow voting to select the team. I miss his wisdom more each year.

Tim

[[email protected]]

On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 7:31:45 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> This thread shows the true colors of the SSA. Look at all you children fighting when you could be supportive instead.
>
> The SSA keeps shrinking year after year! Is anyone surprised?
>
> If the SSA was a business, the controlling shareholders would have everyone fired in management. Starting from the top down.

Lost in Sean Fidler's somewhat embarrassing behavior is that he has case. At the meeting in Cordele last summer where new changes to the team selection process were hotly debated, I noted that we had abandoned a preferential voting system in the past: at least one highly ranked pilot allegedly manipulated it to his advantage by persuading his buddies to downscore a certain leading pilot to keep him off the team. I warned that even the appearance of backroom dealings or lack of transparency in the new voting system would likely push us to return to the purely quantitative process we had until recently (and that was thought not to accomplish the objective of selecting the best teams).

The clumsy, poorly handled way the new system was introduced this spring had me shaking my head. How could some of our smart pilots be so tone deaf? Now, barely weeks after the first votes, I'm still shaking my head.

This isn't a tempest in a teapot to the small number who fly competitively. Selection to the U.S. Team is a Very Big Deal to those at the top of the competitive pyramid. I'll repeat what I said in Cordele: even the APPEARANCE of conflicts of interest or backroom deals is unacceptable.

Have we learned nothing?

Chip Bearden

[[email protected]]

I posted before I read Steve's and Tim's recent contributions. Hear, hear. Santayana's words had occurred to me, too.

At least in soaring, I can't charge it off to most of our crowd being too young to have lived through the mistakes of the past. :)

Chip Bearden

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

The whole reason the US team committee undertook the huge effort is exactly experience with the "objective" system. We were sending, time after time, people to the worlds who you could tell had no chance, either for skill, seriousness, preparation, willingness to adapt to the WGC environment, or psychological stability.

(Sean is actually pretty good on this scale -- he goes nuts behind the keyboard but you don't see him pulling the kind of self-inflicted disasters that bedevil so many others on US teams.)

The modal pilot went to the worlds once, and treated it as a subsidized gliding vacation. We prized "fair" and "objective" above "successful." We could go back to that... and to the predictable results. The US team committee, bless them, wants to win on occasion, not just be "objective" about who gets selected.

So, what do you think is more important: The US winning, or the feelings of people who feel they should have been selected? Experience has proven you can't have both.

Let's give it a try. Let the US team committee pick, and if pilot a or b is unhappy about the result, tough. Let them form good teams, of people who will work as teams. Give them a few cycles, and let's see if they can produce results.

John Cochrane

[BobW]

> I posted before I read Steve's and Tim's recent contributions. Hear, hear.
> Santayana's words had occurred to me, too.
And to me as well, as noted previously not a contest pilot but merely an
interested observer.

> At least in soaring, I can't charge it off to most of our crowd being too
> young to have lived through the mistakes of the past. :)
Given the acrimony directly expressed and inferrable from this thread-to-date,
it's good to know senses of humor can still find expression. :)

And writing as one NOT too young to have lived through the mistakes of the
past, it's also good to (apparently) learn - from the posts of Steve K., Tim
T. and Chip B. (none of whom I know, but two of whom I could pick from a
lineup) - that something previously only guessed at seems to be the actual
case at present, i.e. (re-)introducing personal preferences into U.S. Team
pilot selection. Neo-geezers like me well remember the brouhaha from the
mid-/late-70s in "Soaring" mag accompanying the leaving off of George Moffat
from the U.S. Team when he was at the time (if memory accurately serves) the
existing (two-time) U.S. World Champion. So far as I could then tell, the only
positive aspect I could see flowing from that whole unfortunate - apparently
(from an organizational perspective) self-created - situation, was Mr.
Moffat's grace under the circumstances (Moffat being another individual I
could pick from a lineup). Kids can you spell, f - o - o - t - s - h - o - t?

Assuming that I am accurately assessing the general aspects of the US Team
selection process that have led to the present situation, I find myself in
slack-jawed disbelief that the present situation - ill-grace being "merely" an
incidental accompaniment - was not entirely predictable - and therefore
avoidable - at the time the decision to "revisit the past" in a selection
sense was taken...reGARDless of how that decision was undertaken/implemented.
Understand I intend here to express no opinion on the *quality* of that
decision - noting again, I have no dog in the fight - but rather/"merely" upon
its *nature"...and its predictable results. Sheesh...

Respectfully,
Bob W.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[Papa3[_2_]]

John,

I think you need to take a big step back and separate the goals/objectives from the execution. My suspicion is that many (most?) US competition pilots agree with the objective to send the most qualified team possible. If that requires some amount of subjective input over and above the numerical rankings, so be it.

What you're hearing is a lot of legitimate pushback on the implementation of the new approach. A couple of the fundamentals of organizational change initiatives are communication and transparency. This whole initiative scores a D- on both.

Here's what I sent to Team Committee back in early June and cc'ed to my Regional Director. Note that I got an extensive response from my Director. Crickets from the Team Committee (see a trend here?)

The rancor you are seeing today was 100% predictable (and predicted).

June 4, 2017

Hey Jim,

I was somewhat surprised to see that there is a new WGC Team Selection process; I don't recall much (if any) publicity or debate about this.

While I can see where the desire to "do something different" comes from, I'm not sure that a process that concludes with an opaque selection by a secret committee makes sense. In fact, that's what we USED to do up until about 1985, when the current ranking system came into play. The ranking system came about exactly because the membership was sick of back-room deals that depended more on relationships than pilot skill.

Rather than just complaining, here are my specific recommendations:

1. Ranking "boosters". If we want to give a nod to pilots who have already competed in the WGC, I think that makes sense. But other Category 1 events such as Pan American Events, European Gliding Championships, or Pre-worlds are just a way for the really rich/retired to buy their way on the team. Tighten up the verbiage to include only true WGCs.

2. Committee Selections. If we're going to make the Committee the ultimate selectors, then I would expect (demand) that the process be 100% transparent. Specifically: The votes of the Committee members must be public. The Committee members must document their rationale for selection using a standard form which is made available to the membership.

Feel free to pass this along to the Excomm or whoever it is that made this decision.

Note: I went back and read the minutes from the Spring 2016 BOD meeting. It appears that this was tabled on Saturday and supposed to be discussed on Sunday. But the minutes from Sunday don't reflect this. Seems suspicious.

Erik Mann (P3)
30 years of racing in the USA

On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 12:58:43 PM UTC-4, John Cochrane wrote:
> The whole reason the US team committee undertook the huge effort is exactly experience with the "objective" system. We were sending, time after time, people to the worlds who you could tell had no chance, either for skill, seriousness, preparation, willingness to adapt to the WGC environment, or psychological stability.
>
> (Sean is actually pretty good on this scale -- he goes nuts behind the keyboard but you don't see him pulling the kind of self-inflicted disasters that bedevil so many others on US teams.)
>
> The modal pilot went to the worlds once, and treated it as a subsidized gliding vacation. We prized "fair" and "objective" above "successful." We could go back to that... and to the predictable results. The US team committee, bless them, wants to win on occasion, not just be "objective" about who gets selected.
>
> So, what do you think is more important: The US winning, or the feelings of people who feel they should have been selected? Experience has proven you can't have both.
>
> Let's give it a try. Let the US team committee pick, and if pilot a or b is unhappy about the result, tough. Let them form good teams, of people who will work as teams. Give them a few cycles, and let's see if they can produce results.
>
> John Cochrane

[jfitch]

On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 10:29:14 AM UTC-7, Papa3 wrote:
> John,
>
> I think you need to take a big step back and separate the goals/objectives from the execution. My suspicion is that many (most?) US competition pilots agree with the objective to send the most qualified team possible. If that requires some amount of subjective input over and above the numerical rankings, so be it.
>
> What you're hearing is a lot of legitimate pushback on the implementation of the new approach. A couple of the fundamentals of organizational change initiatives are communication and transparency. This whole initiative scores a D- on both.
>
> Here's what I sent to Team Committee back in early June and cc'ed to my Regional Director. Note that I got an extensive response from my Director. Crickets from the Team Committee (see a trend here?)
>
> The rancor you are seeing today was 100% predictable (and predicted).
>
> June 4, 2017
>
> Hey Jim,
>
> I was somewhat surprised to see that there is a new WGC Team Selection process; I don't recall much (if any) publicity or debate about this.
>
> While I can see where the desire to "do something different" comes from, I'm not sure that a process that concludes with an opaque selection by a secret committee makes sense. In fact, that's what we USED to do up until about 1985, when the current ranking system came into play. The ranking system came about exactly because the membership was sick of back-room deals that depended more on relationships than pilot skill.
>
> Rather than just complaining, here are my specific recommendations:
>
> 1. Ranking "boosters". If we want to give a nod to pilots who have already competed in the WGC, I think that makes sense. But other Category 1 events such as Pan American Events, European Gliding Championships, or Pre-worlds are just a way for the really rich/retired to buy their way on the team. Tighten up the verbiage to include only true WGCs.
>
> 2. Committee Selections. If we're going to make the Committee the ultimate selectors, then I would expect (demand) that the process be 100% transparent. Specifically: The votes of the Committee members must be public. The Committee members must document their rationale for selection using a standard form which is made available to the membership.
>
> Feel free to pass this along to the Excomm or whoever it is that made this decision.
>
> Note: I went back and read the minutes from the Spring 2016 BOD meeting. It appears that this was tabled on Saturday and supposed to be discussed on Sunday. But the minutes from Sunday don't reflect this. Seems suspicious.
>
> Erik Mann (P3)
> 30 years of racing in the USA
>
> On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 12:58:43 PM UTC-4, John Cochrane wrote:
> > The whole reason the US team committee undertook the huge effort is exactly experience with the "objective" system. We were sending, time after time, people to the worlds who you could tell had no chance, either for skill, seriousness, preparation, willingness to adapt to the WGC environment, or psychological stability.
> >
> > (Sean is actually pretty good on this scale -- he goes nuts behind the keyboard but you don't see him pulling the kind of self-inflicted disasters that bedevil so many others on US teams.)
> >
> > The modal pilot went to the worlds once, and treated it as a subsidized gliding vacation. We prized "fair" and "objective" above "successful." We could go back to that... and to the predictable results. The US team committee, bless them, wants to win on occasion, not just be "objective" about who gets selected.
> >
> > So, what do you think is more important: The US winning, or the feelings of people who feel they should have been selected? Experience has proven you can't have both.
> >
> > Let's give it a try. Let the US team committee pick, and if pilot a or b is unhappy about the result, tough. Let them form good teams, of people who will work as teams. Give them a few cycles, and let's see if they can produce results.
> >
> > John Cochrane

"Specifically: The votes of the Committee members must be public." I am a bystanding gawker to this spectacle. Like watching a gruesome traffic accident that you just can't take your eyes off of. I agree with the quote, and wonder how votes might have changed, had the voters known that their votes would be made public? If the answer is they would have changed, this is just as disturbing, as it further reflects the reality that biases and appearances matter more than objectivity. If they would not have changed, why not make it public in the name of transparency?

[Robert Fidler[_2_]]

On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 2:10:10 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
> On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 10:29:14 AM UTC-7, Papa3 wrote:
> > John,
> >
> > I think you need to take a big step back and separate the goals/objectives from the execution. My suspicion is that many (most?) US competition pilots agree with the objective to send the most qualified team possible. If that requires some amount of subjective input over and above the numerical rankings, so be it.
> >
> > What you're hearing is a lot of legitimate pushback on the implementation of the new approach. A couple of the fundamentals of organizational change initiatives are communication and transparency. This whole initiative scores a D- on both.
> >
> > Here's what I sent to Team Committee back in early June and cc'ed to my Regional Director. Note that I got an extensive response from my Director.. Crickets from the Team Committee (see a trend here?)
> >
> > The rancor you are seeing today was 100% predictable (and predicted).
> >
> > June 4, 2017
> >
> > Hey Jim,
> >
> > I was somewhat surprised to see that there is a new WGC Team Selection process; I don't recall much (if any) publicity or debate about this.
> >
> > While I can see where the desire to "do something different" comes from, I'm not sure that a process that concludes with an opaque selection by a secret committee makes sense. In fact, that's what we USED to do up until about 1985, when the current ranking system came into play. The ranking system came about exactly because the membership was sick of back-room deals that depended more on relationships than pilot skill.
> >
> > Rather than just complaining, here are my specific recommendations:
> >
> > 1. Ranking "boosters". If we want to give a nod to pilots who have already competed in the WGC, I think that makes sense. But other Category 1 events such as Pan American Events, European Gliding Championships, or Pre-worlds are just a way for the really rich/retired to buy their way on the team. Tighten up the verbiage to include only true WGCs.
> >
> > 2. Committee Selections. If we're going to make the Committee the ultimate selectors, then I would expect (demand) that the process be 100% transparent. Specifically: The votes of the Committee members must be public.. The Committee members must document their rationale for selection using a standard form which is made available to the membership.
> >
> > Feel free to pass this along to the Excomm or whoever it is that made this decision.
> >
> > Note: I went back and read the minutes from the Spring 2016 BOD meeting.. It appears that this was tabled on Saturday and supposed to be discussed on Sunday. But the minutes from Sunday don't reflect this. Seems suspicious.
> >
> > Erik Mann (P3)
> > 30 years of racing in the USA
> >
> > On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 12:58:43 PM UTC-4, John Cochrane wrote:
> > > The whole reason the US team committee undertook the huge effort is exactly experience with the "objective" system. We were sending, time after time, people to the worlds who you could tell had no chance, either for skill, seriousness, preparation, willingness to adapt to the WGC environment, or psychological stability.
> > >
> > > (Sean is actually pretty good on this scale -- he goes nuts behind the keyboard but you don't see him pulling the kind of self-inflicted disasters that bedevil so many others on US teams.)
> > >
> > > The modal pilot went to the worlds once, and treated it as a subsidized gliding vacation. We prized "fair" and "objective" above "successful." We could go back to that... and to the predictable results. The US team committee, bless them, wants to win on occasion, not just be "objective" about who gets selected.
> > >
> > > So, what do you think is more important: The US winning, or the feelings of people who feel they should have been selected? Experience has proven you can't have both.
> > >
> > > Let's give it a try. Let the US team committee pick, and if pilot a or b is unhappy about the result, tough. Let them form good teams, of people who will work as teams. Give them a few cycles, and let's see if they can produce results.
> > >
> > > John Cochrane
>
> "Specifically: The votes of the Committee members must be public." I am a bystanding gawker to this spectacle. Like watching a gruesome traffic accident that you just can't take your eyes off of. I agree with the quote, and wonder how votes might have changed, had the voters known that their votes would be made public? If the answer is they would have changed, this is just as disturbing, as it further reflects the reality that biases and appearances matter more than objectivity. If they would not have changed, why not make it public in the name of transparency?

The more I hear, the happier I become, that I stopped paying my dues. Oh, happy day

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

With all due respect Robert, the SSA is more than just racing and that is why I support the SSA. I care that young people and new pilots get evolved in a sport I love. If not enough pilots show up for weekend flying then soon there will not be tow planes. Happy for any failures, real or perceived is not only self centered but just negative useless energy. I am sure you currently benefit from the data plate exemption, and many other efforts of the SSA.

As for RC action's all are volunteers, and I believe their collective interest is to take the best course of action for racing in America as drawn from their many years of experience. Is everyone happy all the time, no. Do they get it wrong sometimes, history always tells. Still if you want to make a difference, you have to at least participate instead of standing on sidelines throwing wet sponges into what you perceive as hell.

Jonathan


On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 11:32:24 AM UTC-7, Robert Fidler wrote:
> On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 2:10:10 PM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
> > On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 10:29:14 AM UTC-7, Papa3 wrote:
> > > John,
> > >
> > > I think you need to take a big step back and separate the goals/objectives from the execution. My suspicion is that many (most?) US competition pilots agree with the objective to send the most qualified team possible. If that requires some amount of subjective input over and above the numerical rankings, so be it.
> > >
> > > What you're hearing is a lot of legitimate pushback on the implementation of the new approach. A couple of the fundamentals of organizational change initiatives are communication and transparency. This whole initiative scores a D- on both.
> > >
> > > Here's what I sent to Team Committee back in early June and cc'ed to my Regional Director. Note that I got an extensive response from my Director. Crickets from the Team Committee (see a trend here?)
> > >
> > > The rancor you are seeing today was 100% predictable (and predicted).
> > >
> > > June 4, 2017
> > >
> > > Hey Jim,
> > >
> > > I was somewhat surprised to see that there is a new WGC Team Selection process; I don't recall much (if any) publicity or debate about this.
> > >
> > > While I can see where the desire to "do something different" comes from, I'm not sure that a process that concludes with an opaque selection by a secret committee makes sense. In fact, that's what we USED to do up until about 1985, when the current ranking system came into play. The ranking system came about exactly because the membership was sick of back-room deals that depended more on relationships than pilot skill.
> > >
> > > Rather than just complaining, here are my specific recommendations:
> > >
> > > 1. Ranking "boosters". If we want to give a nod to pilots who have already competed in the WGC, I think that makes sense. But other Category 1 events such as Pan American Events, European Gliding Championships, or Pre-worlds are just a way for the really rich/retired to buy their way on the team. Tighten up the verbiage to include only true WGCs.
> > >
> > > 2. Committee Selections. If we're going to make the Committee the ultimate selectors, then I would expect (demand) that the process be 100% transparent. Specifically: The votes of the Committee members must be public. The Committee members must document their rationale for selection using a standard form which is made available to the membership.
> > >
> > > Feel free to pass this along to the Excomm or whoever it is that made this decision.
> > >
> > > Note: I went back and read the minutes from the Spring 2016 BOD meeting. It appears that this was tabled on Saturday and supposed to be discussed on Sunday. But the minutes from Sunday don't reflect this. Seems suspicious.
> > >
> > > Erik Mann (P3)
> > > 30 years of racing in the USA
> > >
> > > On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 12:58:43 PM UTC-4, John Cochrane wrote:
> > > > The whole reason the US team committee undertook the huge effort is exactly experience with the "objective" system. We were sending, time after time, people to the worlds who you could tell had no chance, either for skill, seriousness, preparation, willingness to adapt to the WGC environment, or psychological stability.
> > > >
> > > > (Sean is actually pretty good on this scale -- he goes nuts behind the keyboard but you don't see him pulling the kind of self-inflicted disasters that bedevil so many others on US teams.)
> > > >
> > > > The modal pilot went to the worlds once, and treated it as a subsidized gliding vacation. We prized "fair" and "objective" above "successful." We could go back to that... and to the predictable results. The US team committee, bless them, wants to win on occasion, not just be "objective" about who gets selected.
> > > >
> > > > So, what do you think is more important: The US winning, or the feelings of people who feel they should have been selected? Experience has proven you can't have both.
> > > >
> > > > Let's give it a try. Let the US team committee pick, and if pilot a or b is unhappy about the result, tough. Let them form good teams, of people who will work as teams. Give them a few cycles, and let's see if they can produce results.
> > > >
> > > > John Cochrane
> >
> > "Specifically: The votes of the Committee members must be public." I am a bystanding gawker to this spectacle. Like watching a gruesome traffic accident that you just can't take your eyes off of. I agree with the quote, and wonder how votes might have changed, had the voters known that their votes would be made public? If the answer is they would have changed, this is just as disturbing, as it further reflects the reality that biases and appearances matter more than objectivity. If they would not have changed, why not make it public in the name of transparency?
>
> The more I hear, the happier I become, that I stopped paying my dues. Oh, happy day

[Bruce Hoult]

On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 7:58:43 PM UTC+3, John Cochrane wrote:
> The modal pilot went to the worlds once, and treated it as a subsidized gliding vacation. We prized "fair" and "objective" above "successful." We could go back to that... and to the predictable results. The US team committee, bless them, wants to win on occasion, not just be "objective" about who gets selected.

I officiated at the worlds once. I was ... surprised ... at how unprepared some of the pilots were.

- one guy broke up his glider in flight on a practice day, parts raining out of a cloud past other pilots.
- one guy scratched lower and lower and lower over a perfectly good ranch airfield, and then cartwheeled and broke his glider.
- one guy started the first task, scored 0.0 km for the day, and withdrew from the contest, saying he wasn't prepared to fly in mountains. (He didn't know the contest would be in NZ?)
- one guy persistently got warnings for things such as landing downwind, against other landing traffic.

[[email protected]]

These are my personal insights and not necessarily the same as the collective US Team Committee.

As much as this message chain is an excellent alternative to the now defunct “House of Cards� TV show I’m afraid that the US team selection reality is rather more pedestrian.

Last night I reviewed what I hope will be the last draft of the US Team scores and voting summary with details of the accepted and declined team slots.. So hopefully it will be publicly available very shortly.

I’m afraid it will be a great disappointment to you conspiracy theory types, as the SSA “old boys� have had virtually no input, other than ensuring that the previously approved selection rules have been implemented and checking for any foolishness in the voting. I’m still unsure how I became an old boy with less than 10 months on the committee!

Let me share a few process factoids to help allay some of your concerns:
• No committee member was present for the review of any class that they had team score points in and they had not already declined that potential team slot
o In my case once the 18m slot was offered to me and I accepted it, I immediately took myself out of consideration for the 15m team
• I don’t remember any case where the team committee decision deviated from the pilot voting recommendations
• One of the long-term committee members had to be encouraged to vote in the classes that they flew because they were initially wary of having too much influence
o A committee member not voting would have been an abnormal distortion of that pilot’s valuable insight for their small class
• The committee members, other than the Survey Monkey designer, only had access to the voting summaries, hence no specific details of who voted for who
• Each committee member had access to all the voting comments
• Each selected team pilot was given a couple of weeks to consider the acceptance of a team slot and encouraged to respond within a week to keep the cycle-time as short as possible

Historically I’ve been very wary of a voting based team pilot selection process, largely based on my experiences from the early 80s in the UK. I was very impressed by the thoughtfulness of the pilot voting and comments shared during this process, so much so, that I feel the resulting teams will be better than the previous numerical selection method. The voting correlated very well with the voter comments and there was no evidence of systematic gaming of the voting process with every voter being amazingly prompt.

I’m frustrated that this total process has taken a couple of months longer than perhaps it could have, largely because the US Team Committee tried to be careful at each stage and anticipate potential problems like having only 2 committee members not recused for the 18m discussions, which required us to invite the SSA chairman to break a potential stalemate.

One of my few disappointments has been the number of well qualified pilots who had to decline for various reasons.

During the process we have had many great suggestions for future improvements which will be considered over the winter.

Bob Fletcher, 90

[Josh Fletcher]

Joined SSA when I was 16, 29 years ago...... I will have no more of it... Good job SSA!

And the numbers continue to plummet.........

[BobW]

Somewhat cropped for the sake of discussion...
> The whole reason the US team committee undertook the huge effort is exactly
> experience with the "objective" system... <snip...>
> ...We prized "fair" and "objective" above "successful." We
> could go back to that... and to the predictable results. The US team
> committee, bless them, wants to win on occasion, not just be "objective"
> about who gets selected.
>
> So, what do you think is more important: The US winning, or the feelings of
> people who feel they should have been selected? Experience has proven you
> can't have both.
>
> Let's give it a try. Let the US team committee pick, and if pilot a or b is
> unhappy about the result, tough. Let them form good teams, of people who
> will work as teams. Give them a few cycles, and let's see if they can
> produce results.

Written with all due respect...

Accepting "winning" as the vslid/highest U.S. Team Selection Committee goal, I
seriously question several hidden assumptions apparently underlying the above
logic.

Acknowledging the stated logical arguments supporting each selection approach,
I'm unconvinced they point solely to a compelling conclusion for "need for
selection methodology change." Stated another way, the "selection choice
dichotomy" may well be a false forced choice while the fundamental problem(s?)
lie elsewhere.

I suspect the reasoning "simply" illustrates symptoms of "somethings else." I
don't pretend to have compelling arguments for proposed/possible solutions,
but suggest that if "fair and objective" selection has consistently yielded
"unprepared pilots" (a debatable proposition, in my view) then "the problem"
could lie elsewhere...e.g.: (gasp!) task calling menu/proportions;
meteorological (the U.S. is large enough to have hugely differing "standard
soaring conditions" compared to [say] middle/western Europe [arguably home for
a high proportion of recent international soaring champions]); the sheer size
of the U.S. may generate/contain inherent issues affecting "team flight" not
affecting many (most?) other countries sending "competitive teams" to
international competitions (e.g. cost/logistics associated with
dispersion-induced "team practice/cohesiveness" etc.).

When I try to apply today's present selection logic to the U.S.'
post-WW-II-based participation in international soaring competitions and its
slate of international champions, selection method doesn't jump out at me as
dominant. What seems more dominant is - arguably - individual brilliance.
MacCready in his day readily admitted he was far from "the best at"
thermalling...but he came up with a way of compensating through
logically-based (and subsequently methodologically proven) "lift
discrimination." Moffat? If anything, he continued in the "MacCready logical
vein" but with (as I infer) "considerably honed" mechanical and psychological
skills. Jacobs? Insufficient info available to me to hazard a guess.
Ironically, Moffat might be considered to have *lost* further chances to make
the U.S. team when we once before switched from "purely results-based
selection" to "other factors actively considered" selection inclusion.

Somewhat tangentially, I suspect "a Sebastian Kawa" can arguably be thought of
as a pilot fitting into the "winner through brilliance alone" category as well.

In any event, in the 35-or-so years between MacCready and Jacobs, LOTS of
other things in and permeating the sport changed massively, two obvious ones
being ship technology (wood/metal=>composites) and knowledge/skills
dispersion/ permeating throughout competitive soaring pilots worldwide.
Additionally, cockpit instrumentation (technology) and again, (gasp) contest
task-calling philosophy/methodology are part of the picture. (For younger
readers, Moffat famously was a part of the forces moving toward higher
proportion of assigned task calls.)

"Obvious conclusions" to "fixing" the U.S.' now-long-standing "failure" to
generate a world champion certainly aren't obvious to me, though I do suspect
the pilot selection methodology change perceived to underlay this thread's
"train wreck" won't prove to be a panacea in the "eventual results" sense of
things. As always, time will have its measure...

What think others?

Respectfully,
Bob - generally interested in these sorts of things - W.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[[email protected]]

Mr Christner,

I was crew for P7 at the Benalla WGC and thus spent hours of every day for weeks witnessing Sean Fidler's interaction with Team members, management, crew, competitors, contest officials/staff, sponsors, members of the Benalla community, and the press. Not once did I witness anything but the most courteous, fair, and respectful behavior to all by both Sean and his crew Tiffany. They were quite a popular team among the scores of Aussie volunteers at the contest field. Additionally, 7T and Tiffany provided excellent video/social media documentation and much-needed promotion of the US Team's efforts at Benalla. Finally, 7T's phenomenal Day Win at his first Worlds was treated by him as an opportunity to share his success and to give credit to others who helped him along the way of his very successful competitive soaring career thus far.

So, Mr Christner, I'm sure you'll be relieved to know that your fears of Sean Fidler's behavior falling short of the requirements of the US Team Code of Conduct are unfounded. Team 7T did the USA proud at the 34th FAI World Gliding Championships in January.

Gina


On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 7:01:22 AM UTC+13, Kevin Christner wrote:
> Dear John,
>
> I agree we should have a discussion about this. One important issue is whether a pilot meets the requirements of the US Team Code of Conduct. I post some relevant sections below:
>
> 13.1.3 Courtesy. Courteous accessibility to visiting SSA members, sponsors, dignitaries and the Press.
> 13.1.4 Respect. Respect for the host organization, the facility, the rules of the airfield and the organization.
> 13.1.5 Treatment. Fair, considerate, courteous treatment of Team Management, Team Volunteers, and members of the public.
> 13.2.1 Highest Level. To maintain at all times a high standard of sportsmanship and fair play
> 13.2.6 Respect. Maintain an attitude of respect and politeness towards competitors both in the air and on the ground.
> 13.3 To Specifically Refrain From. To refrain from any behavior which might reflect unfavorably on the United States of America, the sport, the Team, its management, or which might bring any other pilot, official or the Team into disrepute
>
> Since you voted for Sean highly, can you please certify that he has met all of these requirements?
>

[[email protected]]

On Friday, November 3, 2017 at 9:43:09 PM UTC-4, Josh Fletcher wrote:
> Joined SSA when I was 16, 29 years ago...... I will have no more of
> it... Good job SSA!
>
> And the numbers continue to plummet.........
>
>
>
>
> --
> Josh Fletcher

I have to admit I'm curious as to what you have read here would make you decide to no longer be an SSA member.
A committee of SSA members, elected by SSA members, took on the task of revisiting how we select our teams going to the WGC. In doing so they went to great lengths to understand how other countries select their teams, including face to face interviews with several. Additionally they gathered insights from many current and former team members.
Out of that, a new process grew.
They followed that process and did not interject themselves into it.
One individual has chosen to make claims of "cronyism" and maybe some other malfeasance because he did not get selected to the team he wanted to be on..
This thread is a result of his being called out for his ways of communicating his unhappiness.
Maybe it would be possible for you to explain why you give up on the whole organization over this.
Respectfully
UH

[[email protected]]

I dislike most hobby organizations but I have to give the SSA credit they do a great job. Especially considering their resources. There is a lot of little things they have gotten done with the FAA over the years that add up.. Only thing I have a beef with is the group insurance membership extortion bit but all orgs that can get away with it do that.
All the racing stuff is run by the racing junkies for the racing junkies and doesn't affect the rest of us. Unless we choose to pay attention for gossip or laughs.

[[email protected]]

Thanks Hank, a good summation of what led me to make the original post.

I also agree with John Cochrane's post basically saying there is reasoning to having the new system. Those reasons are listed in the document describing it.

http://www.ssa.org/files/member/Update%20US%20Team%20Selection%20Process%20v1.2.3. pdf

Read the whole document. Below is the just the preamble.

"US Team Committee discussions concerning the current US Team pilot selection process have raised a number of issues, including the following:

• An uncharacteristically bad National contest result (e.g. due to illness) may cause a highly qualified pilot to miss the US Team.

• Pilot skills and how they match conditions expected at WGC contest sites should be considered (e.g. a pilot with predominately flatland skills should not necessarily be selected for a contest that will emphasize mountain flying).

• Pilot personality and the way it fits with the full team can be an important factor.

For a pilot who has competed in past FAI Category 1 contests, performance in those events should be considered.

- Because success at Category 1 contests typically requires some experience in competition at that level, a pilot’s age and likely commitment to future US Team participation should be considered.

- The proliferation of IGC classes raises the possibility that a pilot who has achieved excellent results in one class might be a strong US Team member in another.

The fundamental point is that the goal of every US Team should be to obtain the best results possible at any World Gliding Championships (WGC), and the current team (old) selection process does not appear to be consistently achieving that goal. Accordingly, the US Team Committee is proposing significant changes to the process by which US Team pilots are selected."


For those of you who have been following the bitterness and now belligerence on 7T's website along with this thread, I must restate that I think this whole push to fly SP's or exclusively AT's at our contests is about following the herd around the course. This favors some people's skill set, real racing as it is termed, but I have my doubts it best determines who is the best glider pilot. Admittedly though, it is good prep for the WGC.

I can adapt to the new age of FLARM markers where you can see the location of all the contestants pre-start and the longitudinal axis of the glider and the course line are coincident. In fact, preceding this year's 15m nat'l (3 AT's) we had a US Team camp where we talked about the best way to compete doing it. (Thanks to those volunteers who hosted us). AT's are fun to some extent but let's continue to have some balance in tasking, please. (I need to change my FLARM tag to zzz.)

I still welcome the chance to spread out the field in a TAT or a MAT and there are still TAT's called at the WGC's. There will be more in the future.

And for God' sake let's go flying at our Nationals when the cloud bases are lowish or conditions are less than ideal. This way we can have meaningful results at our Nationals that translate to WGC.

Serious stuff...For laughs I have included this snapshot of Day 1 at the 2014 15m National at Montegue, a place where I had never flown before. A most beautiful flight (not top scoring by any means). A most enjoyable contest! Thanks to those volunteers who put it on! I'll remember it always.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=10WuNiuTbQyN1ETWfXRZVw3dha60JySPN


XC

[Sean Fidler]

https://youtu.be/9rro7I1AO10

[Tango Eight]

On Sunday, November 5, 2017 at 10:20:39 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
> https://youtu.be/9rro7I1AO10

You just can't quit the name calling, can you.... One look at the title, naw, I've got better things to do.

best,
Evan Ludeman / T8

[XC]

The train wreck continues at www.seanfidler.com.

This is what I said in the original post:

"I can only guess at why others didn’t rank him well in the 18m class. I ranked him low in the 15m because he doesn't do well in a TAT or a MAT task. If he doesn’t have markers around him he tends not to do so well. MAT task aside, there are still quite a few TAT tasks at the WGC and pilot needs to be able to perform if they find themselves separated from the lead gaggle. On top of all that he doesn't work well with others and is an internet troll. Sorry, but we all know it to be true."

It was just my personal opinion after seeing his predictable scoresheet tumbles when a MAT or TAT was called. Even more predictable was the later outcry on RAS that these tasks were horrible...

I think I ranked him 3rd or 4th out of 9 possible in 15m. Must have touched a nerve.


XC

#internetbullyingnotjustforteenagegirlsanymore
#stillstampingfeetovergettingpickedlastforkickball
#whyaretherenospacesbetweenthesewords
#matsandtatsarefunforsomenotforothers
#ifyouthinkthesearerealyourenuttierthan7T

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

You guys may be mistaking behind-the-keyboard crazy Sean for the pilot. Sean loves the idea of racing assigned tasks and grand prix, and rather pointedly says so. I haven't seen any particular lack of originality and willingness to strike out on the own in the air. If anything, the opposite, Sean goes where others fear to tread. Just because he doesn't think contests should call tats (which WGC also do, increasingly) does not mean he's any worse at flying them. Not every opinion in this sport is self-interested

John Cochrane

[Bojack J4]

I watched Sean's youtube video.

Professionally presented and analyzed, and proves his point with data.

I fail to see any evidence of a "train wreck" there....and he DID win the entire contest.

If I may add, Sean's performance at Benella was impressive (at one point he was in second place overall and had a day win as I recall?), and he was receiving accolades right here on ras the whole time while doing it.

[Steve Koerner]

Sean F has as much enthusiasm for the sport of glider racing as perhaps the next six of us combined. One way to interpret his over-the-top keyboard behavior is that he cares so much about the sport than he can't figure out how to balance in some nice behavior with his buds online. Annoying, yes; but, so what.

He should get a pass for bad keyboard behavior if he wins races and has good in person behavior as is the accounts that we hear repeatedly. I believe that at voting time, some others didn't give him that pass when they placed their votes. When holding a grudge for having been ****ing off once or twice, it's just not possible to avoid contriving a logical seeming explanation. And therein lies one of several major faults in the use of non-objective team selection standards.

What all of this means is that despite the hard work and good intentions of the US team committee, they have accomplished exactly the opposite of what they set out to accomplish. And we are all worse for the wear.

No, we should not allow a few more years of this to see how it works out as some have suggested.




On Sunday, November 5, 2017 at 7:24:07 PM UTC-7, Bojack J4 wrote:
> I watched Sean's youtube video.
>
> Professionally presented and analyzed, and proves his point with data.
>
> I fail to see any evidence of a "train wreck" there....and he DID win the entire contest.
>
> If I may add, Sean's performance at Benella was impressive (at one point he was in second place overall and had a day win as I recall?), and he was receiving accolades right here on ras the whole time while doing it.

[[email protected]]

On Monday, November 6, 2017 at 1:38:32 AM UTC-5, Steve Koerner wrote:
> Sean F has as much enthusiasm for the sport of glider racing as perhaps the next six of us combined. One way to interpret his over-the-top keyboard behavior is that he cares so much about the sport than he can't figure out how to balance in some nice behavior with his buds online. Annoying, yes; but, so what.
>
> He should get a pass for bad keyboard behavior if he wins races and has good in person behavior as is the accounts that we hear repeatedly. I believe that at voting time, some others didn't give him that pass when they placed their votes. When holding a grudge for having been ****ing off once or twice, it's just not possible to avoid contriving a logical seeming explanation. And therein lies one of several major faults in the use of non-objective team selection standards.
>
> What all of this means is that despite the hard work and good intentions of the US team committee, they have accomplished exactly the opposite of what they set out to accomplish. And we are all worse for the wear.
>
> No, we should not allow a few more years of this to see how it works out as some have suggested.
>
>
>
>
> On Sunday, November 5, 2017 at 7:24:07 PM UTC-7, Bojack J4 wrote:
> > I watched Sean's youtube video.
> >
> > Professionally presented and analyzed, and proves his point with data.
> >
> > I fail to see any evidence of a "train wreck" there....and he DID win the entire contest.
> >
> > If I may add, Sean's performance at Benella was impressive (at one point he was in second place overall and had a day win as I recall?), and he was receiving accolades right here on ras the whole time while doing it.

How about he just grow up and deal with it? Why isn't that the unanimous suggestion here? One option by the disgruntled pilot would be to shrug it off, and go fly the 15 meter contest as a proud representative of the United States, understanding that life isn't always "fair". Why is it impossible for someone to understand that it's just their one opinion that the contest/rules committee maybe is "making mistakes" going through some changes after the US team has had dismal performance in the previous x number of years and that others have a different opinion of how to best address it, right or wrong? Understand that you are not the center of the universe and that some things might be larger than you or any individual? And that regardless of how poor one thinks of the decisions and how they were made, to handle it with some level of maturity and even perhaps some class? Close the laptop and pick up the phone? Has anyone receive a personal phone call? If I thought any of it was done out of interest for US soaring as a whole rather than just 100% self interest I might feel otherwise, but he has shown his hand many times over. The question is whether Sean Fidler is a crybaby child or not, whether the selection process is correct or not is a different question. Someone cried in their beer (again) all over their facebook account and someone called him out on it, by posting in another public forum. Seems not inappropriate. I know nothing of contest flying, the rules/selection committee etc., but it's pretty easy to see when someone has a serious personality flaw, whether "online" or in "real "life". If you can't be a grown up, or even simply adapt your behaviour to avoid the easily foreseeable potential blowback this type of behaviour has on your own personal aspirations, then you'll have to deal with the consequences, "fair" or not. Personally I couldn't care less if he ever flies another contest, regardless of any loss to US soaring in International competition scoresheet, but then again I don't care much about any of it. And this is the reason why. Flying a contest sounds to me a lot like a week long trip to the dentist chair.

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, November 5, 2017 at 7:44:27 PM UTC-5, John Cochrane wrote:
> You guys may be mistaking behind-the-keyboard crazy Sean for the pilot. Sean loves the idea of racing assigned tasks and grand prix, and rather pointedly says so. I haven't seen any particular lack of originality and willingness to strike out on the own in the air. If anything, the opposite, Sean goes where others fear to tread. Just because he doesn't think contests should call tats (which WGC also do, increasingly) does not mean he's any worse at flying them. Not every opinion in this sport is self-interested
>
> John Cochrane

Flying excellence is REALLY important, but it needs to be part of a larger package.
Nasty aggressive behavior, even if not face to face, is corrosive to the entire process of building a team that will succeed. When it's time to perform ,there needs to be a very strong bond for true team work to happen. This does not happen in 3 weeks on site. If you start in a hole, it is very difficult to achieve.
The importance of how the team presents itself is also hard to over emphasize. Raising funds to support a team with a demonstrated bad actor could well be next to impossible. It is hard enough without people saying "I'm not going to support a team with that person on it".
I appreciate the hard caring work of the USTC in developing this new process. I have called them to task, face to face, for the terrible job they did in letting the affected pilots, and others, know how things were changing. They looked me in the eye and vowed to do better.
Thanks to the USTC.
Let's get behind our new team.
UH
US Club Class Team 2001, 2002

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

UH: I agree entirely. This kind of public (yes, internet is public) behavior is near inexcusable and close to disqualifying in a US team member. Any pilot who reacted to a decision by a worlds CD, international Jury, or an action by his own team captain and team mates in this manner should be sent home immediately and banned from further US team participation.

I have not seen a similar ability to overcome the many unfair adversities our sport throws us in competition, but I would surely infer less than the required equanimity, and the US team should consider that in its assessment of pilots overall suitability. Overcoming a bad day and not throwing yourself into a mire of self-inflicted self-pitying misery has been a constant weak point of the US team, and one of the main things this whole selection process was invented in order to avoid.

One effect of going to a voting system: any pilot should pay a little self-interested attention to his relations with other pilots, the US team, and his or her public image. Maybe that isn't all bad!

I merely wanted to correct an impression I saw in earlier posts -- that because Sean rants about assigned tasks and US rules he is necessarily only good at assigned tasks and IGC rules, and does it to further his own contest results. Sean is pretty good at flying any kind of task, and is not a leech in classic style.

Likewise, I argue for high finishes, more TAT and MAT to avoid gaggling and leeching, because I enjoy contests more that way. But as a pilot, I fly the finish line just as crazy as the rest of you guys, and play the gaggle and follow game as necessary.

John Cochrane

[Sean Fidler]

https://youtu.be/uhrEFpb2kGs

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

What is your complaint? Following, team flying, and using markers is very hard, and its a part of the WGC game that US pilots are typically not very good at. We tend to break off and do our own thing when inappropriate and screw the pooch. Kawa himself follows and uses markers when appropriate. If these guys can do it effectively at the right times, good for them, and this should be much in their favor for US team selection. Individualists who want to fly by themselves will not do well at WGC

[[email protected]]

On Monday, November 6, 2017 at 6:38:46 PM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
> https://youtu.be/uhrEFpb2kGs


I just can't make sense of it, I cannot see how doing this serves your goals. So I'll try a different tack... How about you go over to Poland and kick some ass, score at the top of the sheet, post one for the Americans, and give those damn "good 'ol boys" back home here in the US no other option than to put you in the 18 meter class next year and beyond (lots of competition soaring left for you). You might be surprised how many people would get on your side (and be more open to changing US competition soaring to your preference), slapping your back and cheering you on, just like many of us did when you scored well at the Grand Prix. Leeching is legal. No complaining. Go beat everyone despite the terrible rules. Like this guy does. Can you beat him? Or do you just want to be the best US pilot. Low bar for you I think, very low bar.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mH6YVbUotDQ

[Jim White[_3_]]

At 23:38 06 November 2017, Sean Fidler wrote:
>https://youtu.be/uhrEFpb2kGs
>
Why do you do this Sean? If you spent the same amount of time making a few
friends in the US Soaring community, you would probably more easily reach
your goals.

[[email protected]]

On Monday, November 6, 2017 at 6:52:10 PM UTC-5, John Cochrane wrote:
> What is your complaint? Following, team flying, and using markers is very hard, and its a part of the WGC game that US pilots are typically not very good at. We tend to break off and do our own thing when inappropriate and screw the pooch. Kawa himself follows and uses markers when appropriate. If these guys can do it effectively at the right times, good for them, and this should be much in their favor for US team selection. Individualists who want to fly by themselves will not do well at WGC

Pretty much generic gaggle racing that Sean says he likes the most.
When behind, its "tactical following".
When ahead, the other guy is a scum sucking leach.
An example of when he had a good day. Not much to complain about there.
UH

[Sean Fidler]

Hank, as usual, you haven’t the slightest clue. And I am not done with the videos. I’m just getting started.

And "this" is to prove a simple point. The US Team selection process is a joke and fraud. It not based on facts. It favors butt kissers and is something that is now "given" subjectively and not "earned" objectively.

Get behind the “Team.� Get behind the team that in several cases was given their positions and DID NOT EARN IT.

Also, just to be clear, is team flying legal now? How is it that we can have 5E and XC team flying entire contests without anyone noticing or caring? Are we just trusting them? Is everyone else OK completing against the clear advantages which that allowance provides them? The same thing occurred in the Club Class (and D2, LS8, ASW20 division) nationals in Hobbs this year. See my Youtube channel for those videos.

So Mini-Me (XC) and Mr. Cochrane (good old boys spokesman east and west)...which is it? (Facts please, cite evidence). We see that 5E and XC team fly and need each other to lose the 15m Nationals. We now know that 90 leeches P7 as if prison was no deterrent. But we don’t see that with me.. How am I not fast without markers mini-me? At least Cochrane won’t lie here like you. But notice that until I added the actual SeeYou replay proving the narrative was incorrect, that wasn't the case.

Also, note XC comments about how that subjective perception (which Mr. Cochrane disputes) was the reason he voted me down. You can see right there how pathetic the new buddy voting system is.

Why is XC so mad (see: Butthurt)? It is because I called them out for complaining endlessly about the FAI rules DURING the FAI world championships for which they had over a year to prepare. Meanwhile John Good writes endless articles attacking the FAI rules while my wife did 3/4 of the work of the team captain. The Team members should not be afraid of or complain about the FAI rules (or European pilots), they should be fully prepared and READY TO ATTACK IT ON ALL LEVELS AND AT ALL TIMES when the event begins. Instead, they longed for the US rules and tasks. Hence one of my many reasons for despising the failed US Rules experiment which has provided ZERO UPSIDE in TWENTY YEARS while requiring extreme effort to maintain.

Mini-Me, did do you know how the >85% “Elite� (cough, cough, wink, wink) voters voted? How is it that you know the "collective narrative" was (weeks ago) that I am not fast without markers as you posted on my Facebook page? Clearly, now that I have provided this thread some objective evidence (in the form of several SeeYou replays), Cochrane is walking that one (whopper) back for you (and the voters). But (and this is key) that is, apparently, still the justification for 5E to move up in the subjective vote and for me to move down. Hmm? The Team Committee has not released any responses to date. How did you know weeks ago? Could it be that it was contrived by a group of people with high ethical standards that would not let personal disagreements affect their votes? No? Yeah, that is a stretch. So, mini-me, how did you know?

Answer: Mini-me was in on the contrived “subjective� answer of the "elite" SSA loyalists (the good old boys) which was designed too.... We all know the answer...

When will the US Team Committee release the US Team votes and comments so we can compare their responses (subjective) with actual flight data for all relevant competition to see if it makes sense or is just personal? This is the process for the rules poll. Why is this not the process for the TRANSPARENT and OF THE HIGHEST MORAL CHARACTER US Team poll?

#participationtrohpy
#givenNOTearned

[Sean Fidler]

Oh and great thread title mini-me.

The US Team Selection process is a total TRAIN WRECK.

#morelies

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 7:37:32 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Oh and great thread title mini-me.
>
> The US Team Selection process is a total TRAIN WRECK.
>
> #morelies

SSA dues paying members: Sean Fidler disparages the SSA with a link to the organization. https://seanfidler.com/ I think there are many, many SSA members that might be very interested in your personal website... And, as an SSA member my first questions to the SSA leadership now are: How much of the SSA dues funds go to the US soaring team? What are the code of conduct requirements of a US International contest participant? Unfortunately and regrettably we may need to flush that out. Of course criticism itself is not a disqualifying factor, but I'm sure there is some behavioral standard to adhere to. A US team member represents the SSA and the USA.
If you want to bring the SSA into it Sean, then the members get to have a say and are going to ask questions. It's all your choice, you can have a valid grievance and make your point in a respectful way, or not. You routinely choose not to. Blowback is a fair and reasonable consequence. Start calculating for it?
Cheers.
I'd provide my name on this one but you are a suspected (known?) online bully so I'll take the safe route. Probably not hard to figure it out anyway but I'll at least keep it off a public forum.

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 10:02:55 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 7:37:32 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > Oh and great thread title mini-me.
> >
> > The US Team Selection process is a total TRAIN WRECK.
> >
> > #morelies
>
> SSA dues paying members: Sean Fidler disparages the SSA with a link to the organization. https://seanfidler.com/ I think there are many, many SSA members that might be very interested in your personal website... And, as an SSA member my first questions to the SSA leadership now are: How much of the SSA dues funds go to the US soaring team? What are the code of conduct requirements of a US International contest participant? Unfortunately and regrettably we may need to flush that out. Of course criticism itself is not a disqualifying factor, but I'm sure there is some behavioral standard to adhere to. A US team member represents the SSA and the USA.
> If you want to bring the SSA into it Sean, then the members get to have a say and are going to ask questions. It's all your choice, you can have a valid grievance and make your point in a respectful way, or not. You routinely choose not to. Blowback is a fair and reasonable consequence. Start calculating for it?
> Cheers.
> I'd provide my name on this one but you are a suspected (known?) online bully so I'll take the safe route. Probably not hard to figure it out anyway but I'll at least keep it off a public forum.

I'll answer your question re SSA funds. No SSA member funds are used for the US Team. SSA resources assist with publicity to help fund raising. Funding for the US Team is in a separate bucket filled by dedicated contributions, and overseen by SSA leadership.
UH

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 8:11:11 AM UTC-7, wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 10:02:55 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> > On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 7:37:32 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > > Oh and great thread title mini-me.
> > >
> > > The US Team Selection process is a total TRAIN WRECK.
> > >
> > > #morelies
> >
> > SSA dues paying members: Sean Fidler disparages the SSA with a link to the organization. https://seanfidler.com/ I think there are many, many SSA members that might be very interested in your personal website... And, as an SSA member my first questions to the SSA leadership now are: How much of the SSA dues funds go to the US soaring team? What are the code of conduct requirements of a US International contest participant? Unfortunately and regrettably we may need to flush that out. Of course criticism itself is not a disqualifying factor, but I'm sure there is some behavioral standard to adhere to. A US team member represents the SSA and the USA.
> > If you want to bring the SSA into it Sean, then the members get to have a say and are going to ask questions. It's all your choice, you can have a valid grievance and make your point in a respectful way, or not. You routinely choose not to. Blowback is a fair and reasonable consequence. Start calculating for it?
> > Cheers.
> > I'd provide my name on this one but you are a suspected (known?) online bully so I'll take the safe route. Probably not hard to figure it out anyway but I'll at least keep it off a public forum.
>
> I'll answer your question re SSA funds. No SSA member funds are used for the US Team. SSA resources assist with publicity to help fund raising. Funding for the US Team is in a separate bucket filled by dedicated contributions, and overseen by SSA leadership.
> UH

Good to know, thanks.

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 7:30:58 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Hank, as usual, you haven’t the slightest clue. And I am not done with the videos. I’m just getting started.
>
> And "this" is to prove a simple point. The US Team selection process is a joke and fraud. It not based on facts. It favors butt kissers and is something that is now "given" subjectively and not "earned" objectively.
>
> Get behind the “Team.� Get behind the team that in several cases was given their positions and DID NOT EARN IT.
>
> Also, just to be clear, is team flying legal now? How is it that we can have 5E and XC team flying entire contests without anyone noticing or caring? Are we just trusting them? Is everyone else OK completing against the clear advantages which that allowance provides them? The same thing occurred in the Club Class (and D2, LS8, ASW20 division) nationals in Hobbs this year. See my Youtube channel for those videos.
>
> So Mini-Me (XC) and Mr. Cochrane (good old boys spokesman east and west)....which is it? (Facts please, cite evidence). We see that 5E and XC team fly and need each other to lose the 15m Nationals. We now know that 90 leeches P7 as if prison was no deterrent. But we don’t see that with me. How am I not fast without markers mini-me? At least Cochrane won’t lie here like you. But notice that until I added the actual SeeYou replay proving the narrative was incorrect, that wasn't the case.
>
> Also, note XC comments about how that subjective perception (which Mr. Cochrane disputes) was the reason he voted me down. You can see right there how pathetic the new buddy voting system is.
>
> Why is XC so mad (see: Butthurt)? It is because I called them out for complaining endlessly about the FAI rules DURING the FAI world championships for which they had over a year to prepare. Meanwhile John Good writes endless articles attacking the FAI rules while my wife did 3/4 of the work of the team captain. The Team members should not be afraid of or complain about the FAI rules (or European pilots), they should be fully prepared and READY TO ATTACK IT ON ALL LEVELS AND AT ALL TIMES when the event begins. Instead, they longed for the US rules and tasks. Hence one of my many reasons for despising the failed US Rules experiment which has provided ZERO UPSIDE in TWENTY YEARS while requiring extreme effort to maintain.
>
> Mini-Me, did do you know how the >85% “Elite� (cough, cough, wink, wink) voters voted? How is it that you know the "collective narrative" was (weeks ago) that I am not fast without markers as you posted on my Facebook page? Clearly, now that I have provided this thread some objective evidence (in the form of several SeeYou replays), Cochrane is walking that one (whopper) back for you (and the voters). But (and this is key) that is, apparently, still the justification for 5E to move up in the subjective vote and for me to move down. Hmm? The Team Committee has not released any responses to date. How did you know weeks ago? Could it be that it was contrived by a group of people with high ethical standards that would not let personal disagreements affect their votes? No? Yeah, that is a stretch. So, mini-me, how did you know?
>
> Answer: Mini-me was in on the contrived “subjective� answer of the "elite" SSA loyalists (the good old boys) which was designed too.... We all know the answer...
>
> When will the US Team Committee release the US Team votes and comments so we can compare their responses (subjective) with actual flight data for all relevant competition to see if it makes sense or is just personal? This is the process for the rules poll. Why is this not the process for the TRANSPARENT and OF THE HIGHEST MORAL CHARACTER US Team poll?
>
> #participationtrohpy
> #givenNOTearned

This guy is screaming everywhere that he should absolutely be on the US 18 meter international team. Here is some perspective, his US contest record. It's not exactly overwhelming evidence for a guaranteed slot at 18 meters.... Maybe you should win something before you start whining and complaining?

Sean Fidler
Year Contest Placed
2017 18 meter nationals 15th!
2016 2016 15 meter, Open, and Std Nationals 16
2016 18 Meter National 11
2015 18 Meter, Open and US Club Class Nationals 6
2015 Region 5 North G
2014 18 Meter Nationals 4
2014 Region 5 North 5
2014 Seniors Soaring Championship G
2013 Region 6 North (R6N) 2
2013 Region 6 South 10
2013 18 Meter Nationals 5
2013 Seniors Soaring Championship G
2012 Region 4 North 5
2012 Sports Class Nationals 35
2012 Region 6 North Super Regional 6
2011 Uvalde Glide 18M / 15M Contest 8
2011 Region-6 North 8
2010 Region 6 North 5
2009 Region 6 North 2

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 10:39:38 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 7:30:58 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > Hank, as usual, you haven’t the slightest clue. And I am not done with the videos. I’m just getting started.
> >
> > And "this" is to prove a simple point. The US Team selection process is a joke and fraud. It not based on facts. It favors butt kissers and is something that is now "given" subjectively and not "earned" objectively.
> >
> > Get behind the “Team.� Get behind the team that in several cases was given their positions and DID NOT EARN IT.
> >
> > Also, just to be clear, is team flying legal now? How is it that we can have 5E and XC team flying entire contests without anyone noticing or caring? Are we just trusting them? Is everyone else OK completing against the clear advantages which that allowance provides them? The same thing occurred in the Club Class (and D2, LS8, ASW20 division) nationals in Hobbs this year. See my Youtube channel for those videos.
> >
> > So Mini-Me (XC) and Mr. Cochrane (good old boys spokesman east and west)...which is it? (Facts please, cite evidence). We see that 5E and XC team fly and need each other to lose the 15m Nationals. We now know that 90 leeches P7 as if prison was no deterrent. But we don’t see that with me. How am I not fast without markers mini-me? At least Cochrane won’t lie here like you. But notice that until I added the actual SeeYou replay proving the narrative was incorrect, that wasn't the case.
> >
> > Also, note XC comments about how that subjective perception (which Mr. Cochrane disputes) was the reason he voted me down. You can see right there how pathetic the new buddy voting system is.
> >
> > Why is XC so mad (see: Butthurt)? It is because I called them out for complaining endlessly about the FAI rules DURING the FAI world championships for which they had over a year to prepare. Meanwhile John Good writes endless articles attacking the FAI rules while my wife did 3/4 of the work of the team captain. The Team members should not be afraid of or complain about the FAI rules (or European pilots), they should be fully prepared and READY TO ATTACK IT ON ALL LEVELS AND AT ALL TIMES when the event begins. Instead, they longed for the US rules and tasks. Hence one of my many reasons for despising the failed US Rules experiment which has provided ZERO UPSIDE in TWENTY YEARS while requiring extreme effort to maintain.
> >
> > Mini-Me, did do you know how the >85% “Elite� (cough, cough, wink, wink) voters voted? How is it that you know the "collective narrative" was (weeks ago) that I am not fast without markers as you posted on my Facebook page? Clearly, now that I have provided this thread some objective evidence (in the form of several SeeYou replays), Cochrane is walking that one (whopper) back for you (and the voters). But (and this is key) that is, apparently, still the justification for 5E to move up in the subjective vote and for me to move down. Hmm? The Team Committee has not released any responses to date. How did you know weeks ago? Could it be that it was contrived by a group of people with high ethical standards that would not let personal disagreements affect their votes? No? Yeah, that is a stretch. So, mini-me, how did you know?
> >
> > Answer: Mini-me was in on the contrived “subjective� answer of the "elite" SSA loyalists (the good old boys) which was designed too... We all know the answer...
> >
> > When will the US Team Committee release the US Team votes and comments so we can compare their responses (subjective) with actual flight data for all relevant competition to see if it makes sense or is just personal? This is the process for the rules poll. Why is this not the process for the TRANSPARENT and OF THE HIGHEST MORAL CHARACTER US Team poll?
> >
> > #participationtrohpy
> > #givenNOTearned
>
> This guy is screaming everywhere that he should absolutely be on the US 18 meter international team. Here is some perspective, his US contest record. It's not exactly overwhelming evidence for a guaranteed slot at 18 meters... Maybe you should win something before you start whining and complaining?
>
> Sean Fidler
> Year Contest Placed
> 2017 18 meter nationals 15th!
> 2016 2016 15 meter, Open, and Std Nationals 16
> 2016 18 Meter National 11
> 2015 18 Meter, Open and US Club Class Nationals 6
> 2015 Region 5 North G
> 2014 18 Meter Nationals 4
> 2014 Region 5 North 5
> 2014 Seniors Soaring Championship G
> 2013 Region 6 North (R6N) 2
> 2013 Region 6 South 10
> 2013 18 Meter Nationals 5
> 2013 Seniors Soaring Championship G
> 2012 Region 4 North 5
> 2012 Sports Class Nationals 35
> 2012 Region 6 North Super Regional 6
> 2011 Uvalde Glide 18M / 15M Contest 8
> 2011 Region-6 North 8
> 2010 Region 6 North 5
> 2009 Region 6 North 2

You missed 2017 15 Meter Nationals- First place
UH

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 8:49:22 AM UTC-7, wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 10:39:38 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> > On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 7:30:58 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > > Hank, as usual, you haven’t the slightest clue. And I am not done with the videos. I’m just getting started.
> > >
> > > And "this" is to prove a simple point. The US Team selection process is a joke and fraud. It not based on facts. It favors butt kissers and is something that is now "given" subjectively and not "earned" objectively.
> > >
> > > Get behind the “Team.� Get behind the team that in several cases was given their positions and DID NOT EARN IT.
> > >
> > > Also, just to be clear, is team flying legal now? How is it that we can have 5E and XC team flying entire contests without anyone noticing or caring? Are we just trusting them? Is everyone else OK completing against the clear advantages which that allowance provides them? The same thing occurred in the Club Class (and D2, LS8, ASW20 division) nationals in Hobbs this year. See my Youtube channel for those videos.
> > >
> > > So Mini-Me (XC) and Mr. Cochrane (good old boys spokesman east and west)...which is it? (Facts please, cite evidence). We see that 5E and XC team fly and need each other to lose the 15m Nationals. We now know that 90 leeches P7 as if prison was no deterrent. But we don’t see that with me. How am I not fast without markers mini-me? At least Cochrane won’t lie here like you. But notice that until I added the actual SeeYou replay proving the narrative was incorrect, that wasn't the case.
> > >
> > > Also, note XC comments about how that subjective perception (which Mr.. Cochrane disputes) was the reason he voted me down. You can see right there how pathetic the new buddy voting system is.
> > >
> > > Why is XC so mad (see: Butthurt)? It is because I called them out for complaining endlessly about the FAI rules DURING the FAI world championships for which they had over a year to prepare. Meanwhile John Good writes endless articles attacking the FAI rules while my wife did 3/4 of the work of the team captain. The Team members should not be afraid of or complain about the FAI rules (or European pilots), they should be fully prepared and READY TO ATTACK IT ON ALL LEVELS AND AT ALL TIMES when the event begins. Instead, they longed for the US rules and tasks. Hence one of my many reasons for despising the failed US Rules experiment which has provided ZERO UPSIDE in TWENTY YEARS while requiring extreme effort to maintain.
> > >
> > > Mini-Me, did do you know how the >85% “Elite� (cough, cough, wink, wink) voters voted? How is it that you know the "collective narrative" was (weeks ago) that I am not fast without markers as you posted on my Facebook page? Clearly, now that I have provided this thread some objective evidence (in the form of several SeeYou replays), Cochrane is walking that one (whopper) back for you (and the voters). But (and this is key) that is, apparently, still the justification for 5E to move up in the subjective vote and for me to move down. Hmm? The Team Committee has not released any responses to date. How did you know weeks ago? Could it be that it was contrived by a group of people with high ethical standards that would not let personal disagreements affect their votes? No? Yeah, that is a stretch. So, mini-me, how did you know?
> > >
> > > Answer: Mini-me was in on the contrived “subjective� answer of the "elite" SSA loyalists (the good old boys) which was designed too... We all know the answer...
> > >
> > > When will the US Team Committee release the US Team votes and comments so we can compare their responses (subjective) with actual flight data for all relevant competition to see if it makes sense or is just personal? This is the process for the rules poll. Why is this not the process for the TRANSPARENT and OF THE HIGHEST MORAL CHARACTER US Team poll?
> > >
> > > #participationtrohpy
> > > #givenNOTearned
> >
> > This guy is screaming everywhere that he should absolutely be on the US 18 meter international team. Here is some perspective, his US contest record. It's not exactly overwhelming evidence for a guaranteed slot at 18 meters... Maybe you should win something before you start whining and complaining?
> >
> > Sean Fidler
> > Year Contest Placed
> > 2017 18 meter nationals 15th!
> > 2016 2016 15 meter, Open, and Std Nationals 16
> > 2016 18 Meter National 11
> > 2015 18 Meter, Open and US Club Class Nationals 6
> > 2015 Region 5 North G
> > 2014 18 Meter Nationals 4
> > 2014 Region 5 North 5
> > 2014 Seniors Soaring Championship G
> > 2013 Region 6 North (R6N) 2
> > 2013 Region 6 South 10
> > 2013 18 Meter Nationals 5
> > 2013 Seniors Soaring Championship G
> > 2012 Region 4 North 5
> > 2012 Sports Class Nationals 35
> > 2012 Region 6 North Super Regional 6
> > 2011 Uvalde Glide 18M / 15M Contest 8
> > 2011 Region-6 North 8
> > 2010 Region 6 North 5
> > 2009 Region 6 North 2
>
> You missed 2017 15 Meter Nationals- First place
> UH

So it seems logical that he would be put on the 15 meter team, which he was.. But you don't find that on his social media.

[Kevin Christner]

Archer,

Worth repeating the relevant sections of the US Team Code of Conduct here:

13.1.3 Courtesy. Courteous accessibility to visiting SSA members, sponsors, dignitaries and the Press.
13.1.4 Respect. Respect for the host organization, the facility, the rules of the airfield and the organization.
13.1.5 Treatment. Fair, considerate, courteous treatment of Team Management, Team Volunteers, and members of the public.
13.2.1 Highest Level. To maintain at all times a high standard of sportsmanship and fair play
13.2.6 Respect. Maintain an attitude of respect and politeness towards competitors both in the air and on the ground.
13.3 To Specifically Refrain From. To refrain from any behavior which might reflect unfavorably on the United States of America, the sport, the Team, its management, or which might bring any other pilot, official or the Team into disrepute

Rereading the document it is pretty clear to me that this is required at ALL times, not just during a competition.

I think most rational observers would agree many lines were crossed long (honestly several years) ago but no one should have any remaining doubts. Several years back the US Team came very close to pulling a member (711) because of perceived personality issues and a junior team member (OO) was removed during a competition where he had won several days because the TC thought he was drinking too late at night. Yet total silence regarding a psychopathic bully? The SSA / Team Committee needs to make a statement very soon as both of these individuals did far, far less. A permanent ban from future competition seems appropriate and justified.

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 9:53:43 AM UTC-7, Kevin Christner wrote:
> Archer,
>
> Worth repeating the relevant sections of the US Team Code of Conduct here:
>
> 13.1.3 Courtesy. Courteous accessibility to visiting SSA members, sponsors, dignitaries and the Press.
> 13.1.4 Respect. Respect for the host organization, the facility, the rules of the airfield and the organization.
> 13.1.5 Treatment. Fair, considerate, courteous treatment of Team Management, Team Volunteers, and members of the public.
> 13.2.1 Highest Level. To maintain at all times a high standard of sportsmanship and fair play
> 13.2.6 Respect. Maintain an attitude of respect and politeness towards competitors both in the air and on the ground.
> 13.3 To Specifically Refrain From. To refrain from any behavior which might reflect unfavorably on the United States of America, the sport, the Team, its management, or which might bring any other pilot, official or the Team into disrepute
>
> Rereading the document it is pretty clear to me that this is required at ALL times, not just during a competition.
>
> I think most rational observers would agree many lines were crossed long (honestly several years) ago but no one should have any remaining doubts. Several years back the US Team came very close to pulling a member (711) because of perceived personality issues and a junior team member (OO) was removed during a competition where he had won several days because the TC thought he was drinking too late at night. Yet total silence regarding a psychopathic bully? The SSA / Team Committee needs to make a statement very soon as both of these individuals did far, far less. A permanent ban from future competition seems appropriate and justified.

Ok, I'll let others who know something about it make those determinations.
The necessary penalties/consequences, if any, will likely be determined by the necessary individuals, as they have in the past. Doesn't seem to be a problem there. Seems to me like the process, if slow for some, is essentially working! There's plenty of intelligent discussion about it going on in another thread and likely within more official channels past, present, and future.

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 10:39:38 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 7:30:58 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > Hank, as usual, you haven’t the slightest clue. And I am not done with the videos. I’m just getting started.
> >
> > And "this" is to prove a simple point. The US Team selection process is a joke and fraud. It not based on facts. It favors butt kissers and is something that is now "given" subjectively and not "earned" objectively.
> >
> > Get behind the “Team.� Get behind the team that in several cases was given their positions and DID NOT EARN IT.
> >
> > Also, just to be clear, is team flying legal now? How is it that we can have 5E and XC team flying entire contests without anyone noticing or caring? Are we just trusting them? Is everyone else OK completing against the clear advantages which that allowance provides them? The same thing occurred in the Club Class (and D2, LS8, ASW20 division) nationals in Hobbs this year. See my Youtube channel for those videos.
> >
> > So Mini-Me (XC) and Mr. Cochrane (good old boys spokesman east and west)...which is it? (Facts please, cite evidence). We see that 5E and XC team fly and need each other to lose the 15m Nationals. We now know that 90 leeches P7 as if prison was no deterrent. But we don’t see that with me. How am I not fast without markers mini-me? At least Cochrane won’t lie here like you. But notice that until I added the actual SeeYou replay proving the narrative was incorrect, that wasn't the case.
> >
> > Also, note XC comments about how that subjective perception (which Mr. Cochrane disputes) was the reason he voted me down. You can see right there how pathetic the new buddy voting system is.
> >
> > Why is XC so mad (see: Butthurt)? It is because I called them out for complaining endlessly about the FAI rules DURING the FAI world championships for which they had over a year to prepare. Meanwhile John Good writes endless articles attacking the FAI rules while my wife did 3/4 of the work of the team captain. The Team members should not be afraid of or complain about the FAI rules (or European pilots), they should be fully prepared and READY TO ATTACK IT ON ALL LEVELS AND AT ALL TIMES when the event begins. Instead, they longed for the US rules and tasks. Hence one of my many reasons for despising the failed US Rules experiment which has provided ZERO UPSIDE in TWENTY YEARS while requiring extreme effort to maintain.
> >
> > Mini-Me, did do you know how the >85% “Elite� (cough, cough, wink, wink) voters voted? How is it that you know the "collective narrative" was (weeks ago) that I am not fast without markers as you posted on my Facebook page? Clearly, now that I have provided this thread some objective evidence (in the form of several SeeYou replays), Cochrane is walking that one (whopper) back for you (and the voters). But (and this is key) that is, apparently, still the justification for 5E to move up in the subjective vote and for me to move down. Hmm? The Team Committee has not released any responses to date. How did you know weeks ago? Could it be that it was contrived by a group of people with high ethical standards that would not let personal disagreements affect their votes? No? Yeah, that is a stretch. So, mini-me, how did you know?
> >
> > Answer: Mini-me was in on the contrived “subjective� answer of the "elite" SSA loyalists (the good old boys) which was designed too... We all know the answer...
> >
> > When will the US Team Committee release the US Team votes and comments so we can compare their responses (subjective) with actual flight data for all relevant competition to see if it makes sense or is just personal? This is the process for the rules poll. Why is this not the process for the TRANSPARENT and OF THE HIGHEST MORAL CHARACTER US Team poll?
> >
> > #participationtrohpy
> > #givenNOTearned
>
> This guy is screaming everywhere that he should absolutely be on the US 18 meter international team. Here is some perspective, his US contest record. It's not exactly overwhelming evidence for a guaranteed slot at 18 meters... Maybe you should win something before you start whining and complaining?
>
> Sean Fidler
> Year Contest Placed
> 2017 18 meter nationals 15th!
> 2016 2016 15 meter, Open, and Std Nationals 16
> 2016 18 Meter National 11
> 2015 18 Meter, Open and US Club Class Nationals 6
> 2015 Region 5 North G
> 2014 18 Meter Nationals 4
> 2014 Region 5 North 5
> 2014 Seniors Soaring Championship G
> 2013 Region 6 North (R6N) 2
> 2013 Region 6 South 10
> 2013 18 Meter Nationals 5
> 2013 Seniors Soaring Championship G
> 2012 Region 4 North 5
> 2012 Sports Class Nationals 35
> 2012 Region 6 North Super Regional 6
> 2011 Uvalde Glide 18M / 15M Contest 8
> 2011 Region-6 North 8
> 2010 Region 6 North 5
> 2009 Region 6 North 2

I would say that's a pretty good record for a guy who has only been racing gliders less than 10 years.
Glen

[Tom Kelley #711]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 9:53:43 AM UTC-7, Kevin Christner wrote:
> Archer,
>
> Worth repeating the relevant sections of the US Team Code of Conduct here:
>
> 13.1.3 Courtesy. Courteous accessibility to visiting SSA members, sponsors, dignitaries and the Press.
> 13.1.4 Respect. Respect for the host organization, the facility, the rules of the airfield and the organization.
> 13.1.5 Treatment. Fair, considerate, courteous treatment of Team Management, Team Volunteers, and members of the public.
> 13.2.1 Highest Level. To maintain at all times a high standard of sportsmanship and fair play
> 13.2.6 Respect. Maintain an attitude of respect and politeness towards competitors both in the air and on the ground.
> 13.3 To Specifically Refrain From. To refrain from any behavior which might reflect unfavorably on the United States of America, the sport, the Team, its management, or which might bring any other pilot, official or the Team into disrepute
>
> Rereading the document it is pretty clear to me that this is required at ALL times, not just during a competition.
>
> I think most rational observers would agree many lines were crossed long (honestly several years) ago but no one should have any remaining doubts. Several years back the US Team came very close to pulling a member (711) because of perceived personality issues and a junior team member (OO) was removed during a competition where he had won several days because the TC thought he was drinking too late at night. Yet total silence regarding a psychopathic bully? The SSA / Team Committee needs to make a statement very soon as both of these individuals did far, far less. A permanent ban from future competition seems appropriate and justified.

This is true. I was accused of being verbally abusive to women by one individual who later wrote me and apologized for this ( I accepted as I know the truth and we are friends, no problems, we do make mistakes). But the US Team held a "trial" on me and never invited me to that trial. Ya, that is what really ****ed me off! I was informed of this at the 2009 US 18 Meter Nationals. I was told the name of one, but not the other. Yes, great timing during a National contest where a pre-slot will be given for the next Worlds.. I was put on "probation" and could be removed at any time the Team Captain choose(the Team captain can do this at any time with anybody anyways!). But when at the US Team trailer at the WGC 2010, I did ask the Team Captain to talk ovr this. He talked around the issue. When I tried to excuse myself and leave the trailer, he blocked me in and then it became extremely heated. Lucky for all, as KM opened the door, the episode ended. I walked out. KM and his wife had lunch with me and we just talked our way around it. He and I are friends today, no problem!
I am not the only one who has had these false actions taken.
One US Team member who was notified that he was on the US Team. The very next day received a phone call stating that his father would not be allowed to crew for him at the WGC. Also, when the voting took place back years ago, calls were made to all who could vote and they were told if they voted for one individual, they would never be on the US Team.
Thiers, even more, I know. At the WGC Uvalde, major problems occurred. The US Team chairman was removed due to problems. A lot more on this. This same person also did his best to land me out during the WGC 2010. He even stated that and several are witnesses to this!
On the ramp in 2009 at the 18 Meter Nationals, I was put under pressure, as one Team member asked what I would do to help him stay on the US Team. Folks, some sick **** does happen.
Moving forward, 7T, Fidler, had a shot and turned it down as he wanted to go to both the 15 Meter and 18 Meter Worlds. ( HELLO, how does the US Team take a 3 day 95% ranking and turn it into a 100% ranking does not seem fair to the past and present 4 plus day 100% er's!). His want's are not allowed by current US Team policy, so he turned the 15 Meter slot down. I have many saved post's and also past IGC files. Heck, you can watch the SGP video on the final day where he even states he flew with the "Jerzey train". Big deal? No not at all! His choice as 7T team flew with 98 on the first day SGP Seminole and they had a bad day. Later I went to dinner with them and we joked about it. No problems! Now all this junk. WTF! All of us on certain weather days will fly with a group, we are "racing junkies" remember!
The full US Team is usually selected early Fall and starts having group phone calls late fall for the next years WGC. Plenty of time to make arrangements! When a pre-Worlds entrant was selected, only one or 2 went. They had to pay for 'both" contests(no reimbursement). (We only get a small reimbursement, to begin with).
I am not taking sides as all parties need to move forward. 7T you had a shot to go to the 2018 WGC and you simply "fXXked yourself". End of story.

Best. Tom Kelley #711.

[XC]

I'm just seeing this now. I was happy to let this post drop to the bottom but you keep bringing it up to the top. Here we go...

Let me address just a few of your concerns to set the record straight.

1. Team flying - Team or gaggle flying in not against the rules. Pilot to pilot radio communication is. The US Team camp was held at Cordele the week preceding this year's race. We talked all about how to fly as a pair and how to take advantage of gaggles. We practiced tasks team flying as pairs. What did folks think would happen? Everyone was going to practice these new skills.

Wasn't I on this page just a year ago saying we should fly these contests with FLARM in stealth mode? You and others argued against that. I have already stated numerous times I would like to split the field up more by flying MATs and TATs. The current push is to fly ATs more than everything else. At Cordele 3 AT's were called. Fair enough.

Okay - let's race. Now that I can see everyone in the race pre-start on FLARM, who do you think I am going to pick to start with? Answer: The guy I have practiced team flying with, the guy who I have flown 2 IGC events with, the guy who has a glider just like mine and a flying style perfectly complimentary to mine. The guy who is an ideal non-selfish pair flyer. Then we are going to join the fastest gaggle at the start line as learned during Pan-American, WGC, and the team camp and go around course sailboat style just like you like to do. Here's the thing. There was no communications as you have implied. That would be against the rules and it just isn't necessary in our case. Yep, day three you had a better start time in your gaggle. Congratulations!

2. IGC rules - They're fine. They are easier to read and understand which is a plus. They don't allow for MAT tasks which I think is a great task for really determining who is the best glider pilot when call correctly. That's a negative. Don't recall complaining about the rules in Australia. I thoroughly enjoyed the experience. Thanks to John Good and the other volunteers, including Tiffany, who were a big help.

3. Collusion - Here's what I knew about the selection process. A call to Bob Fletcher to see when selections might be known. I needed to know because my last week vacation needed to be bid. Answer: Numerically I still had an outside chance at 5th(?) on the list for 15m. He said the pilot survey was nearly ready to go out. Besides that, I called Pete Alexander after getting an email invitation to join the team in 15m. I wanted to know who I might be going with and let him know I was honored but not at all sure I could get the time off. Unfortunately, I had to decline via call and follow up email to Pete. I had a later phone call from Fernando just to confirm I was declining and to express mutual regrets we would be flying together. I do not know where you got that I knew other people's responses to survey. I do not have access to those results.

I really think yo are doing yourself a disservice by ranting on your web page and here. Please take the vile content down and apologize to the team selection committee members who you've trashed. What purpose does this serve at this point?

XC

[Kevin Christner]

Here is the relevant language from the SSA bylaws. It is time for the SSA board to move. We can no longer suffer this cancer.

ARTICLE VI - SUSPENSION, EXPULSION, ETC.

SECTION 1 - Any member may be dropped from the roll of membership for nonpayment of dues; and any member whose activities are deemed hostile to the objectives or injurious to the purpose of the Society, or who violates its bylaws or established rules, may be removed from office, suspended or expelled from the Society by vote of the Board of Directors.

[ND]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 9:30:58 AM UTC-5, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Hank, as usual, you haven’t the slightest clue. And I am not done with the videos. I’m just getting started.
>
> And "this" is to prove a simple point. The US Team selection process is a joke and fraud. It not based on facts. It favors butt kissers and is something that is now "given" subjectively and not "earned" objectively.
>
> Get behind the “Team.� Get behind the team that in several cases was given their positions and DID NOT EARN IT.
>
> Also, just to be clear, is team flying legal now? How is it that we can have 5E and XC team flying entire contests without anyone noticing or caring? Are we just trusting them? Is everyone else OK completing against the clear advantages which that allowance provides them? The same thing occurred in the Club Class (and D2, LS8, ASW20 division) nationals in Hobbs this year. See my Youtube channel for those videos.
>
> So Mini-Me (XC) and Mr. Cochrane (good old boys spokesman east and west)....which is it? (Facts please, cite evidence). We see that 5E and XC team fly and need each other to lose the 15m Nationals. We now know that 90 leeches P7 as if prison was no deterrent. But we don’t see that with me. How am I not fast without markers mini-me? At least Cochrane won’t lie here like you. But notice that until I added the actual SeeYou replay proving the narrative was incorrect, that wasn't the case.
>
> Also, note XC comments about how that subjective perception (which Mr. Cochrane disputes) was the reason he voted me down. You can see right there how pathetic the new buddy voting system is.
>
> Why is XC so mad (see: Butthurt)? It is because I called them out for complaining endlessly about the FAI rules DURING the FAI world championships for which they had over a year to prepare. Meanwhile John Good writes endless articles attacking the FAI rules while my wife did 3/4 of the work of the team captain. The Team members should not be afraid of or complain about the FAI rules (or European pilots), they should be fully prepared and READY TO ATTACK IT ON ALL LEVELS AND AT ALL TIMES when the event begins. Instead, they longed for the US rules and tasks. Hence one of my many reasons for despising the failed US Rules experiment which has provided ZERO UPSIDE in TWENTY YEARS while requiring extreme effort to maintain.
>
> Mini-Me, did do you know how the >85% “Elite� (cough, cough, wink, wink) voters voted? How is it that you know the "collective narrative" was (weeks ago) that I am not fast without markers as you posted on my Facebook page? Clearly, now that I have provided this thread some objective evidence (in the form of several SeeYou replays), Cochrane is walking that one (whopper) back for you (and the voters). But (and this is key) that is, apparently, still the justification for 5E to move up in the subjective vote and for me to move down. Hmm? The Team Committee has not released any responses to date. How did you know weeks ago? Could it be that it was contrived by a group of people with high ethical standards that would not let personal disagreements affect their votes? No? Yeah, that is a stretch. So, mini-me, how did you know?
>
> Answer: Mini-me was in on the contrived “subjective� answer of the "elite" SSA loyalists (the good old boys) which was designed too.... We all know the answer...
>
> When will the US Team Committee release the US Team votes and comments so we can compare their responses (subjective) with actual flight data for all relevant competition to see if it makes sense or is just personal? This is the process for the rules poll. Why is this not the process for the TRANSPARENT and OF THE HIGHEST MORAL CHARACTER US Team poll?
>
> #participationtrohpy
> #givenNOTearned

sean you are referring to me when you make accusations of team flying taking place at hobbs between D2's and an ASW20. firstly, communication is forbidden in the US, not cooperation. we all know that people cooperate during contests. i thought that one critical element of team flying was communication. since we didn't communicate, we weren't team flying. yes, i'll admit with no fear of retribution that RO, 5F, KMI, and myself flew practically the ENTIRE task together. but there's nothing in the rules against THAT. and none of us landed ****ed-off that the others stuck with us. we did well that day, but noone else at the contest was ****ed at us for flying together. under US rules there are still disadvantages to flying alone, even though it is more incentivized compared to FAI rules. so why do you keep bringing up day 2 at hobbs? we didn't do anything forbidden by US or FAI rules. again, team flying implies communication. i accept that we flew together and that there was informal cooperation. would you please explain your focus on us as an example of illegal team flying please?

[ND]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 3:13:25 PM UTC-5, Kevin Christner wrote:
> Here is the relevant language from the SSA bylaws. It is time for the SSA board to move. We can no longer suffer this cancer.
>
> ARTICLE VI - SUSPENSION, EXPULSION, ETC.
>
> SECTION 1 - Any member may be dropped from the roll of membership for nonpayment of dues; and any member whose activities are deemed hostile to the objectives or injurious to the purpose of the Society, or who violates its bylaws or established rules, may be removed from office, suspended or expelled from the Society by vote of the Board of Directors.

booting fidler from the SSA won't solve the problem kevin. i know you don't like the guy, and i know you have your reasons, but im telling you, they could do it, but it's not going to accomplish anything. and it definitely doesn't keep him off of RAS, which i think is where you've clashed with him most frequently.

[Sean Fidler]

Thanks Gina. Love ya!

[Sean Fidler]

John C., I have no issue with TATs, I have issue with 98% TATs as is common is US Rules competition (up until this year at 15m nationals, still amazed). This misconception about my Task preferences is getting old. I like a 50/50 AT/TAT ratio. I don’t like flying the same task type again and again. TATs are fine (even very fun) and make sense when the weather is somewhat unpredictable. Even I try to avoid certain or the high likelihood of land outs in my practice task planning and I fly TATs (20 mile radius max) all the time at home (when it makes sense under an FAI mindset). What I really dislike (at Nationals) are MATs because they are a “roulette table� and of no value to FAI competition. See Bruce Taylor’s 10mph crushing of us at Uvalde this summer.

#USrulesarefailed
#matsblow

[[email protected]]

Mr Christner,

You again have quoted a section of the US Team Code of Conduct, and this time you wrote that "it is pretty clear to [you] that this is required at ALL times, not just during a competition."

But the United States Soaring Teams Policies & Procedures Manual (Ver 16 02/22/06) clearly states on the cover page the following:

"This manual was developed by the United States Soaring Team Committee as approved by the Board of Directors of the Soaring Society of America to govern United States Soaring Team participation in FAI World Gliding Championships."

The Introduction, on page 3, also makes it clear that these policies are for Team members "during" their time on a US Team. The next section discusses selection to the Team. It is thus unambiguous that these policies are specific to Team members once they have been selected for a particular WGC. Sure, it would be great if all pilots in contention for a Team position are as faultless in their personalities as they are fast in soaring. All y'all can't be Dick Butlers, unfortunately ...

But it is working against our Team goal to win WGCs if people like you insist that all possible USA Team pilots must be choirboys (or choirgirls -- hats off to WWGC Silver Medalist Sarah Arnold) not only at WGCs, but also at all times, in all situations, in all venues, in all years previous to any possible Team Selection.

You were not at the Benalla Worlds, Mr Christner. I myself was an official Team Member as defined in Section 10.2.4, being crew for Sean Fidler's 18m teammate, P7. Far more than most Team members, I was in a position to witness (before, during, and after the competition) Team 7T's exemplary behavior to all and sundry. Sean and Tiffany were super at fundraising for the Team before the WGC; they hosted our Team's party at Benalla, which greatly enhanced Team camaraderie; and after the competition, Sean Fidler was very helpful to other Team members in getting their gliders back into shipping containers.

So, I would appreciate it if you refrained from further ill-advised and erroneous public "guesses" regarding 7T's behavior as a USA Team member, as you are thus engaging in the same kind of behavior of which you complain in others.

I was impressed by how all of the USA Team members were superb ambassadors and representatives of the USA -- it was quite an honor to have been part of that endeavor.

Gina



On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 5:53:43 AM UTC+13, Kevin Christner wrote:
> Archer,
>
> Worth repeating the relevant sections of the US Team Code of Conduct here:
>
> 13.1.3 Courtesy. Courteous accessibility to visiting SSA members, sponsors, dignitaries and the Press.
> 13.1.4 Respect. Respect for the host organization, the facility, the rules of the airfield and the organization.
> 13.1.5 Treatment. Fair, considerate, courteous treatment of Team Management, Team Volunteers, and members of the public.
> 13.2.1 Highest Level. To maintain at all times a high standard of sportsmanship and fair play
> 13.2.6 Respect. Maintain an attitude of respect and politeness towards competitors both in the air and on the ground.
> 13.3 To Specifically Refrain From. To refrain from any behavior which might reflect unfavorably on the United States of America, the sport, the Team, its management, or which might bring any other pilot, official or the Team into disrepute
>
> Rereading the document it is pretty clear to me that this is required at ALL times, not just during a competition.
>
> I think most rational observers would agree many lines were crossed long (honestly several years) ago but no one should have any remaining doubts. Several years back the US Team came very close to pulling a member (711) because of perceived personality issues and a junior team member (OO) was removed during a competition where he had won several days because the TC thought he was drinking too late at night. Yet total silence regarding a psychopathic bully? The SSA / Team Committee needs to make a statement very soon as both of these individuals did far, far less. A permanent ban from future competition seems appropriate and justified.

[John Godfrey (QT)[_2_]]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 10:11:11 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 10:02:55 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> > On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 7:37:32 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > > Oh and great thread title mini-me.
> > >
> > > The US Team Selection process is a total TRAIN WRECK.
> > >
> > > #morelies
> >
> > SSA dues paying members: Sean Fidler disparages the SSA with a link to the organization. https://seanfidler.com/ I think there are many, many SSA members that might be very interested in your personal website... And, as an SSA member my first questions to the SSA leadership now are: How much of the SSA dues funds go to the US soaring team? What are the code of conduct requirements of a US International contest participant? Unfortunately and regrettably we may need to flush that out. Of course criticism itself is not a disqualifying factor, but I'm sure there is some behavioral standard to adhere to. A US team member represents the SSA and the USA.
> > If you want to bring the SSA into it Sean, then the members get to have a say and are going to ask questions. It's all your choice, you can have a valid grievance and make your point in a respectful way, or not. You routinely choose not to. Blowback is a fair and reasonable consequence. Start calculating for it?
> > Cheers.
> > I'd provide my name on this one but you are a suspected (known?) online bully so I'll take the safe route. Probably not hard to figure it out anyway but I'll at least keep it off a public forum.
>
> I'll answer your question re SSA funds. No SSA member funds are used for the US Team. SSA resources assist with publicity to help fund raising. Funding for the US Team is in a separate bucket filled by dedicated contributions, and overseen by SSA leadership.
> UH

However, note that a portion of the SSA contest sanction fee paid involuntarily by every contest entrant goes to the USTeam.

[[email protected]]

The title of this thread was truly prophetic. No matter how horrid the train wreck is, you just can't stop watching. Unfortunately, this one looks like it will never end.

[[email protected]]

There are some serious mental issues on display here.

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 12:19:30 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> There are some serious mental issues on display here.

Yeah and everyone who posts in this thread, no matter the content is afflicted.

[[email protected]]

> > There are some serious mental issues on display here.
>
> Yeah and everyone who posts in this thread, no matter the content is afflicted.

To the extent that none of us is perfect, I suppose you are correct. Otherwise, I disagree. Many good points have been made here...on all sides. The content of the discussion has often been informative and healthy. It's the WAY the discussion has been conducted that is so objectionable. That's the appeal--and the horror--of these faceless, asynchronous, Internet exchanges.

Am I looking for the silver lining in a really big, black, unpleasant storm cloud? Perhaps. But I think out of this will come some good, albeit at a high price.

Chip Bearden

[Branko Stojkovic]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 5:34:07 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> > > There are some serious mental issues on display here.
> >
> > Yeah and everyone who posts in this thread, no matter the content is afflicted.
>
> To the extent that none of us is perfect, I suppose you are correct. Otherwise, I disagree. Many good points have been made here...on all sides. The content of the discussion has often been informative and healthy. It's the WAY the discussion has been conducted that is so objectionable. That's the appeal--and the horror--of these faceless, asynchronous, Internet exchanges.
>
> Am I looking for the silver lining in a really big, black, unpleasant storm cloud? Perhaps. But I think out of this will come some good, albeit at a high price.
>
> Chip Bearden

Chip,

I just came across this discussion thread and, after skimming through, I can say that I totally agree with your post. Bravo!

I only wish that more people like you would post here, people who can separate valid points from emotional vomit and mean spirited personal attacks.

Best,
Branko Stojkovic
XYU

[ND]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 7:07:40 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 12:19:30 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> > There are some serious mental issues on display here.
>
> Yeah and everyone who posts in this thread, no matter the content is afflicted.

you do realize the irony in what you wrote, i hope :D

[Sean Fidler]

Lol. Who is whining now? This thread is such dramatic BS. I was able to tell everyone what was said before I even looked two days ago. This is all very, very simple...

—> voters lied to help their buddy <—
—> a narrative (false) was formed <—
—> the process was gamed and manipulated to a choice a desired outcome <—

The “storm� was created when the SSA good old boys got together and used their latests failure (totally UNtransparent team selection process) to obviously game the us team selection.

Lying 🤥 is unacceptable (in any situation). Lying (thru silence or words) is shameful. And these people have clearly used the selection process opportunity to lie. It’s that simple.

These data are available (within seconds) to all of us. Why the secret? It should be carefully/immediately looked into by comparing objective facts with the responses and votes. Not at the Reno BOD meeting but today. Are those responses sensible or factual or simply sour grapes. Do the responses make sense? Was the team committee doing their job in policing out non-sensible input and votes? Why not?

Not lying? THEN SHOW US ALL THE VOTES AND COMMENTS Pete “the GOB hand puppet� and team selection committee.

Voters, don’t wait for Pete, tell us how and why you voted (cross checked with the actual poll response when we wrestle them loose). What are you afraid of? WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR? RE-WRITING THE RESPONSES PERHAPS? Circling the wagons? #morelies?

A transparent US Team selection process? Honesty? ROTFL.

(SSA Good Old Boy) “Elite� pilots of the highest moral character who “carefully and thoughtfully crafted their responses?� You should be proud of these responses, right? Then why not share them ALL publicly and immediately (weeks ago). And if I’m wrong, why not share it now?

#takingthe5th

Sean Murphy has already (stupidly) proven the votes where deeply personally biased. One) by stating his deceitful and false justification and Two) by stating he knows the narrative formed by many voters... “we decided you are not fast without markers.�

This current US Team is, CLEARLY, at least partially, Illegitimate. ILLEGITIMATE.

Team Slots were STOLEN (as Gina and others have pointed out). Is Gina wrong? Prove it.

Gina is spot on. This theft is factual and obvious to anyone outside the good old boy circle.

The truly disgraceful act here is allowing this STOLEN selection to stand. The same thing happened to Dave Leonard as happened to me. This FRAUD has to be ended NOW, permanently because the good old boys have proven now TWICE (and countless other times elsewhere) that they cannot be trusted to be objective and fair in such matters.

Many are truly ashamed of their actions here in this process. A total shame. Disgusting.

https://youtu.be/sgYH64y8DgU

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 3:19:36 PM UTC-7, wrote:
>


> So, I would appreciate it if you refrained from further ill-advised and erroneous public "guesses" regarding 7T's behavior as a USA Team member, ........
> Gina

Gina,
7T's behavior at Benalla is not what is in question here. I am sure you realize this but you have decided, For whatever reason, to blur an important distinction. From what I am able to gather from the SSA website is that 7T was in fact offered a spot on the US team but declined. 7T's FB and personal web page do not make mention of this (Granted, I didn't dig too deep on either page). So which is it? Good ol boyz and cronyism or did the selection committee see the potential in his flying and offer a spot on the team.
Granted, I am not a fan of the hair pulling that goes on here (RAS), But one good thing that can come out of this thread is a discussion of the US Team decision to move off of a merit based system and the logic behind the current team member selections.

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 8:14:03 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> Lol. Who is whining now? This thread is such dramatic BS. I was able to tell everyone what was said before I even looked two days ago. This is all very, very simple...
>
> —> voters lied to help their buddy <—
> —> a narrative (false) was formed <—
> —> the process was gamed and manipulated to a choice a desired outcome <—
>
> The “storm� was created when the SSA good old boys got together and used their latests failure (totally UNtransparent team selection process) to obviously game the us team selection.
>
> Lying 🤥 is unacceptable (in any situation). Lying (thru silence or words) is shameful. And these people have clearly used the selection process opportunity to lie. It’s that simple.
>
> These data are available (within seconds) to all of us. Why the secret? It should be carefully/immediately looked into by comparing objective facts with the responses and votes. Not at the Reno BOD meeting but today. Are those responses sensible or factual or simply sour grapes. Do the responses make sense? Was the team committee doing their job in policing out non-sensible input and votes? Why not?
>
> Not lying? THEN SHOW US ALL THE VOTES AND COMMENTS Pete “the GOB hand puppet� and team selection committee.
>
> Voters, don’t wait for Pete, tell us how and why you voted (cross checked with the actual poll response when we wrestle them loose). What are you afraid of? WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR? RE-WRITING THE RESPONSES PERHAPS? Circling the wagons? #morelies?
>
> A transparent US Team selection process? Honesty? ROTFL.
>
> (SSA Good Old Boy) “Elite� pilots of the highest moral character who “carefully and thoughtfully crafted their responses?� You should be proud of these responses, right? Then why not share them ALL publicly and immediately (weeks ago). And if I’m wrong, why not share it now?
>
> #takingthe5th
>
> Sean Murphy has already (stupidly) proven the votes where deeply personally biased. One) by stating his deceitful and false justification and Two) by stating he knows the narrative formed by many voters... “we decided you are not fast without markers.�
>
> This current US Team is, CLEARLY, at least partially, Illegitimate. ILLEGITIMATE.
>
> Team Slots were STOLEN (as Gina and others have pointed out). Is Gina wrong? Prove it.
>
> Gina is spot on. This theft is factual and obvious to anyone outside the good old boy circle.
>
> The truly disgraceful act here is allowing this STOLEN selection to stand.. The same thing happened to Dave Leonard as happened to me. This FRAUD has to be ended NOW, permanently because the good old boys have proven now TWICE (and countless other times elsewhere) that they cannot be trusted to be objective and fair in such matters.
>
> Many are truly ashamed of their actions here in this process. A total shame. Disgusting.
>
> https://youtu.be/sgYH64y8DgU

Sean, the original topic of this thread wasn't if you should be picked for the 18 meter team or not, but rather, if your social media presence has any effect on those team selections. Can anyone trust you to fly cooperatively in an international team competition? How can they possibly trust you to use team strategy and tactics? I would personally make the reasonable assumption based on your facebook, website, and youtube accounts that the instant you find it in your personal best interest you would fly to the detriment of the team. Would you like to address those issues? The selection process issue is going on in a different thread. I see you have not posted there, nor to you let anyone post anything to your social media accounts. The authoritarian divide and conquer game you are playing is obvious, right down to the petty names you give to all of the pilots you don't like. How did you come up with all of it, gee hard to imagine. Would you fly with you? Nope. I wouldn't either and I'd do everything in my power to keep you off the team. Others, likely few, justifiably feel differently. What say you about your personal website?

https://seanfidler.com/

https://www.facebook.com/SeanTiff7T/

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2NFMsZX3qpRuwIHczpkR7A

[jfitch]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 4:07:40 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 12:19:30 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> > There are some serious mental issues on display here.
>
> Yeah and everyone who posts in this thread, no matter the content is afflicted.

I am personally saving all of this for inspiration to develop a daytime TV drama entitled, "Days That We Fly": Will 7T throw enough abrasive temper tantrums to finally get the 18m selection he believes he deserves and so desperately craves? Will XC and UH live up to their reputation for back room dealing and freeze him out? Will peacemakers reconcile them and they will share a room at WGC leading to victory? Will the SSA rank and file reach a level of disgust and ban them all? Tune in tomorrow to "Days That We Fly" and watch the stunning developments and cliff hangers....

[[email protected]]

Decorum aside there is enough BS to suspect Sean might be right. I say for the next round of selection we let Sean pick the whole team. What's the worst that could happen, we lose to the Europeans again?
On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 12:58:28 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 8:14:03 AM UTC-7, Sean Fidler wrote:
> > Lol. Who is whining now? This thread is such dramatic BS. I was able to tell everyone what was said before I even looked two days ago. This is all very, very simple...
> >
> > —> voters lied to help their buddy <—
> > —> a narrative (false) was formed <—
> > —> the process was gamed and manipulated to a choice a desired outcome <—
> >
> > The “storm� was created when the SSA good old boys got together and used their latests failure (totally UNtransparent team selection process) to obviously game the us team selection.
> >
> > Lying 🤥 is unacceptable (in any situation). Lying (thru silence or words) is shameful. And these people have clearly used the selection process opportunity to lie. It’s that simple.
> >
> > These data are available (within seconds) to all of us. Why the secret? It should be carefully/immediately looked into by comparing objective facts with the responses and votes. Not at the Reno BOD meeting but today. Are those responses sensible or factual or simply sour grapes. Do the responses make sense? Was the team committee doing their job in policing out non-sensible input and votes? Why not?
> >
> > Not lying? THEN SHOW US ALL THE VOTES AND COMMENTS Pete “the GOB hand puppet� and team selection committee.
> >
> > Voters, don’t wait for Pete, tell us how and why you voted (cross checked with the actual poll response when we wrestle them loose). What are you afraid of? WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR? RE-WRITING THE RESPONSES PERHAPS? Circling the wagons? #morelies?
> >
> > A transparent US Team selection process? Honesty? ROTFL.
> >
> > (SSA Good Old Boy) “Elite� pilots of the highest moral character who “carefully and thoughtfully crafted their responses?� You should be proud of these responses, right? Then why not share them ALL publicly and immediately (weeks ago). And if I’m wrong, why not share it now?
> >
> > #takingthe5th
> >
> > Sean Murphy has already (stupidly) proven the votes where deeply personally biased. One) by stating his deceitful and false justification and Two) by stating he knows the narrative formed by many voters... “we decided you are not fast without markers.�
> >
> > This current US Team is, CLEARLY, at least partially, Illegitimate. ILLEGITIMATE.
> >
> > Team Slots were STOLEN (as Gina and others have pointed out). Is Gina wrong? Prove it.
> >
> > Gina is spot on. This theft is factual and obvious to anyone outside the good old boy circle.
> >
> > The truly disgraceful act here is allowing this STOLEN selection to stand. The same thing happened to Dave Leonard as happened to me. This FRAUD has to be ended NOW, permanently because the good old boys have proven now TWICE (and countless other times elsewhere) that they cannot be trusted to be objective and fair in such matters.
> >
> > Many are truly ashamed of their actions here in this process. A total shame. Disgusting.
> >
> > https://youtu.be/sgYH64y8DgU
>
> Sean, the original topic of this thread wasn't if you should be picked for the 18 meter team or not, but rather, if your social media presence has any effect on those team selections. Can anyone trust you to fly cooperatively in an international team competition? How can they possibly trust you to use team strategy and tactics? I would personally make the reasonable assumption based on your facebook, website, and youtube accounts that the instant you find it in your personal best interest you would fly to the detriment of the team. Would you like to address those issues? The selection process issue is going on in a different thread. I see you have not posted there, nor to you let anyone post anything to your social media accounts. The authoritarian divide and conquer game you are playing is obvious, right down to the petty names you give to all of the pilots you don't like. How did you come up with all of it, gee hard to imagine. Would you fly with you? Nope. I wouldn't either and I'd do everything in my power to keep you off the team. Others, likely few, justifiably feel differently. What say you about your personal website?
>
> https://seanfidler.com/
>
> https://www.facebook.com/SeanTiff7T/
>
> https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC2NFMsZX3qpRuwIHczpkR7A

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 1:11:34 PM UTC-5, jfitch wrote:
> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 4:07:40 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 12:19:30 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> > > There are some serious mental issues on display here.
> >
> > Yeah and everyone who posts in this thread, no matter the content is afflicted.
>
> I am personally saving all of this for inspiration to develop a daytime TV drama entitled, "Days That We Fly": Will 7T throw enough abrasive temper tantrums to finally get the 18m selection he believes he deserves and so desperately craves? Will XC and UH live up to their reputation for back room dealing and freeze him out? Will peacemakers reconcile them and they will share a room at WGC leading to victory? Will the SSA rank and file reach a level of disgust and ban them all? Tune in tomorrow to "Days That We Fly" and watch the stunning developments and cliff hangers....

I think I just got slammed, but not sure why. Could the writer provide some evidence that UH was involved in back room dealing? Or is this just a ploy to inflame the thread?
UH

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 10:45:24 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 1:11:34 PM UTC-5, jfitch wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 4:07:40 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> > > On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 12:19:30 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> > > > There are some serious mental issues on display here.
> > >
> > > Yeah and everyone who posts in this thread, no matter the content is afflicted.
> >
> > I am personally saving all of this for inspiration to develop a daytime TV drama entitled, "Days That We Fly": Will 7T throw enough abrasive temper tantrums to finally get the 18m selection he believes he deserves and so desperately craves? Will XC and UH live up to their reputation for back room dealing and freeze him out? Will peacemakers reconcile them and they will share a room at WGC leading to victory? Will the SSA rank and file reach a level of disgust and ban them all? Tune in tomorrow to "Days That We Fly" and watch the stunning developments and cliff hangers....
>
> I think I just got slammed, but not sure why. Could the writer provide some evidence that UH was involved in back room dealing? Or is this just a ploy to inflame the thread?
> UH

We're all headed to the back room this weekend for the RC meeting. I'll be sure to make notes about the deals. I really wish cash were involved. If I'm going to sell out my principles it really needs to be profitable for me. Please PM me if you would like to attempt a bribe. Full disclosure - it'll be very expensive. Also, if you want it to be secret, doctoring the meeting notes carries an extra charge.

/s

9B

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 1:57:15 PM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 10:45:24 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 1:11:34 PM UTC-5, jfitch wrote:
> > > On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 4:07:40 AM UTC-8, wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 12:19:30 AM UTC-5, wrote:
> > > > > There are some serious mental issues on display here.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah and everyone who posts in this thread, no matter the content is afflicted.
> > >
> > > I am personally saving all of this for inspiration to develop a daytime TV drama entitled, "Days That We Fly": Will 7T throw enough abrasive temper tantrums to finally get the 18m selection he believes he deserves and so desperately craves? Will XC and UH live up to their reputation for back room dealing and freeze him out? Will peacemakers reconcile them and they will share a room at WGC leading to victory? Will the SSA rank and file reach a level of disgust and ban them all? Tune in tomorrow to "Days That We Fly" and watch the stunning developments and cliff hangers....
> >
> > I think I just got slammed, but not sure why. Could the writer provide some evidence that UH was involved in back room dealing? Or is this just a ploy to inflame the thread?
> > UH
>
> We're all headed to the back room this weekend for the RC meeting. I'll be sure to make notes about the deals. I really wish cash were involved. If I'm going to sell out my principles it really needs to be profitable for me.. Please PM me if you would like to attempt a bribe. Full disclosure - it'll be very expensive. Also, if you want it to be secret, doctoring the meeting notes carries an extra charge.
>
> /s
>
> 9B

How come I get the blame and you get the money?
Rigged!!!!!!!!!
UH

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 11:35:34 AM UTC-8, wrote:

> How come I get the blame and you get the money?
> Rigged!!!!!!!!!
> UH

I'm more manipulative than you are Hank.

You've got to get up to speed on how to swing things in your favor. It's kind of like leeching, but with human personalities. Pretend they're your friend and go along until you don't need them anymore, then kick them to the curb - or use someone else do it for you. It takes practice.

For those who are perplexed by the human dynamics of organizations, I've found this article quite illuminating as a general guide.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/melissa-schenker/working-knowledge-how-to-_b_10722026.html

[Dennis Vreeken]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 12:42:57 PM UTC-8, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 11:35:34 AM UTC-8, wrote:
>
> > How come I get the blame and you get the money?
> > Rigged!!!!!!!!!
> > UH
>
> I'm more manipulative than you are Hank.
>
> You've got to get up to speed on how to swing things in your favor. It's kind of like leeching, but with human personalities. Pretend they're your friend and go along until you don't need them anymore, then kick them to the curb - or use someone else do it for you. It takes practice.
>
> For those who are perplexed by the human dynamics of organizations, I've found this article quite illuminating as a general guide.
>
> https://www.huffingtonpost.com/melissa-schenker/working-knowledge-how-to-_b_10722026.html
Andy , you are killing me and it's not even winter yet ! Time to go and make some more popcorn!

[[email protected]]

Someone wrote this to me:

"Gina,
7T's behavior at Benalla is not what is in question here. I am sure you realize this but you have decided, For whatever reason, to blur an important distinction."

If you are going to personally address me, it is common courtesy that you sign your posts.

If you read my two posts at RAS, you'll see that they are corrections of another poster's incorrect assumptions or statements. Mr Christner had quoted a portion of the US Team Code of Conduct and had asked John Cochrane if he could "certify that [7T] has met all of these requirements". Because John Cochrane was not in attendance at the Benalla WGC, I myself assured Mr Christner that Sean Fidler's behavior at the WGC was exemplary (as was the conduct of all the other Team Members).

Subsequently, Mr Christner quoted the same portion of the US Team Code of Conduct and opined that pilots are required to adhere to the Code "at ALL times, not just during a competition." I then corrected that mistaken assumption by quoting the relevant portions of the US Team Code of Conduct -- the Code is specific to WGC competitions and is not meant to be a requirement, 24-7, for all competition pilots who might possibly be future US Team Members.

It was important to make these corrections to Mr Christner's mistaken assumptions, because he was using them to support his call for a "permanent ban from future competition" for one of USA's top competition pilots.

It's always a good idea to correct mistaken assumptions or statements, especially when they are the argumentative basis for actions with very serious consequences, don't you agree, Mr or Ms Somebody?

Gina



On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 4:16:37 AM UTC+13, wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 3:19:36 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> >
>
>
> > So, I would appreciate it if you refrained from further ill-advised and erroneous public "guesses" regarding 7T's behavior as a USA Team member, ........
> > Gina
>
> Gina,
> 7T's behavior at Benalla is not what is in question here. I am sure you realize this but you have decided, For whatever reason, to blur an important distinction. From what I am able to gather from the SSA website is that 7T was in fact offered a spot on the US team but declined. 7T's FB and personal web page do not make mention of this (Granted, I didn't dig too deep on either page). So which is it? Good ol boyz and cronyism or did the selection committee see the potential in his flying and offer a spot on the team.
> Granted, I am not a fan of the hair pulling that goes on here (RAS), But one good thing that can come out of this thread is a discussion of the US Team decision to move off of a merit based system and the logic behind the current team member selections.

[John Cochrane[_3_]]

Well, that does it. I had been giving Sean the benefit of the doubt, as his behavior in person and as a pilot has, in my presence at least, always been unobjectionable.

But now, a prospective US team member has slandered, in public and in writing, pretty much everyone who might be a team mate, a team captain, meteorologist or other support person; the entire US team committee, and most of the people (including me) who might have at one point been interested in contributing money to send him off to the WGC. (The "good old boy network" pays a lot of bills and does a huge amount of volunteer work.)

How can someone who has done this ever be part of a team?

Among others, a few quotes:
"voters lied"
"the SSA good old boys [USTC, RC] got together and used...team selection process...to obviously game the us team selection."
"Was the team committee doing their job in policing out non-sensible input and votes?"

Savor that. The USTC is now supposed to filter out non-sensible votes?

"Pete “the GOB hand puppet� " RE-WRITING THE RESPONSES" Sean Murphy.. his deceitful and false "

Well, this prospective team member can't count on any help from Pete or Sean Murphy, in any capacity going forward.

"This current US Team is, CLEARLY, at least partially, Illegitimate. ILLEGITIMATE. Team Slots were STOLEN"

Make that the whole US team. Or anyone on the USTC. By this act, it seems to me that Sean has written himself off the US TEAM pretty much for good.

John Cochrane

[Tom Kelley #711]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 2:10:16 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> Someone wrote this to me:
>
> "Gina,
> 7T's behavior at Benalla is not what is in question here. I am sure you realize this but you have decided, For whatever reason, to blur an important distinction."
>
> If you are going to personally address me, it is common courtesy that you sign your posts.
>
> If you read my two posts at RAS, you'll see that they are corrections of another poster's incorrect assumptions or statements. Mr Christner had quoted a portion of the US Team Code of Conduct and had asked John Cochrane if he could "certify that [7T] has met all of these requirements". Because John Cochrane was not in attendance at the Benalla WGC, I myself assured Mr Christner that Sean Fidler's behavior at the WGC was exemplary (as was the conduct of all the other Team Members).
>
> Subsequently, Mr Christner quoted the same portion of the US Team Code of Conduct and opined that pilots are required to adhere to the Code "at ALL times, not just during a competition." I then corrected that mistaken assumption by quoting the relevant portions of the US Team Code of Conduct -- the Code is specific to WGC competitions and is not meant to be a requirement, 24-7, for all competition pilots who might possibly be future US Team Members.
>
> It was important to make these corrections to Mr Christner's mistaken assumptions, because he was using them to support his call for a "permanent ban from future competition" for one of USA's top competition pilots.
>
> It's always a good idea to correct mistaken assumptions or statements, especially when they are the argumentative basis for actions with very serious consequences, don't you agree, Mr or Ms Somebody?
>
> Gina
>
>
>
> On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 4:16:37 AM UTC+13, wrote:
> > On Wednesday, November 8, 2017 at 3:19:36 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> > >
> >
> >
> > > So, I would appreciate it if you refrained from further ill-advised and erroneous public "guesses" regarding 7T's behavior as a USA Team member, .......
> > > Gina
> >
> > Gina,
> > 7T's behavior at Benalla is not what is in question here. I am sure you realize this but you have decided, For whatever reason, to blur an important distinction. From what I am able to gather from the SSA website is that 7T was in fact offered a spot on the US team but declined. 7T's FB and personal web page do not make mention of this (Granted, I didn't dig too deep on either page). So which is it? Good ol boyz and cronyism or did the selection committee see the potential in his flying and offer a spot on the team.
> > Granted, I am not a fan of the hair pulling that goes on here (RAS), But one good thing that can come out of this thread is a discussion of the US Team decision to move off of a merit based system and the logic behind the current team member selections.

Gina, (if this really is Gina?), You and I have chatted over the years. You have even helped me at contest's and we have shared dinners chatting. Since Sean wishes honesty, I share the below as it's a direct copy of a post to Seans FB page by another. Why does the poster state what you share differently?

Sean Fidler Soaring
October 31 at 8:38am ·
From an unnamed friend this AM.
“What fools. So a guy (Sean Fidler) wins his second competition day at
a World Championships (totally unheard of) in the 18m class (with a
teammate who refused to team fly and with virtually no team support,
wife had to communicate) and is skipped over in the selection that
SAME year for the next world championships for an insider (Good old
boy pet) who was way behind in the their countries own international
rankings (which use different rules). What’s the problem? That sounds
completely justifiable. Nothing to see here. Move along. Extended
laughter...Jesus F Christ...f€%k that and F$&k them...you have been
right all along Sean...�
Well said I think.
Next statement...�you know the test on this is to ask yourself, if the
situation was reversed, would you have been picked?�
Next statement...�that’s borderline criminal...�
Thanks everyone but the decision is final.


Sean even states "The decision is final". So, Gina, the above poster does state their were problems which you never saw. So, by what "others" are seeing/reading, they are simply giving their comments/views. Honest communication, by all parties, could end this. But this train wreck has had earlier derailments, which have never been corrected. In most, if not all sports, this is seen/experienced.

Thanks Gina, Best. Tom #711.

[[email protected]]

Hi, Tom

The purpose of your post isn't entirely clear to me. You rather vaguely indicate that others "saw" "problems" that I never saw. If you meant "problems" regarding 7T's behavior at the Worlds, then of course I am not witness to, or privy to, everything that took place at Benalla. I never claimed such omniscience. Other Team Members are naturally welcome to state their own opinions regarding what they personally witnessed, if they are so inclined.

I'll repeat this one more time. Kevin Christner, who was not at the Benalla WGC, suggested that 7T would not be able to meet the requirements of the US Team Code of Conduct. As someone who spent more time in the presence of Team 7T than most everyone else on the US Team, I felt qualified to reply to Mr Christner and reveal what I witnessed, day after day, week after week, at the Worlds in January. I repeat -- I witnessed nothing but exemplary behavior from Team 7T.

If anyone believes that I am not entitled to my own opinion in this regard, then please do us all a favor and keep it to yourself.

Gina


>
> Gina, (if this really is Gina?), You and I have chatted over the years. You have even helped me at contest's and we have shared dinners chatting. Since Sean wishes honesty, I share the below as it's a direct copy of a post to Seans FB page by another. Why does the poster state what you share differently?
>
> Sean Fidler Soaring
> October 31 at 8:38am ·
> From an unnamed friend this AM.
> “What fools. So a guy (Sean Fidler) wins his second competition day at
> a World Championships (totally unheard of) in the 18m class (with a
> teammate who refused to team fly and with virtually no team support,
> wife had to communicate) and is skipped over in the selection that
> SAME year for the next world championships for an insider (Good old
> boy pet) who was way behind in the their countries own international
> rankings (which use different rules). What’s the problem? That sounds
> completely justifiable. Nothing to see here. Move along. Extended
> laughter...Jesus F Christ...f€%k that and F$&k them...you have been
> right all along Sean...�
> Well said I think.
> Next statement...�you know the test on this is to ask yourself, if the
> situation was reversed, would you have been picked?�
> Next statement...�that’s borderline criminal...�
> Thanks everyone but the decision is final.
>
>
> Sean even states "The decision is final". So, Gina, the above poster does state their were problems which you never saw. So, by what "others" are seeing/reading, they are simply giving their comments/views. Honest communication, by all parties, could end this. But this train wreck has had earlier derailments, which have never been corrected. In most, if not all sports, this is seen/experienced.
>
> Thanks Gina, Best. Tom #711.

[Bojack J4]

This is better than watching television! :)

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 7:00:32 PM UTC-5, Bojack J4 wrote:
> This is better than watching television! :)

Much. Like binge watching a series on Netflix. No need to wait until next week for the following episode. Read the latest scandalous revelation. Grab a sandwich or take a meeting. Then back to "Train Wreck on RAS" for the latest!

That said, I'm going to be really crushed if we learn it was all scripted for our entertainment and none of it is real. Possible. Some of this stuff is pretty hard to believe.

Chip Bearden

[Renny[_2_]]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 5:00:32 PM UTC-7, Bojack J4 wrote:
> This is better than watching television! :)

My friends at the NSA have also enjoyed reading all of these posts. Oftentimes security work is rather boring, but this has really been quite entertaining and a very nice change from the usual traffic from various unnamed countries and individuals. Unfortunately, due to security concerns, I cannot reveal my last name, but those of you out there with the need to know, do know who I am....

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 3:48:24 PM UTC-8, wrote:

> ...favor...

[[email protected]]

Betting against Sean is a losing proposition. I’m convinced after watching his incredibly in depth comprehensive videos that he should have been a lawyer to win legal cases.

I’m betting two things will happen.

Sean eventually shines enough light on the selection process to get into the class he wants to get on.

Or, he will find a third world country like the Dominican Republic where you can pay a small amount of money to obtain dual citizenship and represent that country instead in the class he wants to.

My advice is to all the pilots on here is to join up with the potential winners for our countries sake and don’t have such thin skin. Otherwise he will win against us.

Let the man soar, without changing the rules to block him.

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 2:10:16 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> Someone wrote this to me:

> It's always a good idea to correct mistaken assumptions or statements, especially when they are the argumentative basis for actions with very serious consequences, don't you agree, Mr or Ms Somebody?
>
> Gina
Gina,
I thought that night in Benalla was bigger than the both of us but now I am just "Mr Somebody? Was I just another notch in your lipstick case?
(Laughing) Is this 7T? (Laughing harder) How is it you show up here with a new account and only 4 posts claiming to be a crew member and yet you have more intimate knowledge of the SSA rules than most competitors?
Sean, I mean Gina, You probably don't remember me but we met briefly at the Nats. I am one of the dozens of casual competitors who enjoyed meeting you and talking in person and is entertained by your zainy interweb antics (Weren't you the one who started a soaring classified on FB over a snit with Tim Mara?).
This IS better than TV. I'm gonna grab another beer;).

[[email protected]]

Mr Somebody again addressed me personally, without the courtesy of identifying himself, and wrote:

"How is it you show up here with a new account and only 4 posts claiming to be a crew member and you have more intimate knowledge of the SSA rules than most competitors?"

I claimed to be a crew member at Benalla because I was. You erroneously state that I have "intimate knowledge of the SSA rules." I merely did a Google search for the US Team Code of Conduct and read it. And I don't know who "Tim Mara" is.

Sean Murphy can enlighten you regarding the existential dilemma that you are having, Mr Somebody (or do you prefer Mr Nobody?). XC knows who I am. I had the pleasure of meeting him shortly before he flew in his first Worlds.. The 15m US Team did an excellent job at Benalla, and I enjoyed every minute of it.

Perhaps you should lay off the beer. The only pilot I know who can drink like a fish and not act like a dork is P7.

Gina Wilson
New Zealand



On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 3:24:43 PM UTC+13, wrote:
> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 2:10:16 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> > Someone wrote this to me:
>
> > It's always a good idea to correct mistaken assumptions or statements, especially when they are the argumentative basis for actions with very serious consequences, don't you agree, Mr or Ms Somebody?
> >
> > Gina
> Gina,
> I thought that night in Benalla was bigger than the both of us but now I am just "Mr Somebody? Was I just another notch in your lipstick case?
> (Laughing) Is this 7T? (Laughing harder) How is it you show up here with a new account and only 4 posts claiming to be a crew member and yet you have more intimate knowledge of the SSA rules than most competitors?
> Sean, I mean Gina, You probably don't remember me but we met briefly at the Nats. I am one of the dozens of casual competitors who enjoyed meeting you and talking in person and is entertained by your zainy interweb antics (Weren't you the one who started a soaring classified on FB over a snit with Tim Mara?).
> This IS better than TV. I'm gonna grab another beer;).

[XC]

7T has been known to post under an alias here and in the sailboat racing world but not this time. I am convinced that last post was P7's crew, Gina. A delightful soul.

As to 711's post and anyone else who may be interested.

Gina is absolutely correct. There was no dysfunction with our team in Benalla. Everyone got along. Sean Fidler was a perfect gentleman. The pilots and crews represented the US well. John Good worked very hard (7am-11pm) and did two jobs as team captain and team manager. Tiffany, Gina and other folks did double duty to help out. Not to say we had enough help but it was a fun cooperative effort. Great experience.

This whole post began as my shocked reaction to Sean Fidler attacking his teammates and friends on the USTC after not getting selected in 18m. I mean to say John Good didn't do a good job is crazy! And the other vile things....nuts! He was offered a slot on the 15m squad after all. I continue to be mystified at how someone could act in such a manner.

I still can't believe it but I've said enough about all that...perhaps too much.

XC
Sean Murphy

[JS[_5_]]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 7:39:54 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> Mr Somebody again addressed me personally, without the courtesy of identifying himself, and wrote:
>
> "How is it you show up here with a new account and only 4 posts claiming to be a crew member and you have more intimate knowledge of the SSA rules than most competitors?"
>
> I claimed to be a crew member at Benalla because I was. You erroneously state that I have "intimate knowledge of the SSA rules." I merely did a Google search for the US Team Code of Conduct and read it. And I don't know who "Tim Mara" is.
>
> Sean Murphy can enlighten you regarding the existential dilemma that you are having, Mr Somebody (or do you prefer Mr Nobody?). XC knows who I am. I had the pleasure of meeting him shortly before he flew in his first Worlds. The 15m US Team did an excellent job at Benalla, and I enjoyed every minute of it.
>
> Perhaps you should lay off the beer. The only pilot I know who can drink like a fish and not act like a dork is P7.
>
> Gina Wilson
> New Zealand
>
>
>
> On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 3:24:43 PM UTC+13, wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 2:10:16 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> > > Someone wrote this to me:
> >
> > > It's always a good idea to correct mistaken assumptions or statements, especially when they are the argumentative basis for actions with very serious consequences, don't you agree, Mr or Ms Somebody?
> > >
> > > Gina
> > Gina,
> > I thought that night in Benalla was bigger than the both of us but now I am just "Mr Somebody? Was I just another notch in your lipstick case?
> > (Laughing) Is this 7T? (Laughing harder) How is it you show up here with a new account and only 4 posts claiming to be a crew member and yet you have more intimate knowledge of the SSA rules than most competitors?
> > Sean, I mean Gina, You probably don't remember me but we met briefly at the Nats. I am one of the dozens of casual competitors who enjoyed meeting you and talking in person and is entertained by your zainy interweb antics (Weren't you the one who started a soaring classified on FB over a snit with Tim Mara?).
> > This IS better than TV. I'm gonna grab another beer;).

Gina, He is just a tosser, even though he might not know the expression.
"Urban" if you want to be respected at all, give yourself a real name while you're insulting a known crew member who has attended soaring competitions around the globe.
Jim
SCUM

[[email protected]]

Sebastian Kawa doesn't care.....

[K m]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 8:54:30 PM UTC-7, XC wrote:
> 7T has been known to post under an alias here and in the sailboat racing world but not this time.............
Thanks for the clarification XC. I figured this was another Wilbur or Orville thing again. When I first read this thread I was rooting for 7T to hopefully be able to resolve this issue and move on but after some of the responses it shows how toxic this behavior really is.
And to the real Gina, I will echo what myself and others have said, No issues with anyone in person, But on the internet it is a completely different story. When I first posted I was hoping 7T would get beyond the accusations and name calling and shed some insight (That was naive on my part).
And lastly JAMES, I usually do not dignify childish posts like yours with a response, but Tosser? Really? Is name calling necessary? Stop and think for a minute, Soaring is a small community and referring to people as jerk offs and scum is just counter productive.

[Tom Kelley #711]

On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 11:50:40 PM UTC-7, K m wrote:
> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 8:54:30 PM UTC-7, XC wrote:
> > 7T has been known to post under an alias here and in the sailboat racing world but not this time.............
> Thanks for the clarification XC. I figured this was another Wilbur or Orville thing again. When I first read this thread I was rooting for 7T to hopefully be able to resolve this issue and move on but after some of the responses it shows how toxic this behavior really is.
> And to the real Gina, I will echo what myself and others have said, No issues with anyone in person, But on the internet it is a completely different story. When I first posted I was hoping 7T would get beyond the accusations and name calling and shed some insight (That was naive on my part).
> And lastly JAMES, I usually do not dignify childish posts like yours with a response, but Tosser? Really? Is name calling necessary? Stop and think for a minute, Soaring is a small community and referring to people as jerk offs and scum is just counter productive.

My God, "SCUM", is a 4 letter word which was sold on many T-Shirts and carrying bags by the late CD Charlie Lite. These 4 letters mean "Sailplane Crew Union Member". The "real" KM would know this! JS was the crew for both the AU folks who came to Uvalde this last summer, which Bruce Taylor won. JS is the one who also lent Bruce Taylor his ASG 29 for Nephi the year before.
As Gina stated earlier, why don't you sign your name because your not who some may think you are, Mr/Ms. Nobody!
Thank you, both XC and Gina, as I also will support your views on 7T at all the contests we have been at together. As a matter of fact, at all the contest's I have ever been to, I have always seen a good showing of Sportsmanship and Camaraderie with the entrant's, crew's, tow pilot's, contest management and line folks. Might have missed a few, but them too.

Best. Tom #711.

[[email protected]]

K m, the Pilot formerly Known as Mr Nobody, has again addressed me, thusly:

> And to the real Gina, I will echo what myself and others have said, No issues with anyone in person, But on the internet it is a completely different story.

There was no "fake" Gina, so no need to refer to a "real" one.

Here's a question for you, K m, and for those who believe that selection to a US Team should be based, even in part, upon whether or not a sizeable portion or even a majority of decision-makers believe that person's (internet, in this case) behavior to be objectionable. Which of all the arguably "difficult" or hotheaded or rash top-ranked athletes would you have yanked or banned from World teams or Olympic teams or national teams because they ****ed off a lot of people (by behavior that might have been the direct result of a perceived or actual injustice)?

Think of all the top athletes in their sports (basketball, hockey, tennis, boxing, soccer, rugby, etc.) whose behavior was less than desirable, or even eye-poppingly out-of-control, hair-on-fire, bat**** crazy stuff when that athlete suspected unfairness to himself or herself. Some astute poster already mentioned John McEnroe. Andy Roddick's tantrums were epic, and I'm old enough to remember Roddick's coach Jimmy Connors' meltdowns and abuse of officials. A lot of hair-trigger senses of injustice.

Any of you happened to have followed LeBron James's past national team career? He was considered so "disrespectful" of staff members that he was almost banned from the 2008 Olympic team, but luckily for the USA, not all admin or staff pooh-bahs were thin-skinned. LeBron was instrumental in the USA's back to back Gold Medals in the 2008 and 2012 Olympics, becoming the all-time leading scorer in the US men's basketball history. Sure, you don't have to like guys like LeBron, but sometimes it's best to get out of their way if you know what's best for the USA (rhymes).

So, in the infamous Fidler style of jerking one's chain, and for those of you who watch the soap opera "As the World (Team) Burns" --

Thin-skinned admin: "Oh! That LeBron was soooo rude to soooo many of us volunteer staff at Athens. [wringing of hands] It's inexcusable. I won't stand for it! He should just "suck it up" if he's not happy about our carefully considered decision to drastically limit his playing time. [reaching for handkerchief, dabbing of eyes] I feel sooooo disrespected by LeBron calling me names that I say we ban him from the 2008 Olympic Team. And if he keeps on disrespecting me after being banned from Beijing, I want him banned from all Olympics from here on in! I mean, I don't have to take this ****! I could be home with my pet gerbils Kareem and Kobe and watching Bowling with the Stars instead of taking this ****!"

Not-so-thin-skinned admin: "Oh, fer chrissakes! He's our best chance of winning Gold in the Olympics, so stop getting your panties in a knot. YOU'RE the one who should "suck it up". Drop that hankie and get LeBron on the phone -- he's on the Team.


Gina
SCUM-sucking SCUM



On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 7:50:40 PM UTC+13, K m wrote:
> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 8:54:30 PM UTC-7, XC wrote:
> > 7T has been known to post under an alias here and in the sailboat racing world but not this time.............
> Thanks for the clarification XC. I figured this was another Wilbur or Orville thing again. When I first read this thread I was rooting for 7T to hopefully be able to resolve this issue and move on but after some of the responses it shows how toxic this behavior really is.
> And to the real Gina, I will echo what myself and others have said, No issues with anyone in person, But on the internet it is a completely different story. When I first posted I was hoping 7T would get beyond the accusations and name calling and shed some insight (That was naive on my part).
> And lastly JAMES, I usually do not dignify childish posts like yours with a response, but Tosser? Really? Is name calling necessary? Stop and think for a minute, Soaring is a small community and referring to people as jerk offs and scum is just counter productive.

[Dan Marotta]

Chip,

I think you're on to something!Â* This might very well be polishing a
pitch for a new series on Discovery Channel.Â* I mean, how many more
naked mud-bogger wilderness shows can we watch?

Dan

On 11/9/2017 5:55 PM, wrote:
> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 7:00:32 PM UTC-5, Bojack J4 wrote:
>> This is better than watching television! :)
> Much. Like binge watching a series on Netflix. No need to wait until next week for the following episode. Read the latest scandalous revelation. Grab a sandwich or take a meeting. Then back to "Train Wreck on RAS" for the latest!
>
> That said, I'm going to be really crushed if we learn it was all scripted for our entertainment and none of it is real. Possible. Some of this stuff is pretty hard to believe.
>
> Chip Bearden

--
Dan, 5J

[Dan Marotta]

Hi Gina,

You really don't sound like a Kiwi.Â* Are you a transplant from the US?Â*
You write like you're from somewhere in the upper Midwest.

Anyway, I hope to meet you when I come to Omarama next year.

Cheers!

Dan

On 11/10/2017 4:18 AM, wrote:
> K m, the Pilot formerly Known as Mr Nobody, has again addressed me, thusly:
>
>> And to the real Gina, I will echo what myself and others have said, No issues with anyone in person, But on the internet it is a completely different story.
> There was no "fake" Gina, so no need to refer to a "real" one.
>
> Here's a question for you, K m, and for those who believe that selection to a US Team should be based, even in part, upon whether or not a sizeable portion or even a majority of decision-makers believe that person's (internet, in this case) behavior to be objectionable. Which of all the arguably "difficult" or hotheaded or rash top-ranked athletes would you have yanked or banned from World teams or Olympic teams or national teams because they ****ed off a lot of people (by behavior that might have been the direct result of a perceived or actual injustice)?
>
> Think of all the top athletes in their sports (basketball, hockey, tennis, boxing, soccer, rugby, etc.) whose behavior was less than desirable, or even eye-poppingly out-of-control, hair-on-fire, bat**** crazy stuff when that athlete suspected unfairness to himself or herself. Some astute poster already mentioned John McEnroe. Andy Roddick's tantrums were epic, and I'm old enough to remember Roddick's coach Jimmy Connors' meltdowns and abuse of officials. A lot of hair-trigger senses of injustice.
>
> Any of you happened to have followed LeBron James's past national team career? He was considered so "disrespectful" of staff members that he was almost banned from the 2008 Olympic team, but luckily for the USA, not all admin or staff pooh-bahs were thin-skinned. LeBron was instrumental in the USA's back to back Gold Medals in the 2008 and 2012 Olympics, becoming the all-time leading scorer in the US men's basketball history. Sure, you don't have to like guys like LeBron, but sometimes it's best to get out of their way if you know what's best for the USA (rhymes).
>
> So, in the infamous Fidler style of jerking one's chain, and for those of you who watch the soap opera "As the World (Team) Burns" --
>
> Thin-skinned admin: "Oh! That LeBron was soooo rude to soooo many of us volunteer staff at Athens. [wringing of hands] It's inexcusable. I won't stand for it! He should just "suck it up" if he's not happy about our carefully considered decision to drastically limit his playing time. [reaching for handkerchief, dabbing of eyes] I feel sooooo disrespected by LeBron calling me names that I say we ban him from the 2008 Olympic Team. And if he keeps on disrespecting me after being banned from Beijing, I want him banned from all Olympics from here on in! I mean, I don't have to take this ****! I could be home with my pet gerbils Kareem and Kobe and watching Bowling with the Stars instead of taking this ****!"
>
> Not-so-thin-skinned admin: "Oh, fer chrissakes! He's our best chance of winning Gold in the Olympics, so stop getting your panties in a knot. YOU'RE the one who should "suck it up". Drop that hankie and get LeBron on the phone -- he's on the Team.
>
>
> Gina
> SCUM-sucking SCUM
>
>
>
> On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 7:50:40 PM UTC+13, K m wrote:
>> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 8:54:30 PM UTC-7, XC wrote:
>>> 7T has been known to post under an alias here and in the sailboat racing world but not this time.............
>> Thanks for the clarification XC. I figured this was another Wilbur or Orville thing again. When I first read this thread I was rooting for 7T to hopefully be able to resolve this issue and move on but after some of the responses it shows how toxic this behavior really is.
>> And to the real Gina, I will echo what myself and others have said, No issues with anyone in person, But on the internet it is a completely different story. When I first posted I was hoping 7T would get beyond the accusations and name calling and shed some insight (That was naive on my part).
>> And lastly JAMES, I usually do not dignify childish posts like yours with a response, but Tosser? Really? Is name calling necessary? Stop and think for a minute, Soaring is a small community and referring to people as jerk offs and scum is just counter productive.

--
Dan, 5J

[K m]

On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 2:15:11 AM UTC-7, Tom Kelley #711 wrote:
711
Thanks for the clarification (Boy do I feel silly). My name is Kirk and I have signed my posts for years and many of the people here know who I am anyways and the subject has never come up. I have used K m for over a decade on one of my Google accounts because it holds a personal significance and (With the space and the lower case) it can not be mistaken for a contest number. There is no intent to imply any other identity.
In regards to the US team, other than financial support through donations to SSA, I don't have a horse in this race. I do however have friends who are past Team Members and I have head plenty of stories of good old boys and cronyism (Like an important decision being made, with bad results for the team, by someone who was not qualified to make such a call). And this is from people who are not prone to indulgence or drama. That is what initially attracted me to read about this team situation. Beyond this, I am possibly being mistaken for someone who cares. Also, I do not know any of the members involved well enough to form an opinion. For example, when referring to someone as "Mini Me", is that meant to be demeaning or sarcastic or what? Slander is another story of course but I figure trading barbs is between these two.
Lastly, in regards to conduct, I don't care and I figure it is up to SSA to decide what is acceptable (Unless it involves safety at contests of course).
Thanks again!

[[email protected]]

Hi, Dan

> You really don't sound like a Kiwi.

Oh, all right. I'll change it to "stop getting your knickers in a knot" and I'll add an "eh?" at the end of every other sentence.

> You write like you're from somewhere in the upper Midwest.

Now, there's no need to insult people from the upper Midwest. (har!) They can't help it if they live in the wop-wops and write funny.

> Anyway, I hope to meet you when I come to Omarama next year.

I don't live anywhere near Omarama (more's the pity, eh?). But R1 and his better half visited me a decade ago in the South Island, and they both lived to tell about it.

Gina



On Saturday, November 11, 2017 at 6:40:05 AM UTC+13, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Hi Gina,
>
> You really don't sound like a Kiwi.Â* Are you a transplant from the US?Â*
> You write like you're from somewhere in the upper Midwest.
>
> Anyway, I hope to meet you when I come to Omarama next year.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Dan
>
> On 11/10/2017 4:18 AM, Gina wrote:
> > K m, the Pilot formerly Known as Mr Nobody, has again addressed me, thusly:
> >
> >> And to the real Gina, I will echo what myself and others have said, No issues with anyone in person, But on the internet it is a completely different story.
> > There was no "fake" Gina, so no need to refer to a "real" one.
> >
> > Here's a question for you, K m, and for those who believe that selection to a US Team should be based, even in part, upon whether or not a sizeable portion or even a majority of decision-makers believe that person's (internet, in this case) behavior to be objectionable. Which of all the arguably "difficult" or hotheaded or rash top-ranked athletes would you have yanked or banned from World teams or Olympic teams or national teams because they ****ed off a lot of people (by behavior that might have been the direct result of a perceived or actual injustice)?
> >
> > Think of all the top athletes in their sports (basketball, hockey, tennis, boxing, soccer, rugby, etc.) whose behavior was less than desirable, or even eye-poppingly out-of-control, hair-on-fire, bat**** crazy stuff when that athlete suspected unfairness to himself or herself. Some astute poster already mentioned John McEnroe. Andy Roddick's tantrums were epic, and I'm old enough to remember Roddick's coach Jimmy Connors' meltdowns and abuse of officials. A lot of hair-trigger senses of injustice.
> >
> > Any of you happened to have followed LeBron James's past national team career? He was considered so "disrespectful" of staff members that he was almost banned from the 2008 Olympic team, but luckily for the USA, not all admin or staff pooh-bahs were thin-skinned. LeBron was instrumental in the USA's back to back Gold Medals in the 2008 and 2012 Olympics, becoming the all-time leading scorer in the US men's basketball history. Sure, you don't have to like guys like LeBron, but sometimes it's best to get out of their way if you know what's best for the USA (rhymes).
> >
> > So, in the infamous Fidler style of jerking one's chain, and for those of you who watch the soap opera "As the World (Team) Burns" --
> >
> > Thin-skinned admin: "Oh! That LeBron was soooo rude to soooo many of us volunteer staff at Athens. [wringing of hands] It's inexcusable. I won't stand for it! He should just "suck it up" if he's not happy about our carefully considered decision to drastically limit his playing time. [reaching for handkerchief, dabbing of eyes] I feel sooooo disrespected by LeBron calling me names that I say we ban him from the 2008 Olympic Team. And if he keeps on disrespecting me after being banned from Beijing, I want him banned from all Olympics from here on in! I mean, I don't have to take this ****! I could be home with my pet gerbils Kareem and Kobe and watching Bowling with the Stars instead of taking this ****!"
> >
> > Not-so-thin-skinned admin: "Oh, fer chrissakes! He's our best chance of winning Gold in the Olympics, so stop getting your panties in a knot. YOU'RE the one who should "suck it up". Drop that hankie and get LeBron on the phone -- he's on the Team.
> >
> >
> > Gina
> > SCUM-sucking SCUM
> >
> >
> >
> > On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 7:50:40 PM UTC+13, K m wrote:
> >> On Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 8:54:30 PM UTC-7, XC wrote:
> >>> 7T has been known to post under an alias here and in the sailboat racing world but not this time.............
> >> Thanks for the clarification XC. I figured this was another Wilbur or Orville thing again. When I first read this thread I was rooting for 7T to hopefully be able to resolve this issue and move on but after some of the responses it shows how toxic this behavior really is.
> >> And to the real Gina, I will echo what myself and others have said, No issues with anyone in person, But on the internet it is a completely different story. When I first posted I was hoping 7T would get beyond the accusations and name calling and shed some insight (That was naive on my part).
> >> And lastly JAMES, I usually do not dignify childish posts like yours with a response, but Tosser? Really? Is name calling necessary? Stop and think for a minute, Soaring is a small community and referring to people as jerk offs and scum is just counter productive.
>
> --
> Dan, 5J

[[email protected]]

"Train Wreck" is now the MOST-VIEWED RAS THREAD since Walt Connelly's perennial fave "Letter to the FAA" from last May!! (per Google Groups: with a major share of RAS activity)

And it's still going strong.

Surely there must be an award in this category. There is for everything else in media. Maybe we can vote on it.

Chip Bearden

[[email protected]]

The Brits weigh in with their take:

https://www.facebook.com/Sean-Fiddlers-Sore-Ring-171842133398406/

Congratulations, Sean! You have made the International Laughingstock Team!

[Sean Fidler]

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1PLWyktOZ_TeDJxAWwCO0205-Jtzi59TX

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

On Monday, November 13, 2017 at 8:20:05 AM UTC-8, Sean Fidler wrote:
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1PLWyktOZ_TeDJxAWwCO0205-Jtzi59TX

See Sean, there is a proper way to gripe.

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

On Monday, November 13, 2017 at 8:20:05 AM UTC-8, Sean Fidler wrote:
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1PLWyktOZ_TeDJxAWwCO0205-Jtzi59TX

See Sean, there is a proper way to gripe.

[[email protected]]

What's the voting system Chip?

[Tom (TK)]

On Saturday, November 11, 2017 at 9:04:06 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> The Brits weigh in with their take:
>
> https://www.facebook.com/Sean-Fiddlers-Sore-Ring-171842133398406/
>
> Congratulations, Sean! You have made the International Laughingstock Team!

Like or dislike Sean's communication style (I do not have a dog in this hunt) but at least he owns his comments and is not a coward posting fake Facebook pages with someone else's picture as the profile.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, November 14, 2017 at 11:18:53 AM UTC-6, Tom (TK) wrote:
> On Saturday, November 11, 2017 at 9:04:06 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> > The Brits weigh in with their take:
> >
> > https://www.facebook.com/Sean-Fiddlers-Sore-Ring-171842133398406/
> >
> > Congratulations, Sean! You have made the International Laughingstock Team!
>
> Like or dislike Sean's communication style (I do not have a dog in this hunt) but at least he owns his comments and is not a coward posting fake Facebook pages with someone else's picture as the profile.

Tom, there's ample proof that Sean has been posting here under pseudonym, many times, let's keep this real. It's immediately obvious to anyone with a brain that the Facebook page your refer to is meant to poke fun at him. And yes, it is crass.

[[email protected]]

Let's get this going again, I'm at deer camp and we have no TV but we do have 4G all over the woods.
Glen

[[email protected]]

I think Sean & Tiffany are a hard working team and they will get the USA on the podium. Wait and see, film at 11

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, November 16, 2017 at 9:05:32 AM UTC-6, wrote:
> I think Sean & Tiffany are a hard working team and they will get the USA on the podium. Wait and see, film at 11

I sure hope Sean and Tiffany will make room for Wilbur when they get on that podium. He seems to be the real brains behind the operation.

[Dan Marotta]

So stream videos.

On 11/16/2017 5:45 AM, wrote:
> Let's get this going again, I'm at deer camp and we have no TV but we do have 4G all over the woods.
> Glen

--
Dan, 5J

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Robert Fidler[_2_]]

Anyone have a clue when the SSA will disclose the voting record of the selection committee?

[Jonathan St. Cloud]

If, you paid your SSAdues you could call and ask.

[[email protected]]

Did he PM you ahead of time with that setup line? :D Gotta love it.

Chip Bearden

[[email protected]]

On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 8:40:00 AM UTC-5, Robert Fidler wrote:
> Anyone have a clue when the SSA will disclose the voting record of the selection committee?

The results of the poll of the team squad were published to the members on 11/3.
The selection committee did no voting on this, other than individuals that were on the squad voting in their class.
As to who voted for who, I expect this will remain withheld, as I believe it should be, so as to avoid the enabling of personal attacks based on how a person voted. I'm sure the SSA BOD could appoint a non involved person to verify no funny business, but there is no reason to believe this is needed.
UH
2017 US Team Squad member

[Dave Leonard]

On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 6:40:00 AM UTC-7, Robert Fidler wrote:
> Anyone have a clue when the SSA will disclose the voting record of the selection committee?

The selection committee only administered the vote by peer pilots and tallied the results. They did not exercise the option in the selection process to adjust the results of the vote to reorder the selection list. Some participated in the election / survey they qualified to vote in. Those pilot votes were by secret ballot and should never be disclosed.

The selection committee promised to disclose the rationale if the election results were altered per the process. They did not promise to explain why pilot peers voted the way they did. The ballot did solicit voluntary comments which were also promised to not be attributed. They might be interesting or entertaining, but they are irrelevant except maybe for shaping the next campaign. I don't expect those to be disclosed.

I am not on the committee, but have spoken to several who are, and I definitely had an interest in the outcome.