ToddL

Reminder: Tonight is the Town Hall by Nate.

In addition to participating in your regional AWSA winter meetings, please check your email if you are a current member. Nate has scheduled a Town Hall to provide the current status and accept feedback. the events is scheduled for Monday, January 17 at 8 p.m. ET and the link to join is provided in the email.

- dude! I get it. Your role has been tough. You're frustrated. I was truly trying to understand how best to SEPARATE youth risks from NORMAL skiing events and sanctions. Go ahead, force this on every adult if that's what you think is best. Watch the mass exit and death of the sport with that type of attitude. The "blood" of that death will be on your hands, not mine. Now, with cooler heads... Seriously, these types of scenarios better be thought about so that we CAN separate the actual risks from those where there is NO actual risks. It also shows that something other than a 90-minute course with a test at the end should be a tool in the toolbox of SS for regular people to participate in regular activities where sufficient supervision is provided for youth. Damn, dude.

- OK. So, that means collegiate recruits will be subject to SS training before they can compete in B team. Correct?That also means that GR membership is still available and the primary tool for Basic Skills event involvement. What happens when the Basic Skills event participants are a mixture of adults and children? In that case do the adult participants (not the hosts) have a SS requirement? What if the clinics were separated by age such that under aged participants are under a separate basic skills sanction than the adult group's sanction, even if they occur on the same site at the same time? What if at a basic skills event for children, all clinic host adults are not actively competing, and therefore have no SS requirement, (except the sole L1 instructor)? It seems by your answer that this is a feasible scenario, correct?

- given that no sanctioned competition can be conducted with a single, solitary judge forming the determination of the score, it seems to me that no judges have authority as defined above.

- are you able to answer my questions above from Jan 10th?

- How do these scenarios fit into the pending requirements?1) Adults only Basic Skills clinic for people who never before have been a member and who will likely not start competing for a few weeks/months. These adults are participating in a sanctioned event. This requires them to have some form of membership. Is the day pass for clinics still an option in context of all of this? If so, or even if they can pay for a grass roots membership, what additional requirements come along with that? Do they have to complete the training before the clinic? Do they have to complete it afterward? What happens if they fail to do so?2) Collegiate tryouts/recruiting event under a basic skills clinic or club practice. Same questions above.As you can guess, the concern is about how to allow "on that day, walk up" participation for the sake of "trying out" the sport or becoming familiar with our passion.

- interesting. The meat of that site (how to do it) is found here: https://www.wrldwtrski.com/suggestions It appears that for a "membership" fee of $30, ANY skier can provide his or her skiing scores into one of the 3 divisions based upon the context of the performance. Thus, a skier could provide their scores from a friendly home site "competition", from a USA-WSWS sanctioned event, or from a non-sanctioned event that meets one of the three league event requirements. The league specifications also allow for a variety of boat speed control scenarios.

- yes, shelf cloud. Formed when colder air falls from an approaching storm and meets warmer ambient air and lifts it. It can be a warning of very severe weather or just a slight change in temp and wind. In this case it was not severe. Needless to say, I did not get to attempt the next pass headed back toward it. The wind actually was at 1 ball when I was rounding 6. Hopped in the boat and put it on the lift (which was on the same end as the end of that pass).

Hello there.

The very fact that the BOS Best Of post list has contained comments from this thread for the past 90 days shows USAWS that this topic is one of the most important topics to affect our sport in a very long time. As I said in a previous post, this time is a pivotal time in our sport. Where it goes and how this plays out may sustain it or it may the the final nail in a coffin that is already nearing completion.

@MDB1056 (who isn't an active member due to retiring from competition) 1. Seeking input of those you serve is a basic sign of strength of leadership. It also ensures that decisions are founded in applicable context and more likely to be widely supported by the majority of membership due to their involvement in the decision-making process. This thread is a result of the perception of lacking involvement. This thread's passionate discussion is entirely based on that reality. 2. An organization is by its very definition a collection of members. The members are the organization. Without a membership, there is nothing to organize. 3. The policy requirement coming out of the law and out of Safe Sport did NOT specify which roles in which contexts equate to interactions with minors. Those decisions were suggested by consultants and insurance representatives. The leadership realized that our structure does not easily separate youth from adult competition unlike other sports. The easy button was to simply cast a wider net of applicability which exceeded the actual requirements. This is the point of this thread. The other valid criticism is the right-sizing of the programs for the specific audiences. SS allows for many solutions. It does not specify the specific solution proposed by our leadership. 4. These things like BGC and SS are viewed as making an impact by policy-makers. The reality is that these things only superficially help. More so, these things provide a liability deflection for those who force or implement them. When liability is more important that actual safety, there is misdirected focus. I think your summary had missed the above finer details of the concern.

@ForrestGump - oh, I have developed LMS content for a global corporation for deployment using train-the-trainer, CBT, and follow-up content knowledge validation tracking. I know exactly what you mean and what that takes. What people are missing in my proposal is this: If USA-WSWS correctly identifies the true roles of high-interaction with youth, those roles can be managed through the existing SS LMS system. For ALL OTHER ROLES, the objective can be relaxed to simply awareness management. Clearly, USA-WSWS leadership would have to propose and convince the insurance and SS compliance persons that this solution is meaningfully applicable to the requirements of compliance. To do that, the proposal needs to be fully defined. There seems to be a lot of resistance to "pushing" for such acceptance to go forward. If leadership doesn't want to make an attempt, then there will be no improvement in how USA-WSWS manages this requirement for its organization. A LMS (Learning Management System) is not mandatory for this awareness level of content distribution. USA-WSWS already has all the tools within its toolbox. For example, I have described the KISS approach of generating a concise, awareness video using free tools. That is not costly. I understand the fear of content selection. However, the tracking aspect is still outstanding. USA-WSWS already has an on-line legal signatory solution for e-signing the release of liability. That same solution could be used for an on-line e-signature of a legal statement acknowledging that the video was viewed. The statement could include a summary of the content and the reporting information as well. The statement could therefore be another redundancy of the content to solidify knowledge awareness objectives. Now, before anyone says, people will just skip the video and do the e-signature, I want to point out that the current training solution from SS appears to allow one to simply click next repeatedly and jump to the test at the end. So, if that type of "training" is acceptable to SS, insurance reps, US congress, etc., then this isn't about ensuring the safety of our youth. This is about checking a box for CYA, which can more easily be accomplished in a less distasteful way.

@ghutch - so was this your first time doing any SS training for USA_WSWS? If so, then you broke the speed barrier and you just proved that the content is just "checking a box".

90 vs 30 minutes: 30 mins = refresher, it was a breeze. Those who have previously taken SS full training (L1 coaches, leadership) were only required to do refresher content. 90 mins = full training. For 1st time persons. This one is NOT easy, not quick, etc. Apparently some people are having technical difficulty. My hypothesis on difficulties is that the system assumes the viewer will NOT MULTITASK during the session, stay on the active window the whole time, never click away, etc. etc.

I suggested to Nate that USA-WSWS consider: 10 minute or less awareness video for all members Current training required for Coaches, JD adults, and judges wanting to work Jr divisions at Nationals Offer the Safe Sport training as voluntary resources to parents. Offer the Safe Sport youth training as voluntary to parents to share with their youth. The answer I got back was that such a plan is not feasible due to financial costs to generate content, etc. I have not yet pushed back, but come on... it costs nothing to grab a phone, tripod holder, and a desk lamp and record a video posted to YouTube or whatever. As far as the script goes, the content should explain the law, provide an overview of USA-WSWS's approach and program, share three things every member can do to improve safety, provide information about reporting a concern, and state where to find more information. It seems like a worthwhile effort with minimal cost to me.

Latest that I received from Nate is that they are making headway to move the BGC to only be required of Nationals' Judges for all Sport Disciplines. If that comes to be, assistant judges (who can't judge at nationals anyway) would be exempt. I assume for Regular and Senior judges, the BGC would be optional. Only those who want to work Nationals would be required to comply.

@ForrestGump - haha!

@dave2ball - I understand your rejection of that responsibility. Other than "everyone" and "no one", what officials' role(s) are responsible? What are your thoughts on the separate training content/audiences?

Someone whom I regard as quite fair, kind, smart, and level-headed suggested that a reasonable solution would be to make the membership education an awareness training that is very crisp and concise with an overview taking less than 10 minutes to watch. Then, apply the current more in depth training to a new role called SafeSport Officer which would be required at all sanctioned events. Possibly that role can be combined with the existing Safety Director rating. Thus, the organization would have full awareness, and baseline education, but the events would have in depth oversight by trained individuals. This doesn't solve the BGC debate, but it does "right-size" compromise the SS debate. [Edit: SS Officer - seems not terribly popular. OK, then all officials?] Further: There are 4 audiences of SS training. Each has a different need and a right-sized education. Some scope of Official(s) - the current program content: how to spot a predator, insuring safe situations/contexts, reporting. etc. Adult Members - awareness of the USA-WSWS approach, expectations of a "safe" competitor Parents of youth competitors - voluntary content: awareness of USA-WSWS approach, how to spot a predator, insuring safe situations/contexts, reporting Youth - voluntary content offered to parents to share with their children if they choose: being safe, situations to avoid, who to contact for help

I am working on a Google forms survey. I will provide the link when it is ready.

@ski6jones - I understand the allure of simplicity. However, there are a few more situations than this. Also, the SS training is a bit of a non-negotiable item. The BGC topic is very negotiable, and there are many levels of rejection and acceptance. One can easily consolidate the draft suggestions into for vs against it. The granularity provides much more insight. I wish we could do a multi-select style of poll where respondents could check all that apply. That would even be more insightful responses.

Maybe it is time for a new poll to get a true pulse of the BOS community. Before we create the actual poll, let's fine tune the answer choices. Here's a first draft. Let me know if something is missing. Describe your position on 2022 membership renewal: I'm done. There is nothing I think they will do that will bring me back. I will not renew. but I might come back if things change to make more sense. I will likely not renew. I fear they will not undo this enough to change my mind. I want to renew, but have concerns and will wait to see if things get better. I will likely renew. If there are more requirements coming, then I will stop. I will likely renew. I don't like this, but I will still comply. I will likely renew, but will drop my officials ratings and just become a consumer. I will renew. I love competitive skiing so much that I will comply.

+1 for what @sunperch wrote.

Here are the recipients that I used for my message to leadership. All of their email addresses are readily available in public documents on the websites. Alternatively, you can direct message me and I can provide the list with the consolidated emails. Nathan Boudreaux , USA-WSWS Executive Director Dale Stevens , Vice President Doug Robbins, AWSA-Director, BOD Chairperson Tim Cullen, USA-WSWS Past President Keith Lindemulder, AWSA-Chairman/EVP Kate Knafla, ASWA-VP Brad Corbin, AWSA-EVP, West Robert Howerton, AWSA-EVP, South Central Dennis Downes, AWSA-EVP, MidWest Karen Melnik, AWSA-EVP, East Robert Harris, AWSA-EVP, South Bylaws Chair Email Ethics Chair Email International Activities Chair Email Judicial Chair Email https://teamusa.org/-/media/USA_Waterski/Disciplines/3-Event-Water-Skiing/AWSACommittees.pdf https://usawaterski.org/graphics/downloads/USAWSCommittees.pdf https://usawaterski.org/graphics/downloads/USAWSBOD.pdf