buechsr

It was 8-10pm on the east coast! After months of griping and bickering in this thread, the reason why (many) didn't attend a virtual town hall with Nate, Bob, and insurance reps to explain the logic and need for their decisions was that people were working? I don't buy it.

A lot of names in this thread were on the meeting. Although it was impossible to decipher who had called in rather than join the webcast, it was notable that some of the most vocal critics in this thread were not (apparently) participating. That said, they could have called in. For me, largest takeaway was that these decisions are not made because the board "wants" to, but because they "have" to, as fiduciaries of the finances and existence of the organization. I found it extremely hard to find fault in the decisions that were made. Of course, I've done SS training for some time and find it to be hardly an imposition.

@Jody_Seal https://www.teamusa.org/usa-water-ski/about-us/governance-documents click bylaws. Start at the bottom of page 8. then, click policies and procedures, and start page 7. I don't have link for AWSA bylaws for board governance, but one could fairly assume that it works like essentially every other board. I didn't look into old stuff (minutes) but one could presume that Bob ascended to his post by being elected as AWSA representative for USAWS BOD, and was elected President. As for @klindy, he can respond for himself, but would assume he became a board member through normal process, and was voted COB.

@ForrestGump You have that legal responsibility already, depending on the context. But if you really feel that way, that's sad. Safesport isn't a babysitting training class. For all (not directed at Shane): 80,000 claimants in the Boy Scout mess. Every single seat of the LA Coliseum, AT&T stadium, Ben Hill Griffin Stadium, etc...a victim of sexual abuse...not just grooming. Next time you turn on a football game, picture that over decades, of all the seemingly benevolent organizations, BOY SCOUTS missed THAT MANY! How many of those victims, their parents, and those troop leaders etc. look back with sickening regret that they missed whatever signs there were. That number is exponentially higher. And yet even in this day and age of awareness of the misses and missteps of trust of so many, we have grown adults threatening non-renewal of a membership in a small organization, which costs less than a tank of gas, which does all it can with limited resources, over a required 1-1.5 hour course with the purpose being to raise awareness about how these things work and how to prevent it, because of "mandate" pushback. Mind-blowing. This is an embarrassingly wrong side of history for some to be on, regardless of USAWS's motivations for requirement.

@BS74, I'm not either. I've only pointed out there is more to the story than the "accused's" quotes. But lets be honest, his reputation was spoiled not by safesport but when was arrested for 45 counts of child porn. And if he was legitimately falsely accused without evidence, he'd have a claim for malicious prosecution. There was a whole bunch of news stories on this guy, but I didn't see one on that. In your view, what was wrong with the way safesport handled his situation? He wasn't banned, he was suspended. He's entitled to, and will apparently be participating in safesport's process for further action, if any is warranted. What part of that do you have a problem with? Only conclusion must be that safesport should not be able to temporarily suspend someone? Is that right? Because, that's all that's happened.

@BS74 I know what the article you linked says. But, you may want to click more of the links to get "more" of the story, as reported. Or, just google his name. I don't know if he's guilty or not. Don't know if he was aquitted, charges were dropped, or took a plea deal. For purposes of this discussion of safesport's suspension, it's irrelevant. They didn't ban him. They suspended him, by definition, a temporary pause. Heck our own legal system uses the same methodology ie temporary restraining orders, which is essentially what a suspension is until such time that more is learned and permanent decision can be made. Safesport relates to athletic events and participants. It is not, and should not, be a simple mirror of the legal system, for myriad reasons, most importantly, prosecutorial decisions (and even jury decisions) should not be the sole arbiter of whether someone is "safe" to participate in sports. Furthermore, we are patchwork of 50 states with unique laws of evidence and punishment in each, which influence the decisions of prosecutors. More succinctly, I'm fine with Safesport having the autonomy to conduct their own investigations and dole their own sanctions.

@BS74 I read the entirety of your article. Frankly, you may want to read more on Mr. Morris, including from the links in the article you posted. Or, just google him. There is no shortage of appalling allegations. From what is surmisable, he was facing almost 200 years for child pornography, and appears to have pled guilty to lesser charges, but elsewhere there is reference to a "conviction" for computer services theft. For purposes of my post, it doesn't matter. Furthermore, it also appears Safesport flagged his one day racing license request this summer, not in response to an old newspaper article. I have no problem with safesport operating with a evidentiary standard different than that of a courtroom. While criminal defendants' right to be entitled to the benefit of being innocent until proven guilty is sacrosanct, I have no issue with someone who was accused of some pretty heinous things being "temporarily suspended". He will have his day to dispute his suspension. He'll get the due process he seeks from safesport. While I don't know if he's guilty or not, I have no problem keeping people who have been charged with child pornography off the starting docks at USAWS events "temporarily" until a full investigation is done. There is a big difference between exoneration and prosecutorial decisions. To be sure, I view this as an example of safesport working.

In the words of Tony Lightfoot “O my word”! Has there ever been an event where 41 was run by 2 different skiers? Unbelievable skiing. Kyle Eade on the mic is awesome as well. Must say I’m happy for Jon, too. Men’s final has perfect mix of legends and newer names.

Don't confuse sunsetter LX with Lxi. Lxis were made between 99 and 04. Honestly I agree with @andjules , there has never been a "big" DD that skis like a sunsetter Lxi. I've had a couple. I can't believe I sold them. So big, so versatile, and skied so good. Do NOT consider the 05 and beyond sunsetter Lxis. Huge difference. They're more on par with the 209, 214, and 206 offerings.

Thought Horton uses a setting that only allows people with posted USAWS numbers to post in threads like this?

How are you outboarders getting the RPM signal? Reason I ask is that I have a bad signal at the dash on a Malibu (It will read correct for a while then go haywire, then go to 0). Yes I've inverted the signal, and I've already bypassed the factory harness so now using the 3 wire rpm harness not typically needed on Malibu. in any event, been told last resort is to pull the rpm signal from the engine. Where would I do that? At the coil? Thanks!

Maybe I misunderstood him but I thought he said he was getting 14.5 at the battery. I presumed at rest to have ruled out a bad battery but maybe not.

jerry, lots of good advice but maybe a call to skidim is in order. They have plenty of 160 thermostats although I'm not clear if you've bench tested a new one. Has anyone ever made a diverter hose for the tranny cooler so as to not restrict fresh water flow to the raw water pump? Jerry, I assume your tranny cooler is not on the pressure side of the raw water pump, correct?

In other words, I'd bet your loose connections fried your alternator, which has damaged battery as well.

14.5 volts? At the battery? That's too high. I'd still test your alternator output but by definition it should be higher than your battery. But you shouldn't see anything that high.

I'm kind of with thager, as op's explanation that (he believes) since the dash pod gauges are lighting doesn't have anything to do with the lanyard switch. I don't think that rules out kill switch at all. But, I don't understand OPs terminology. He says the starter can be "jumped" and then later says it will not "start"...are we talking about a no fire condition or no turn over condition? The screwdriver jump can be used to turn starter over but if its not "firing" then I'd start at the kill switch. I can't speak for sure in nautiques but in many Malibus the kill switch will not keep the engine from turning over, it will only prevent it from running (firing).

Can you post your battery and alternator voltages both before you tightened and after? I'd hazard a guess that you could have been damaging the alternator with the loose connections and thats its output voltage is now deficient.

Must be frustrating. If its a 2019, is your dealer involved or at least aware in case you pop the engine?

@jjackkrash Maybe there was a disagreement as to the verdict form, but it does not treat that question as a predicate to the failure to warn question in the actual form. Perhaps that's an issue for an appeal? https://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/documents/404/67553/Batchelder-v.-Malibu-Boats-verdict-forms.pdf Maybe it was written that way for purposes of a High-low agreement depending on the answers? Maybe the questions were designed to preserve product liability insurance coverage (ie, using the word negligence)? But then, does the State of Georgia go away for their (apparent) 75% of $120M? Interesting.

@davemac One is depth and the other temps (water and air). Not related to speed control. One of the switches above the key switches pitots and the other adjusts the speedo. This one predates the switches for controlling the multifunction LCD like on yours. I didn't catch that blue wire at first but am similarly perplexed. It's not going to the throttle linkage and goes astern of the flame arrestor and the goes down. It's too small to be going to the starter and there's no reason it would be going to the distributor or cap. I'm not saying this is a good guess, but I think the transmission shift control bracket is on starboard side and am wondering if someone had to replace the shift linkage cable and either didn't have the right size or couldn't run it in the factory location?

In 2001 Malibu had a factory accu-ski system but the display is not in the pictures. Maybe there's a auxillary square perfect pass display mounted low but that would be odd.

@BraceMaker Interesting observation, but the driver was not a defendant, either, and the jury was allowed to include him in their liability apportionment. A personal injury attorney friend of mine has explained that some states allow a jury to apportion fault to non-parties whether they've settled or not. Don't know about Georgia but would appear the same. Reading between the lines, plaintiffs nor defendants seem like they wanted or needed the Marina involved.

Pics weren't up when I posted last...yes that is a monsoon.

If you post a picture of the engine we can tell you. Likely the monsoon which is a great engine. Sunsetter Lxi is a great boat. I used to have one. There's really nothing "common" except perhaps a bad HDS box (hydrophonic dampening system) which is proprietary to malibu. Even if it is, its not that big of a deal. Lots of info on the malibu crew for solutions. Other than that, nothing unique.

I guess. I just don't see how alignment has any effect on the seal since the shaft is running through the channel that's attached to the shaft. In any event, I think we're in agreement its the opportune time to check the alignment, which is done too infrequently anyway.