klindy

Interestingly, I had Dave Goode send me a new ski a couple years ago. I couldn’t get it to work for me. A couple weeks later we were at the same site. First thing he did was use soap and a scotch brite pad to scrub the bottom. We made some additional adjustments and it still wasn’t right for me.

@Mrs_MS ”flagged”?? As in somewhere that discrepancy is noted and somehow “used against” that judge? If that’s what you mean, absolutely, positively not - NO! There’s no way nor is there any system to track if even if it was desirable to do so. If you mean something else by your statement, please let me know.

Sorry @Bruce_Butterfield ! https://vm.tiktok.com/TTPd6NHf8Q/

@dave2ball the background check is a third party but not part of and “government contract”. They may very well do other work for the government but the background checks are not the same as the SafeSport training (which is part of a congressionally funded program). Not suggesting you’re feelings of opinion are wrong but the two issues are separate.

Well done! The photos are excellent!

I’ve been on the road all day. I’ll answer in the am.

@Horton Lake Lure is literally just outside Asheville. There’s a course and ski school there. Even a tournament every once in a while.

@Bruce_Butterfield I would agree. The decision was appealed and rejected. All those arguments weee made it seems.

@wski1831 John, to address a couple of your points. There actually has been fairly significant research done to see how other NGBs have implemented SS. Some NGBs are larger and otters smaller. Interestingly all who provided feedback have implemented SS for all members. All expressed that there were vocal opponents and legitimate concerns about effectiveness. SS has been implemented in phases over some time. Coaches, board/committee members and others have been required to take it for several years. I’ve had to take the refresher twice. USOPC conducts a 4-year audit which was a primary reason to add additional categories of members. The difficulty in determining exactly how to distinguish which members have access to minors makes it difficult to say this person has to take it and that person doesn’t. Therefore the USAWSWS board decided to make it mandatory for all members. That is being revisited on some levels by sport division.

@Jody_Seal i have no idea what you’re talking about. I make others in the Southern Region miserable? I’m on the position I’m in by acclimation? Nope. Wrong. As COB I don’t even have a vote unless it’s to break a tie (which I’ve not had to do). If you have a problem with the Southern Region directors, I’m happy to help if I can.

@Jody_Seal you got it backwards. I’m not using anything against you. Your solution is to start something new and fracture the sport even more. Tell us what you expect and how it would work better. Tell us how you think you’d be exempt from a law every other amateur sports organization needs to find a way to comply with? Tell us how it will be funded? Jody, again your ideas are good. Your passion and knowledge second to none. But somehow you come off as if everyone (or maybe just me?) is out to purposely make your life miserable. That’s simply not the case.

@Jody_Seal first of all I have had ZERO to do with any kind of “invite” or expectation that waterskiing will become an Olympic sport. For absolute clarity, I do NOT believe that an engine has anything to do with denial to become an Olympic sport. I DO believe the primary reason is that it’s just doesn’t have the appeal to a mass audience in the current format. I DO believe it’s possible but I have ABSOLUTELY ZERO expectations of getting there nor are ANY of my personal decisions about the direction of 3-event skiing have anything to do with our affiliation with USOPC. None. Zero. And @Jody_Seal ill ask you to stop making broad generalizations about everyone on a board or committee suggesting collectively we are focused on some kind of Olympic push. Second, the organization can survive without any direct funding from the USOPC. It makes up approximately 10% of total USAWSWS income which, if you do the math, can be totally replaced with a modest increase in dues (~$15). Don’t misunderstand me, the grants and other funds from USOPC are helpful and DO pay for things we would otherwise either have to fund elsewhere or eliminate. The relationship with USOPC, in its current form, provides significant creditability to the sport in general. It does provide prize money and underpins sponsorship for major events like the Masters and Open Worlds. There are literally hundreds of messages on BOS alone which encourage, support and cheer on the amazing coverage from TWBC and others, the overall quality and access which has greatly improved in recent years! ALL that exposure and chatter is directly related to the elite skiers around the world. I can think of dozens of ski schools and boat dealerships which are likely in existence today because of elite skiers - either training and/or coaching opportunities (both US and lots of foreign skiers). The elite program is critical to the survival of the sport and the industry. Third, shame on me and others for “bringing government into the sport” while having so much affluence and wealth?! Dude, get a grip! It’s not about affluence or wealth! It’s about some really bad, ugly people on society that taint our quiet life for all of us! We don’t have Nassar or any of the issues that other sports. The Boy Scouts or the Catholic Church has, but we DO live in that world. And those horrible, sickening actions cause our elected politicians to react (overreact? Maybe, but as soon as you can control their actions, please let me know!). Here’s a link to the latest amendment to the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act further tightening the regulations we’ve spent nearly 40 pages debating - https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/COMPS-13986/pdf/COMPS-13986.pdf Make careful note that while it does discuss the USOPC as the primary organization, it also includes language which ropes in ALL “amateur sports organizations”. Breaking off USOPC won’t help, you still need to develop your own program or pay SafeSport MUCH more than a member NGB does. Breaking off USAWSWS doesn’t exempt any organization with 1)amateur athletes and 2) minors. So complain all you want about how our board, committees, ED, or i bungled the implementation, it’s here to stay in some form or fashion. I can assure you and anyone else reading that there have been LOTS of communication circulated among many people with questions, answers, more questions and ideas on how to comply with a minimum of burden to our membership. Change is hard, especially when you didn’t cause the need to change. The sport is expensive and you’re right, many are affluent. That affluence has built an industry and many businesses associated with that industry - including very reputable boat dealers and repair shops like yours. Many of your ideas are good. Some will likely come into play. Others (like some of mine too) won’t see the light of day. Regardless of who or what your disappointment da jour is, we are all working to do the best things possible for the sport and the organization. Please consider that as we move forward.

@Jody_Seal do you take the standard deduction on your income taxes? Should USAWSWS change the corp status away from a 501c3 corp so donations are not tax deductions? Should we abolish the scholarship program since apparently everyone is a millionaire? The government funds literally thousands of programs because it’s been determined it’s in the best public interest to support them. I certainly don’t agree with all the funding and I would like to see more assistance in other areas. But in this case, the USOPC is charged with and funded to support amateur sports programs exactly like USAWSWS. Be happy that some of your hard earned tax dollars are funneled back into something you (used to) support.

@LeonL @ski6jones the new membership software looks at several different databases that make up your membership. Switching off the old system and turning on the new one will likely connect to a few places it didn’t look before. You are correct that it will say “inactive” or “pending” depending on the status of one or more of the parts of your membership. One of the reasons it’s being turned on now is because the tournament season is inactive during December. You’ll have plenty of time to get whatever ends up as a part of membership completed.

I haven’t filled out any form at this point so I don’t know if that’s possible or not. I’ll find out.

@MISkier @The_MS the background check info goes directly to the third party company that does background checks - NCSI. None of the data is stored by USAWSWS. @The_MS ever buy anything from Amazon, Netflix or even Wiley’s? You’ve entered your credit card number there. I’ve been told that NCSI will also allow you to not enter the SS number or CC number and will call for that information if the member desires.

@Jody_Seal the general membership votes on who’s on the regional council. The general membership votes for directors. Again the directors vote for officers.

That’s correct. There are some minimum requirements such as being a director for a certain amount of time but generally there is a nomination process. You can be nominated by someone and agree or nominate yourself. You can also be nominated from the floor at the meeting where the election takes place (regular board meeting). The directors of the board vote on officers - COB, President, VP, Treasurer and Secretary.

@Jody_Seal Mr Robbins is the COB of the USAWSWS Board. Mr Archambeau is the President of USAWSWS. That is the over arching organization which has 9 sport divisions under it. That’s the organization that has made the decision that all members need SS training. That’s the organization that has a mission statement and a vision for the sport. That’s the organization that you, me and all the other folks who join are members of. I am the COB of AWSA. AWSA is a sport division of USAWSWS. We have a purpose (to follow the mission and vision of USAWSWS) with a specific focus on traditional 3-event waterskiing. We set rules and manage the 3event tournaments. We are the biggest sport division of USAWSWS with Show skiing second and collegiate #3. We have a voice on the USAWSWS board but we are not the USAWSWS board alone. @JackQ 25% (3,500 out of 13,700) member of USAWSWS are under the age of 18. Many are show skiers. You are correct that 25% of skiers at AWSA tournaments are typically not under 18. Some tournaments have 100% participants who are under 18 by definition. @Jody_Seal so as far as AWSA is concerned, we are learning how these changes/mandates/regulations came to be and how they effect us just the same as you are. I can tell you that you are not the only one who has concerns and want answers. Once you start unpacking all the details, things are a bit more clear and understandable. The laws aren’t going away, but minimizing the impact while maximizing the intention of the laws is the challenge.

@lpskier correction USA Cycling requires SafeSport training of all members does NOT include the word “minor”. “USA Cycling requires members who have been authorized, appointed or approved to have regular contact with or authority over athletes to take SafeSport Trained. In addition, pursuant to The Center’s Education and Training Policy, USA Cycling requires adults at our Local Associations and with our Clubs who have regular contact with or authority over minor athletes to take SafeSport Trained.” The difference is likely a clear separation of athletes and officials etc. Perhaps someone who’s knows how their sanctioned events work can better explain if athletes are ever used for “officials” or not. Pretty clear it’s not limited to only coaches or trainers.

@ski6jones I believe the measures being implemented seem like we’re driving a finish nail with a sledgehammer. And, unfortunately, we’re trying to drive the nail thru a piece of glass. By that I mean society has changed. There is an expectation that the environment where we compete is safe and healthy (this is a good thing). While we all share varying levels of responsibility to make sure that happens (from parents teaching there kids appropriately to site owners keeping sites reasonably maintained to officials keeping intoxicated people from driving boats to any number of other concerns, it’s also the responsibility of the sanctioning body to put programs and other safeguards in place to mitigate the risks both real and financial. Due to today’s reality, laws and regulations are in place which make these things not only a good idea but a legal requirement. So unfortunately it’s irresponsible not to do something (at a minimum, what’s required). At least two federal laws compel ANY amateur athletic organization which includes minors to provide a safe environment where those minors can participate. They include several requirements for awareness, preventative training, investigation and protection from sexual abuse, molestation and bullying. Note, this is NOT a USOPC or NGB requirement. It’s for ALL amateur sports organizations (e.g. - the “world we live in”). Read more here - https://www.usef.org/forms-pubs/ZeXEaZoEt-k/fact-sheet-protecting-young-victims Criminal background checks are another tool required and use by the laws to identify potential bad actors and controlling their participation. Again, these too are part of federal law which mandates the are conducted for adult participants who have “regular contact” with minors. FYI, minors make up approximately 25% of our total membership. Likewise, for example, show skiers make up approximately 40% of our membership and it’s pretty clear that all those members have regular contact with minors. So while it seems draconian, based on the defensible definition of regular contact, the majority of the members need to be screened and take safe sport anyway. We are discussing reviewing that discipline by discipline and some adjustments may be made but the requirements aren’t going way - with or without USOPC or as a stand-alone AWSA or as a new organization. Ultimately the mandate isn’t from internal decisions but from our elected officials. To add another layer, it would be fiscally irresponsible for USAWSWS to operate without insurance. The insurance carriers are increasingly resistant to provide incident coverage for these risks. Many WILL offer coverage (and the premiums vary) based on the ACTIONS taken by the insured (USAWSWS) to, as much as reasonably possible, mitigate risk. Currently we DO have coverage based on our current practices and our willingness to face these risks with recognized programs and procedures. None of these laws/regulations/procedures will prevent all issues. Likewise, whether a parent/guardian chooses ignore a incident or take matters into their own hands, the organization has a responsibility to reduce opportunity and l risk per the laws in place. As leaders inside USAWSWS and AWSA, it our job to take the laws serious and try to maximize compliance, project reasonably into the future and minimize the negative impact on the organization and membership. Some things are practical steps which are changing and others are financial decisions. We can eliminate our relationship with USOPC. It would mean our access to programs like SafeSport go away or become more costly. Not being recognized by USOPC would likely change the relationship with IWWF and would prevent is from fielding teams for World Championship events (Open, U14, U17, U21, 35+, 45+, 55+, etc). That would likely have implications for sponsored athletes, ski and boat R&D, even ski schools and other programs that directly relate to elite athletes that we all benefit from. Even the title sponsor at this years Open Worlds was made possible by our affiliation with USOPC. This is on top of any financial benefit AND has ZERO to do with any dream or effort to become an Olympic sport (of which no active effort exists in the US that I’m aware of). So, yes I think this likely similar to hitting a finish nail with a sledgehammer. However other sports organizations have been doing this for years already and were catching up. There still may be some tweaks which will help lessen the stress to get it in place but the reality is we alone aren’t going to change the world. There are a LOT of other details which are important but I didn’t include here. I’m sure there will be questions. A more detailed paper and FAQs will be coming out shortly (I’ve seen one draft).

@ski6jones i agree with your language. Precisely what I intended. @Wish a common misperception is that liability is being pushed on the LOC. the USAWSWS general liability insurance and even rider that covers the LOC, organizers, etc of an event included sexual misconduct now just as it has in the past. There is no additional liability being transferred to the LOC. There are some reporting/paperwork requirements which, as I understand it, can be handled by a simple email to all participants and a similar post onsite for late entries. There should be some changes made to the details posted online and an email going out to all the clubs shortly.

If they has better training, background checks and a more proactive program to guard against that type of thing I do think the insurance companies are more likely to defend and address claims. Besides, of that settlement, I don’t know if insurance paid it all. Here’s another article. Find is much, much larger than the $380million noted above. Looks like much of it did come from insurance coverage https://finance.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/coalition-abused-scouts-justice-increases-213500033.html The point is this is the world we’re in. Reducing the potential as much as possible and ensuring there is adequate safeguards in place to better manage any issues that arise is an important part of operating the organization. There are no perfect answers. No easy answers. Just multiple layers of actions that minimize the opportunities and risks.

@BraceMaker that’s correct. With GPS Steering and ZO you could program the system to default to neutral unless manually controlled anywhere on the lake except (for example) between the green buoys within 6” of the centerline of the course.

Let’s remember that much of the technology is only required for record level tournaments. For class C the requirements are much lower and the use of the tech is optional. So in the vast majority of the cases, it’s someone’s choice to use it. @UWSkier, the technology is being developed by a private third party person/company. I’m not aware of any initiative that is driving this. So you don’t need to “banish” anyone for trying to kill the sport, just don’t buy the product.