• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
southerncross

Wanted Missing VOR Skipper

Recommended Posts

I have no, and will have no opinion either way regarding "lines being crossed" until I better understand the full context of the situation and hear directly from the parties involved. This seems yet another example of society's current propensity to convict people in the kangaroo court of public opinion based on internet sound bites. Video and soundbites can be made to say anything from any source footage. Since no one posting here was present during the creation of that video, and I assume has had no direct contact with the parties involved I will reserve opinion until the truth and the full context comes out. 

As my previous post I think the bigger concern is how the system permits outsiders with no connection to the event potentially affecting the outcome.

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, random said:

For me it was not about Rule 69, it was how the fuck do we stop these throwbacks from harassing women onboard.

WTF... How do you know AB was harassed? Were you on board? Have you spoken to her? Has she issued a statement to the press or on FB or a blog? Do you know her personally and know that that sort of humour does not fit with her personality? 

The only thing we can say for certain, 1) AB was not asked to apply the sudocrem, only advice on how the others should apply it. 2) AB was 100% part of the joke given that she was wearing the beard. 3) yes, she was rendered speechless, but we DO NOT know if it was because it was offensive to her .

AB as it seems has sailed with DW before on Scallywag Maxi and has spent a lot of time with DW in the lead up to the filming of video. Unless AB is totally niave,  which the patronising "offended" brigade seem to think, AB will have either know exactly the question that was coming or at least knew what it might be like, i.e. offensive to the mangina brigade. 

If I was "Dr Clog", I'm pretty sure I could have been rendered speechless in the moment, especially if I knew it was being filmed.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, random said:

Some of us here knew that Witty had crossed the line when we first saw the video.

Crossed your line? yes. Crossed AB's line? no one here knows that.

I suspect that DW know's AB's line better than anyone on SA.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, stief said:

Interesting. Not sure exactly what you mean, but would fit Jack's point about Dawn Riley.

 

Filing protests against everyone and everything in the hope that something or indeed anything at all sticks. That is what it looks like to me.

 

Lets expand a bit.
I obviously don't know what is actually going on beyond reading this thread and what makes it to other media. 

 

As I understand during/after Leg 2 of this VOR edition of Rule 69 protests based on media coming off the boats a series got filed against several people. From sailors on different boats, to OBR, to VOR staff.
Most of those protests went away during preliminary investigation. Some were deemed serious enough to warrant a special investigator. Some or all of those now go to protest hearings.

No matter who filed them (Dawn Riley, someone else, several different people) or if someone with the actual ability to protest had to refile them it it is obvious that the protests come from within the sport. Outsiders would NOT bother with a protest.

 

One of my problems is that this seems to be about finding fault -somewhere, anywhere- rather than improving the situation. The VOR is long enough to force a broad discussion and generate a set of rules and expectations for the sport.  With or without input from the VOR. Then put the teams under close surveillance for the remaining 6 months or so. If something happens, and if there is actually a systematic problem it will happen again, then pounce on them with protests. 
Also, at which point becomes the sheer amount of apparently baseless protests a reason in itself a reason to throw all of them out?

Heck, what if Annemieke said something to the effect of "And girls, that is why you take a very close look at a sailor before you do anything with them at all." but it got cut from the video. So easy to turn the whole thing around.

 

Anyway. At the end of the day it is yet another reinforcement of the lesson that anything you say or do WILL be used against you. So STFU sailor, or at least dunk OBR and gear a few times into salt water. :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hoppy said:

Crossed your line, yes. Crossed AB's line, no one here knows that.

I suspect that DW know's AB's line better than anyone on SA.

I knew that it crossed a line of acceptability for many people.

It does not even matter if she was or was not offended, the issue is about Witt's actions, not her feelings.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

VOR contacted us to clarify that Hancock was incorrect as fuck about the R69.  It was not initiated by VOR or another team.  It was the response to a complaint by an outside party, and someone I respect suggested that it came from 'some uptight arse at the HKSF "who has it in for Witty and hates the owner". 

If that's the correct version I may have an inkling as to who the protestor may be, but I'll be fucked if I'm going to tar someone with that brush on just gut feeling.

Will the protestor be named at the hearing and will the outcomes etc be posted online?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, random said:

I knew that it crossed a line of acceptability for many people.

It does not even matter if she was or was not offended, the issue is about Witt's actions, not her feelings.

So you are defending AB because you think AB is too weak to defend herself, how chivalrous of you.

If you are so prissy, why did you watch the video beyond the warning?

It's like going to a porn site, reading the warnings on the front page, clicking the "I'm over 18/21" button and then getting offended by the content.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points Chasm 

FWIW, Doerr's Guidance is pretty clear that a complaint can come from outside, and that RO action should be proactive. Just one example:

Quote

49.5  It is important that all race officials work together to tackle the dissent when it is encountered. Failure to confront unacceptable behaviour at the time can lead competitors to think it is acceptable and repeat it in the future.

Huh. Thought others had taken the bliss of the ignore pill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hoppy said:

So you are defending AB because you think AB is too weak to defend herself, how chivalrous of you.

Please link where I am supposed to be defending AB?  Calm down precious, stop making shit up.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, random said:

Please link where I am supposed to be defending AB?  Calm down precious, stop making shit up.

 

1 hour ago, random said:

it was how the fuck do we stop these throwbacks from harassing women onboard.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, random said:

It does not even matter if she was or was not offended, the issue is about Witt's actions, not her feelings.

So it's not about harassment of a female crew and more about a personal issue with a VOR Skipper then.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, vibroman said:

So it's not about harassment of a female crew and more about a personal issue with a VOR Skipper then.

The Protest was not from a female crew member so her feelings are presumably not part of the protest.

So it can only be the actions of Witty and his crew that are being protested.  Simple if you really take the time to think about it.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Gorn FRANTIC!! said:

If that's the correct version I may have an inkling as to who the protestor may be, but I'll be fucked if I'm going to tar someone with that brush on just gut feeling.

Will the protestor be named at the hearing and will the outcomes etc be posted online?

I doubt it, because the complaints don't have to be part of the protest and the investigation doesn't need to be made public.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mark Set (BIMBO Local 713) said:

so I finally got to see the video on the home page........thats.....it? Really? All this fuss over that very mild joke? 

Mate you are so fucking spot on, very mild joke.

It's so mild that Dr Random prescribes you a dose of the mild joke at your workplace sometime soon.  Get back to us with how that goes.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all the hoopla and hand-wringing, I thought the video was going to be much worse. IMO, it was tasteless but only mildly offensive. If that's a rule 69 violation, then damn near every boat I sailed on over a 25 year span is guilty. Good thing no video BITD.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean seriously...Witt so rubbed his crotch and then sniffed his fucking fingers...holy crap...Witt wasn't humiliating AB, he was targeting Hayles and the fact that by that time, Scallywag was sucking hind teat at the back of the fleet. He calls this the Steven Hayles Show...i.e. placing the responsibility for their current performance directly on his head. He then proceeds to humiliate him by groping his has balls and grabbing his ass while he is at the helm. THEN SNIFFING HIS HAND....omg gross!!

 

No wonder Hayles left...and frankly from that perspective...that WAS abusive not only indirectly to AB and the crew but directly to Hayles.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, random said:

Mate you are so fucking spot on, very mild joke.

It's so mild that Dr Random prescribes you a dose of the mild joke at your workplace sometime soon.  Get back to us with how that goes.

So its workplace sexual harassment you say? Let the employer deal with it then. 

Seems like David Witt is being proven right about his "Social Experiment" comment, you think that will help women in sailing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, RKoch said:

damn near every boat I sailed on over a 25 year span is guilty.

You see there it goes again, same old shit, no recognition that not only does no one give a fuck what happened to you in the last 25 years sailing, but that is was not posted on the interweb during a highly publicised global event!  WTF is so hard to understand about the difference?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, random said:

Mate you are so fucking spot on, very mild joke.

It's so mild that Dr Random prescribes you a dose of the mild joke at your workplace sometime soon.  Get back to us with how that goes.

Give a rest.... how have you gotten this far in life....?

Please don't youtube any comedy routines from Jim Jeffreys.... gosh darn it.... to heck (sorry again Random for my super offensive outburst)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mark Set (BIMBO Local 713) said:

So its workplace sexual harassment you say? Let the employer deal with it then. 

Seems like David Witt is being proven right about his "Social Experiment" comment, you think that will help women in sailing?

It seems to me that that is exactly what is happening.

Witty knew that it would be challenging for him,  and you are correct,  he and his actions will do nothing to encourage women in sailing, that's what they are desperately trying to patch up.  Think about it, the floating bill-boards are no interested in selling more stuff to half the population (men) they want to sell to all the population.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, random said:

You see there it goes again, same old shit, no recognition that not only does no one give a fuck what happened to you in the last 25 years sailing, but that is was not posted on the interweb during a highly publicised global event!  WTF is so hard to understand about the difference?

I'm not the one pretending to be offended on behalf of AB. She's signed up for Leg 3, so either she wasn't offended or they worked it out amongst themselves. Not my place to decide if she's supposed to be offended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, random said:

It seems to me that that is exactly what is happening.

Witty knew that it would be challenging for him,  and you are correct,  he and his actions will do nothing to encourage women in sailing, that's what they are desperately trying to patch up.  Think about it, the floating bill-boards are no interested in selling more stuff to half the population (men) they want to sell to all the population.

No that is specifically not what is happening. Not filed by VOR or anyone associated with. 

The protest came from outside the workplace. Its really simple if you take the time to think about it

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, random said:

You see there it goes again, same old shit, no recognition that not only does no one give a fuck what happened to you in the last 25 years sailing, but that is was not posted on the interweb during a highly publicised global event!  WTF is so hard to understand about the difference?

Bwaaaaa !!!!!

I find your use of expletives in the above post misandristic and highly offensive,  and I have been harassed. Where is the phone number for the International Court of Human Rights?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, RKoch said:

I'm not the one pretending to be offended on behalf of AB. She's signed up for Leg 3, so either she wasn't offended or they worked it out amongst themselves. Not my place to decide if she's supposed to be offended.

I am not pretending to be offended, that's a strawman response from privileged white men who are scared shitless that the last safe place they had has been invaded by females.

Neither does it matter whether AB was offended or not, totally besides the point.  It's about what Witt did.

For the record, I was not offended by what I saw.  For some reason I am finding difficult to put into words, Witt grosses me out, I find him hard to watch, cringe-inducing.

I started to watch the video again today after it was posted on the front page but only got a few seconds into it.  Something very fucking creepy about that guy and I could not bear to watch the frozen reaction of AB again, not to mention the sheepish expressions of the crew.  They sat there like school children, definitely uncomfortable, they instinctively knew it was out of order

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, random said:

I am not pretending to be offended, strawman response from privileged white men who are scared shitless that the last safe place they had has been invaded by females.

Neither does not matter whether AB was offended or not, totally besides the point.  It's about what Witt did.

For the record, I was not offended by what I saw.  For some reason I am finding difficult to put into words, Witt grosses me out, I find him hard to watch, cringe-inducing.

I started to watch the video again today after it was posted on the front page but only got a few seconds into it.  Something very fucking creepy about that guy and I could not bear to watch the frozen reaction of AB again, not to mention the sheepish expressions of the crew.  They sat there like school children, definitely uncomfortable, they instinctively knew it was out of order

 

so the truth comes out, you just hate David Witt. Thats fine, you dont have to like him, I dont either. But having the rule book respond to sexual harassment among the crew, is that really appropriate? Rule 69 is the same for professional crew as it is for amateur crews.  If so then I guess all race committees should go on youtube looking for videos of crew during races to make sure they arent offending anybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, random said:

I am not pretending to be offended, that's a strawman response from privileged white men who are scared shitless that the last safe place they had has been invaded by females.

Neither does it matter whether AB was offended or not, totally besides the point.  It's about what Witt did.

For the record, I was not offended by what I saw.  For some reason I am finding difficult to put into words, Witt grosses me out, I find him hard to watch, cringe-inducing.

I started to watch the video again today after it was posted on the front page but only got a few seconds into it.  Something very fucking creepy about that guy and I could not bear to watch the frozen reaction of AB again, not to mention the sheepish expressions of the crew.  They sat there like school children, definitely uncomfortable, they instinctively knew it was out of order

 

So, your panties are twisted in a knot because you don't like the skipper. Guess what? You're not on the boat, so no one cares. Except me...I care. Let me help you out...

 

IMG_0037.PNG

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, random said:

They sat there like school children, definitely uncomfortable, they instinctively knew it was out of order

Had she had a good comeback it might have salvaged the situation.

Maybe instead of a "caption" contest we could have a "comeback" contest.

Any takers? I'll be first.

AB:  "Had you two any balls in the first place maybe we wouldn't be at the back of the fleet."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Creeping "Male Feminism" is worse that I had thought, it's gone beyond most of Europe and the US lefties and has spread into yachting. Much like the scourge of socialism to economic vigor,  demanding "equal outcomes" and thus the special accommodation to attain them will quash the spirit of sports. The only defense will be to leap ahead and have the requisite number of athletes "identify" as female, and thus finesse the PC crowd with their own ideological rubric. I am truly surprised that it has not happened already. Given that "lauren" is from Kiwiland, (s)he might even be a sailor... 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On my boat it tends to be my remarks that leave men speechless.

As a practicing doctor  I can tell you that the problem with Witts scrotum needed more than cream, I have something that is applied with a syringe and 6 inch needle that would probably keep him quiet for the rest of the trip.

OMG......I used the word "scrotum" . Sorry about that.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does it stop at videos on the internet, or can anyone who is offended by a joke on an offshore race turn the perpertrator in  for Rule 69?

Hell, how come we haven' t seen a Rule 69 for the 'hazing' those who cross the equator.

This has really gone too far. (and i won't even mention how far Riley just raised the bar for taking women offshore) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DarkHorse said:

Does it stop at videos on the internet, or can anyone who is offended by a joke on an offshore race turn the perpertrator in  for Rule 69?

It stops at events where there are paid crew sailing under RRS, oh and it matters if the record get's off the boat.

You are free to engage in misogyny and schoolboy antics on your boat anytime.  Fucking funni here how the rednecks with 4ksb's think that this incident applies to them.

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DarkHorse said:

Does it stop at videos on the internet, or can anyone who is offended by a joke on an offshore race turn the perpertrator in  for Rule 69?

Hell, how come we haven' t seen a Rule 69 for the 'hazing' those who cross the equator.

This has really gone too far. (and i won't even mention how far Riley just raised the bar for taking women offshore) 

 

Dawn couch-surfed at my pad for about 3 months, 30 years ago. She can give it and take it with any guy. I'm a bit surprised she got herself into this clusterfuck. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

Potter has confirmed it was Dawn Riley. [  .  .   . ]

I find this thread tendentious so haven't slogged through it and will limit my comment to one narrow avenue.

  • Where exactly has Riley publicly stated she found the vid offensive and has instigated (or collaborated on) a Rule 69 complaint with the VOR committee?  I can't find it, except for the above innuendo.
  • Riley is a spectator in this round, nothing more.  Spectators, as far as I know, have no standing in any protest committee actions, except possibly as witnesses. 
  • If this Rule 69 protest (apparently introduced by the Protest Committee without an official protester who's participating in the race) is upheld, what does it mean for me as an insignificant but sanctioned racing sailor?

What's swirling in my head is the situation where I gotta pee off the stern (or leeward shrouds) in a can race, carefully time it so no other boat can see me do so, some spectator ashore observes what is essentially indecent exposure, illegal discharge of sewage, and reports their observations to the Governing Authority,  and the next thing I know is I'm banned from racing for 6 months or more?

If that's true, I can live with it.  Sad to have to kneel in the cockpit and pee in a scupper with the mess that ensues, or even invest in a bunch of WAG bags.  The NBA handles such peccadilloes with a few thousand dollar fine, the NHL with some penalty box time (or fines), the NFL with a 5 yard penalty.  Also for this particular alleged transgression news is nowhere to be found on the Official VOR site, or the general media.

WTF is going on?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, axolotl said:

I find this thread tendentious so haven't slogged through it and will limit my comment to one narrow avenue.

  • Where exactly has Riley publicly stated she found the vid offensive and has instigated (or collaborated on) a Rule 69 complaint with the VOR committee?  I can't find it, except for the above innuendo.
  • Riley is a spectator in this round, nothing more.  Spectators, as far as I know, have no standing in any protest committee actions, except possibly as witnesses. 
  • If this Rule 69 protest (apparently introduced by the Protest Committee without an official protester who's participating in the race) is upheld, what does it mean for me as an insignificant but sanctioned racing sailor?

What's swirling in my head is the situation where I gotta pee off the stern (or leeward shrouds) in a can race, carefully time it so no other boat can see me do so, some spectator ashore observes what is essentially indecent exposure, illegal discharge of sewage, and reports their observations to the Governing Authority,  and the next thing I know is I'm banned from racing for 6 months or more?

If that's true, I can live with it.  Sad to have to kneel in the cockpit and pee in a scupper with the mess that ensues, or even invest in a bunch of WAG bags.  The NBA handles such peccadilloes with a few thousand dollar fine, the NHL with some penalty box time (or fines), the NFL with a 5 yard penalty.  Also for this particular alleged transgression news is nowhere to be found on the Official VOR site, or the general media.

WTF is going on?

IIRC anybody can file a 69 complaint with the protest committee. Apparently that now includes video watchers. And yes, if you piss off the back of your boat and random is watching through binocs, she'd probably be highly offended and file a 69 complaint. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RKoch said:

IIRC anybody can file a 69 complaint with the protest committee. Apparently that now includes video watchers. And yes, if you piss off the back of your boat and random is watching through binocs, she'd probably be highly offended and file a 69 complaint. 

Indeed.

 

69.2 Action by a Protest Committee
(a) A protest committee acting under this rule shall have at least three members.
(b) When a protest committee, from its own observation or from information received from any source, including evidence taken during a hearing, believes a person may have broken rule 69.1(a), it shall decide whether or not to call a hearing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, duncan (the other one) said:

Indeed.

 

69.2 Action by a Protest Committee
(a) A protest committee acting under this rule shall have at least three members.
(b) When a protest committee, from its own observation or from information received from any source, including evidence taken during a hearing, believes a person may have broken rule 69.1(a), it shall decide whether or not to call a hearing.

So that means it can call a Hearing without a protest being received.

Edit: Makes sense if they are serious in protecting the reputation of the sport.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, pudge said:

At least I don't live in the stone age. 

No you live in the cotton wool age. You are getting very excited over this cup cake - me thinks you may have a personal connection to the players (maybe Witt cut your lunch?), otherwise why would a rational adult have so much sand in their vag over something that has nothing to do with them. Yes we know you are doing this for your niece, your girlfriend and the female boss you fantasize over at work.

Any chance of posting their tits?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mark Set (BIMBO Local 713) said:

well its the same fucking rule so why wouldnt it? What does "professional crew" have to do with it? Rule 69 makes zero fucking mention of it.

Good point.  I see that professional crew turn the boat into a workplace where additional considerations apply.  But it could be just any RRS event.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, random said:

Please link where I said I was outraged. Even 'faux-ish'

Making shit up again dude, it's a chronic issue you have, reading in what you want to see.

You endless winey posts in this thread are a fair indication of your Faux butt hurt. Maybe you could try some of witt's cod cream?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, random said:

So that means it can call a Hearing without a protest being received.

RRS 69 is not grounds for a protest.  Only the PC can call a hearing if they believe the rule has been broken. :

69.1 (c) An allegation of a breach of rule 69.1(a) shall be resolved in accordance with the provisions of rule 69. It shall not be grounds for a protest and rule 63.1 does not apply.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LB 15 said:

You endless winey posts in this thread are a fair indication of your Faux butt hurt. Maybe you could try some of witt's cod cream?

I'll give it a go, but I''ll stop short of you applying it.  Have to say that I am starting to get used to your cold damp nose on my freckle though.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random said:

Please link where I am supposed to be defending AB?  Calm down precious, stop making shit up.

So I provided this link earlier and you failed to respond.

You are nothing more than your avatar suggests, a troll who needs a good amount of sudocrem rubbed into your private parts.

3 hours ago, random said:

it was how the fuck do we stop these throwbacks from harassing women onboard.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

otherwise why would a rational adult have so much sand in their vag over something that has nothing to do with them

the-hypocrisy-is-strong-with-this-one.jp

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hoppy said:

So I provided this link earlier and you failed to respond.

You are nothing more than your avatar suggests, a troll who needs a good amount of sudocrem rubbed into your private parts.

 

I think Bengay would be more suitable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hoppy said:

So I provided this link earlier and you failed to respond.

You posted a link that proved nothing, nothing to comment on.  If you have anything to show that I am defending AB let's see it.

Given the bleating of the hairy masses here, I also though that failure of me to respond would have been a success for testosterone.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, random said:

 

I support anyone who stands up and takes action against what Witty did, to stamp this shit out.

Unless that women was someone you dislike for commenting on male sports like Erin Molan. Keep up the good work mate - even people who agree with you think you are a cunt.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, random said:

I'll give it a go, but I''ll stop short of you applying it.  Have to say that I am starting to get used to your cold damp nose on my freckle though.

You seem to have your tongue in JS's of late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, random said:

I'll give it a go, but I''ll stop short of you applying it.  Have to say that I am starting to get used to your cold damp nose on my freckle though.

More sexual harassment from you Random..... I'm protesting  ... rule 69 of course .. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Gone Drinking said:

RRS 69 is not grounds for a protest.  Only the PC can call a hearing if they believe the rule has been broken. :

69.1 (c) An allegation of a breach of rule 69.1(a) shall be resolved in accordance with the provisions of rule 69. It shall not be grounds for a protest and rule 63.1 does not apply.

Indeed.

 

if you read Part 5 - there's effectively three procedures: protest, redress, and rule 69 action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, duncan (the other one) said:

oh fuck - just when this thread starts to settle down, along comes randumb to derail it again.

What did you expect.... He is the new DouG LorD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, duncan (the other one) said:

oh fuck - just when this thread starts to settle down, along comes randumb to derail it again.

You mean just when the circle-jerk got humming?

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, duncan (the other one) said:

Indeed.

if you read Part 5 - there's effectively three procedures: protest, redress, and rule 69 action.

Appendix G (p48) of Doerr's guidance is pretty good reading too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, axolotl said:

I find this thread tendentious so haven't slogged through it and will limit my comment to one narrow avenue.

  • Where exactly has Riley publicly stated she found the vid offensive and has instigated (or collaborated on) a Rule 69 complaint with the VOR committee?  I can't find it, except for the above innuendo.
  • Riley is a spectator in this round, nothing more.  Spectators, as far as I know, have no standing in any protest committee actions, except possibly as witnesses. 

It was mentioned by Potter first I think. Something about confirming that she raised the issue during the yacht racing forum in Copenhagen. Then I asked the representative from my country if this was true and it was confirmed that she raised the issue in that forum.

Whether she or anybody else outside the VOR can file a protest is unknown to me. But apparently they can.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random said:

I am not pretending to be offended, that's a strawman response from privileged white men who are scared shitless that the last safe place they had has been invaded by females.

Neither does it matter whether AB was offended or not, totally besides the point.  It's about what Witt did.

For the record, I was not offended by what I saw.  For some reason I am finding difficult to put into words, Witt grosses me out, I find him hard to watch, cringe-inducing.

I started to watch the video again today after it was posted on the front page but only got a few seconds into it.  Something very fucking creepy about that guy and I could not bear to watch the frozen reaction of AB again, not to mention the sheepish expressions of the crew.  They sat there like school children, definitely uncomfortable, they instinctively knew it was out of order

 

You find him hard to watch so you watched it again. I guess you needed to see it twice confirm your reading of the other crews minds and working out exactly how they were feeling as this horror unfolded. Thanks for sharing their thoughts and feelings with us.

Arseclown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

It was mentioned by Potter first I think. Something about confirming that she raised the issue during the yacht racing forum in Copenhagen. Then I asked the representative from my country if this was true and it was confirmed that she raised the issue in that forum.

Whether she or anybody else outside the VOR can file a protest is unknown to me. But apparently they can.

Yep - anyone who sees anything anywhere in the world they don't like associated with the sport can now try and bring a rule 69 against them. Randumb, old son, you should sell your shitbox and concentrate on gardening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

you find him hard to watch so you watched it again

"I started to watch the video again today after it was posted on the front page but only got a few seconds into it.  Something very fucking creepy about that guy and I could not bear to watch the frozen reaction of AB again, not to mention the sheepish expressions of the  ..."

Some people just put clever spin on things, you rotate it 180 degrees till it's just plain incorrect.  Put your glasses on mate.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surly this entire forum is grounds for a 69. We are all fucked but the hearing should be piss funny.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, random said:

"I started to watch the video again today after it was posted on the front page but only got a few seconds into it.  Something very fucking creepy about that guy and I could not bear to watch the frozen reaction of AB again, not to mention the sheepish expressions of the creepy ..."

Some people just put clever spin on things, you rotate it 180 degrees till it's just plain incorrect.  Put your glasses on mate.

But no comment on your hatred of women calling men's sports?

Arseclown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LB 15 said:

But no comment on your hatred of women calling men's sports?

Arseclown.

I hate men calling netball too.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel slightly harassed at the moment, by the way. I'm on a business trip and had to take a transfer bus out to a plane, of course the bus gets super crowded, but there's this business man who occupies TWO seats, even though old women stand right next to him.... and I'm thinking that he competes in the world class asshole competition, try to convince the women (by pointing to the seat) to just sit down, but they won't. I will regret my lack of gut for the rest of my life, I should have just addressed the man and told him to offer his extra seat to other passengers. No matter their gender.

The rest of the day was a series of encounters where men just took their place and didn't care if I was already being serviced. I was in the process of checking in to my hotel but the receptionist was constantly abrubted by men asking for different things. What the fuck. So in this place (eastern Europe) clearly men outrank women. I was nobody. And I was shocked.

Never EVER have I been treated this way during sailing. And you all know which boat I have delivered so I'm not new to the aussies. To even think that these guys would do something on purpose to make Annemieke feel bad is just beyond belief.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

And you all know which boat I have delivered so I'm not new to the aussies.

Been dining out on that one for a while.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

It was mentioned by Potter first I think. Something about confirming that she raised the issue during the yacht racing forum in Copenhagen. Then I asked the representative from my country if this was true and it was confirmed that she raised the issue in that forum.

Whether she or anybody else outside the VOR can file a protest is unknown to me. But apparently they can.

No, only the protest committee can file a 69 protest. But they can initiate that action based on information they receive from anywhere. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

I feel slightly harassed at the moment, by the way. I'm on a business trip and had to take a transfer bus out to a plane, of course the bus gets super crowded, but there's this business man who occupies TWO seats, even though old women stand right next to him.... and I'm thinking that he competes in the world class asshole competition, try to convince the women (by pointing to the seat) to just sit down, but they won't. I will regret my lack of gut for the rest of my life, I should have just addressed the man and told him to offer his extra seat to other passengers. No matter their gender.

The rest of the day was a series of encounters where men just took their place and didn't care if I was already being serviced. I was in the process of checking in to my hotel but the receptionist was constantly abrubted by men asking for different things. What the fuck. So in this place (eastern Europe) clearly men outrank women. I was nobody. And I was shocked.

Never EVER have I been treated this way during sailing. And you all know which boat I have delivered so I'm not new to the aussies. To even think that these guys would do something on purpose to make Annemieke feel bad is just beyond belief.

Which bit of backwater europe are you in???!!

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mad said:

Which bit of backwater europe are you in???!!

Bulgaria...let's just say they have some work to do.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The committee receiving a complaint is like a police or investigating judge/counsel (depending on what country you're from) getting a tip. 

They investigate everything and give the accused due process. It can be  about sailors getting drunk and trashing the bar. Skipper not paying professional help. Cheating not otherwise addressed by the rules. 

Getting bent out of shape until there's actually some sanctions involved. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

I feel slightly harassed at the moment, by the way. I'm on a business trip and had to take a transfer bus out to a plane, of course the bus gets super crowded, but there's this business man who occupies TWO seats, even though old women stand right next to him.... and I'm thinking that he competes in the world class asshole competition, try to convince the women (by pointing to the seat) to just sit down, but they won't. I will regret my lack of gut for the rest of my life, I should have just addressed the man and told him to offer his extra seat to other passengers. No matter their gender.

The rest of the day was a series of encounters where men just took their place and didn't care if I was already being serviced. I was in the process of checking in to my hotel but the receptionist was constantly abrubted by men asking for different things. What the fuck. So in this place (eastern Europe) clearly men outrank women. I was nobody. And I was shocked.

Never EVER have I been treated this way during sailing. And you all know which boat I have delivered so I'm not new to the aussies. To even think that these guys would do something on purpose to make Annemieke feel bad is just beyond belief.

+ 1

There are genuine predators and abusers and all around harassing male arse-holes out there. Zero tolerance for that.

Then there is the conceited idiot who thinks he is smarter than me in the workplace because he is male. Thankfully a diminishing number and my response is a thick skin and just get the job done better and make more money than him and have a better life.

But men on sailboats are unlikely to grow up any time soon. I have a withering glance that works pretty well if they cross the eyesailor line.  Am I the only person who finds sailors and their sheepish looks after they tell a particularly bad joke, kinda cute? I guess I married one. He still likes to go out drinking with the boys and I can only guess at what kind of jokes they tell each other but I've had 25+ years of being treated as the love of his life so I will take this big dumb sailor any day. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

It was mentioned by Potter first I think. Something about confirming that she raised the issue during the yacht racing forum in Copenhagen. Then I asked the representative from my country if this was true and it was confirmed that she raised the issue in that forum.

Whether she or anybody else outside the VOR can file a protest is unknown to me. But apparently they can.

Just curious. How do you get to go to a Yacht Racing Forum? Who decides who represents a country? Was Dawn representing a country? are there invitations? from whom? Can anyone just turn up and walk in (e.g/ democratic)? Do you get paid to attend? Travel and subsistence expenses? Pay your own or does someone else pay? What qualifies you to get listened to? Who decides who's views to pay attention to? are there votes? Sounds like it could be a bit of a fun trip if someone else is paying but you would need to be very conscientious to pay for such a trip yourself when you could spend the money on a holiday though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

I feel slightly harassed at the moment, by the way. I'm on a business trip and had to take a transfer bus out to a plane, of course the bus gets super crowded, but there's this business man who occupies TWO seats, even though old women stand right next to him.... and I'm thinking that he competes in the world class asshole competition, try to convince the women (by pointing to the seat) to just sit down, but they won't. I will regret my lack of gut for the rest of my life, I should have just addressed the man and told him to offer his extra seat to other passengers. No matter their gender.

The rest of the day was a series of encounters where men just took their place and didn't care if I was already being serviced. I was in the process of checking in to my hotel but the receptionist was constantly abrubted by men asking for different things. What the fuck. So in this place (eastern Europe) clearly men outrank women. I was nobody. And I was shocked.

Never EVER have I been treated this way during sailing. And you all know which boat I have delivered so I'm not new to the aussies. To even think that these guys would do something on purpose to make Annemieke feel bad is just beyond belief.

This is a good reminder why folks might want to settle down and see why in the Anglo American world there's more heightened sensitivity to this stuff. A lot of pent up social pressures and heroes being revealed. I notice for every whining PC police there's also a whining antiPC police insisting nothing is wrong. 

Harder to judge standards when there's so many cultural factors and multinational groups nvolved . 

Edit: don't really seriously understand what's the ruckus from either extreme. Even old seadogs can learn to be appropriately emphatic to new things.

Just an example. European crews more or less have figured out how not to unnecessarily offend each other. Europeans can't go around doing ching chong eyes with east Asian sailors trying to enter the fold and If doing ching chong eyes is so important to you, you're just a sad asshole. 

Likewise. If you're east Asian and someone did chingchong eyes as a gesture. Just politely explain how it is offensive and move on. We all figure out who we want to sail or live lives with. Men. Women. Nonbinary gender. Whatever make believe religious ystem . It isn't that hard. 

For me personally, I'm more aggravated when "press" directly sexualize athletes not looking to sell that part. When the cameras mics are off, or even when on, pigs who pretend to be advocates of equality and progressive orientation are just as likely to tell a female I've been lusting after you for years, or diminish their accomplishments by saying oh you have a male connectio . 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DarkHorse said:

Does it stop at videos on the internet, or can anyone who is offended by a joke on an offshore race turn the perpertrator in  for Rule 69?

Hell, how come we haven' t seen a Rule 69 for the 'hazing' those who cross the equator.

This has really gone too far. (and i won't even mention how far Riley just raised the bar for taking women offshore) 

 

Agree DarkHorse, I see being held down and having your head shaved while being smeared in a random concoction of shit as being more hurtful than a joke about a rash on someones nut sack. Pretty sure that would be labelled "bullying" in the workplace. 

I think we should all take a mental health day and have a fucking good hard look at ourselves... I believe for the next leg they are going to employ an HR officer for each boat who's additional duties will include cleaning the head and washing out the crews mouth's with soap. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of this is utterly ridiculous.  What the hell were the rules writers thinking when the popped the door open on RRS 69?  The result is this?

I promise, I will not be a judge involved in any of this sort of RRS 69 puffery.  I'll tell any yacht club to go find someone else.

World Sailing really missed the target on this rule change.  The rule was just fine before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites