• 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.  
Sign in to follow this  
John Ball

Getting banned for attending a Prohibited event

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

NICE!

 

You think it's NICE! that a legal ruling is made by a Commission, not by a court?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole world does not think like Poms doggie.  Thank goodness.

You say Court we say Commission.  Enjoy your Brexit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong. There is a European Court of Justice. The European Commission is not a court, it is a governmental body.

FWIW I voted "remain".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

Wrong. There is a European Court of Justice. The European Commission is not a court, it is a governmental body.

FWIW I voted "remain".

European Commission:

  • Role: "Promotes the general interest of the EU by proposing and enforcing legislation as well as by implementing policies and the EU budget"

You know, law is not only judge's matter, there are also legislators and executors...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Legislators make law. Executors apply law. Courts interpret law. It's called "separation of powers" and is generally seen as a good thing.

What we have here is interpretation of law by the executive branch. This is not generally seen as a good thing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is considered a "prohibited event" ?  Racing a OD under Portsmouth Yardstick?  Going to the "wrong" kitesailing regatta?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dogwatch said:

Legislators make law. Executors apply law. Courts interpret law. It's called "separation of powers" and is generally seen as a good thing.

What we have here is interpretation of law by the executive branch. This is not generally seen as a good thing.

 

It’s an improvement on the self serving ways of World Sailing. 

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prohibited events are very unusual (apart from Kite sailing where they've got **** fights between different organisations)

I loathe world sailings no worlds unless you are an official Int class policy, but reluctantly concede its better than the sort of mess with competing world authorities like boxing. If this sticks it could be a gift for Rastregar in the Laser Performance attempted destruction of the Sunfish CA.

http://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/2017EligibilityCodeRegulation19-[21689].pdf 

Quote

19.20 A ‘Prohibited Event’ means an event:

(a) permitting or requiring advertising beyond that permitted by the World Sailing Advertising Code;

(b) with prizes or other benefits referred to in Regulation 25.12.2 that is a national event not approved by the National Authority of the venue or an international event not approved by World Sailing;

(c) that is described as a world championship or uses the word "world", either in the title of the event or otherwise, and that is not approved by World Sailing;

(d) that does not conform to the requirements of RRS 89.1 and is not otherwise approved by World Sailing; or

(e) for which the Organizing Authority that has not paid the World Sailing event fees, and

(f) has been listed on the World Sailing website on a list maintained for this purpose

Share this post


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

The rules only apply to banning athletes that compete in non sanctioned events. 
That means we can now have Roller Ball type speed skating events and the competitors can enter in Sanctioned events.too.

It stated nowhere (that I read) that World Level Organizations have given up ownership or title or copyright to the term "World Championships"

I would urge you and Scot to sponsor the San Diego World Championships, sailed using PHRF ratings. But only after Scot gets his adjustment :)
In a few years the So Cal Regional PHRF Champs will be in SD, maybe that will suffice.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, PaulK said:

What is considered a "prohibited event" ? 

Anything that Dawn Riley doesn't like.

Share this post


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

Anything that Dawn Riley doesn't like.

just don't refer to her anatomy in any way, or a different court will hold you in contempt .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, dogwatch said:

Legislators make law. Executors apply law. Courts interpret law. 

 

you have an interesting view of european governance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Meat Wad said:

The rules only apply to banning athletes that compete in non sanctioned events. 
That means we can now have Roller Ball type speed skating events and the competitors can enter in Sanctioned events.too.

It stated nowhere (that I read) that World Level Organizations have given up ownership or title or copyright to the term "World Championships"

I would urge you and Scot to sponsor the San Diego World Championships, sailed using PHRF ratings. But only after Scot gets his adjustment :)
In a few years the So Cal Regional PHRF Champs will be in SD, maybe that will suffice.
 

This ruling effectively ends World Sailing's ability to ban sailors for competing in World Championships that refuse to get World Sailing approval for their event.  Fortunately, World Sailing has a nice new logo to stick on its events so it can call them World Sailing World Championships, because that's all they will be allowed to do with regards to 'world' anything. 

I thought the name change was stupid, and now you all know why

Share this post


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

you have an interesting view of european governance

That was rather my point.

You haven't said whether you consider it "NICE!".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, mad said:

It’s an improvement on the self serving ways of World Sailing. 

I was talking about process, not outcome.

Share this post


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

I was talking about process, not outcome.

And I was talking about the outcome, not the process.  Each to their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Alcatraz5768 said:

Hey doggy, are you a lawyer by chance.

 

No I am not. I just give a shit about the way we get governed. Nobody else here does, I get it. I'm out.

 

Share this post


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

No I am not. I just give a shit about the way we get governed. Nobody else here does, I get it. I'm out.

 

I'd be more worried about our present government predicament than a decision about World Sailing.

Share this post


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

you have an interesting view of european governance

except in the rest of the world you voted for these people and they voted for the next layer up the tree.

The EU commission are unelected dictators

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On Friday, December 08, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Kenny Dumas said:

And yet so obvious that it's the right thing to do.  

Yup.

regardless of any breach in governing process, it most definitely is the right decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, bgytr said:

, it most definitely is the right decision.

We shall see. I have every confidence that a decision like this can have no end of thoroughly undesirable unintended consequences.  

It does, for instance, pull the rug right from under the feet of the Sunfish CA in their fight to prevent Laser Performance creating a puppet CA, since it seems the puppet organisation will now be allowed to call their event the Sunfish World Championships too, so we'll have two Sunfish Worlds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dogwatch said:

That was rather my point.

You haven't said whether you consider it "NICE!".

I always think anti-monopolistic laws are good, especially when about an issue I have been upset about for the better part of my career.  

Share this post


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

except in the rest of the world you voted for these people and they voted for the next layer up the tree.

The EU commission are unelected dictators

The EC spend several years investigating and deliberating over this decision, which was made for the good of sports people all over Europe.  That sounds very undictatorial to me.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dogwatch said:

No I am not. I just give a shit about the way we get governed. Nobody else here does, I get it. I'm out.

 

Translation: "Our overlords wanted to own the word Worlds, and I support that."

That's odd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, JimC said:

We shall see. I have every confidence that a decision like this can have no end of thoroughly undesirable unintended consequences.  

It does, for instance, pull the rug right from under the feet of the Sunfish CA in their fight to prevent Laser Performance creating a puppet CA, since it seems the puppet organisation will now be allowed to call their event the Sunfish World Championships too, so we'll have two Sunfish Worlds.

That's exactly wrong.  One of the few things a governing body will be able to control is championships titles and class names that create confusion.  It's actually in the ISA decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, JimC said:

We shall see. I have every confidence that a decision like this can have no end of thoroughly undesirable unintended consequences.  

It does, for instance, pull the rug right from under the feet of the Sunfish CA in their fight to prevent Laser Performance creating a puppet CA, since it seems the puppet organisation will now be allowed to call their event the Sunfish World Championships too, so we'll have two Sunfish Worlds.

so what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MR.CLEAN said:

I always think anti-monopolistic laws are good, especially when about an issue I have been upset about for the better part of my career.  

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dogwatch said:

No I am not. I just give a shit about the way we get governed. Nobody else here does, I get it. I'm out.

 

 

37 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Translation: "Our overlords wanted to own the word Worlds, and I support that."

That's odd.

I don't see how you get that from what DW said.

His objection was not about the decision but about the process. More along the lines, that he cares that the decision on interpretation of the law was taken by a non elected executive branch of the EU rather than tested in a court.

I would translate his objection as:

'even if the decision is the right one we should be concerned that the overlords made it rather than the courts'

your response appears to be:

'as long as they decide in my favor  i am happy to support the overlords'

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2017 at 1:33 PM, dogwatch said:

Legislators make law. Executors apply law. Courts interpret law. It's called "separation of powers" and is generally seen as a good thing.

What we have here is interpretation of law by the executive branch. This is not generally seen as a good thing.

 

The way the EU works has indeed been voted, the members of the Commission are designated by each state, which is represented by their elected officials, the president of the EU Commission is also elected, in this case by the EU Parlament, which is elected by EU citizens.

Judges? No, they are not voted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, chuso007 said:

The way the EU works has indeed been voted, the members of the Commission are designated by each state, which is represented by their elected officials, the president of the EU Commission is also elected, in this case by the EU Parlament, which is elected by EU citizens.

Judges? No, they are not voted.

Exactly, their job is to interpret the laws, and ensure that the laws are enacted properly with respect to whatever basic rights are defined.  There is no value or reason for voting in this, they should be acting objectively, and applying laws.

The EU Comission is an an executive body, their job is to enact the laws, not interpret them.

This separation ensures that majorities cannot override the basic rights of minorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JohnMB said:

 

I don't see how you get that from what DW said.

His objection was not about the decision but about the process. More along the lines, that he cares that the decision on interpretation of the law was taken by a non elected executive branch of the EU rather than tested in a court.

I would translate his objection as:

'even if the decision is the right one we should be concerned that the overlords made it rather than the courts'

your response appears to be:

'as long as they decide in my favor  i am happy to support the overlords'

 

This deserves to be in PA at this rate. 

Share this post


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

This deserves to be in PA at this rate. 

DW's point was a political point, related to process, PA may be the best place for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Commissioner

the people making law in the EU are not voted for that job so you cant vote them out and have the sole right to propose legislation, oh and by the way are obligated to represent the EU and not their countries interest.

So more money changing hands to lobby outcomes than washington...

That would explain why you can call a product chocolate in the EU that contains zero coco
so shock horror the EU made a decision for the layman and not big interest for once...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, JimC said:

We shall see. I have every confidence that a decision like this can have no end of thoroughly undesirable unintended consequences.  

It does, for instance, pull the rug right from under the feet of the Sunfish CA in their fight to prevent Laser Performance creating a puppet CA, since it seems the puppet organisation will now be allowed to call their event the Sunfish World Championships too, so we'll have two Sunfish Worlds.

I remember when I went to the Corsair Trimaran "Nationals" in 2004 and absolutely nobody there could explain to me why this was "the Nationals."

It just was. Inspired by this, I have since competed in the Sun Cat Nationals (which I had to invent and host in order to compete in it) and the Wingsail Laser Worlds, which was only invented because no other Lasers showed up.

If I see another opportunity to invent and/or compete in another National or World Chamionship sailing regatta, I'll surely do it. Is that really so undesirable?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Would it be so terrible if the "problem" with sailing was that we had a dozen different Sunfish Worlds?

It would not be terrible but it would be worse that what we have got. I've some direct experience of a sport that was blessed with multiple governing bodies with differing sets of rules and championships and I can report that more can be less.

Share this post


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

Would it be so terrible if the "problem" with sailing was that we had a dozen different Sunfish Worlds?

Human sacrifice! Dogs and cats living together! Mass hysteria!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2017 at 12:35 PM, MR.CLEAN said:

The EC spend several years investigating and deliberating over this decision, which was made for the good of sports people all over Europe.  That sounds very undictatorial to me.  

A benevolent dictatorship is still a dictatorship!

But the anti-monopolistic EC decision is right, imho.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 2:36 PM, MR.CLEAN said:

Translation: "Our overlords wanted to own the word Worlds, and I support that."

That's odd.

More than that. They wanted a slice of any action that involved prize money or had a commercial element.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2017 at 1:44 PM, Sailabout said:

except in the rest of the world you voted for these people and they voted for the next layer up the tree.

The EU commission are unelected dictators

The EU in general has brought unprecedented stability to Europe and done many good things for all.  No government entity is perfect but considering the history of Europe the EU has done a pretty good job of bringing a little more order to the chaos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, dogwatch said:

It would not be terrible but it would be worse that what we have got. I've some direct experience of a sport that was blessed with multiple governing bodies with differing sets of rules and championships and I can report that more can be less.

So based on an observation of one, this discussion is over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, sunseeker said:

So based on an observation of one, this discussion is over.

Neither you nor I get to say when the discussion is over. However I have an opinion, based on actual experience in another sport that lives in the brave new world of multiple governing bodies, rules and "world champions". My opinion is that it was shit. Learning multiple sets of rules was shit. Having to pay multiple governing body subscriptions was shit.  The petty turf wars and the proliferation of tiny governing bodies and their ranks of windbag chairmen and secretaries were shit.  Just about everything people don't like about WS just got replicated N times. So be careful what you wish for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU?

Only the council of ministers has the power to actually pass anything into law, and even then it requires local implementation in each country through what ever democratic process they require. The commission is in effect a civil service. The parliament scrutinises legislation and can recommend changes but does not have the final say and can be over ruled. Saying the commission should not investigate none compliance is like saying the Revenue should not investigate tax dodgers because the Finance ministry originally drafted the wording.

A good number of smaller countries (and some of the big ones too) are fully behind the independence of the commission and its monopoly right to bring forward legislation. As a direct consequence it stops the larger countries like the UK, France or Germany bringing forward legislation purely in their own, and their own large corporations, interest that they then force through on the basis of their voting rights. Just because the commission is the only body that can bring forward legislation does not mean that it does not take guidance from national governments or the EU parliament, but you can see why the bullyboys on the Tory right hate that shit.

The right seems to see the EU as intolerably liberal and anti-national, the left sees it as a puppet of big business whose free market benefits corporations and brings down labour standard (in their own countries) by allowing hardworking immigrants free movement. It's both and yet neither.

To date the EU and specifically the commissions resistance to big business lobbying has been reasonable. Microsofts anti competitive practice and attempt to take over the internet was effectively stopped by the EU. The legislation has its issues in terms of creating a single EU wide market that's likely to be dominated by 2-3 players (sufficiently that Verizon has moved its world wide roaming operation out of the US and based it in the EU in order to be in a position to take advantage) but over a period of 7-8 years bought about the abolition of roaming charges. And then there have been significant findings on tax avoidance by large multi nationals like Apple. Legislation on agriculture has actually created a safer and more resilient industry that delivers produce of a substantially higher quality, while also, all be it to an increasingly lesser extent, preventing big business interest from completely taking over.

In other words the EU commission does a much better job of policing the monopoly practices of corporate America than the Federal agencies in the US do. Add in that large parts of northern Europe have been perusing the kind of evidence based liberal policy they hate and moving towards a common position on defence that would enable them to stand against Russia while lessening dependence on the US and UK and it's little wonder that the right wing movement in the US is increasingly anti EU. Well obviously they are being led by the nose too.

Is it immune to corruption? No. Are there issues with jobs for the boys and sacrificing national need for a cushy job on the commission when you get iced by your local electorate? Yes. Are there issues with nepotism? Yes. With wasted and unaccountable spending? I'm sure there are. EU parliamentarians taking the piss with their expenses? For sure. Is there a democratic deficit? Depends on the angle you look at it from.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Multiple governing bodies?

The prohibited event status is not about WS right to set the rules. They retain full copy right control over the RRS.

It is entirely about WS getting paid by any entity running sailing events on commercial basis.

WS is quite happy for there to be a Star Sailors League, Champions League of Sailing, World Match Racing Tour, 52 (or what ever the number is) class World Championships, IRC World Championships, ORC World Championship, Americas Cup, Volvo Ocean Race, World Ocean Masters Race, Golden Globe Round the World Race and so on so long as each of them pays their pound of flesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Raz'r said:

The Int Canoes don’t have a Sailing World Championships. I guess they can now. 

Actually we do. For historical reasons its held under International Canoe federation rules not IYRU/ISAF/WS/whatever they're called this year rules. Their rules are different, and if not enough different nationalities turn up we're not allowed to declare a world champion. The two authorities isn't a major problem for us because there's a well understood demarcation, but if it were put to any stress it would probably be a mess. At the moment ICF is pretty hands off because the sailors founded it and we don't give them any trouble so they worry about the paddlers, and ISAF is very hands off because we have nothing to do with them directly, just deal with the clubs.

However if we were not Canoes, and were not affiliated to the Canoe federation, I imagine we would have a world of trouble if we wanted to call ourselves International and hold world championships. But Canoe sailing is a recognised discipline of the Canoe authorities, and has been since before what became the IYRU had any interest in small boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, fastyacht said:

The EU  is still going through what we Americans went through between 1779 or so and 1787.

What, the rich men deciding they don't like paying their taxes, and conning the poor people into fighting a war and getting killed in order to make them even richer? How history repeats itself!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It started as a trade association which was a good idea, now its a....... dunno but makes over 100billions Euros disappear every year and prints about 60-80 billion every month.

Ponzi scheme or what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2017 at 1:33 PM, dogwatch said:

Legislators make law. Executors apply law. Courts interpret law. It's called "separation of powers" and is generally seen as a good thing.

What we have here is interpretation of law by the executive branch. This is not generally seen as a good thing.

 

I agree with you but bear in mind that the rabid anti EU crowd (remember all the anti European justice propaganda in tabloids) can't stand the idea of European institutions having real powers thus the commission gets everything as it emanates from national governments. One positive outcome of Brexit is that we might stand a better chance of reforming the EU once Farage and co are out of the loop. It always bug me that they keep repeating that the EU isn't democratic (partially true) and then block all attempts to reform it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

reform it into what?

Its a typical socialist bureaucratic megalomaniacal experimental money pit paid for by capitalism and growth well Europe is full and every one is old living on pensions that dont exist so experiment over.
The poorer southern states have gone from being poor ( you can still be happy) to bankrupt

Talk to young people in France and Italy, do they think they have future, they know they wont even have the life of their parents, now thats sad.

Bankers would say it was just a money union to ensure it was too big to fail.

Years ago the US gov took part in NAFTA, huge trade deal does it need a whole parliament to run it?

If it stayed as a trade organisation I'm sure everyone would still be happy with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sailabout said:

reform it into what?

Its a typical socialist bureaucratic megalomaniacal experimental money pit paid for by capitalism and growth well Europe is full and every one is old living on pensions that dont exist so experiment over.
The poorer southern states have gone from being poor ( you can still be happy) to bankrupt

Talk to young people in France and Italy, do they think they have future, they know they wont even have the life of their parents, now thats sad.

Bankers would say it was just a money union to ensure it was too big to fail.

Years ago the US gov took part in NAFTA, huge trade deal does it need a whole parliament to run it?

If it stayed as a trade organisation I'm sure everyone would still be happy with it.

We don't need no stinkin advice on how to run our affairs, it is now a political and monetary union, we may as well make it democratic. Unlike in the USA, people who don't like how it evolves can leave the union. And no, we don't want to be like the USA where 40 millions people are in poverty.

Anyway there is nothing in there about sailing, take it to political anarchy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Socialism without capitalism = communism

Capitalism without socialism= back to slavery

Extreme capitalism = extreme communism (North Korea, one family owns all)

But:

 

8 hours ago, Sailabout said:

If it stayed as a trade organisation I'm sure everyone would still be happy with it

Youre partly right here, if you change it to this its better;

If it stayed as a trade organisation I'm sure a lot of people would still be happy with it.

Give it 50 yrs and then make a conclusion, its still has not reached puberty.

 

Pano, Cali and Texas has groups that want independence.

 

Take it to PA, I am out.

Share this post


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

 

Pano, Cali and Texas has groups that want independence.

 

 

I know but last time that part of the USA tried to secede it didn't end well!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this