SLSA Surfers Banned from Competition Sites

This forum is for questions that individual members have regarding competitions sponsored by the SLSA. Ask away :)
Post Reply
User avatar
Abel Halderman
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:07 am
SL Name: Abel Halderman
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Post by Abel Halderman »

I totally agree. I had a conversation on that topic with one of the former board members and I was told that a sim that would ban people just to keep them away from a comp would never be trusted again and hold an event. However, I think it's more a matter of regulations than having faith that it won't happen because a sim owner would have to deal with cosequences. That doesn't sound too proffesional. SLSA rules have to be clear and work with any situation, even the most weird. And I agree with Kathy: I would love to see a rule that says that all people competing are unbanned at the sim that holds the contest for the day when it's the event takes place.

User avatar
Rani Decosta
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:46 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Post by Rani Decosta »

I can imagine that this is a very frustrating and annoying situation for your team and team member to be in. However, to suggest changing a venue for one person is simply ridiculous!!
This is simply something that the SLSA cannot and should not get involved in. Reasons for a person being banned from a sim can be complex and I really don't see why the SLSA should get involved in such issues. The SIM owner is perfectly within their rights to not allow someone on their land.
We had same situation occur earlier this year. The Board thought long and hard and decided :-
Addendum voted on February 6th, 2008, by the Board of Directors and accepted into the SLSA Rule Book are as follows:

E. Surfers banned from a sim/region that is hosting a competition/event will not be able to compete in that competition/event. The SLSA Board of Directors will not arbitrate resolutions between competitive surfers and host sim/region owners. Surfers must be responsible for their own actions and arbitrate a resolution with the host. Conflict resolutions must be made prior to heat draw assignments, for the surfer to be able compete at the competition/event.

Apologies for quoting the bylaws, but wanted to draw your attention to it!

With regards to your suggestion for having a sim that we own ourselves, well, in an ideal world that would be wonderful I agree. But, the cost involved is great, just to meet the tier, let alone buy the sim. A premium account would be needed for the tier to be paid through - how do you get around that? Am not sure. Plus, in my opinion I think its good to change venues, try new surf sims. If someone can find a way to fund our own sim, without making this too commercial or asking SLSA members for money then great.

In my opinion this is simply not an issue.

User avatar
Abel Halderman
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:07 am
SL Name: Abel Halderman
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Post by Abel Halderman »

Well, it is an issue that personal things are able to allow or not allow people to compete. It's not a new thing. My question about the rule apeared just after it was released, so it's not about one person. It's a general thing.

Let's say: the sim owner belongs to one of the teams. He or she wants the team and its memebers to place well in the comp. Why not ban the best competitors from other teams? It could happen and it doesn't matter how unlikely it is. The rules are made to prevent unlikely situations, too.
It's not a big thing to make a rule that would protect the community against such situations. Two sentences would work. Also for the day of a competition, the sim becomes a public area. Kathy was right saying about Moscow Olympics. I don't see how SLSA prevents situations like that. It's also not about SLSA being involved in some surfers&sim owner conflicts. It's about making one simple rule for all. If it ever happen, I'll be glad. Probably it won't happen in this season but the topic apeared.

User avatar
Wilfrid DeCuir
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 2:06 am
SL Name: Wilfrid DeCuir
Location: Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Contact:

Post by Wilfrid DeCuir »

I am aware of this situation, and I know why this person was banned, I know this person. This person is not a grieffer, (which should always be banned), but this person was banned because of personal differences between that group and said person. In these instances, the ban should be removed for that day.

I've seen the analogy that for a soverign country, participants must get their own visas, and good luck in you are persona non gratta. However, this is SL and ppl must be willing to forgive and forget. Also, since this ban is based on personality differences, does this go against SL's TOR???

And to use Moscow and LA, we, as a members of the SLSA, can boycott certain said events lust like in RL Olympics, sending a clear message to sim owners who ban ppl only because of personality conflicts.
Crazy Canuck Hippie Surfer

User avatar
Poid Mahovlich
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:37 am
SL Name: Poid Mahovlich
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Poid Mahovlich »

ok think of it this way & turn the whole situation around - what if a surfer decided to go out of their way to be banned from a sim ? just for the hell of it ... to create a drama or wotever, so they then could go crazzy and insist on being allowed to take part on a sim they are banned from.

Sim owners have a right to ban for what ever reason they so wish a person from a sim. Ganging up or threatening a boycott of a sim is unreasonable.

Even if an SLSA event created 1million$L a sim owner has a choice what they wish to do, it is not the bussiness of the SLSA to get involved. That issue is between sim owner and the banned person. Period

If someone hanging out on 'your sim' behaved in woteverway that you banned them how would you feel about them returning because a group of person told you how to run your sim and that this person should be allowed ?

You can ask the sim owner to reconsider and say why you might feel this - if they still do not want that person to be on the sim - that is thier choice.

The SLSA is not there to be a go between surfer & sim owner vi a ban dispute. The SLSA is there to arbitrate and regulate within it's own members code of conduct.

Requesting more than once access could also be seen as harassment.

Poid
Poid Mahovlich
SLSA Advisor & Event Day Security Person

User avatar
Rani Decosta
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:46 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Post by Rani Decosta »

Totally agree with what you say Poid!

With regard to earlier posts/comments:-

You just can't bully or expect sim owners to agree to allow all registered SLSA competitors access to their sim. As I said earlier reasons for bans can be complex and as a sim owner myself I for one would not lift a ban! Regarding this particular team member that team Tsunami are posting about, well, again hard for anyone outside the team to comment and also hard for the team to be unbiased! There are two sides to every story eh?! Just cos someone is a member of SLSA doesn't mean that person has gone through a vetting process and is a 'good person' and it doesn't mean that SLSA should step in to every dispute between sim owner and surfer.
To quote Kathy :-
"Suppose someone has an issue with a team member and subsequently decides to ban all team members from the sim? " well if a sim owner was that 'obvious' then the board would and should look at the situation, but I find it very unlikely that surfing sim owners would stoop this low, but the board could review any situation as and when this happens.

Finally. regarding the old chestnut of SLSA having a dedicated sim and lack of sponsorship. Well, I don't think SLSA needs or should have sponsorship. Why does it always end up being about money? Why does it always have to be commercial? Ends up just like RL! I for one like that comps are at different venues, keeps it interesting and fresh. But maybe I am 'A Lone voice in the wilderness' in not wanting to see the SLSA become about money and commercial interests.

User avatar
flynn_sheridan
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 11:50 pm
Location: Pu'u Honu
Contact:

Post by flynn_sheridan »

Well my only comment on this is that I stand by what I stated in SLSA's ruling that people need to deal with their own visa issues and that SLSA is not responsible for arbitration between surfers and owners.

btw... I am no longer involved in SLSA, except as a member. Sorry Kathy, can't help fix the forums, you will have to speak to a Director.

User avatar
Sierra Sugar
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 4:14 pm
Location: in Thor's arms where i belong
Contact:

Post by Sierra Sugar »

Keeping it short and sweet here as I am too tired to form more complex commentary. That and the fact that these two issues have been discussed at length repeatedly amongst current and past SLSA directors and advisors.

I agree 100% with Poid and Rani on both issues. It is beyond the scope of the SLSA to arbitrate, mediate or otherwise intervene in personal disputes. Just as it is beyond the scope of the ISA or other official pro or amature sporting organization to arbitrate or negotiate for individual members of that organization. It just creates too much gray area of what is and isn't officially related. Be responsible for your own actions and the actions of your team members or deal with the consequences what ever they may be.

Further, a team is presumably a static entity with very little variance amongst the owners officers. The SLSA is a rotating office of officials, constantly changing. Even if we lengthened the term of directors, it is still a revolving door. That creates another whole set of politics and financial oversight should sponsorship and management of an organizational SIM be introduced. Over all I feel that people are looking for too much micromanagement of little issues and forgetting the bigger picture, that being we are here to have fun.

We are not here to micromanage every single minute intimate detail of surfing and relationships within SL. This is not a full time job but a volunteer position. Presumably we are all adults or close there to. Be responsible for yourself and lets not pigeon hole and try to control everyone and every tiny little thing. Lets just relax and try to have some fun. Managing the SLSA is already a drain, ask each and every person that has been a director. The more "rules" you want to create and enforce the more work and stress on the organization. Granted some changes should be made, but we need to pick and choose the most important and just let the rest go and try to have fun.

Ok, short and sweet when I'm tired just doesn't work, sorry for the lengthy response. Next?
**his kitty**

Cipriano Grut
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:09 am
Contact:

Post by Cipriano Grut »

Using the words of Ferdinand the Second of Trastamara, known as the Catholic, King of Aragon married to the Queen Elizabeth (Isabel) of Castilla; King of Sicily and Naples and father of Joan the nut (Juan la Loca): I am sorry to hear one of your riders will not be in battle. And I truly am, but also think this is not an SLSA issue, as Poid and Rani just pointed it out. I totally agree with their perspective.
Maybe we should help with these kind of matters as team captains or co-captains, selecting our riders and being sure they are not banned of surfing sims for whatever reasons; cause that will always mean trouble, and work with riders that dont have issues, which is the great majority.

User avatar
Abel Halderman
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:07 am
SL Name: Abel Halderman
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Post by Abel Halderman »

I understand all your comments and your point of view. They made your statement a lot clearer. However, no one ever said that SLSA should mediate between a banned surfer and a sim owner. I don't think it should. There is just to much to do for the directors and advisors to focus on individual cases. That is understandable and obvious. That's why a single rule could fix the problem. In my opinion it should be fixed. Right now, officially, according to paragraph E I think, directors don't make a start list. It all depends on a sim owner/manager who is able not to allow someone to compete. I think you will agree with that. Also, it gives a lot of trust to a sim owner who is a human and makes mistakes, too. Rules are made to avoid human factor in such important things as start lists for competitions. Imagine any RL elections. In my country sometimes it takes place in schools or other places that have private owners. Should that owner be allowed not to let someone come in and vote just like that, because he or she owns the place? SLSA start lists are as much important for the surf community as RL votings for the local or national community.

I also understand your point of view Poid that a sim owner has a full right to decide who is banned. However, for the day of a comp, in some way the sim is given to SLSA for its purposes.

Also, everybody should be responsible for their actions, but that doesn't mean that a sim owner is always right when he or she bans someone. It's just not the point, either. The point is that all people make mistakes: surfers and sim owners as well. That's why maybe SLSA should eliminate that factor during its events.

User avatar
Christine Daffodil
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:34 pm
Location: Puna, Hawaii
Contact:

Maybe I am Confused

Post by Christine Daffodil »

I am having trouble understanding the huge concern over one surfer being excluded from one SLSA event by a sim owner (not by the SLSA), when excluding all "amateurs" from all "pro" SLSA events is supposed to be perfectly okay.

Cipriano Grut
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:09 am
Contact:

Post by Cipriano Grut »

Kathy, who is missing the point here? A few of tsunami team members who do not bother about credibility, or some of most hard working people who have actually help build that credibility. The voices we all read here against your point of view are from 3 members of SLSA Hall of Fame, independent surfers and team riders of more than one team (none of which are tsunami), SLSA advisor, actual and past members of SLSA board of Directors. Who, by the way, have worked their behinds off to build that credibility.
So I dont blame Christine having trouble understanding all this, in fact I dont blame a lot of confused SLSA members reading you.

User avatar
Abel Halderman
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:07 am
SL Name: Abel Halderman
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Post by Abel Halderman »

Well, a pro and an amateur league will be about skills, not personal issues.

User avatar
Abel Halderman
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:07 am
SL Name: Abel Halderman
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Post by Abel Halderman »

One thing is certain Cip: the reason of authority is missing a point in every discussion.

User avatar
Rani Decosta
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:46 pm
Location: England
Contact:

WHOA!!

Post by Rani Decosta »

Whoa, hold on a minute!!! This was a discussion I thought about SLSA becoming involved in the issue of a surfer who is banned from a sim being allowed to surf in a up coming surf comp. We all have our opinion and thats what this forum is for, to voice those opinions.
However, I get annoyed and very disappointed when I read Kathy's comments that seem to be getting way too personal! To suggest that, in Kathy's own words:-
I understand why the SLSA doesn't want to get into someone's personal business. However, some of the replies to my post suggest that you either don't appreciate the importance of the SLSA or what it does for a sim owner. Either that or you simply don't care.

Just hold on a minute, I care!! I also know for a fact that surfers who have posted on this topic also care! If I didn't care I wouldn't post here and if I didn't care I wouldn't have given 6 months of my time to the SLSA! Same goes for the other people who have posted here, all who have given much to SLSA and surfing.

The SLSA isn't perfect, maybe some things need change but this constant breaking down and desire (as Sierra so eloquently put it) to 'micro-manage' is just not needed. I think we all appreciate that the SLSA is brilliant and we have a good reputation, people want to surf in our competitions, there is great kudos in placing on the podium of a SLSA comp.

I am not going to repeat myself regarding my thoughts on allowing banned surfers to sim, I stand by them. I have a feeling this topic will run, but thats what this forum is all about, everyone voicing their opinions. Lets continue to do that but try to keep the defamatory words/phrases out of the conversation please.

User avatar
Christine Daffodil
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:34 pm
Location: Puna, Hawaii
Contact:

Post by Christine Daffodil »

Kathy said, "Gee, there is a huge difference, and it's not that complicated."

Gee, do you think we could have a just a little bit less condescension and/or sarcasm, please? Just because someone does not understand your logic or agree with what you consider important does not mean they are idiots.

In my opinion, exclusion is exclusion, whatever the reason. As such, it looks to me that a few people are freaking out because one teammate is being excluded from one comp. Those same people seem to find it okay to exclude a bunch of surfers from a bunch of comps because they are "amateurs." I see a disconnect there.

I fail to understand this attitude of entitlement. Surfing in SLSA is not a god-given right. And in all honesty, SLSA does not owe ANY individual surfer anything, just because that surfer joined the SLSA group and wants to compete. Why should the SLSA be responsible for ensuring that every single one of its members can compete in every single one of its competitions? If someone has had trouble in the past causing them to be banned from sims, justifiably or not, that is their "kuleana," not the SLSA's.

(Kuleana is a Hawaiian word meaning ones personal sense of responsibility. A person high in this value will be quick to say, I accept my responsibilities, and I will be held accountable.)

User avatar
Abel Halderman
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:07 am
SL Name: Abel Halderman
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Post by Abel Halderman »

If we come to quotes: "In my opinion, exclusion is exclusion, whatever the reason". Well, there are some pro and amatour leagues in RL, too. Is that wrong? It's a matter of skills and keeping a level of competition. In RL there are pro contests and open contest. I don't see it as something unfair because every sport is about skills and thay are what metters, not personal issues.

I tend to think that this discussion doesn't make any sense. On one side there are people thinking that a sim owner has a right to manipulate with start list for comps (I'm not saying that anyone does that, but the rule says that every sim owner has that right. Is that a just rule?). I understand that SLSA doesn;t want to go between surfers and sim owners. That's why in RL there is law that makes in non-personal. On the other hand there people saying that personal issues aside and let all SLSA surfers compete just becasue they do surf and some of them are even good, just becasue it's only fair to keep the fair play of the competition and final ranking (which SLSA should care the most).

Honestly I wish what was said would matter more than what team someone belongs to or who a person dates as well.

User avatar
Christine Daffodil
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 5:34 pm
Location: Puna, Hawaii
Contact:

Post by Christine Daffodil »

And what does who someone dates have to do with this discussion?????

User avatar
Abel Halderman
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:07 am
SL Name: Abel Halderman
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Post by Abel Halderman »

Oh, I just said that as an example, a poor one. Sorry, Chrissy.

User avatar
Rani Decosta
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:46 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Post by Rani Decosta »

Kathy,

I read and re-read your post, in context, I felt that what you said was clear but hey ho, would appear that I (and many other people) got the wrong end of the stick.
Anyway, thank you for clearing up the confusion, appreciate it.
Ooh, would you mind explaining the reference to 'The Burning Bush' not being on Cip's list? I didn't understand how G-d's first revelation to Moses from the flames of a burning Thorn-bush meant you were still entitled to an opinion? You really got me scratching my head.

Thanks,

a 'confused surfer'

:)

User avatar
Milo Voss
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:25 pm
SL Name: Milo Voss
Location: The Beaver State
Contact:

This is the warning

Post by Milo Voss »

Everybody take a breath.......

I wish we could all get along even when ideas expressed don't fit with our own. I love open dialog and there is nothing wrong with debating a good issue but this thread is very close to being locked. If it is to continue lets stay on track and be respectful of each other.

User avatar
Cierra Theriac
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 1617
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 11:50 pm
SL Name: Cierra Theriac
Location: Pu'u Honu - Happily under my rock
Contact:

Post by Cierra Theriac »

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Whether to give an opinion or just keep out of it... oh what they heck, I will throw it out there.

My opinion - the rule needs to stand as is. The SLSA cannot dictate to a sim (owner) who they can or cannot allow or ban on their sim.

Generally if someone gets banned, there is a darn good reason for it, and they have to deal with the consequences. Only the sim owner and the pperson banned really know why. Of course there are exceptions. The Tsunami team member (or any person really) could very well be completely undeserving of being banned. There are two sides to every story and I have no idea what anybody's side is or who even is involved. Although I am curious, it doesn't matter to the principle.

BUT - I find it very hard to believe that a sim owner/manager/whatever will use their ability to ban or allow avis on a sim to try to manipulate the outcome of a competition or the rankings. There is nothing in it for them. At the risk of completely offending someone, they would either have to be stupid or a total asshat ("jerk" if I am censored). Either way it is going to bite them in the butt (can't wait to see if that word goes through). If someone bans a person or an entire team the word is going to get around, oh in about 15 minutes. Ultimately, SLSA will not use that sim again for a comp, and surfers that are not part of the inner-circle will stop frequenting the sim.

Bottom line - it is not in a sim's best interest (for popularity or business) to ban a surfer.

It is not in SLSAs best interest to dictate to sim owners who they can or cannot allow on their sim even for one day. Doing so will alienate sim owners.

I do not believe that holding a comp results in the success or continuing business of a surf spot. (I could be completely wrong on this, but I have never heard a sim owner say anything like it.) It may expose a surf spot to peopple that have not been there before, but word of mouth, and people's experience outside of a comp is what keeps surfers coming back.

Of course, I am not sure if I am entitled to an opinion since I have been unable to actually compete in like, forever...

(As usual way too long and I apologize for any typos.)

User avatar
Abel Halderman
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:07 am
SL Name: Abel Halderman
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Post by Abel Halderman »

"The SLSA cannot dictate to a sim (owner) who they can or cannot allow or ban on their sim". Banning people may be caused by one of two reasons though: 1) a banned person is a grieffer or 2) personal issues. SLSA really shouldn't go there and investigate at all. However if you say that SLSA cannot dictate to a sim owner who they allow or not allow to enter the sim (I think you meant also during the comp day)... well, it does that. We expect a sim owner to accept the fact that only surfers competing and SLSA staff are allowed to stay at the comp sim during the event, we tell them to rez a buoy or place it in the right spot. Suprisingly SLSA do not expect a sim owner to let all the competitors compete.

Also, the word "unlikely" or "believe" shouldn't appear in this conversation at all as long as we're talking about formal rules. It is unlikely that walking through the street suddenly you get shot, however you do expect law to have a paragraph about that and sanction for that. Same thing with sim owners who can be jerks and not necessarly act rationally, however if you ask me I do expect a rule that would protect competing surfers against such situation.

User avatar
Cierra Theriac
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 1617
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 11:50 pm
SL Name: Cierra Theriac
Location: Pu'u Honu - Happily under my rock
Contact:

Post by Cierra Theriac »

As someone who was a sim owner and hosted a surf comp (but maybe my opinion doesn't count because I no longer own a sim or can host an event), I would want SLSA to honor my avitar bans. Limiting admission to the sim on comp day to reduce lag is not comparable. Yes, I allowed SLSA to come in and take over to set up for the comp. But if at some point I would have said something would not work, I am comfortable that my wishes would have been taken into consideration.

Yes, there were a heck of a lot more visitors to La Bahia prior to the comp. But I did not experience a major (some, but not major) increase in funds due to increased persons visiting the sim. And naturally this number dropped back down after the comp.

On the flipside: If we remove the rule to allow anyone who wants to surf to do so, then there is no recourse to prevent someone who should not be allowed on the sim from being there. And I can see an argument happening that is the exact opposite, with people upset that SLSA is not preventing someone from competing because the rules don't allow it. (yes there is a rule to allow SLSA to remove someones membership for certain infractions, but these to may not go hand in hand)

Rules cannot be created to cover every situation and to make every person happy. They have to be created for a majority and most likely (sorry you don't like that word) situations. Of course there are flaws, and of course some people feel the brunt of this that may not deserve it. But as things are not black and white, we have to determine what the gray area will need to cover.

When deciding if the rule should be changed/booted/whatever, think about this - Are most people banned from a sim because the sim owner is an asshat or because the visitor is? Most sim owners I have met are not jerks, I am sorry if others experiences have not been as favorable.

I am sorry for this person who will not be allowed to compete if their ban was unfair or not for the right reasons. But I stand by my support of letting the rule stand.

User avatar
Abel Halderman
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:07 am
SL Name: Abel Halderman
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Post by Abel Halderman »

It doesn't matter if you own a sim or not. Everybody's opinion counts. I respect yours. Here's mine: rules aren't made to make everyone happy and yes, they should cover every situation, just like RL law. It's about justice, not making anybody happy. It's not about what is likely or unlikely. What if RL law was made like that? Nobody's private experience should be a reason for making a rule, removing a rule or keeping it, either, but an abstract thought about what is fair, just, what are the consequences of the rule or what negative result it can make in future. It's not about individual cases but abstract situations that may happen. And why we talk about it right now is not because of one person. It's a general issue.

User avatar
Rani Decosta
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:46 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Post by Rani Decosta »

I agree everyone's opinion counts.
I agree wholeheartedly with Cierra.
I agree, Abel, that rules and laws aren't made to make everyone happy, but I don't agree they should cover every situation just like RL law. Simply can't.
Let me give some examples (they may be silly/funny but you get my point I think). Here in the UK it is not illegal to Jaywalk yet in USA and some other countries it is. The law here obviously gives individuals credit for making their own decision about when its safe to cross the road, it's considered a personal responsibility, kinda like the word Chris used kuleana I think. We dont like a 'Nanny state'.
Fact is some law is made that isn't right or just, only have to look around the rest of the world or even home to see that. I love this one:-
It is an act of treason to place a postage stamp bearing the British monarch upside-down! lol. Presumably this law was created when there was far more gravitas paid to our monarchy. Anyway, just wanted to lighten the mood.

User avatar
Abel Halderman
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:07 am
SL Name: Abel Halderman
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Post by Abel Halderman »

LOL Rani. I liked your post. Maybe I wasn't clear enought, though. Of course rules or law cannot cover all possible situations. There has to be a room for freedom. The reason why peoples made laws for their members was to prevent conflicts. So, basically, when it comes to jaywalking I don't see it causing serious conficts, but when it comes to not letting someone compete and messing with start lists becuse of private issues - it might. No matter if it has ever happened or not. It may happen. For me it's enough to think about it and try to protect the community against it. And I know that the community is what all the people posting at this forum really care the most.

One word to Cierra: you will agree that some things have to be done by SLSA to prepare a sim for comp. They just have to. A room for the spectators has to be set, there have to be buoys and a certain kind of waves. The area cannot be open for public or a mall cannot be rezzed in the day before comp to prevent lag. If those things happens, the comp cannot happen. That's how SLSA influance sim owners right now. If it can do that, why not letting all surfers that signed up compete? In the end the fairness of comps and final rankings is one of the most important things in SLSA. It's also not about what kind of person someone is or what that person has done in the past. We are surfers. When it comes to fairness of the comps and ranking that should be all that matters.

User avatar
Cierra Theriac
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 1617
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 11:50 pm
SL Name: Cierra Theriac
Location: Pu'u Honu - Happily under my rock
Contact:

Post by Cierra Theriac »

Of course some things have to done to a sim to prep for a comp. But unless things have changed in the last 3 months, no one told me what I had to do or could not do with my sim the week before or the day of the comp. We arranged for spectator seating in our neighbors sim. No one told us we had to do that. No one told me to close my stores. No one told me to remove all my extra scripts from the property. And no one told me who I could or could not have on my sim. It was a cooperative effort.

And none of that has anything to do with the subject, so I am sorry if I was the one that brought it up.

The subject is should the SLSA require a sim owner to lift a ban on the day of competition. I am saying no they shouldn't require it. It is between the surfer and the sim owner and the SLSA should not be involved.

Perhaps at this point we should agree to disagree on this and let anyone who has something new to contribute to the discussion to do so. Then let the directors do with it what they may.

Dharma-Austin
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 3:17 pm
Location: LIVESTRONG
Contact:

Kathy's Post about an SLSA sim

Post by Dharma-Austin »

Well yes I agree instead of running around trying to collect sponsors that time could be spent setting up ongoing sponsors fro the entire season. Get a sponsor who is willing to commit for hte entire season. Then SLSA could meet all or part of tier. It is great exposure for any sim owner or retail owner to advertise at SLSA events. The SLSA due to lack of paid staff just doesn't have time to follow up. Two months ago I told Craig Stallion I wanted to sponosr at that surf comp and was told there were no spots left. I asked him to keep me in mind for next time. Never heard another word but not blaming Craig at all. I should have followed up.

As ar as SLSA having a home sim well heck they are more than welcome to have Tavarua be their home sim. I don't mind. The Board can do as they wish there as long as I get to keep my pet snake called Milo and the Cloudbreak Bar and my forthcoming waterfall I am having builtand the firewalk! Gotta have that firewalk! hahaha. Well SLSA Board? Want a free sim? I am offering! Makes no difference to me! The more the merrier!
I LIVESTRONG
Dharma Austin

Dharma-Austin
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 3:17 pm
Location: LIVESTRONG
Contact:

Oh and P.S.

Post by Dharma-Austin »

BTW I am serious. If the SLSA Executive Committee wishes to discuss the details contact me. I will be away from SL from August 6-13 but can be reached via email at dharmaiswonderful@yahoo.com
Namaste bros and sistas
I LIVESTRONG
Dharma Austin

User avatar
Sierra Sugar
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 4:14 pm
Location: in Thor's arms where i belong
Contact:

Post by Sierra Sugar »

The idea of having a sim dedicated to the SLSA is a good one, and one that hopefully one day can be achieved. But with the politics involved in sim management, finances, etc... if the SLSA were to have a dedicated sim it would have to be one bought and owned by the organization, not donated and ultimately overseen/run by someone else. Creates the potential down the road for conflict of interest.

The SLSA, while having sponsors for individual events ultimately needs to remain its own entity and not appear partnered with individuals or businesses. It would eventually bring up issues such as favortism, kick backs, and other such issues that we just do not need to deal with. Sponsorship for individual events are a trade of basically services rendered. The sponsors are paying for a service for a one time event, and those sponsors have the ability to rotate each event, therefor avoiding any appeared control over the organization. If the SLSA were based on a surf teams home group of sims, or under the umbrella of another organization/entity, our independence could eventually be questioned or controlled.

Further, the slsa was also founded to help the sim owners who support surfers by keeping surfable waves for public use....if slsa doesn't have comps at other sims, surfing in general will suffer as more and more sims stop providing surfable waves and convert to commercial sims...
**his kitty**

Dharma-Austin
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 3:17 pm
Location: LIVESTRONG
Contact:

sim for SLSA

Post by Dharma-Austin »

hi his kitty I haven't talked to you in a long time. I hope you are doing well. I agree the ideal situation would be a full out ownership. As a donor of land I always retain the right to reclaim otherwise LL would come looking to you (SLSA) for the tier. And I also agree that comps should be held around the grid. I can tell you first hand that our retail sales at West of Ireland when we held the Crab Classic skyrocketed through the roof. We had never seen such high sales or traffic the comp brought to our sims. This is the only time (in most cases) a surf sims sees their traffic counts jump to the 10,000-20,000 level. Its nice. It's great exposure for a sim. It's a win/win. Furthermore I was amazed that we litterally had to do no work at all! Just sit back and SLSA did it all! We reaped the rewards. That points out that part of what Kathy is saying about sim owners is correct - it is a priviledge and an honor to have SLSA select your sim for a comp. Why SLSA continues to select sites that are not strong is beyond me. Sims should be "applying" to be a host sim for an SLSA event.

Back to the donation of a sim. Yes I agree even if SLSA has a home sim - need comps across the grid. But wouldn't it be nice to have your own home sim? With your staging area set up all the time? You could have smaller comps at the drop of a hat! Oh well...there are no strings. You may have heard that I donated land once and reclaimed it and I did. That doesn't mean I will do it again. I reclaimed it because the other party did not live up to their end of the bargain. So....only about 1/8 of what you hear about Dharma is true....the rest is venom spewed by malcontents or former employees. I used to run a HUGE organization and as we all know sometimes those in positions of authority are unfairly criticized. My offer still stands.
Namaste
I LIVESTRONG
Dharma Austin

Dharma-Austin
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 3:17 pm
Location: LIVESTRONG
Contact:

P.S.

Post by Dharma-Austin »

I always think of one more thing. You mentioned a sim owned by the "organization" - Well I hate to be the one to inform you but that is impossible unless SLSA can prove to LL it is a 501(c)3 org under the IRS tax laws, and even then, LL requires ONE PERSON ONLY to have a credit card on file and be accountable for the tier of that land and OWN that land. That person can in turn deed land to SLSA but can ALSO reclaim it. So...say for example...you designate your ONE PERSON. Say....that ONE PERSON gets ticked off for whatever reason.....reclaim...SLSA is in no way protected even within its own ranks. So I don't see what difference it makes whether I donate a FULL sim or SLSA buys their own...cos it boils down to ONE PERSON. Say.....that ONE PERSON dies? Well according to LL that one person better have wording in his/her LW&T as to who the land is to be transferred to....just points the board should consider. Also the donation of land is always at the leisure of the sim owner. Everyone knows that! But we are business and mature people are we not? Of course an agreement would have to be written and agreed to be all parties concerned. Even if you only ahd a home sim for 6 months and donor died (I am sick) well what? You still got a home sim for 6 months! FREE! I don't understand. This generous offer is being way overthought by you kitty. I'd like to hear from all board members eventuallly.
I LIVESTRONG
Dharma Austin

Cipriano Grut
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:09 am
Contact:

Post by Cipriano Grut »

Dharma, what I understand of all this: is that you are the person who has been banned from the sim where the comp will be held at in the near future. That you are also the owner, practically, of tsunami surfing team. Well, at least tsunami beach is legally yours. That the members of tsunami opened this post to convince surfer/members that SLSA should let you ride in the comp, even if the sim does not want you there; meeting with a lot of opposition in member posts. So are you now trying to tell us all that you want to be the owner of the surfing sim where SLSA should hold all the surfing comps in the future? What is next Dharma, you want to own SLSA? Or because I have been bought in a latin american country I am getting all this wrong and dont understand much?

User avatar
Sierra Sugar
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 4:14 pm
Location: in Thor's arms where i belong
Contact:

Post by Sierra Sugar »

i am not going to comment on this topic further. It is close to being closed as Craig mentioned. We are all going round in circles.

I will ask one thing, and its of a personal nature. Please address me as Sierra. "kitty" was my nickname from Thor. i was His kitty. It is upsetting to me on many different levels to be called such by someone else. I do not want issues pertinent to the SLSA to be overshadowed by personal feelings, and right or wrong that is something that is still very close and tender to my heart. The lose of Thor is something i struggle with daily and i view it as almost an insult to be addressed as such by others. I realize that it is not meant that way, but grief and emotion are not rational. So, i respectfully ask, please address me as Sierra.
**his kitty**

User avatar
Rani Decosta
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:46 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Post by Rani Decosta »

As I have previously stated in earlier posts I really dont see the need for SLSA to have their own sim. I agree with Sierra that the question of independence is very important. But I also like being able to hold comps at such different venues. Keeps it fresh and interesting.
What I take great issue with is your comment :-
Why SLSA continues to select sites that are not strong is beyond me.

You cannot make blanket comments like that. Last season the surfing sims that were selected were great and this season we thought very carefully about the selection and I believe strongly it was a good one. Please can you tell me which sim was not a strong one?
Majini
Monkeh Barrel
Surfline
Neart
El Corazon

Chi
Heliopolis
La Bahia
Crab
Imagi

I am sure I am not alone in wondering just which sim was not strong!!

Dharma-Austin
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 3:17 pm
Location: LIVESTRONG
Contact:

Strong Sims

Post by Dharma-Austin »

Well I have to admit I am not sure exactly so I stand corrected. However how many of these sims you listed CRASHED right before, during or right after the competition? How many are on what LL refers to as Void Sims that cannot withstand high scripts/avatars/prims? Those would be the ones I would consider not strong. Crab was on a void sim. We were lucky in that it didn't crash. If I were still at WOI I would reconsider it.
I LIVESTRONG
Dharma Austin

Dharma-Austin
SLSA Surfer
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 3:17 pm
Location: LIVESTRONG
Contact:

response to Cip

Post by Dharma-Austin »

Cip I do not know where you are getting your information but it is way off base and not even worth of a reply. You are wrong my friend and I will NOT respond to any more dharma attacks today. I tried to do something nice and this is my response? Thank you all for being so kind to me.
I LIVESTRONG
Dharma Austin

User avatar
Milo Voss
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:25 pm
SL Name: Milo Voss
Location: The Beaver State
Contact:

Post by Milo Voss »

From Cip -"That you are also the owner, practically, of tsunami surfing team".


Just for the record this is not true.
Last edited by Milo Voss on Sat Apr 05, 2008 2:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Abel Halderman
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:07 am
SL Name: Abel Halderman
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Post by Abel Halderman »

NO ONE OWNS TSUNAMI TEAM. It's managed by Kathy and her co-captains, that is Colleen, Milo and me. NO ONE influances decisions made by the team. I'm sorry if you got it all wrong. No one insulted you, Cip. Too bad you had to do that to the an entire team of your fellows surfers.

User avatar
Sierra Sugar
SLSA Hall of Fame
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 4:14 pm
Location: in Thor's arms where i belong
Contact:

Post by Sierra Sugar »

Alright, with comp day coming up and HAVOK literally wrecking havok on the ability to surf everyone is stressed. I politely suggest everyone just stop for the night. There are a lot of mitigating factors behind everyone's opinions, history at play that people are not aware of, and the fact that some topics are being beat to death and its becoming weary for all of us.

Everyone has expressed their opinion and thoughts. The directors are aware of them. Some changes will be made, some will not, but nothing is gong to happen tonight. If this continues the only thing that is going to happen is things will deteriorate and become even more ugly and make things worse.

Lets just drop it. Everyone. Please.
**his kitty**

User avatar
Abel Halderman
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:07 am
SL Name: Abel Halderman
Location: New Mexico
Contact:

Post by Abel Halderman »

As one of our friends would say: "Peace"... and good luck to all of you tomorrow.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest