Rutherford Labs double sprint race, 26 Aug

[Homer]

As a club 'mate' of 'noomember' I am embarrassed by his stance. Please remove it for the sake of orienteering.

Perhaps our club should refuse his renewal application at the end of the year, as I believe his previous club did?

[mike g]

And perhaps my club should cancel his entry for the City of London Race and return the entry fee. I might suggest to the committee that they consider doing that when they meet next week.

[Gross]

This is turning into a witch hunt against the guy. He did nothing wrong in running round with a headcam. It is common practice in orienteering, just as it is common practice not to allow dogs in the terrain. The organisers managed to advise against bringing dogs but said nothing about photographs..... (from reading final info)

Look to the organisers or the controller who acted in a way that allowed this situation to develop. They maybe hard working volunteers but this time they screwed up.... it happens, get over it and don't take it out on others

[SJC]

Look to the organisers or the controller who acted in a way that allowed this situation to develop. They maybe hard working volunteers but this time they screwed up.... it happens, get over it and don't take it out on others.

Rubbish. They didn't screw up. Once the videos had been posted they simply asked noomember if he would take these videos off until there is clearance to show them.
A fairly simple request which anyone with any common sense would have done.

Given his refusal to do so, what other requests from event organisers might he choose to ignore in future ? I would therefore agree with the idea of cancelling his entry for the City of London Race and returning the entry fee.

[graeme]

Maybe as penance nooomember should offer to take some really good footage which could be used to promote future events.

[EddieH]

For heavens sake Gross. No-one has suggested that Noomember did anything wrong in taking the video.

But what principle he is standing on that prevents him from removing it as questioned is beyond me. I find it easier to understand the mentality of Islamic suicide bombers and I'd imagine that virtually everyone here believes them to be anything other than misguided.

[Gross]

Given his refusal to do so, what other requests from event organisers might he choose to ignore in future ? I would therefore agree with the idea of cancelling his entry for the City of London Race and returning the entry fee.

Go down that road & you need to be very certain of what you are doing. City of London is a public race with no restrictions on entry as far as I can see. The guy has not been proven to have broken any rules.

You can't just announce on a web forum that a guy is banned. Do it if you like but go through the correct procedures etc etc.

[mikey]

Given his refusal to do so, what other requests from event organisers might he choose to ignore in future ? I would therefore agree with the idea of cancelling his entry for the City of London Race and returning the entry fee.

Go down that road & you need to be very certain of what you are doing. City of London is a public race with no restrictions on entry as far as I can see. The guy has not been proven to have broken any rules.

Nothing shall be done to prejudice the goodwill of landowners, their tenants or agents. Competitors and officials shall comply with all requests made by such persons or notified to them by the organiser.

BOF Rule 1.6.1

[Adventure Racer]

As discussed above, Gross, event organisors are under no obligation to accept entries, nor to explain their reasons for refusing an entry.

I shall make this my last post on the subject - not because I have nothing else to say, but because I like my current post count

[Gross]

BOF Rule 1.6.1

I think you will find from what has been made public on this forum that the guy did nothing to break rule 1.6.1 before or during the competition.

It is debatable whether BOF rules apply after the competition has finished & results published.

Have the organisers confirmed that it is ok to published detailed large scale maps of the area?

Should the organisers, controllers or jury decide the guy has brought the sport into disrepute then the way forward is below & not a kangaroo court:

9.5.1
If the Organiser, Controller or Jury consider that the sport has been brought into
disrepute they shall bring the matter to the attention of
the Chairman of British.......

[JK]

For once I agree with Gross (which probably comes as a bigger suprise to Gross than it does to me).

In my opinion he broke no rules during the event and therefore shouldn't be DQd from it as some people have suggested to me.

If someone thought that by him refusing to take things off when politely asked he is bringing O/TVOC/SYO/BOF into disrepute (BOF rule 1.6.1) then that person would have to follow proper procedures to report a formal complaint.

Arbitrarly banning him from events here and there without such procedures would IMO be childish and vigilante mentality.

Edit: I have just seen mikey's post: I support the view that 1.6.1 wasn't broken before or during the competition.

[andy]

just a question - with the Roseisle leg of the 6days finishing on an airbase, should the ending of this video be cut (even though it doesn't give away any 'secrets'!) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8C-CEXHSJg

interesting. knowing the organisers... I'll ask if this was discussed

[Roomungous]

just a question - with the Roseisle leg of the 6days finishing on an airbase, should the ending of this video be cut (even though it doesn't give away any 'secrets'!) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8C-CEXHSJg

interesting. knowing the organisers... I'll ask if this was discussed

It was discussed. Regular, positive dialogue with security staff at Kinloss ensured any sensitive areas of the base were well out of our way and there were no issues with pictures or ground level video being taken around assembly/run-in (or on the vehicle route in and out). There was a tentative request for someone to deploy a mini aerial camera, which we decided was beyond the spirit of what had been agreed with the security team. As it was, we managed to get some excellent aerial shots of assembly taken by the RAF.

[Meat Market]

This is ridiculous, I was at this event and the courses were well planned, all relevant info in the event notes, well organised, great area and I had a great time despite mispunching on the prologue. If we want to include things in the event notes which 90% view as common sense (don't walk around with your pants down in public, don't murder anyone and punch all the controls on your map) then the event notes turn into war and peace for the rest of us and we miss the important stuff (ie OOB areas, start procedure, punching system)

Please take your video down and next time when the organiser of an event asks you do something for the future of the event do it, even if you disagree with the decision and how he asks you (which i thought was fairly reasonable). He/she is only trying to ensure that the rest of us can get out on the area next time and have a great time without any risk of us losing access to the event area in future.

Don't ban this guy either it seems like he needs to get out at weekends and let off some steam.

[ianandmonika]

This is getting totally out of hand. Having intially been asked by the event officials, the video should be deleted - loss of an area affects many people. Not to delete it seems to be adopting an unnecessary position.