DSE

If one continues to repeat a bullshit story, does the veracity of the story/opinion eventually become true? It's the "I think I can, I think I can..." may help personal endeavors. but "This is is true, this is true" doesn't make it any more accurate. No honorable person in this thread, nor in any communication I've recieved has said that "the only reason the EC settled was because Jan said this or that or Jan did this or that." Jan (along with others) contributed before, during, and after litigation. As an individual, she (like yourself, BillyVance, and so many others) are entirely entitled to speak their mind in any way shape or form. If they're not on the USPA Board of Directors at the time they are speaking. Like it or not, whenever one becomes a policy maker, administrator, or representative of a body, rights to "free speech" are considerably curtailed. I hope Jan runs again regardless of the outcome of this situation.

I was at Eloy on a Skyvan load over the holidays. A guy came up to me and said "You're that camera guy, huh?" Can you tell me what this is for (on his Sony HC3 camcorder)? I can't figure out manual focus on this thing, I've been looking for over a month." Not that it matters much, but on the ride to altitude, I'm thinking of a lot more than his focus problem. RTFM. BTW, if you're that guy and reading this, I wasn't offended, but it is a relevant story. On that particular jump, it was one of my very early wingsuit jumps, so I was somewhat focused on my own experience. I'm still mulling my opinon over having an actual rating, I can think of a lot of reasons I like the idea and a few reasons I don't. The concept of having a quiz/written exam for camera flyers is a good one, IMO, and basing most of it around safety, but some of it around technical chops means that the camera person is learning more about their craft. If you wanna be a guy that merely straps on a camera to shoot your buddies geeking during a freefly, cool. Have fun, be safe. But I'm coming to the conclusion that if you're going to be flying 3' away from two others laminated together with only limited control, and you're focused on them and not so focused on your surroundings, being aware of the potential issues that might arise, and how to deal with specific situations (ie; tandem master is an asshat that likes to go to 3K cuz he wants to make the next load, or the student that suddenly goes into a track or cannonball, trap doors on different types of rigs), then I do believe more than just the blessing of a $$-oriented DZO is required. I'm just not yet sure what that requirement should be.

C'mon, lighten up. As a camera operator, I have run across an active NASCAR track 5 times in the past few years, and haven't been hit by any car zooming towards me at 190 mph. Both me and my camera were fine. I did see a guy drop his tether once, and the passing car caught it in the rubber. Kinda similar to riser slap, but at much higher speed. Broke his shoulder when the camera was pulled from his shoulder, also broke 3 fingers from the lens grip. Camera of course, was totaled, he was removed from the production team as a field op. But it's never happened to me, so I think it's probably safe to keep running across active tracks.

When is it? I don't believe so

You don't get it. There are two factions here: Those that say "USPA LOST!" Those that say "Skyride WON!" Neither faction understands that settlement is reached because both parties are satisfied with agreements that allow them to get on with their business without incurring additional costs. Such agreements are typically of mutual benefit. Otherwise, if Skyride *really* wanted the compensation they'd asked for in their initial complaint, they never would have settled. If USPA was 100% confident in their position, it's unlikely they would have settled. Both sides won, or both sides lost. I hope that's settled.

I love BootCamp

I'm an advertiser, I don't get it early. Maybe it's cuz' I also occasionally write, and they don't want me to see the edits til the book has shipped? Looking forward to seeing it. Betsy's post is similar to an email I received today about the page.

Is it any less valid than the Church of John Coltrane? Next question I can hear resounding through the minds of the young'uns...."Who is John Coltrane?" Blasphemy!

If you were uglier, no one would have chosen your pic. BTW, I had a longer bridle put on that rig in case you have another "oops."

BSR only says 200 jumps to fly a camera in SIM sec 6.8. I don't have a PDF of the IRM, but believe it calls for 500 jumps. if it does, it's almost contrapuntal to the SIM, because the SIM talks about 200 jumps and tandem students in the same section, but IIRC, the IRM calls for 500. However, I believe all of the tandem manufacturers require that a camera flyer be tandem-qualified, or 500 jumps, prior to jumping with a tandem.

I'm interested in the modification to Kodak's. I've got a young guy here that I'm helping get started. Maybe I can find him a cheapo Kodak.

Curious...what is your opinion on a camera rating? Is a rating without specific BSR's of any value? Should a BSR be created for camera flyers flying with tandems? 4 way? Special events? None of the above? I talked to a guy this morning who is flying camera w/tandems at 60 skydives. This sparked a discussion between us about BSR vs recommendations. Looking forward to your thoughts.

I don't think that's the point. You're right, Jan deserves a pat on the back no matter what, because not only has she raised the issue of Skyride to a very loud level from which they'll struggle to recover, but she's also done one helluva lot for the community. Still yet,"The road to hell is paved with good intentions..." From an exclusively organizational viewpoint, and no other viewpoint (so if you've never sat on a corporate board, you just might not comprehend this), there is no way a policy-making body to have a rogue member that is visible to the general public without some form of punitive discussion. On the whole, it weakens the entire structure. And therein lies (IMO) the only point that matters. If Jan is removed from the board (and there is a looming possibility that she won't be) then there is next the possibility of the board censuring her. Or, they might vote that she be recused from voting, which has the same effect as being removed. Or, it may turn into a political mess of "yelling" in an orderly fashion. Should the board be mired in a morass of mess for the next year? Or should they be making policy and working on *real* issues? That said, no matter what, Jan is in a power position to be elected again, IMO, and she hopefully will once more seek office. She cannot be banned from seeking public office within the USPA. In either scenario...Jan effectively comes out on top, I believe. I'd sure vote for her. I guess I prefer to see it from a purely political perspective rather than an "Oh my god, they're beating down my friend." Whether it's recognized or not, Jan has just been handed a big stick. Reference the recent change in the agenda as one small example of that big stick.

I waited til jump 400 to become gay, and waited til nearly jump 700 to become a gay addict. Monkeyboy held my hand on one jump, and Scott Campos was on top of me for one jump. I've only partially made it into a large flock though, so I'm not quite yet complete in my gayness. Virgin-burner, FWIW I think it's admirable that you decided to put down the suit for now, and get some jumps in on a tracking suit. Takes balls to admit you're not quite ready for a new discipline, IMO.

There are a hundred "my situation was different" stories. My experiences traveling at least once a week with half a million $$ worth of lenses, camera body, and related production personals, plus international travel with same, has given me a fairly consistent experience once I've drilled it down to a few things. Someone suggested I write an article on travel with gear, and I'm doing exactly that. In the mean time, when you *do* run into those moments; Stay calm, keep your voice modulated. Never swear, not even "damn or hell." Ask a lot of questions, asking them nicely, not in an offensive or assertive tone of voice. Take photos. If they try to deny you photos of your gear, ask nicely why they're preventing you from photographing your gear. (this is technically illegal, be prepared for a lot of resistance). Have a clear inventory of the bag where you and the TSA can see it. yes, locks can break "in the hold" and the airline will attempt to claim no responsibility. They're like an insurance company, they're trained to deny, deny, deny. S' OK. Because you can press, press, press. I've had to challenge AirFrance on many occasions (I truly understand why the French are amongst the most-hated people in the world). I have zero fear packing my stuff in the hold. I carry some things with me too. Bear in mind, you're technically allowed three carry-ons, but if you try bringing on a rig, camera bag of normal size, and a "purse" or laptop, you'll be screwed. The airline has the right, and usually they'll exercise it, to limit your carryon VOLUME in addition to the number of bags.

I submit it would be a lot more productive to see a discussion of the BOD that doesn't keep rooting into Skyride. OK, Skyride is the evil beast in the skydiving world. I think this is permanently tattooed in the psyche of the DZ.com community. If Skyride is the only issue that seems to challenge the administration, policy-making, and operations of the BOD, then I'd say they've done a reasonable job. Is it even possible for the community to drop the single-minded thought process for even one thread, and leave Skyride out of any discussion related to the BOD? It's somewhat pathetic, and appears to border on hysteria.

If you use Adobe Premiere or Sony Vegas, you can get the Bullet Time plug in from DeBugMode. It's free, and very easy to use.

I'm going through what you sent me now. So far, doesn't look any different than what I've currently got, but I want to be sure there is nothing confidential in there before hanging my tail out. I've had the original filing and responses on my website for a few day now, but have only been PM'ing them. It's easy to hang your hat on the single ruling, but the single ruling does not remotely address the bulk of the complaint.

In a nutshell, I think that sums my opinion up very well. J, I've got plenty of webspace and bandwidth if you want to upload documents.

One more time for the slow folks. Lee was excused from the EC vote because of his DZ's policy of accepting Skyride coupons, if my understanding is correct. The timeline of the webpages and posts in question is moot. They still exist today. They've continued to perpetuate following the settlement. My understanding is that it was asked that they be removed. I don't understand why you're all so damn fast to tar the EC with a hot brush and a load of feathers. These are decent people we're discussing here, people who's reputation you're so glibly maligning. I don't know everyone, but I do know Jay, Sherry, and Scott. They're all honorable people. They're all skydivers, just like you and I. They have a vested interest in our sport, just as we all do. You know how much they're paid, right? Have you ever shaken their hand, jumped with them, broken bread with them? Shared a cup of coffee? I doubt it, because it's pretty clear that they've been de-humanized by so many of these posts. Bear in mind, I came into this discussion with one perspective. A few phone calls, an email here and there, and a little research caused me to understand why a proposal has been made. I don't know how it will turn out, but the proposal certainly has just cause. Lose the "Oh my god, they're booting one of my friends" and look at it objectively, and any moron can see that it's a discussion that needs to take place, regardless of the outcome.

The insurance company always wants to settle. The BOD could have voted otherwise, apparently they had enough information to do what they felt was best. No one here knows. I'm willing to trus that there was/is no grand conspiracy on the part of the BOD, legal advisers, and insurance company. What evidence do you possess that contraindicates their information or responsibly suggests they should have tossed the dice? You can say this with unequivocable authority and honesty? What do you know that we don't? Agreed. Coulda, coulda, coulda. It's all supposition. It could be jsut as easily argued that the entire BOD consumed ganja brownies at that meeting. The only indisputable facts I'm aware of are: A-BOD erred when they took Skyride out of the organization. B-Skyride sued, as is their right (anyone can sue anyone). C-Public statements by policy-makers have been directly cited as an element of evidence in the Skyride suit against USPA. Most of those statements are still available. Where has anyone said Jan is 100% responsible? That's a strawman's argument. Demonstrate any public anti-Skyride or USPA statement from another BOD member cited in the lawsuit against USPA (made during or post litigation), and it's possible that others bear equal responsibility and therefore those members of the BOD should be removed as per your comments. No one is screaming "Jan has to go!" Rather, people are responding that there are issues which are relevant to why it has been proposed that Jan be removed from the board. Those issues are being discussed. Nothing more. Not one person in this thread, save for Gary Peeks, has any a vote in whether Jan is retained or not. We all have influence with our RD's and the EC, but that's where it stops. Both sides of the issue not only ought to be discussed, both positions should require discussion so that folks might be informed. You feel it's acceptable that public statements of weight made by a member of the Board of Directors, made during a period of active litigation and post litigation. Others feel that a member of the board should have used jurisprudence and discretion in makingcomments about the litigation or related parties to the litigation. My belief, which is probably less informed than most: ~USPA terminated Skyride's membership in the USPA. ~Skyride sued USPA. ~Jan Meyer had/has a lot to say about Skyride. As a BOD member, this may or may not be appropriate, but it does summarily generate a risk for the representative body. ~USPA apparently asked Jan Meyer to not speak about Skyride and USPA. She allegedly continued to do so, and at the least left previous commentary available to the general public and promoted those comments via search engines/bots. ~For whatever reason, Skyride specifically identified those comments as being made by a policy-maker at USPA and addressed those comments as part of their complaint against USPA. ~USPA's legal team, insurance company, and EC voted that it was best to settle the complaint out of court. We'll never absolutely know if this was the right thing to do or not, but we do absolutely know that settling the complaint limited USPA's financial liability, exposure and freed up USPA resources. ~One member of the BOD has requested a discussion on whether Jan Meyer should be permitted to remain as a member of the BOD. The reasoning seems cut and dried. The opinion various people may have is going to be derived from what they believe they know or surmise has transpired. Some apparently feel that no matter what the cause may be, "two wrongs make a right." Others may feel that allowing the liability that (may have) existed to continue to exist, is still a liability in perpetuity. Each person needs to to form their own somewhat-informed opinion and forward that opinion to their Regional Director and the EC so that they might best know how to best represent individual opinions at the next meeting. Otherwise this entire thread is nothing but wasted babble and emotional spew, IMHO.

I bought the 580EXII based on Laszlo's recommendation, and it's great. Rechargeable batts make it easy. Get the TTL 03 cable for it for ease of use.

Rig, camera, or anything else that isn't clothing, is hand-inspected. Always. All you need to do is ask, and stand there with the lock and zip ties in your hands. If you *really* wanna have security, tell them there is a firearm in the case with the gear, and carry a 20.00 starter pistol in there. They treat the gear very differently when there is a firearm involved, and the gear is tracked from destination to destination. Given that I travel a minimum of 120k miles per year, we've learned a lot of tricks. Nothing is stolen any more, nothing has been damaged for years, and I feel very comfortable with the methods we've established.

I dunno if I can agree with this statement, Gary. I'm OK for money and can manage the time. But I won't/can't for office for a number of reasons; ~too new to the sport, I've seen how people with minimal time are treated and/or spoken about ~Not part of the 'good ole boy' network, and don't care to be. ~not former nor retired military ~my current RD does a very fine job, both in keeping my region informed and responding to queries. ~and of course your last, I don't think I'd stand a chance of being elected due to all of the above combined. Last year, there were regions with no one running. In some regions, very few people bothered to vote. Folks generally genuinely don't care about the politics of any administration so long as the trains run on time and taxes aren't out of line, whether it's the USPA, NBA, or USA. There will *always* be conflicts of interest. I submit conflicts of interest are good ingredients when managed properly. Conflicts of interest/personal agendas are why people run for board positions. Candidates often have issues with how policy functions, so they run for office with the intent of changing those policies. This is a conflict of interest too, but it's a motivational factor. Why did you run for office? I'll wager that in no small part, it was because you haev a passion and love for the sport, but you also feel/felt that some changes needed to be made within the representation/administration of the sport, and you wanted to make a change that you believe is for the better, no? FWIW, I think it's an admirable motivation. But not kept in check by board members and/or constituents, it can become a misguided motivation.