www.eteamz.active.com/equipesf
[ June 30, 2005, 02:18 AM: Message edited by: altoids ]
Full Version: Equipe SF
Brian, I see the word "recruitment" pushed your buttons. Too bad.
Although, I too would be irked to have my site shut down for no good reaon. People have a right to go where they want and organise as they want.
I'm happy my city-team realises that "we" as a team are going whereever it is "we" each decide to go.
chuck.
Although, I too would be irked to have my site shut down for no good reaon. People have a right to go where they want and organise as they want.
I'm happy my city-team realises that "we" as a team are going whereever it is "we" each decide to go.
chuck.
It is too bad EquipeSF has had such problems with their yahoo.com group. I certainly hope it is not because of some sort of 'official' Team San Francisco attempt to sabotage their efforts to assist bay area athletes attend the OutGames, and that instead it is just the work of a few misguided individuals.
Like I have said many times on the 'Schism' board, I really think what we see happening with city teams like Team Vancouver, Team Toronto, Team New York and Team Sydney - where each organization is supporting athletes regardless of which event they decide to attend in 2006 - is the model I would hope more city teams would follow.
As anybody who read some of the original entries on the Schism board can attest, I was extremely pro-OutGames in terms of my own personal support. But like for everyone else on our Team Toronto board - some like me very pro-OutGames - others just as much in the FGG camp - from a perspective of what was good for GLBT sport in our community - it was a no-brainer to make Team Toronto's official policy to support our athletes attend EITHER event in 2006 and beyond.
In fact when we (the Team Toronto board) have occassionally discussed some of the rumours we were hearing along these lines, we really have been surprised and in many ways, as members of both GLISA and the FGG, we have been quite disappointed too. If a city team chooses differently from Team Toronto, Sydney, New York and Vancouver and decides to only support one event, so be it. I think most of us can live with that. But to then actually go out of the way to make it difficult for those in your city who want to attend the other event - sorry - that's just wrong.
Pat
Like I have said many times on the 'Schism' board, I really think what we see happening with city teams like Team Vancouver, Team Toronto, Team New York and Team Sydney - where each organization is supporting athletes regardless of which event they decide to attend in 2006 - is the model I would hope more city teams would follow.
As anybody who read some of the original entries on the Schism board can attest, I was extremely pro-OutGames in terms of my own personal support. But like for everyone else on our Team Toronto board - some like me very pro-OutGames - others just as much in the FGG camp - from a perspective of what was good for GLBT sport in our community - it was a no-brainer to make Team Toronto's official policy to support our athletes attend EITHER event in 2006 and beyond.
In fact when we (the Team Toronto board) have occassionally discussed some of the rumours we were hearing along these lines, we really have been surprised and in many ways, as members of both GLISA and the FGG, we have been quite disappointed too. If a city team chooses differently from Team Toronto, Sydney, New York and Vancouver and decides to only support one event, so be it. I think most of us can live with that. But to then actually go out of the way to make it difficult for those in your city who want to attend the other event - sorry - that's just wrong.
Pat
This is a response to questions regarding “one group for two events”. I trust that the owners of OutSports can appreciate the fact-based nature of this post.
Team San Francisco's Board and members voted not to divide our focus for the 2006 calendar year, choosing to send one contingent to Chicago (members were in attendance at a public meeting which had been scheduled over a year in advance, advertised on our website, and announced to our members by email).
Therefore, we publicly stated that a local group was free to form locally, under the leadership and direction of GLISA, to organize all those interested in attending Montreal 2006. Team San Francisco did not say our members could not, or should not, attend.
We believed, however, that if such a group formed, they would do so with an understandable name and clear mission.
Unfortunately, in forming his new group for the OutGames, Brian Jung used misleading variations on the names "Team San Francisco" and "Team SF" without the permission of the 501©(3) organization, and California non-profit, Team San Francisco. He did not post his own name on the site, so we had no way of knowing whom to contact with our concerns. We had former Board members asking us why we were posting announcements in local gyms for the non-Gay Games events. If they were confused, we knew the general public could misunderstand as well.
When sent repeated requests to change the incorrect and misleading information on his site, Brian did not respond. Despite his incorrect announcements to the contrary, Team San Francisco did not shut down his site, YahooGroups! shut down the site, twice, since they recognized that the Equipe SF group owner is in fact not the non-profit organization that was being mentioned through their service.
(Interestingly enough, the first Word document emailed to local athletes from Equipe SF, lists Brian Jung as the author and shows that it was created on a work computer at Blue Shield of California. Clearly, he is one of the main organizers, if not the only member of the Equipe SF leadership team.)
Team San Francisco was formed from Dr. Tom Waddell's San Francisco Arts & Athletics, the group which hosted the first two Gay Games in San Francisco (and the only two Gay Games which have ever been profitable). SFA&A was the organization which became the international Federation of Gay Games.
Therefore, the mission of Team San Francisco is clear, and our main focus is to prepare athletes for the original, official, and quadrennial Gay Games. Our mission is written into the bylaws of Team San Francisco. Locally, we work to network our member organizations. However, our work had been severely hampered by a constant campaign of misinformation since the fall of 2003.
Rather than working with others within Team San Francisco to enact change, Brian Jung worked against the existing structure. He routinely monopolized meetings and publicly misrepresented the mission and interests of the organization. When votes did not arrive at his desired result, he even stood up and left public meetings. As a Board member, Brian skipped Board meetings which had been cancelled and rescheduled SPECIFICALLY to fit his schedule.
Brian never made a point of getting to know the leaders in the local gay sports community. When various names were mentioned to him at the Federation of Gay Games annual meeting in Cologne, Germany, Brian publicly stated that he did not know them, even though these same individuals had been at the Team San Francisco meetings and events regularly, unlike Brian.
Brian has stated that he does not think he has ever met athlete and journalist Jim Provenzano, the author of a local LGBT sports column in the Bay Area Reporter. In fact, Jim attended the first Team San Francisco meeting Brian attended and Jim participated in some additional Team SF meetings Brian failed to attend.
Brian was invited to join the Team SF Board based on the fact that he told Board members that he was a financial management expert. Because of his stated experience, he was routinely asked to assist in fundraising. Additionally, he was asked to assist in pursuing grants and financial support. This support would have reduced the cost for ALL of our members as they paid to attend the Gay Games. Some of our athletes, however, need more than just a little help.
Our main outreach is the Athletes' Assistance Fund. This fund is set up to help those who could not otherwise afford to attend the Gay Games. During his time on the Board, Brian did NOT help raise money to underwrite the Athletes' Assistance Fund, preferring to focus on issues which were NOT central to the mission of the organization.
As a Board member and temporary delegate to the Federation of Gay Games, Brian acted in such a way which embarrassed the organization on an international level. He publicly stated that he represented hundreds of people and multiple organizations in San Francisco, yet when pressed for more information, he could never provide specific names or organizations to defend his case. After he sent out an email announcement asking for a letter campaign to Team SF in his defense, the only letters we received were from a friend of his in Singapore, and another friend from Boston. Both parties were encouraged to voice their concerns regarding the Federation of Gay Games through their local representatives (for example, Team Boston).
Because Brian did not seem to get his way in group decisions made by the Board, Brian chose to act, publicly, in a manner which continued to confuse residents of the San Francisco Bay Area. When representing Team SF and the Bay Area at the Federation of Gay Games, Brian acted in a manner contrary to the wishes of the Board of Team San Francisco. Such actions, according to the by-laws, are grounds for removal from the Board. The removal of Brian from the Board is a matter of public record, and occurred at a public meeting… which Brian did not attend.
If he were indeed proud of Team San Francisco, Brian should have not acted in such a way to besmirch the group. One cannot ride the coat-tails of an organization, expecting to benefit from the years of effort and hard work of others, and simultaneously tear down that organization's reputation in public.
Clearly, if he were proud of his GLISA / OutGames / Montreal 2006 affiliation from the start, he would have made that clear to the public when forming his group on Yahoo!, and he would not have used misleading names or information.
The OutGames and Montreal 2006 (backed largely by the Montreal tourism and travel interests who will not lose ANY money if the OutGames event is not successful) distributed an email from a group referring to themselves as "the TEAM from SAN FRANCISCO". This continued to confuse residents of our area and muddy the waters.
Yet, when challenged, the GLISA Co-Presidents disavowed all knowledge of Brian Jung and EquipeSF. When asked to rectify the situation over the misleading use of the words Team San Francisco, they stated that they did not have official representatives in the San Francisco Bay Area. Therefore, even GLISA leaders do not publicly recognize Brian Jung as a spokesman for their organization.
At the recent San Francisco Pride celebration, GLISA and Montreal 2006 representatives (in their information booth) said that the OutGames event had 5,000 paid registrations. Unfortunately, there is no way to verify the veracity of that statement, and we know from several colleagues that it is possible to register for the OutGames without paying or having any intention of attending. When you register for Chicago, you must pay, & thus the reported numbers are accurate, and in no way misleading.
Of course, Montreal 2006 refuses to open their books to the public, so we will never know the truth.
We have first-hand reports that GLISA and Montreal 2006 representatives told Pride attendees that the Chicago 2006 Gay Games VII are not the "real" Gay Games and that Chicago 2006 Gay Games VII are bankrupt.
Again, both statements are not true. We know this because Chicago 2006 organizers, as the official licensee of the Gay Games, have been working closely, openly, and honestly with the FGG. And they told attendees that Montreal 2006 is the only true Gay Games, which is impossible, since they never signed the licensing agreement.
Additionally, representatives stated that Chicago "went ahead and scheduled the Gay Games" during the same summer as Montreal 2006, failing to mention that they were awarded the summer 2006 event based on promises they made, but refused to uphold (this last statement made in front of me, while I was visiting the GLISA representative at their booth).
The Chicago 2006 Gay Games VII is placing the focus on sports. Circuit parties and lavish events may be fun for some, but they are not the focus of the Gay Games. This decision is based squarely upon the request of Gay Games participants who made their voices heard in a post-Sydney 2002 questionnaire (sent to EVERY athlete registered for the Sydney 2002 Gay Games VI). The idea to focus the Gay Games on sports, rather than spend registration money on circuit parties, was rejected by Mark Tewksbury and Josee Genereux in a meeting held between Team San Francisco and Montreal 2006 at the 2003 IGLA event at Stanford University. Mark Tewksbury told me that Montreal 2006 organizers would not consider that recommendation, despite the fact that it came directly from Sydney 2002 athletes.
Montreal 2006 organizers and supporters may say whatever they wish. And they may say it often. And they may say it online, or through emails, or in a splashy or entertaining way. AND, you may get a free t-shirt or two in the process. Quantity does not produce quality, and repetition does not make their claims turn into the TRUTH.
Ross M. Hayduk, MA, Sport Management ‘05
Delegate to the Federation of Gay Games
Team San Francisco Board of Directors (since January 2001)
Team San Francisco's Board and members voted not to divide our focus for the 2006 calendar year, choosing to send one contingent to Chicago (members were in attendance at a public meeting which had been scheduled over a year in advance, advertised on our website, and announced to our members by email).
Therefore, we publicly stated that a local group was free to form locally, under the leadership and direction of GLISA, to organize all those interested in attending Montreal 2006. Team San Francisco did not say our members could not, or should not, attend.
We believed, however, that if such a group formed, they would do so with an understandable name and clear mission.
Unfortunately, in forming his new group for the OutGames, Brian Jung used misleading variations on the names "Team San Francisco" and "Team SF" without the permission of the 501©(3) organization, and California non-profit, Team San Francisco. He did not post his own name on the site, so we had no way of knowing whom to contact with our concerns. We had former Board members asking us why we were posting announcements in local gyms for the non-Gay Games events. If they were confused, we knew the general public could misunderstand as well.
When sent repeated requests to change the incorrect and misleading information on his site, Brian did not respond. Despite his incorrect announcements to the contrary, Team San Francisco did not shut down his site, YahooGroups! shut down the site, twice, since they recognized that the Equipe SF group owner is in fact not the non-profit organization that was being mentioned through their service.
(Interestingly enough, the first Word document emailed to local athletes from Equipe SF, lists Brian Jung as the author and shows that it was created on a work computer at Blue Shield of California. Clearly, he is one of the main organizers, if not the only member of the Equipe SF leadership team.)
Team San Francisco was formed from Dr. Tom Waddell's San Francisco Arts & Athletics, the group which hosted the first two Gay Games in San Francisco (and the only two Gay Games which have ever been profitable). SFA&A was the organization which became the international Federation of Gay Games.
Therefore, the mission of Team San Francisco is clear, and our main focus is to prepare athletes for the original, official, and quadrennial Gay Games. Our mission is written into the bylaws of Team San Francisco. Locally, we work to network our member organizations. However, our work had been severely hampered by a constant campaign of misinformation since the fall of 2003.
Rather than working with others within Team San Francisco to enact change, Brian Jung worked against the existing structure. He routinely monopolized meetings and publicly misrepresented the mission and interests of the organization. When votes did not arrive at his desired result, he even stood up and left public meetings. As a Board member, Brian skipped Board meetings which had been cancelled and rescheduled SPECIFICALLY to fit his schedule.
Brian never made a point of getting to know the leaders in the local gay sports community. When various names were mentioned to him at the Federation of Gay Games annual meeting in Cologne, Germany, Brian publicly stated that he did not know them, even though these same individuals had been at the Team San Francisco meetings and events regularly, unlike Brian.
Brian has stated that he does not think he has ever met athlete and journalist Jim Provenzano, the author of a local LGBT sports column in the Bay Area Reporter. In fact, Jim attended the first Team San Francisco meeting Brian attended and Jim participated in some additional Team SF meetings Brian failed to attend.
Brian was invited to join the Team SF Board based on the fact that he told Board members that he was a financial management expert. Because of his stated experience, he was routinely asked to assist in fundraising. Additionally, he was asked to assist in pursuing grants and financial support. This support would have reduced the cost for ALL of our members as they paid to attend the Gay Games. Some of our athletes, however, need more than just a little help.
Our main outreach is the Athletes' Assistance Fund. This fund is set up to help those who could not otherwise afford to attend the Gay Games. During his time on the Board, Brian did NOT help raise money to underwrite the Athletes' Assistance Fund, preferring to focus on issues which were NOT central to the mission of the organization.
As a Board member and temporary delegate to the Federation of Gay Games, Brian acted in such a way which embarrassed the organization on an international level. He publicly stated that he represented hundreds of people and multiple organizations in San Francisco, yet when pressed for more information, he could never provide specific names or organizations to defend his case. After he sent out an email announcement asking for a letter campaign to Team SF in his defense, the only letters we received were from a friend of his in Singapore, and another friend from Boston. Both parties were encouraged to voice their concerns regarding the Federation of Gay Games through their local representatives (for example, Team Boston).
Because Brian did not seem to get his way in group decisions made by the Board, Brian chose to act, publicly, in a manner which continued to confuse residents of the San Francisco Bay Area. When representing Team SF and the Bay Area at the Federation of Gay Games, Brian acted in a manner contrary to the wishes of the Board of Team San Francisco. Such actions, according to the by-laws, are grounds for removal from the Board. The removal of Brian from the Board is a matter of public record, and occurred at a public meeting… which Brian did not attend.
If he were indeed proud of Team San Francisco, Brian should have not acted in such a way to besmirch the group. One cannot ride the coat-tails of an organization, expecting to benefit from the years of effort and hard work of others, and simultaneously tear down that organization's reputation in public.
Clearly, if he were proud of his GLISA / OutGames / Montreal 2006 affiliation from the start, he would have made that clear to the public when forming his group on Yahoo!, and he would not have used misleading names or information.
The OutGames and Montreal 2006 (backed largely by the Montreal tourism and travel interests who will not lose ANY money if the OutGames event is not successful) distributed an email from a group referring to themselves as "the TEAM from SAN FRANCISCO". This continued to confuse residents of our area and muddy the waters.
Yet, when challenged, the GLISA Co-Presidents disavowed all knowledge of Brian Jung and EquipeSF. When asked to rectify the situation over the misleading use of the words Team San Francisco, they stated that they did not have official representatives in the San Francisco Bay Area. Therefore, even GLISA leaders do not publicly recognize Brian Jung as a spokesman for their organization.
At the recent San Francisco Pride celebration, GLISA and Montreal 2006 representatives (in their information booth) said that the OutGames event had 5,000 paid registrations. Unfortunately, there is no way to verify the veracity of that statement, and we know from several colleagues that it is possible to register for the OutGames without paying or having any intention of attending. When you register for Chicago, you must pay, & thus the reported numbers are accurate, and in no way misleading.
Of course, Montreal 2006 refuses to open their books to the public, so we will never know the truth.
We have first-hand reports that GLISA and Montreal 2006 representatives told Pride attendees that the Chicago 2006 Gay Games VII are not the "real" Gay Games and that Chicago 2006 Gay Games VII are bankrupt.
Again, both statements are not true. We know this because Chicago 2006 organizers, as the official licensee of the Gay Games, have been working closely, openly, and honestly with the FGG. And they told attendees that Montreal 2006 is the only true Gay Games, which is impossible, since they never signed the licensing agreement.
Additionally, representatives stated that Chicago "went ahead and scheduled the Gay Games" during the same summer as Montreal 2006, failing to mention that they were awarded the summer 2006 event based on promises they made, but refused to uphold (this last statement made in front of me, while I was visiting the GLISA representative at their booth).
The Chicago 2006 Gay Games VII is placing the focus on sports. Circuit parties and lavish events may be fun for some, but they are not the focus of the Gay Games. This decision is based squarely upon the request of Gay Games participants who made their voices heard in a post-Sydney 2002 questionnaire (sent to EVERY athlete registered for the Sydney 2002 Gay Games VI). The idea to focus the Gay Games on sports, rather than spend registration money on circuit parties, was rejected by Mark Tewksbury and Josee Genereux in a meeting held between Team San Francisco and Montreal 2006 at the 2003 IGLA event at Stanford University. Mark Tewksbury told me that Montreal 2006 organizers would not consider that recommendation, despite the fact that it came directly from Sydney 2002 athletes.
Montreal 2006 organizers and supporters may say whatever they wish. And they may say it often. And they may say it online, or through emails, or in a splashy or entertaining way. AND, you may get a free t-shirt or two in the process. Quantity does not produce quality, and repetition does not make their claims turn into the TRUTH.
Ross M. Hayduk, MA, Sport Management ‘05
Delegate to the Federation of Gay Games
Team San Francisco Board of Directors (since January 2001)
Add Team DC to the list of local groups that are supporting their athletes in whichever event they choose to go to.
Well after reading Brian's letter and then Ross's reply - I'll wish both groups well. Good luck to Team San Francisco in their efforts towards assisting those who choose to attend the Gay Games and to Equipe SF (or whatever it ends up being called) in helping out those who want to attend the OutGames. But man - am I ever glad I'm on the very together Team Toronto board and not involved with that mess.
Pat
Pat
How can some of you so called 'athletes' be so naive with your Kumbaya pronouncements to criticize Team San Francisco?
Team SF has always been about 10% of any Gay Games since 1990, and has been a leader in the movement on so many levels.
Do some of you not understand the dynamics of 'team sports'?
I can understand it if you never had that experience, so to those people I apologize for this rant, it will make no sense to you.
It is just my own lifetime experience in competing, coaching, and organizing that makes me react so angrily to this thread.
Teams train together, travel together, raise money together, live together, -and- sacrifice for each other.
There is a special 'bond' and 'loyalty', that elusive camaraderie, that every coach & team aspire to achieve.
That 'experience' is a critical component in building a 'team' as well as a family or community.
Team SF has been there, many times, and the athletes of San Francisco know it.
Do I have to produce a list of -ALL- the sports leaders of San Francisco who are supporting the Gay Games to put this nonsense to rest?
You cannot fool them, as they have built in Team San Francisco a sense of Pride, a team, a family, and a community for 20 years now.
Can you blame them for being a bit protective?
The sports clubs of San Francisco voted overwhelming on this and it is not so hard to understand.
We want to experience the Gay Games together as we have for 25 years with a known quantity where there is great history & tradition.
When the individuals on a team decide to make this commitment, it is a very difficult choice, not made haphazardly or cavalierly.
We understand that there are limited resources and that there is a greater good in supporting the 'team' effort.
Can you imagine trying to put together a basketball team, do all the work for years, raise the $$, and then send half of them to a different tournament?
Such a policy smacks of some sort of social experiment and would undercut the very motivation that makes a strong 'team'.
Never mind that no team in its right mind would ever vote to do this!
No one 'individual' in Team SF is being denied their right to make their own decisions between OutGames and GayGames.
It is simply that Team SF has decided to focus their limited resources on a single event to get the biggest bang for their buck.
So please, do not dare to criticize the duly made decisions of a 'team' that has 20 years of expertise, and sends ~1000 athletes to a Gay Games.
I just marvel at the PC hubris of some here to think that anyone should be allowed to appropriate Team San Francisco's brand to try and confuse and capitalize.
Why should Team SF have to spend $$ on a legal challenge, when that $$ could go to the athletes scholarship fund?
This episode smacks of the kind of politics that should embarrass all of us because it comes down to greed.
You don't steal a brand unless you are acknowledging the market share and you want a piece of the action.
We have copyright infringement laws for a reason, so go establish your own friggin brand!
Obviously Yahoo agreed, not once, but twice.
Gene Dermody
San Francisco
[ July 01, 2005, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: gdermody ]
Team SF has always been about 10% of any Gay Games since 1990, and has been a leader in the movement on so many levels.
Do some of you not understand the dynamics of 'team sports'?
I can understand it if you never had that experience, so to those people I apologize for this rant, it will make no sense to you.
It is just my own lifetime experience in competing, coaching, and organizing that makes me react so angrily to this thread.
Teams train together, travel together, raise money together, live together, -and- sacrifice for each other.
There is a special 'bond' and 'loyalty', that elusive camaraderie, that every coach & team aspire to achieve.
That 'experience' is a critical component in building a 'team' as well as a family or community.
Team SF has been there, many times, and the athletes of San Francisco know it.
Do I have to produce a list of -ALL- the sports leaders of San Francisco who are supporting the Gay Games to put this nonsense to rest?
You cannot fool them, as they have built in Team San Francisco a sense of Pride, a team, a family, and a community for 20 years now.
Can you blame them for being a bit protective?
The sports clubs of San Francisco voted overwhelming on this and it is not so hard to understand.
We want to experience the Gay Games together as we have for 25 years with a known quantity where there is great history & tradition.
When the individuals on a team decide to make this commitment, it is a very difficult choice, not made haphazardly or cavalierly.
We understand that there are limited resources and that there is a greater good in supporting the 'team' effort.
Can you imagine trying to put together a basketball team, do all the work for years, raise the $$, and then send half of them to a different tournament?
Such a policy smacks of some sort of social experiment and would undercut the very motivation that makes a strong 'team'.
Never mind that no team in its right mind would ever vote to do this!
No one 'individual' in Team SF is being denied their right to make their own decisions between OutGames and GayGames.
It is simply that Team SF has decided to focus their limited resources on a single event to get the biggest bang for their buck.
So please, do not dare to criticize the duly made decisions of a 'team' that has 20 years of expertise, and sends ~1000 athletes to a Gay Games.
I just marvel at the PC hubris of some here to think that anyone should be allowed to appropriate Team San Francisco's brand to try and confuse and capitalize.
Why should Team SF have to spend $$ on a legal challenge, when that $$ could go to the athletes scholarship fund?
This episode smacks of the kind of politics that should embarrass all of us because it comes down to greed.
You don't steal a brand unless you are acknowledging the market share and you want a piece of the action.
We have copyright infringement laws for a reason, so go establish your own friggin brand!
Obviously Yahoo agreed, not once, but twice.
Gene Dermody
San Francisco
[ July 01, 2005, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: gdermody ]
TravelPat and DupontRed,
Just we have variety in our athletics, not every sports team or organization can have the same needs and structure.
It is very easy for Team DC to support both events, because it is a relatively young organization. Thus, Team DC does not have the same relationships and traditions as Team San Francisco.
This difference does not make one City Team any better than the other.
TravelPat, congratulations on have a "very together" board in Toronto. Our Board has been "very together" for years, since we send one of the largest delegations to the Gay Games every four years. In Sydney, Northern California represented 25% of the attendees from North America.
Our Board was "very together" when we upheld our by-laws of our non-profit corporation and kept our focus on the original Gay Games, our mission from the start.
As in sport, there are rules to be followed, in order to enjoy the game. If you continually break the rules, or choose not to follow the by-laws of our organization, are you really a "team player"? Because we are all working together to further the core values of our organziation, we have a lot of fun on our Board because we are all working together!
Team Toronto may wish to support both events in 2006, because it will be much more affordable for your members to travel to each event, than it will for our athletes to fly so far from home. Additionally, Americans get less vacation time than Europeans (is that true in Canada, too?), so many people cannot afford to take two or three weeks of vacation away from home. Therefore, income, geography, and vacation time are called into play (three factors over which a City Team has no control).
I would also imagine some national patriotism would play a factor as well in your desire to attend an event in your country. However, when faced with the original choice of cities, I voted for Montreal over other cities, including Atlanta (and I grew up in the southern United States!). Originally, I believed the very slick marketing message and promises made by Montreal 2006 organizers, too.
As the Team SF delegate to the Federation of Gay Games, a Gay Games participant, and a long-time Board member, I burned many the cellular phone minute speaking with Montreal 2006's Mark Tewksbury about plans for sending a very large contingent from San Francisco, and his desire to work out the licensing agreement between his organization and the FGG.
When it all comes down to it, I guess I did not make myself understood in the first posting. Team San Francisco was formed from the same group of people who started the Gay Games.
Locally, our Track & Field club was the same team with which Dr. Tom Waddell trained and competed. His widow, Sara Waddell Lewinstein, has been involved in the San Francisco Gay Softball League for many, many years.
Somehow, this natural affinity for the Gay Games is called into question again and again. Blood is thicker than water, as the old saying goes.
For us, however, it is more than our rich history as the cradle of the Gay Games. We have a number of FGG participants who live in our area and participate with our sports teams and organizations, as well as attend our membership meetings regularly. There were at least a half-dozen San Francisco residents at the November 2003 Federation of Gay Games annual meeting (when Montreal 2006 walked away from the negotations).
Please note: Brian Jung was not at those meetings, so he has to base his opinions on second-hand information. I am sure you had friends or teammates who attended those meetings, TravelPat and DupontRed, but I am not sure if you were there as well.
Having been there, the experiences of the FGG delegates vary from the Montreal 2006 reports. Example: Montreal posted an online press release stating that the Federation had broken off the negotitations, when the opposite was true.
Press releases stating that large City Teams and European sports organizations are boycotting the Chicago 2006 Gay Games VII were untrue as well. It seems that one or two people from those organizations started speaking for their City Team or group, without the knowledge and/or permission of their leadership team.
The Federation of Gay Games faced additional challenges when Montreal continued to use the words "Gay Games", "gay games" or variations thereof, AFTER they refused to sign the licensing agreement.
All of this is in keeping with the patterns of Montreal 2006 organizers. In Johannesburg, South Africa, Montreal 2006 won the overwhelming vote of the Federation of Gay Games, because, in large part, they stood before the delegates and promised to sign the original contract, as written. Ten to fourteen revisions later (depending upon who is reflecting upon the experience), Montreal 2006 still had not signed the contract. It is my understanding that they promised to pay their licensing fee in full (and sign the contract as written), if they were awarded the Gay Games.
They did not sign the contract, they did not pay the licensing fee. Therefore, when Montreal 2006 organizers, backed largely by the Montreal tourism and travel interests, walked away from the negotiations in November 2003, the Federation of Gay Games had to open the bidding process again, and the organization which submitted the winning bid was Chicago 2006.
When their honesty is challenged, Montreal 2006 (or GLISA, or the OutGames) supporters seem to take on the role as a "victim" of unfair attacks by the Federation of Gay Games.
Consistently, we hear reports that the Montreal 2006 supporters are spreading misinformation, or partial information, which is clearly misleading to the general public.
Locally, Equipe SF has followed the same model. Positioning the group as a "victim" of an oppressive competitor, misusing the other organization's names or nicknames, spreading misinformation in the name of the other group, and refusing to work together (yet claiming to desire unity).
Our Team has a clear focus, a rich history, and a desire to support the Federation of Gay Games which, despite reported shortcomings or alleged differences of opinion, works ethically and honestly with her member teams, athletes, and business partners.
Ross Hayduk
Team SF
Just we have variety in our athletics, not every sports team or organization can have the same needs and structure.
It is very easy for Team DC to support both events, because it is a relatively young organization. Thus, Team DC does not have the same relationships and traditions as Team San Francisco.
This difference does not make one City Team any better than the other.
TravelPat, congratulations on have a "very together" board in Toronto. Our Board has been "very together" for years, since we send one of the largest delegations to the Gay Games every four years. In Sydney, Northern California represented 25% of the attendees from North America.
Our Board was "very together" when we upheld our by-laws of our non-profit corporation and kept our focus on the original Gay Games, our mission from the start.
As in sport, there are rules to be followed, in order to enjoy the game. If you continually break the rules, or choose not to follow the by-laws of our organization, are you really a "team player"? Because we are all working together to further the core values of our organziation, we have a lot of fun on our Board because we are all working together!
Team Toronto may wish to support both events in 2006, because it will be much more affordable for your members to travel to each event, than it will for our athletes to fly so far from home. Additionally, Americans get less vacation time than Europeans (is that true in Canada, too?), so many people cannot afford to take two or three weeks of vacation away from home. Therefore, income, geography, and vacation time are called into play (three factors over which a City Team has no control).
I would also imagine some national patriotism would play a factor as well in your desire to attend an event in your country. However, when faced with the original choice of cities, I voted for Montreal over other cities, including Atlanta (and I grew up in the southern United States!). Originally, I believed the very slick marketing message and promises made by Montreal 2006 organizers, too.
As the Team SF delegate to the Federation of Gay Games, a Gay Games participant, and a long-time Board member, I burned many the cellular phone minute speaking with Montreal 2006's Mark Tewksbury about plans for sending a very large contingent from San Francisco, and his desire to work out the licensing agreement between his organization and the FGG.
When it all comes down to it, I guess I did not make myself understood in the first posting. Team San Francisco was formed from the same group of people who started the Gay Games.
Locally, our Track & Field club was the same team with which Dr. Tom Waddell trained and competed. His widow, Sara Waddell Lewinstein, has been involved in the San Francisco Gay Softball League for many, many years.
Somehow, this natural affinity for the Gay Games is called into question again and again. Blood is thicker than water, as the old saying goes.
For us, however, it is more than our rich history as the cradle of the Gay Games. We have a number of FGG participants who live in our area and participate with our sports teams and organizations, as well as attend our membership meetings regularly. There were at least a half-dozen San Francisco residents at the November 2003 Federation of Gay Games annual meeting (when Montreal 2006 walked away from the negotations).
Please note: Brian Jung was not at those meetings, so he has to base his opinions on second-hand information. I am sure you had friends or teammates who attended those meetings, TravelPat and DupontRed, but I am not sure if you were there as well.
Having been there, the experiences of the FGG delegates vary from the Montreal 2006 reports. Example: Montreal posted an online press release stating that the Federation had broken off the negotitations, when the opposite was true.
Press releases stating that large City Teams and European sports organizations are boycotting the Chicago 2006 Gay Games VII were untrue as well. It seems that one or two people from those organizations started speaking for their City Team or group, without the knowledge and/or permission of their leadership team.
The Federation of Gay Games faced additional challenges when Montreal continued to use the words "Gay Games", "gay games" or variations thereof, AFTER they refused to sign the licensing agreement.
All of this is in keeping with the patterns of Montreal 2006 organizers. In Johannesburg, South Africa, Montreal 2006 won the overwhelming vote of the Federation of Gay Games, because, in large part, they stood before the delegates and promised to sign the original contract, as written. Ten to fourteen revisions later (depending upon who is reflecting upon the experience), Montreal 2006 still had not signed the contract. It is my understanding that they promised to pay their licensing fee in full (and sign the contract as written), if they were awarded the Gay Games.
They did not sign the contract, they did not pay the licensing fee. Therefore, when Montreal 2006 organizers, backed largely by the Montreal tourism and travel interests, walked away from the negotiations in November 2003, the Federation of Gay Games had to open the bidding process again, and the organization which submitted the winning bid was Chicago 2006.
When their honesty is challenged, Montreal 2006 (or GLISA, or the OutGames) supporters seem to take on the role as a "victim" of unfair attacks by the Federation of Gay Games.
Consistently, we hear reports that the Montreal 2006 supporters are spreading misinformation, or partial information, which is clearly misleading to the general public.
Locally, Equipe SF has followed the same model. Positioning the group as a "victim" of an oppressive competitor, misusing the other organization's names or nicknames, spreading misinformation in the name of the other group, and refusing to work together (yet claiming to desire unity).
Our Team has a clear focus, a rich history, and a desire to support the Federation of Gay Games which, despite reported shortcomings or alleged differences of opinion, works ethically and honestly with her member teams, athletes, and business partners.
Ross Hayduk
Team SF
Hey Ross and Gene:
I can understand that especially in the case of Team San Francisco and the founding role it has played in the creation and building of the Gay Games, how protective of the Gay Games those involved at the organizational level of the Team would be. And in the case of your team in particular I am not surprised by its continued support of the Gay Games and only the Gay Games. I can't really blame you for feeling as passionate about it as you do because in many ways the Gay Games is your baby. I think the Gay Games and the FGG will be well served by people with such passions in the future, if those passions are allowed to be channeled in a positive way and not distracted into negatives, as unfortunately seems to have happened, at least as far as I can tell by watching the recent exchange of San Franciscans from here.
I have come to the conclusion - as have many, that in spite of the ugliness and nastiness of all that happened in the split between the FGG and Montreal, that out of that I think has come a better and more proactive FGG. And I think GLISA - if given a chance - can be a very good thing too. I really do believe that GLBT sports - assuming Montreal and Chicago can both produce successful events in 2006, will be in a much better position post 2006, hopefully with a major international event every two years, with sizeable and successful regional events in the years between those. I think the growth of gay sport is such, that a scenario along those lines is one worth aiming for and is one that if we all work together is a scenario that can work. I just hope we don't end up killing or at least badly harming each other - until we get to that point.
I liken this to when the battle for gay rights hit some setbacks about 10 years ago here in Ontario and some gays blamed those who wanted it all - adoption rights, marriage rights etc, for creating an excuse for the government of the day to not pass some more basic pro-gay legislation. But because we all pulled together and continued to aim for the moon, here we are less than 10 years later, and with the recent marriage legislation - we have now reached the point where we basically are full equals in our society. So I don't buy the argument that we can only pull off one big event every four years. I think we can do better and if we all work positively to something more than that- there is no reason we can't get there.
I appreciate your passion on this, and I only hope there are lots of other people out there with such passion to make GLBT sport better. Because if they are out there - and I think they are - both the FGG (Gay Games) and GLISA (OutGames and Regional Games) should both be able to flourish and all GLBT athletes and non-athletes alike will be better off because of it.
I'm here in Toronto this weekend playing in the Canada Cup Gay softball tournament promoting the OutGames while at the same time being able to admire the work of Kevin Boyer, who is here with his Chicago team, in his efforts at promoting the Gay Games. And BOTH events - at least amongst the ball players I talked to today - are getting a positive supportive response. And that positive place is where I think most athletes are sitting right now. And give them a year or two gap between the events instead of two weeks and I think that positive response will even be that much greater.
Cheers,
Pat
[ July 03, 2005, 06:56 PM: Message edited by: Travelpat ]
I can understand that especially in the case of Team San Francisco and the founding role it has played in the creation and building of the Gay Games, how protective of the Gay Games those involved at the organizational level of the Team would be. And in the case of your team in particular I am not surprised by its continued support of the Gay Games and only the Gay Games. I can't really blame you for feeling as passionate about it as you do because in many ways the Gay Games is your baby. I think the Gay Games and the FGG will be well served by people with such passions in the future, if those passions are allowed to be channeled in a positive way and not distracted into negatives, as unfortunately seems to have happened, at least as far as I can tell by watching the recent exchange of San Franciscans from here.
I have come to the conclusion - as have many, that in spite of the ugliness and nastiness of all that happened in the split between the FGG and Montreal, that out of that I think has come a better and more proactive FGG. And I think GLISA - if given a chance - can be a very good thing too. I really do believe that GLBT sports - assuming Montreal and Chicago can both produce successful events in 2006, will be in a much better position post 2006, hopefully with a major international event every two years, with sizeable and successful regional events in the years between those. I think the growth of gay sport is such, that a scenario along those lines is one worth aiming for and is one that if we all work together is a scenario that can work. I just hope we don't end up killing or at least badly harming each other - until we get to that point.
I liken this to when the battle for gay rights hit some setbacks about 10 years ago here in Ontario and some gays blamed those who wanted it all - adoption rights, marriage rights etc, for creating an excuse for the government of the day to not pass some more basic pro-gay legislation. But because we all pulled together and continued to aim for the moon, here we are less than 10 years later, and with the recent marriage legislation - we have now reached the point where we basically are full equals in our society. So I don't buy the argument that we can only pull off one big event every four years. I think we can do better and if we all work positively to something more than that- there is no reason we can't get there.
I appreciate your passion on this, and I only hope there are lots of other people out there with such passion to make GLBT sport better. Because if they are out there - and I think they are - both the FGG (Gay Games) and GLISA (OutGames and Regional Games) should both be able to flourish and all GLBT athletes and non-athletes alike will be better off because of it.
I'm here in Toronto this weekend playing in the Canada Cup Gay softball tournament promoting the OutGames while at the same time being able to admire the work of Kevin Boyer, who is here with his Chicago team, in his efforts at promoting the Gay Games. And BOTH events - at least amongst the ball players I talked to today - are getting a positive supportive response. And that positive place is where I think most athletes are sitting right now. And give them a year or two gap between the events instead of two weeks and I think that positive response will even be that much greater.
Cheers,
Pat
[ July 03, 2005, 06:56 PM: Message edited by: Travelpat ]
TravelPat-
Please do not gloss over the facts here and try to equivocate or spin blame.
Not ONE single action of Team SF can even be remotely construed as unfair, in fact IMHO, Team SF has been far too accommodating.
What has happened to Team SF is a clear violation of ethics and law, and there is NO blame on ANY of the actions of Team SF.
If we really believe that Team SF should waste resources on a legal solution because we cannot rely on peer pressure and the integrity of our community leaders to speak up, then we are all doomed.
We all know Montreal has deep pockets of government $$ to take these legal risks in the hopes they can intimidate local teams.
Sadly, I am seeing this sorry pattern being repeated in other locales, and it is NOT in the spirit of the London Conference.
Can we not even acknowledge the FACTS and respect YAHOO's legal determination (free!) that this was clearly a violation of copyright standards?
Can we at least produce just ONE shred of corroborated credible evidence of Team SF's impropriety?
Team SF has a long and credible history.
Team SF has produced a lot of evidence backed by a lot of people.
Is that cache of integrity not good enough anymore in our community?
Do any of you even know this individual in question, never mind having dealt with him?
What this individual has done for almost 4 years now is to mount a 'victim' campaign of deceit and misinformation designed to undermine the morale and spirit of Team SF in order to render them helpless and then penetrate their Northern California market.
In our community, that is a crime, and the FACTS have been presented by Ross.
I am all for competition in the arena of FAIR political discourse that can stand the test of community scrutiny.
But can we at least be honest enough to present ourselves with our own brand, make our case, and take the political consequences like the loyal opposition?
This individual and his ideas have been soundly rejected by Team SF.
Move On!
This victim behavior is immature, and would/should not be tolerated in government or business.
Whenever I read this individual's victim garbage, I want to start singing "We Are The World" and send out Prozacs.
This behavior is not the action of a true athlete and certainly not worthy of our respect.
Do we require a public poll or a listing of all the people who support TEAM SF's actions?
Perhaps we can hire some lawyers, a grand jury, and maybe a special prosecutor.
Why, because we lack personal integrity and have the $$?
We are smarter and way better than that.
Where is all this goo-goo respect, cooperation, & trust language that gets thrown around this thread?
Is it all just words and PC spin?
We have an obligation as community leaders to not tolerate ethical and legal violations -regardless- of our politics.
I have been a long time Federation partisan, and you know that NO ONE in the Federation has been more brutally critical of them, both internally and externally than me. But I continue to work within the Federation because IMHO there is no credible alternative given the limited resources of our community.
I respect the integrity of Team Toronto's decisions, and would NEVER second guess them in a public thread, giving credence to a malcontent I did not even know.
I expect the -same- integrity from you.
Gene Dermody
San Francisco
Please do not gloss over the facts here and try to equivocate or spin blame.
Not ONE single action of Team SF can even be remotely construed as unfair, in fact IMHO, Team SF has been far too accommodating.
What has happened to Team SF is a clear violation of ethics and law, and there is NO blame on ANY of the actions of Team SF.
If we really believe that Team SF should waste resources on a legal solution because we cannot rely on peer pressure and the integrity of our community leaders to speak up, then we are all doomed.
We all know Montreal has deep pockets of government $$ to take these legal risks in the hopes they can intimidate local teams.
Sadly, I am seeing this sorry pattern being repeated in other locales, and it is NOT in the spirit of the London Conference.
Can we not even acknowledge the FACTS and respect YAHOO's legal determination (free!) that this was clearly a violation of copyright standards?
Can we at least produce just ONE shred of corroborated credible evidence of Team SF's impropriety?
Team SF has a long and credible history.
Team SF has produced a lot of evidence backed by a lot of people.
Is that cache of integrity not good enough anymore in our community?
Do any of you even know this individual in question, never mind having dealt with him?
What this individual has done for almost 4 years now is to mount a 'victim' campaign of deceit and misinformation designed to undermine the morale and spirit of Team SF in order to render them helpless and then penetrate their Northern California market.
In our community, that is a crime, and the FACTS have been presented by Ross.
I am all for competition in the arena of FAIR political discourse that can stand the test of community scrutiny.
But can we at least be honest enough to present ourselves with our own brand, make our case, and take the political consequences like the loyal opposition?
This individual and his ideas have been soundly rejected by Team SF.
Move On!
This victim behavior is immature, and would/should not be tolerated in government or business.
Whenever I read this individual's victim garbage, I want to start singing "We Are The World" and send out Prozacs.
This behavior is not the action of a true athlete and certainly not worthy of our respect.
Do we require a public poll or a listing of all the people who support TEAM SF's actions?
Perhaps we can hire some lawyers, a grand jury, and maybe a special prosecutor.
Why, because we lack personal integrity and have the $$?
We are smarter and way better than that.
Where is all this goo-goo respect, cooperation, & trust language that gets thrown around this thread?
Is it all just words and PC spin?
We have an obligation as community leaders to not tolerate ethical and legal violations -regardless- of our politics.
I have been a long time Federation partisan, and you know that NO ONE in the Federation has been more brutally critical of them, both internally and externally than me. But I continue to work within the Federation because IMHO there is no credible alternative given the limited resources of our community.
I respect the integrity of Team Toronto's decisions, and would NEVER second guess them in a public thread, giving credence to a malcontent I did not even know.
I expect the -same- integrity from you.
Gene Dermody
San Francisco
Hi Gene:
Like I said - I have great respect for your passion and yes I do remember your titanic struggles against others on the FGG board when I was the Team Toronto rep on that board. I will admit - I am not in SF - I do not know Brian or Ross - I do not know what happened in Team SF's board meetings prior to, during, or after the split. I leave that to you guys to all let us know what your interpretation of those events were, and then the rest of us can decide based on those accounts what we make of what happened.
But in all honesty - I would expect someone who disagrees with decisions made by us here in Toronto to say so. Second guess us all you want. People in our community do it all the time. But I think it is very safe to say that the VAST majority of those involved in GLBT sport here in this city (BUT NOT ALL) very much support the middle of the road approach we have taken. I have no problem debating the MANY who say we should immediately drop our asociation with the FGG - not a view I support inspite of my pro-Montreal posts here.
So when I read that the disagreements within the San Francisco area seemingly have resulted in a much more fractured situation than what we are experiencing - it does not shock me. There are those involved in GLBT sport in Toronto who, if they were in the majority view, would have had us in a similar position. It was quite possible that the Team Toronto board could have chosen one event over the other and had we done that it would have undoubtedly been in support of Montreal, GLISA and the OutGames.
And I will admit - I do not know all the details of whether or not ads or promotions that ran in support of the Outgames in SF misused the Team San Francisco name. So if they did - by all means protect your trade mark or your team name. I'll support you on that. And believe me - I have absolutely no expertise on what is legal or not in terms of things like this. But to my layman's view if the other guys stick with Equipe SF or Equipe San Francisco, and not use the English word 'Team' I think any reasonable person would recognize the difference, especially since San Francisco is not an English - French bilingual city as is Montreal. I think were a group of Montrealers who were suppprting the Gay Games to attempt to call themselves 'Team Montreal' (Montreal's former FGG member is 'Equipe Montreal'), then in that case - in a bilingual French/English community, then I think you may have a problem. I just don't see that for 'Equipe SF' or 'Equipe San Francisco'. But not being there, I don't know what is happening. If they are using phrases like the 'Team from San Francisco' or in fact using 'Team San Francisco', then I am in agreement with you, that you need to take steps to avoid confusion.
By the way - in case anybody is interested - a great weekend of softball here, with a team from Madison, Wisconsin - yes a bunch of Cheeseheads won the division I was playing in. And unfortunately one of Kevin B's teammates from Chicago suffered an unfortunate injury yesterday when he broke his leg yesterday. I hope he heals well, as all of us hate to see injuries like that happen when playing in a fun, social gay tournaments like our Canada Cup.
Happy 4th to my American friends and - sigh - back to work for all of us Canuckleheads after our three day long weekend that had us getting Friday off for Canada Day.
Pat
[ July 03, 2005, 07:12 PM: Message edited by: Travelpat ]
Like I said - I have great respect for your passion and yes I do remember your titanic struggles against others on the FGG board when I was the Team Toronto rep on that board. I will admit - I am not in SF - I do not know Brian or Ross - I do not know what happened in Team SF's board meetings prior to, during, or after the split. I leave that to you guys to all let us know what your interpretation of those events were, and then the rest of us can decide based on those accounts what we make of what happened.
But in all honesty - I would expect someone who disagrees with decisions made by us here in Toronto to say so. Second guess us all you want. People in our community do it all the time. But I think it is very safe to say that the VAST majority of those involved in GLBT sport here in this city (BUT NOT ALL) very much support the middle of the road approach we have taken. I have no problem debating the MANY who say we should immediately drop our asociation with the FGG - not a view I support inspite of my pro-Montreal posts here.
So when I read that the disagreements within the San Francisco area seemingly have resulted in a much more fractured situation than what we are experiencing - it does not shock me. There are those involved in GLBT sport in Toronto who, if they were in the majority view, would have had us in a similar position. It was quite possible that the Team Toronto board could have chosen one event over the other and had we done that it would have undoubtedly been in support of Montreal, GLISA and the OutGames.
And I will admit - I do not know all the details of whether or not ads or promotions that ran in support of the Outgames in SF misused the Team San Francisco name. So if they did - by all means protect your trade mark or your team name. I'll support you on that. And believe me - I have absolutely no expertise on what is legal or not in terms of things like this. But to my layman's view if the other guys stick with Equipe SF or Equipe San Francisco, and not use the English word 'Team' I think any reasonable person would recognize the difference, especially since San Francisco is not an English - French bilingual city as is Montreal. I think were a group of Montrealers who were suppprting the Gay Games to attempt to call themselves 'Team Montreal' (Montreal's former FGG member is 'Equipe Montreal'), then in that case - in a bilingual French/English community, then I think you may have a problem. I just don't see that for 'Equipe SF' or 'Equipe San Francisco'. But not being there, I don't know what is happening. If they are using phrases like the 'Team from San Francisco' or in fact using 'Team San Francisco', then I am in agreement with you, that you need to take steps to avoid confusion.
By the way - in case anybody is interested - a great weekend of softball here, with a team from Madison, Wisconsin - yes a bunch of Cheeseheads won the division I was playing in. And unfortunately one of Kevin B's teammates from Chicago suffered an unfortunate injury yesterday when he broke his leg yesterday. I hope he heals well, as all of us hate to see injuries like that happen when playing in a fun, social gay tournaments like our Canada Cup.
Happy 4th to my American friends and - sigh - back to work for all of us Canuckleheads after our three day long weekend that had us getting Friday off for Canada Day.
Pat
[ July 03, 2005, 07:12 PM: Message edited by: Travelpat ]
Thanks Pat..
Let me explain further, as this may be confusion about an American legal issue.
I served on Team SF for many years and Golden Gate Wrestling (GGWC) has a similar situation.
Team SF is a non-profit 501c3 organized in California since 1987.
The IRS and state rules about the disbursement of organizational funds to members of a 501c3 are extremely stringent, and it usually trigger audits when the government sees too much cash activity with individuals.
The Athlete's ScholarShip program goes back to 1994, and has in the past qualified for direct cash disbursements as long as there are no 'membership strings' attached.
That means that Team SF can disburse funds as they see fit as long as they can prove that their application process is open, fair, and does not discriminate against non-members.
This requirment may not sit quite well with those of us who believe in 'sweat equity', but it is the law.
The criteria is primarily economic hardship within targeted populations within a geographic locale who can prove they are registered with the Gay Games.
501c3 non-profits must prove that they are providing for the public welfare.
Knowing how to focus your efforts to serve a narrower population is an art that keeps many a lawyer and accountant busy.
The problem is (as you can expect) that there were those people who applied for stipend whom no one in Team SF really knew.
Team SF did not employ a verification service like a bank, it would have been overkill.
But Team SF wanted to award stipends to deserving athletes in the Bay Area who had economic hardship who wanted to compete at Gay Games.
So in order to keep some 'control', Team SF has (in the past when I was there), not issued cash stipends, but in lieu supplied vouchers for team uniforms, airline tickets, and hotel rooms, that were obtained at group discount/bulk rates.
This eliminated a lot of the uneasiness within Team SF, but it also narrowed the options down as to what could be awarded.
There is no way Team SF could obtain these group discounts if they had to manage getting airlines and hotel rooms for both events.
It would be a nightmare to try an manage vouchers to support 2 events in different cities.
This is perhaps a difference between Team Toronto & Team SF not only in the American laws of non-profit 501c3s, but a difference in experience & scale.
Team SF is always a huge contingent, and there is precedent in this 'travel & housing' voucher approach that goes back to 1994.
So I get back to this 'second guessing' issue I have with the posts in this thread.
There is no division within Team SF, there is ONE misinformed malcontent who wanted to change this process.
It was soundly rejected for very prudent economic reasons.
To try and make this a political issue with 'victim' overtones' is what is fueling this silly debate.
My point again to you is that we as leaders should not be second guessing each other's organizational decisions.
If there is to be this mass reconciliation and cooperation after 2006, then we cannot be planting these land mines now.
Gene Dermody
San Francisco
[ July 04, 2005, 12:45 AM: Message edited by: gdermody ]
Let me explain further, as this may be confusion about an American legal issue.
I served on Team SF for many years and Golden Gate Wrestling (GGWC) has a similar situation.
Team SF is a non-profit 501c3 organized in California since 1987.
The IRS and state rules about the disbursement of organizational funds to members of a 501c3 are extremely stringent, and it usually trigger audits when the government sees too much cash activity with individuals.
The Athlete's ScholarShip program goes back to 1994, and has in the past qualified for direct cash disbursements as long as there are no 'membership strings' attached.
That means that Team SF can disburse funds as they see fit as long as they can prove that their application process is open, fair, and does not discriminate against non-members.
This requirment may not sit quite well with those of us who believe in 'sweat equity', but it is the law.
The criteria is primarily economic hardship within targeted populations within a geographic locale who can prove they are registered with the Gay Games.
501c3 non-profits must prove that they are providing for the public welfare.
Knowing how to focus your efforts to serve a narrower population is an art that keeps many a lawyer and accountant busy.
The problem is (as you can expect) that there were those people who applied for stipend whom no one in Team SF really knew.
Team SF did not employ a verification service like a bank, it would have been overkill.
But Team SF wanted to award stipends to deserving athletes in the Bay Area who had economic hardship who wanted to compete at Gay Games.
So in order to keep some 'control', Team SF has (in the past when I was there), not issued cash stipends, but in lieu supplied vouchers for team uniforms, airline tickets, and hotel rooms, that were obtained at group discount/bulk rates.
This eliminated a lot of the uneasiness within Team SF, but it also narrowed the options down as to what could be awarded.
There is no way Team SF could obtain these group discounts if they had to manage getting airlines and hotel rooms for both events.
It would be a nightmare to try an manage vouchers to support 2 events in different cities.
This is perhaps a difference between Team Toronto & Team SF not only in the American laws of non-profit 501c3s, but a difference in experience & scale.
Team SF is always a huge contingent, and there is precedent in this 'travel & housing' voucher approach that goes back to 1994.
So I get back to this 'second guessing' issue I have with the posts in this thread.
There is no division within Team SF, there is ONE misinformed malcontent who wanted to change this process.
It was soundly rejected for very prudent economic reasons.
To try and make this a political issue with 'victim' overtones' is what is fueling this silly debate.
My point again to you is that we as leaders should not be second guessing each other's organizational decisions.
If there is to be this mass reconciliation and cooperation after 2006, then we cannot be planting these land mines now.
Gene Dermody
San Francisco
[ July 04, 2005, 12:45 AM: Message edited by: gdermody ]
QUOTE
Travelpat:
And I will admit - I do not know all the details of whether or not ads or promotions that ran in support of the Outgames in SF misused the Team San Francisco name. So if they did - by all means protect your trade mark or your team name. I'll support you on that. And believe me - I have absolutely no expertise on what is legal or not in terms of things like this. But to my layman's view if the other guys stick with Equipe SF or Equipe San Francisco, and not use the English word 'Team' I think any reasonable person would recognize the difference, especially since San Francisco is not an English - French bilingual city as is Montreal. I think were a group of Montrealers who were suppprting the Gay Games to attempt to call themselves 'Team Montreal' (Montreal's former FGG member is 'Equipe Montreal'), then in that case - in a bilingual French/English community, then I think you may have a problem. I just don't see that for 'Equipe SF' or 'Equipe San Francisco'. But not being there, I don't know what is happening. If they are using phrases like the 'Team from San Francisco' or in fact using 'Team San Francisco', then I am in agreement with you, that you need to take steps to avoid confusion.
Pat
So now Pat, are you telling me that since Montreal is a bilingual city, they should be subject to a different set of legal criteria in terms of determining trademark infringement (forget copyright infringement - let's call a spade a spade - this is trademark infringement) than a city who isn't bilingual? For a layman who has even a remote understanding of what is going on, I would expect a better response.And I will admit - I do not know all the details of whether or not ads or promotions that ran in support of the Outgames in SF misused the Team San Francisco name. So if they did - by all means protect your trade mark or your team name. I'll support you on that. And believe me - I have absolutely no expertise on what is legal or not in terms of things like this. But to my layman's view if the other guys stick with Equipe SF or Equipe San Francisco, and not use the English word 'Team' I think any reasonable person would recognize the difference, especially since San Francisco is not an English - French bilingual city as is Montreal. I think were a group of Montrealers who were suppprting the Gay Games to attempt to call themselves 'Team Montreal' (Montreal's former FGG member is 'Equipe Montreal'), then in that case - in a bilingual French/English community, then I think you may have a problem. I just don't see that for 'Equipe SF' or 'Equipe San Francisco'. But not being there, I don't know what is happening. If they are using phrases like the 'Team from San Francisco' or in fact using 'Team San Francisco', then I am in agreement with you, that you need to take steps to avoid confusion.
Pat
Here's the reality: "Equipe" is the French equivalent of Team - Equipe SF made that very apparent in its advertising (perhaps I should link the ad many of us received via spam email and included on the Outgames website stating such fact when announcing its creation). Therefore, it is an infringement of Team SF's trademark. It not only creates confusion in the marketplace (though I give our athletes a lot more credit in knowing the difference), it is a sorrowful attempt to piggyback on the work of an organization that has been in existence over 20 years and who has had a role in the success of bay area LGBT sports teams in that time span. Yahoo, which has strict procedures in determining whether any request to bring a group address down has merit, didn't have a problem deciding that Team San Francisco's claims of infringement were valid.
There is nothing wrong with competition - in fact, I think it is healthy. There is, however, something incredibly wrong when someone or some entity feels the need to borrow on a pre-existing corporate entity name in order to establish a scintilla of credibility and/or justify its extistence. That Ross and Gene have to defend the actions of Team San Francisco on this board is asinine, but what is sadder is that you really buy in to your quote above.
Is this what it has come to?
Charles King
San Francisco
I've just re-read all the threads on this post. I have this to say: Ross, you made a very clear case why you (and the TSF board) feel that an individual is misrepresenting positions and appropriating your brand. There have been people in my city who have done the same. It's a local issue, and an annoying one. You stated your case very well. I certainly understand no "Team" body likes this sort of thing.
Travelpat, I believe you hit it bang on, as regards to individuals from SF calling themselves Equipe SF. They have to call themselves something. There can be no confusion with "Equipe." What else should they call themselves? The rutabagas from San Francisco? The people from that California city that has a nice big bridge?
So, Ross and Gene, is equipe all right with you, or do you have a better suggestion?
Now, after excellent statements of Team SF's position regarding use of it's name, which is the whole purpose of this thread, did you both HAVE to go off the rails and totally cede the moral high ground through ranting?
By ranting, I mean :
--"backed largely by T and T interests who will not lose any money if the event is not a success." Really, if true, what does this have to do with the price of tea in China?
--the 5000 registrations of Montreal: "Montreal refuses to open their books to the public, so we may never know the truth." I've filled in forms for both Montreal and Chicago and paid neither. So what? Nice use of the word, TRUTH , by the way. OOOH, the truth... What is this, the X-files? And this has to do with Team San Francisco's name....how?
Curcuit parties. Yawn, yawn, yawn. Why is this your ultimate boogie-man, and who the hell cares? I won't be going to any, and again, about the defense of your name...this has got to do with....??????
The contract Montreal didn't sign. Okay, and did the FGG sign any of the counters that Montreal proposed? And since I'll address the word that kept coming up in your posts: LEGAL, in the next paragraph, did the FGG's lawyers (you know, lawyers, people who are generally paid to give legal opinions, good bad or indifferent,) recommend signing any versions of the contract Montreal proposed? 13 point what was it? Oh, and where is the public access to the minutes of the 2003 November FGG meeting where it all went to rat poo.....? AND REGARD LESS, THIS HAS GOT TO DO WITH TEAM SANFRANCISCO.... HOW....????
Legal, paying for lawyers, etc. What is it with you people???? Why don't you just put on a jersey and play some ball. Why is everything about lawyers?
Nice, neutral, reasoned words like "spreading misinformation." All this does is get people's backs up. I agree that more misinformation has been spread through this whole mess than bullshit by a backhoe at planting time, BUT: WHAT THE HELL IS YOUR POINT???
If your point is: "We have to protect our group's trademark"
then you did so with your arguements. If your point is "we don't like the Montreal Outgames," fine, then go to the Chicago Gay Games, and have a wonderful time, and I really mean that. But if you're going to seize the moral high ground, decide what the issue is that you're seizing it over.
chuck.
[ July 04, 2005, 04:15 PM: Message edited by: chuckvanc ]
Travelpat, I believe you hit it bang on, as regards to individuals from SF calling themselves Equipe SF. They have to call themselves something. There can be no confusion with "Equipe." What else should they call themselves? The rutabagas from San Francisco? The people from that California city that has a nice big bridge?
So, Ross and Gene, is equipe all right with you, or do you have a better suggestion?
Now, after excellent statements of Team SF's position regarding use of it's name, which is the whole purpose of this thread, did you both HAVE to go off the rails and totally cede the moral high ground through ranting?
By ranting, I mean :
--"backed largely by T and T interests who will not lose any money if the event is not a success." Really, if true, what does this have to do with the price of tea in China?
--the 5000 registrations of Montreal: "Montreal refuses to open their books to the public, so we may never know the truth." I've filled in forms for both Montreal and Chicago and paid neither. So what? Nice use of the word, TRUTH , by the way. OOOH, the truth... What is this, the X-files? And this has to do with Team San Francisco's name....how?
Curcuit parties. Yawn, yawn, yawn. Why is this your ultimate boogie-man, and who the hell cares? I won't be going to any, and again, about the defense of your name...this has got to do with....??????
The contract Montreal didn't sign. Okay, and did the FGG sign any of the counters that Montreal proposed? And since I'll address the word that kept coming up in your posts: LEGAL, in the next paragraph, did the FGG's lawyers (you know, lawyers, people who are generally paid to give legal opinions, good bad or indifferent,) recommend signing any versions of the contract Montreal proposed? 13 point what was it? Oh, and where is the public access to the minutes of the 2003 November FGG meeting where it all went to rat poo.....? AND REGARD LESS, THIS HAS GOT TO DO WITH TEAM SANFRANCISCO.... HOW....????
Legal, paying for lawyers, etc. What is it with you people???? Why don't you just put on a jersey and play some ball. Why is everything about lawyers?
Nice, neutral, reasoned words like "spreading misinformation." All this does is get people's backs up. I agree that more misinformation has been spread through this whole mess than bullshit by a backhoe at planting time, BUT: WHAT THE HELL IS YOUR POINT???
If your point is: "We have to protect our group's trademark"
then you did so with your arguements. If your point is "we don't like the Montreal Outgames," fine, then go to the Chicago Gay Games, and have a wonderful time, and I really mean that. But if you're going to seize the moral high ground, decide what the issue is that you're seizing it over.
chuck.
[ July 04, 2005, 04:15 PM: Message edited by: chuckvanc ]
Hey Charles:
Seriously - if Toronto had two separate groups for each event, and the existing one called Team Toronto was supporting Chicago and the other one started to bill themselves as Equipe Toronto, to me personally that would signal that they are trying to clearly identify themself as the group that is going to Montreal and are not same as Team Toronto which is supporting Chicago. In fact I'd probably chuckle and go - nice twist on our name and a clever way to tie into the Montreal event. That's just me - maybe others would react differently.
And even if I did not assume that, were I Joe Ballplayer who knows nothing about the split but is just trying to figure out what event my team is playing at next year Gay Games in Chicago or OutGames in Montreal, the name of the 'city team' is not even on the radar screen HERE. (I admit it may be different there). That is the reality here in Toronto where the vast majority of athletes just care about when and where is their next practice or game is. And Team Toronto is having little impact on deciding which event indivduals choose to attend. We just try to provide them with as much information as we can about each event through links to the websites, presentations that we have had here from both organizations etc. The reasons why people decide to attend one event over the other are varied and probably innumerable. Some will make their decison based on
- What event might have the stronger field in their sport
- What city will be more fun
- What city will be less expensive to get to and to stay in for 10 days
- Where are my friends going
- Which event will be more international
- Which event has more tradition and have I always dreamed about being in
Team Toronto's name - nowhere in that equation.
Now to be fair to you guys Gene has pointed out that there are some specific legal issues as described in his posts that explain why Team SF felt it needed to act as it has. And both him and Ross clearly explained not only the reasons for Team SF's unwavering support of the Gay Games, but the size and scope of Team SF is obviously much different and larger than other city teams like the one I am involved with. Although maybe we are going to have to change somewhat and become more like Team SF with the huge growth in numbers we are expecting with the expectation of sending possibly as many as 750+ to Montreal and Chicago in 2006. Almost six times the number we sent to Sydney. I take all of those reasons presented by Ross and Gene at face value and I let them stand unchallenged. In particular with the legal issues I certainly am no expert on Ontario law in this regard never mind California's. All that legal crap is just not my bag at all as anybody who knows me will tell you and when discussions turn to bylaws, meeting rules etc., I'm not the person you want on your board. But when it comes to helping out with specific actions that help fundraise, raise awareness and sponsorships or help with sports leagues, then I'm active and involved and happy.
So with that caveat out there, that I'm not the guy you want advising you on legalities, I will say this. That barring legal advice to the contrary, the reaction of our board at Team Toronto if this sort of thing were happening here would be - Fine - let us concentrate on what we need to be doing to help people get to Chicago, and leave it to Equipe Toronto to do the same for those going to Montreal. And throughout that entire process I suspect we would always be looking for ways to see if we could find common ground with the other group to see if we can pull it all together again if not for 2006 for years beyond for the good of our athletes here in Toronto.
Other city teams which may face problems that we don't have here in Toronto - be they legal - or nefarious conduct of certain individuals , then of course you have the right to reach different decsions and that is fine.
After reading Gene's explanation and Ross's I'm not second guessing you. I'm not accusing you of reaching the wrong decisions. I'm just saying that fortunately we are in a different space right now here in Toronto, and I hope you all can get beyond this so ALL your efforts are to do the things that benefit GLBT sport and move it forward. Because I assume that is why at least most of us who get involved with organizations like Team Toronto, Team Vancouver and Team San Francisco and dare I say - Equipe San Francisco - do so in the first place.
Pat
Seriously - if Toronto had two separate groups for each event, and the existing one called Team Toronto was supporting Chicago and the other one started to bill themselves as Equipe Toronto, to me personally that would signal that they are trying to clearly identify themself as the group that is going to Montreal and are not same as Team Toronto which is supporting Chicago. In fact I'd probably chuckle and go - nice twist on our name and a clever way to tie into the Montreal event. That's just me - maybe others would react differently.
And even if I did not assume that, were I Joe Ballplayer who knows nothing about the split but is just trying to figure out what event my team is playing at next year Gay Games in Chicago or OutGames in Montreal, the name of the 'city team' is not even on the radar screen HERE. (I admit it may be different there). That is the reality here in Toronto where the vast majority of athletes just care about when and where is their next practice or game is. And Team Toronto is having little impact on deciding which event indivduals choose to attend. We just try to provide them with as much information as we can about each event through links to the websites, presentations that we have had here from both organizations etc. The reasons why people decide to attend one event over the other are varied and probably innumerable. Some will make their decison based on
- What event might have the stronger field in their sport
- What city will be more fun
- What city will be less expensive to get to and to stay in for 10 days
- Where are my friends going
- Which event will be more international
- Which event has more tradition and have I always dreamed about being in
Team Toronto's name - nowhere in that equation.
Now to be fair to you guys Gene has pointed out that there are some specific legal issues as described in his posts that explain why Team SF felt it needed to act as it has. And both him and Ross clearly explained not only the reasons for Team SF's unwavering support of the Gay Games, but the size and scope of Team SF is obviously much different and larger than other city teams like the one I am involved with. Although maybe we are going to have to change somewhat and become more like Team SF with the huge growth in numbers we are expecting with the expectation of sending possibly as many as 750+ to Montreal and Chicago in 2006. Almost six times the number we sent to Sydney. I take all of those reasons presented by Ross and Gene at face value and I let them stand unchallenged. In particular with the legal issues I certainly am no expert on Ontario law in this regard never mind California's. All that legal crap is just not my bag at all as anybody who knows me will tell you and when discussions turn to bylaws, meeting rules etc., I'm not the person you want on your board. But when it comes to helping out with specific actions that help fundraise, raise awareness and sponsorships or help with sports leagues, then I'm active and involved and happy.
So with that caveat out there, that I'm not the guy you want advising you on legalities, I will say this. That barring legal advice to the contrary, the reaction of our board at Team Toronto if this sort of thing were happening here would be - Fine - let us concentrate on what we need to be doing to help people get to Chicago, and leave it to Equipe Toronto to do the same for those going to Montreal. And throughout that entire process I suspect we would always be looking for ways to see if we could find common ground with the other group to see if we can pull it all together again if not for 2006 for years beyond for the good of our athletes here in Toronto.
Other city teams which may face problems that we don't have here in Toronto - be they legal - or nefarious conduct of certain individuals , then of course you have the right to reach different decsions and that is fine.
After reading Gene's explanation and Ross's I'm not second guessing you. I'm not accusing you of reaching the wrong decisions. I'm just saying that fortunately we are in a different space right now here in Toronto, and I hope you all can get beyond this so ALL your efforts are to do the things that benefit GLBT sport and move it forward. Because I assume that is why at least most of us who get involved with organizations like Team Toronto, Team Vancouver and Team San Francisco and dare I say - Equipe San Francisco - do so in the first place.
Pat
QUOTE
Legal, paying for lawyers, etc. What is it with you people???? Why don't you just put on a jersey and play some ball. Why is everything about lawyers? -chuckvanc
Hey Chuck... I know your are a lawyer, so I understand the sensitivity. But I do wrestle & coach 3 times/week thank you very much, have for almost 20 years with the medals to prove it.
I have avoided this snake pit for MONTHS, and it has been wonderful. But the naive smugness of the comments against Team SF were just too much for me, especially from you and others who should know better.
I do resent having to go to hours of extra meetings to discuss legal options with lawyers in the hopes that we do NOT have to spend more $$ and time on other lawyers just to protect what even you and TravelPat admit is rightfully ours, our brand/trademark. Thankfully Yahoo gave us a swift & free determination that should be acceptable to anyone with a sense of fair play.
You especially know perfectly well that we have a legal obligation to always defend our brand/trademark so that there is a trail of proper management should it ever be challenged. We know from experience. We have been through this fire drill twice now with the USOC and the Gay Games Rings.
We cannot let this Team/Equipe slide because some partisan Canadians think we Americans are being too 'sensitive' about whatever. Wow, that's a switch, Americans being too sensitive!
Our time and $$ -should- be spent on the Athlete's ScholarShip Program, just like Teams Toronto and Vancouver are doing. We should not be defending ourselves against the deep pockets of Canadian tourism which does not care if they lose a case as long as they wear us down.
Maybe a nice well placed letter to Justice John Gomery or some Conservative MP will get someone's attention as to just how Canadian $$ is being spent at American pride events.
This is a disgrace, and when people with your background try to soft pedal and spin it without FACTS or even knowing the individual (BTW- he is an ex-Canadian!), you do us all a disservice. This makes these difficult times even harder by distracting us from trying to keep the peace and undermining what little trust is left.
Perhaps Team Vancouver and Team Toronto are not as legally tied into the legal burdens of non-profit and trademark law, or perhaps it is less of an issue for them in Canada. But it -is- a major issue for us.
Gene Dermody
San Francisco
QUOTE
gdermody
/QUOTE]Hey Chuck...
I know your are a lawyer, so I understand the sensitivity. But I do wrestle & coach 3 times/week thank you very much, have for almost 20 years with the medals to prove it.
I have avoided this snake pit for MONTHS, and it has been wonderful. But the naive smugness of the comments against Team SF were just too much for me, especially from you and others who should know better.
Gene Dermody
San Francisco [/QB]
1.) I'm not a lawyer. My two jobs are as a Writer and an Assistant Properties Master for film and televsion./QUOTE]Hey Chuck...
I know your are a lawyer, so I understand the sensitivity. But I do wrestle & coach 3 times/week thank you very much, have for almost 20 years with the medals to prove it.
I have avoided this snake pit for MONTHS, and it has been wonderful. But the naive smugness of the comments against Team SF were just too much for me, especially from you and others who should know better.
Gene Dermody
San Francisco [/QB]
2.) This naive smugness of my comments...(and exactly why I "should know better...?" Better than what? When you started your rant, I had posted exactly 5 sentences.
2A.) The chronology of this thread is as follows:
altoids
chuckvanc
RossSFCA
dupontred
travelpat
gdermody
RossSFCA
travelpat
gdermody
travelpat
gdermody
CharlesK
chuckvanc
travelpat
gdermody
2B.) Go back and read the second posting to this thread. in it, you will see I:
a.) Chastize 'Brian' (who I have never heard of before) for the use of the word 'recruitment.'
b.) Say I would be irked to have my site shut down for no good reason. I assume this is what bothered you. However, I was not addressing you. I was talking to Brian (that would be post #1. I would be post #2.) and I gathered from his tone and content that that was what he felt was happening. For myself, I don't have a problem with the use of the word 'equipe.'
c.) Say that people have a right to go where they want and organize as the want.
d.) Say that I am happy my city team recognises we as a team are going wherever we as individuals decide to go.
Tell me, please, which of the 5 sentences I wrote before you started your off-topic rant were responsible for pushing you into the aformentioned tizzy?
Tell me, please, which of my 5 sentences so offended you for their 'naive smugness?' that you had to dive into the fray slinging mud?
Finally, and most importantly, since the TITLE OF THIS THREAD IS EQUIPE SF do you have any suggestion as to what the San Franciscans attending Montreal should call themselves? Really: there are people going. They need to be announced at the ceremonies and just generally called something. What should it be?
This is your chance; have some input; go to town. What should they call themselves?
Chuck-
Sorry if when you presented yourself to me last year as an 'intellectual properties' person I assumed you were a lawyer.
Of course you would not have known about brands/trademark law.
Now you do. No charge.
Your threshold for enjoying vigorous debate is obviously very different than mine, but who decided your style was better?
...passive aggressive subterfuge, ad-hominem attacks, word games...
You've tried them before on me, but you lack the historical gravitas and record of committed volunteerism to be taken any more seriously than a Johnny-come-lately angry political partisan.
Pat at least is and has been involved for years with Team Toronto, the FGG, as well as his sport.
Is this also part of the 'plan' to keep people from posting here about what is happening in the trenches, leaving it to a few to play victim Canada and sing Kumbaya?
Do you need the last word on the thread?
Fat chance.
This debate was STARTED by this malcontent, and taken up by some of you as a cause to beat up Team SF.
That projection was a deliberate smear, it insinuated that there was something wrong with the Team SF decision to support the Gay Games.
Now you are backtracking, but not without whining about my style.
Sorry, I am a wrestler first, and it carries over. Get used to it if you are not already.
Ross, Charles, & I have made very logical presentations of FACTS for why Team SF must protect their brand.
Get over the style and concentrate on the substance.
Ross's comments that bothered you so much (re-hash of parties, the negotiations, etc.. ) were absolutely necessary to explain WHY Team SF does feel so strongly about their decisions.
Believe it or not, we do not share your vision of a multi-sport event. Respect that!
Thank you for keeping this issue alive way beyond necessary, as I have now said many times in this thread, this blog is research-prep for the media types lurking out there.
I have already been contacted by a syndicated columnist for further details & explanation about other reported patterns.
This is an escalation of the schism caused by your words, not ours.
As for what 'they' should call themselves, lets start with what 'he' should call himself.
The sad part is there is no plural, thereby making the use of either term 'team' or 'equipe' presumptuous.
Sorry if when you presented yourself to me last year as an 'intellectual properties' person I assumed you were a lawyer.
Of course you would not have known about brands/trademark law.
Now you do. No charge.
Your threshold for enjoying vigorous debate is obviously very different than mine, but who decided your style was better?
...passive aggressive subterfuge, ad-hominem attacks, word games...
You've tried them before on me, but you lack the historical gravitas and record of committed volunteerism to be taken any more seriously than a Johnny-come-lately angry political partisan.
Pat at least is and has been involved for years with Team Toronto, the FGG, as well as his sport.
Is this also part of the 'plan' to keep people from posting here about what is happening in the trenches, leaving it to a few to play victim Canada and sing Kumbaya?
Do you need the last word on the thread?
Fat chance.
This debate was STARTED by this malcontent, and taken up by some of you as a cause to beat up Team SF.
That projection was a deliberate smear, it insinuated that there was something wrong with the Team SF decision to support the Gay Games.
Now you are backtracking, but not without whining about my style.
Sorry, I am a wrestler first, and it carries over. Get used to it if you are not already.
Ross, Charles, & I have made very logical presentations of FACTS for why Team SF must protect their brand.
Get over the style and concentrate on the substance.
Ross's comments that bothered you so much (re-hash of parties, the negotiations, etc.. ) were absolutely necessary to explain WHY Team SF does feel so strongly about their decisions.
Believe it or not, we do not share your vision of a multi-sport event. Respect that!
Thank you for keeping this issue alive way beyond necessary, as I have now said many times in this thread, this blog is research-prep for the media types lurking out there.
I have already been contacted by a syndicated columnist for further details & explanation about other reported patterns.
This is an escalation of the schism caused by your words, not ours.
As for what 'they' should call themselves, lets start with what 'he' should call himself.
The sad part is there is no plural, thereby making the use of either term 'team' or 'equipe' presumptuous.
So, you are not even going to consider what name these sports people from your city can use? You have strongly presented your case for NOT using the words "team" or even "equipe."
The best I have been able to think up is "group" or "groupe." At least I've thought about it, and I'm not even from your city.
And, as for your complaint about the comments to this thread---
In my neighbourhood, if we didn't want the neighbours to put in their two cents about our dirty laundry, then we didn't leave it hanging out on the line.
The best I have been able to think up is "group" or "groupe." At least I've thought about it, and I'm not even from your city.
And, as for your complaint about the comments to this thread---
In my neighbourhood, if we didn't want the neighbours to put in their two cents about our dirty laundry, then we didn't leave it hanging out on the line.
Christ, why do I even peek into anything GG/OG-related... what an unbelievable amount of sniping.
Signed,
Just an Athlete Who Wants to Compete
:mad:
Signed,
Just an Athlete Who Wants to Compete
:mad:
Chuck..
I agree with you, but we did not 'hang out our laundry', some malcontent did, and you guys felt the need to inappropriately comment. IMHO, it should have been DELETED as an inappropriate thread when it was posted. Now it has been blown totally out of proportion and taken on a life of its own.
Jamie...
I also agree, I would love for all of this to go away, and we can get back to our sports. But it won't as long as Tourism Montreal insists on meddling with American teams.
Gene Dermody
San Francisco
[ July 05, 2005, 12:24 PM: Message edited by: gdermody ]
I agree with you, but we did not 'hang out our laundry', some malcontent did, and you guys felt the need to inappropriately comment. IMHO, it should have been DELETED as an inappropriate thread when it was posted. Now it has been blown totally out of proportion and taken on a life of its own.
Jamie...
I also agree, I would love for all of this to go away, and we can get back to our sports. But it won't as long as Tourism Montreal insists on meddling with American teams.
Gene Dermody
San Francisco
[ July 05, 2005, 12:24 PM: Message edited by: gdermody ]
QUOTE
gdermody:
you guys felt the need to inappropriately comment.
Gene, I am sorry. I'll stop now. But what is it about the words "Discussion Board" that you don't understand?you guys felt the need to inappropriately comment.
Really, I'm stopping. Stopping now.
Published in the San Francisco Bay Area Reporter on page 7 of the July 21, 2005 edition:
_______________________________________________________________________
Dear Editor-In-Chief,
I read with tremendous disappointment the 7/7/05 Bay Area Reporter article entitled, “Faking the Team” by Jim Provenzano. In addition to the numerous inaccuracies and biased omissions presented, Mr. Provenzano did a great disservice to the San Francisco Bay Area LGBT community by characterizing the organizing efforts of local athletes and artists who have chosen to go to, or are thinking of going to, the Montreal Outgames as underhanded and unethical. Maligning others with opinions and falsehoods does nothing but widen the unfortunate divide that now exists in the LGBT sporting community.
At the heart of all this negative attention are good, honest San Franciscans who simply want to enjoy themselves as a team in Canada next summer. Team NY, Team Toronto, Team Sydney and many others are sending “official” Team delegations to both Chicago Gay Games and Montreal Outgames in 2006. However, “Team SF” does not want anyone calling themselves as such to show up in Montreal. Regrettably, this petty squabble over the use of a name has resulted in the term “Equipe SF.”
When Tom Waddell founded the Gay Games here in San Francisco in 1982, I believe he wanted to create an environment where any and all LGBT athletes and artists from around the world could celebrate their diversity and uniqueness in the fellowship of peers and supporters. He knew how empowering it was to experience the joy and stereotype-shattering moment of marching into a thundering stadium packed with tens of thousands of screaming fans and competitors of every size, age, shape, color and nation origin, all of whom were there to wish you well and let you know that you were not just okay, but that you were absolutely fabulous!
Regardless of the name on our jackets, that is the spirit that our very “real” team of San Franciscans will carry into Montreal’s Olympic Stadium next year. I am hopeful that every individual who participates in any 2006 Games will live up to this ideal of inclusion, support, and community.
Brian Jung
San Francisco
www.eteamz.active.com/equipesf
P.S. I have included for your reference the full, unedited version of my original response to Mr. Provenzano’s inquiry regarding the issue he characterized as “recruiting” efforts of Equipe SF.
_______________________________________________________________________
Dear Editor-In-Chief,
I read with tremendous disappointment the 7/7/05 Bay Area Reporter article entitled, “Faking the Team” by Jim Provenzano. In addition to the numerous inaccuracies and biased omissions presented, Mr. Provenzano did a great disservice to the San Francisco Bay Area LGBT community by characterizing the organizing efforts of local athletes and artists who have chosen to go to, or are thinking of going to, the Montreal Outgames as underhanded and unethical. Maligning others with opinions and falsehoods does nothing but widen the unfortunate divide that now exists in the LGBT sporting community.
At the heart of all this negative attention are good, honest San Franciscans who simply want to enjoy themselves as a team in Canada next summer. Team NY, Team Toronto, Team Sydney and many others are sending “official” Team delegations to both Chicago Gay Games and Montreal Outgames in 2006. However, “Team SF” does not want anyone calling themselves as such to show up in Montreal. Regrettably, this petty squabble over the use of a name has resulted in the term “Equipe SF.”
When Tom Waddell founded the Gay Games here in San Francisco in 1982, I believe he wanted to create an environment where any and all LGBT athletes and artists from around the world could celebrate their diversity and uniqueness in the fellowship of peers and supporters. He knew how empowering it was to experience the joy and stereotype-shattering moment of marching into a thundering stadium packed with tens of thousands of screaming fans and competitors of every size, age, shape, color and nation origin, all of whom were there to wish you well and let you know that you were not just okay, but that you were absolutely fabulous!
Regardless of the name on our jackets, that is the spirit that our very “real” team of San Franciscans will carry into Montreal’s Olympic Stadium next year. I am hopeful that every individual who participates in any 2006 Games will live up to this ideal of inclusion, support, and community.
Brian Jung
San Francisco
www.eteamz.active.com/equipesf
P.S. I have included for your reference the full, unedited version of my original response to Mr. Provenzano’s inquiry regarding the issue he characterized as “recruiting” efforts of Equipe SF.
To both sides of this discussion:
Like most of the readers on this site I have never attended any of the previously held Gay Games and have been seriously considering attending next year ..... but after reading all the sniping and catty remarkd from both sides, I have to admit how ahamed I am of my gay brethren and not sure I want to attend either one of them. This issue is as silly and ridiculous as the International Olympic Committee forbidding the use of the term "Olympics" in the Gay Olympic games a few years ago.....
I am an attorney but have no interest in getting bogged down in a legal debate over something as ridiculous as this. Trust me...there are much more importatn issues than this to waste your time with.
Peace.
Like most of the readers on this site I have never attended any of the previously held Gay Games and have been seriously considering attending next year ..... but after reading all the sniping and catty remarkd from both sides, I have to admit how ahamed I am of my gay brethren and not sure I want to attend either one of them. This issue is as silly and ridiculous as the International Olympic Committee forbidding the use of the term "Olympics" in the Gay Olympic games a few years ago.....
I am an attorney but have no interest in getting bogged down in a legal debate over something as ridiculous as this. Trust me...there are much more importatn issues than this to waste your time with.
Peace.
This is the syndicated article "Faking The Team" as published in the South African paper:
http://www.gmax.co.za/look05/07/18-sportscomplex.html
http://www.gmax.co.za/look05/07/18-sportscomplex.html
The following letter entitled, "Enough pettiness to go around" was published in the San Francisco Bay Area Reporter on July 28, 2005:
____________________________________________________________________________
Dear Editor,
I read the 7/7/05 Bay Area Reporter article entitled, “Faking the Team” by Jim Provenzano and I was very disappointed. Too often the community has been labeled insular, bitchy, drama-filled, and petty -- this article does nothing to dispel that view. Moving beyond the emotional history between the Montreal Outgames and the Gay Games; to individually single out Brian Jung in order to villify and malign his character is unexcusable.
Brian is not responsible for the divide between the Montreal Outgames and the Gay Games -- other individuals should take that responsiblity. The reasons the atheletes choose to go to the Montreal Outgames are their own and have a much larger scope than being some part of a conspiracy to 'destroy' the Gay Games movement. They deserve the support of their community.
Having known Brian for over 6 years, I can attest his integrity and values are beyond reproach. I hope the Bay Area Reporter can realize that building community and support for all LGBT individuals should be the mission of this paper.
Sincerely,
Steven Danielson
Oakland, CA
____________________________________________________________________________
Dear Editor,
I read the 7/7/05 Bay Area Reporter article entitled, “Faking the Team” by Jim Provenzano and I was very disappointed. Too often the community has been labeled insular, bitchy, drama-filled, and petty -- this article does nothing to dispel that view. Moving beyond the emotional history between the Montreal Outgames and the Gay Games; to individually single out Brian Jung in order to villify and malign his character is unexcusable.
Brian is not responsible for the divide between the Montreal Outgames and the Gay Games -- other individuals should take that responsiblity. The reasons the atheletes choose to go to the Montreal Outgames are their own and have a much larger scope than being some part of a conspiracy to 'destroy' the Gay Games movement. They deserve the support of their community.
Having known Brian for over 6 years, I can attest his integrity and values are beyond reproach. I hope the Bay Area Reporter can realize that building community and support for all LGBT individuals should be the mission of this paper.
Sincerely,
Steven Danielson
Oakland, CA
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.