Chad's Accusations ... See My Post Before Voting!

[[old] mpukita]

With this poll, please only answer if you are also willing to post your vote here, so we can truly validate the vote total and avoid ballot box stuffing.<br /><br />Thanks!

[[old] mpukita]

I voted <b>YES</b>.

[[old] hjs]

I voted no.<br /><br />reason: In sports an achievement is only valid when proven. If somesome does something in training/unofficial event is't common to wait untill that person shows he/she repeat that. It does not mean we don't believe the performance but You simply have to proof it. that,s what sport is all about.<br />In my eyes Chad's asks Adams: Come on show it! That not the same as saying: you are a lier.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />

[[old] PaulS]

"Yes, I believe Chad did accuse Dwayne of cheating", but it would be impossible to <b>prove</b>. <br /><br />These questions are always tough, and you have made it tougher by including the "believe". Afterall, this all started with a poll requiring "belief" (or not), or "Don't Care" if a ranked time was real.<br /><br />The uproar seems to be the questioning of anothers integrity through implication and innuendo, in spite of the repeated claims that it was only an attempt to "do something productive regarding the provability of ranked times/distances".<br /><br />Chad could have started out with something like:<br /><br /><b>Poll: Ranked Times/Distances, are they provable beyond question?<br /><br />Yes.<br /><br />No.<br /><br />Maybe. (Please post your concerns)</b><br /><br /><br />I would imagine such a poll would have inspired some equally heated debate, and shed some light on the current failings (i.e. the Interval loophole), but since no-ones integrity was being impuned, the author of the poll would not have inspired wrath against themself, which was deserved IMO, but an equal waste of time and effort.<br />Personally, I was willing to believe Chad (because he did say) really wanted to do something productive regarding firming up the ranking verification methods, but then he stated without any lack of clarity, "This is about Dwayne.", then defended that by saying "Dwayne made it personal by calling me (Chad) a [name].", so in that case my initial belief was changed based on clear and convincing evidence.<br /><br />Dang! I wish we could get back to discussing things that were related to improving Erging performance/fitness/enjoyment and having fun. Well, as much as the Erg can be "enjoyed".

[[old] Chad Williams]

Once this "Dwayne proving his times" is all tided up, I shall be starting my crusade with regards to the ranking system.<br /><br />1 job at a time.

[[old] Porkchop]

No aurprise here -- I voted "Yes."

[[old] Daren C]

Yes

[[old] Chad Williams]

<!--QuoteBegin-Daren C+Jan 21 2006, 11:16 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Daren C @ Jan 21 2006, 11:16 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Yes <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Are you going to ask the 50+ Taff Attack members to vote the same way as you Daren? They have been very loyal to the cause haven't they. How many showed their support in the thread I started?<br /><br />Lets count them, You and Seat5.<br /><br />

[[old] Carl Henrik]

I voted <b>yes</b>. <br /><br />The accusation was implicitly made. Was there an explicit accusation where Chad said "Dwayne is a liar"? No. But, an accusation of one sort or the other there was indeed. "Things don't fall into place" I believe were the words of Chad concering specificaly Dwaynes ranked performances, not the ranking system. <br /><br />He does not seem to realize the accusation himself though, and tries to bring focus on other things that he can understand, like a wish proof for example. Something that is very possible to express without accusations but Chad sadly failed in this. And he is an American so no hiding behind language difficulties. (Don't try to stick this one on Europe )

[[old] Citroen]

Interesting to see how all the yes votes are posting here. But not one of the NO voters has bothered. <br /><br />I voted NO. I don't think that Chad explicitly called Dwayne a liar. He did cast some doubt on Dwayne's results and possibly not what is seen as the most tactful way (but then most whistleblower's suffer the same fate). <br /><br />If folks dislike what they see on this board, they are at complete liberty to report the item to the forum moderators. Has anyone done that with any of Chad's items? Have the moderators seen fit to remove any items?<br /><br />The thread is, currently, up to 561 replies and has been read 16,186 times and no one has reported an objection that has been upheld. C2 could easily eviscerate the whole debate, they haven't seen the need to do that.

[[old] Citroen]

<!--QuoteBegin-Carl Henrik+Jan 21 2006, 04:46 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Carl Henrik @ Jan 21 2006, 04:46 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->He does not seem to realize the accusation himself though, and tries to bring focus on other things that he can understand, like a wish proof for example. Something that is very possible to express without accusations but Chad sadly failed in this. And he is an American so no hiding behind language difficulties. (Don't try to stick this one on Europe  ) <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />That is clearly NOT true. There was one of Chad's items where he spelled humour with the U. That is something you folks would not do. I'd say he's English, Irish, Australian or a New Zealander. He's a native English speaker although his spelling (or typing) isn't very good.<br /><br /><a href='http://concept2.ipbhost.com/index.php?a ... st&p=51026' target='_blank'>http://concept2.ipbhost.com/index.php?a ... p=51026</a>

[[old] Chad Williams]

<!--QuoteBegin-Citroen+Jan 21 2006, 11:54 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Citroen @ Jan 21 2006, 11:54 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-Carl Henrik+Jan 21 2006, 04:46 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Carl Henrik @ Jan 21 2006, 04:46 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->He does not seem to realize the accusation himself though, and tries to bring focus on other things that he can understand, like a wish proof for example. Something that is very possible to express without accusations but Chad sadly failed in this. And he is an American so no hiding behind language difficulties. (Don't try to stick this one on Europe  ) <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />That is clearly NOT true. There was one of Chad's items where he spelled humour with the U. That is something you folks would not do. I'd say he's English, Irish, Australian or a New Zealander. He's a native English speaker although his spelling (or typing) isn't very good.<br /><br /><a href='http://concept2.ipbhost.com/index.php?a ... st&p=51026' target='_blank'>http://concept2.ipbhost.com/index.php?a ... p=51026</a> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />12 years in the UK.<br />

[[old] Carl Henrik]

<!--QuoteBegin-Citroen+Jan 21 2006, 04:54 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Citroen @ Jan 21 2006, 04:54 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There was one of Chad's items where he spelled humour with the U. <br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Good point with the U, How do you express this then, a lie?:<br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin-Chad Williams+Jan 16 2006, 11:16 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Chad Williams @ Jan 16 2006, 11:16 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I have been on this forum for many months, Yes, I registered to make this point, it is my right to free speech as an American. <br /> </td></tr></table>

[[old] Graham Benton]

I voted NO - I think the thread escalated but ultimately he was just looking to rationalise what is an unprecedented situation - dominance in performance terms by someone very few of us have seen row at all and noone has seen row to that level. When someone performs beyond what is commonly accepted as possible then doubt is always going to exist - it is human nature and doesn't necessarily doubt the individual but more suggests our personal inability to deal with progress.<br /><br />The indoor rowing world needed this proving really - I think Dwayne's times, assuming they are proven, are an inspiration to all - 40+, non-professional rower, approachable and helpful guy within the community, very much a 'non-rower' attitude despite being an accomplished rower, etc. The doubt that exists negates some of the huge positives that someone like Dwayne performing at his level brings to the community - once the doubt is removed then we can all take huge inspiration from what is possible, not by 6'10 international athletes but people like us.<br /><br />I don't know the exact numbers but people used to believe that the 4 minute mile was impossible. Roger Bannister broke 4 minutes for the first time and in the following year something like 30 people went under 4 mins. Sometimes it just takes a pioneer to show us what the human body is really capable of.

[[old] Drago]

I voted NO.<br /><br />Some people seem to be confusing the issue greatly, I feel that Chad did not call Dwayne a cheat or a liar, Chad was just asking him to back-up certain things that Dwayne had claimed he had done<br /><br />Best<br />Drago<br />