Dont you hate when you smash your PB and the photographer misses you ...

81 to 100 of 186 messages
30/04/2013 at 12:38

I don't think I miss the point entirely.
DF - as I said - raised an issue in a very unsubtle way, yet highlighted a glaring fk up from an alleged big city marathon.
The rest of us have looked at the links/evidence/scenario, and despite it being 'universal knowledge' (it isn't) most of us have come to the conclusion there was a wholesale catastrophe with the events timing system.
Sure DF can be a bit of a cock womble, but as with the case of the Brighton 'outlier' (a thread, which if i'm not mistaken, you were not in favour of) glaring discrepancies in the public domain should be highlighted.
As regards questioning the data, Manchester have put something on one of their pages, I have yet to hear back from the company that provides chip timing for Brighton, as to whether their product can record start and finish times, yet throw up spurious readings in the interim. I didn't mention names, runners or specifics, but just asked a general question, so as not to question anyone's integrity.

As regards protecting peoples integrity, do you feel the same way about public figures?

30/04/2013 at 12:40

I don't really buy into the 'I didn't say anything just pointed out some facts' argument, because I think insinuations are kind of worse than allegations (more slippery, nothing a person can get hold of and deny outright).

But I think the chip timing at Manchester looks pretty f*cked up and that is worth discussing. I notice on their facebook page a woman (not this particular one) has posted that she was given her husband's time and it was a lot faster than hers, and that she'd had to contact the organisers to get it sorted, which it eventually was. I imagine the timing people are still working through the backlog.

30/04/2013 at 12:43

I think there's a few on here who are playing the man rather than the ball.

I'd been keeping an eye on the Top 10 improvers for the month on the Run Britain website, as I'd been up there close to the top 10 earlier in the month myself, and a fellow poster off another thread then got themselves into contention last week.

Logged in to have a look just before I left work last night and noticed that there was a very unlikely new entrant in the top 10 (and thus in line for a prize) who had apparently gone from running bests of 10m/mile over 5k parkruns to 8m/mile over a full marathon distance. 

Whether there was skullduggery at play or not, and it looks increasingly likely that there wasn't, by entering a competition where your name is going to appear on a leaderboard, you are opening your results up to scrutiny, particularly if you are suddenly in a prize winning position.

Given the previous thread and the fact that I didn't have time to dig any further, I tipped DF3 off on what I'd spotted as I guessed he'd probably take a closer look.

If that makes me a bad person, my humble apologies, and please do throw some of your ire in my direction rather than directing it all at DF3.

I note now that the error and thus the rankings have been corrected by the way. 

30/04/2013 at 12:45
" If you post things I don't approve of on here I will get them cazzed" Was this the worry some people had, that if some forumites were given a bit of power, that it would go to their heads? I'm not sure if I can suffer any more shorts or no shorts threads, which the Pillar obviously approves of.
30/04/2013 at 12:46

On the Manchester thread on here there is talk of duplicate numbers as well (i.e., two people running with the same number).  All very odd.

For what it's worth, I don't think this thread should be cazzed.  I did report the Brighton thread as to me it crossed the line as the woman's name was mentioned in the thread title and the thread was very high on Google if searching for her name.  On this one, the names haven't been specifically mentioned although I do agree the speculation isn't really justified.

30/04/2013 at 12:46

FFS - we had this discussion last time Dustin. Public figures have (rightly or wrongly) to expect this sort of behaviour. Private citizens don't.

And yes, "Glaring discrepancies in the public domain" should be highlighted. To the race organisers.

 

Tommygun2    pirate
30/04/2013 at 12:46

Here you go David this guy is a real cheat, its quite an interesting read if you have some spare time on your hands. Its quite an amazing story

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/08/06/120806fa_fact_singer

30/04/2013 at 12:53
Sorry I can never except Pillars argument that one person somehow has less rights as a human being just because they are famous.
30/04/2013 at 12:58
Sussex Runner (NLR) wrote (see)
Sorry I can never except Pillars argument that one person somehow has less rights as a human being just because they are famous.

FFS Does anybody actually read my posts?

Personally I don't accept that famous people have any less rights to privacy that non-famous ones but in this day and age it comes with the territory, unfortunately. 

BTW SR - I won't ask why you are stalking my posts on other threads. 

And anyone that can't see that this thead wasn't started to highlight and discuss the technical errors at this event is in pretty bloody deep denial... 

Oh and Bob - getting someone else to do your dirty work for you? Nice.

Edited: 30/04/2013 at 13:04
30/04/2013 at 13:05

so will you get a thread that questions the integrity of a famous person cazzed or do you have double standards? Would you post on such threads, as it comes with the territory, that comments that throw sh*t at celebs are not called for?

tommy gun - nice link, thanks

Edited: 30/04/2013 at 13:06
30/04/2013 at 13:13

Kats have the right to be put in a sack with some bricks and chucked in the cut 

Edited: 30/04/2013 at 13:13
Pudge    pirate
30/04/2013 at 13:21
ghost of kittenkat wrote (see)
What about kats, what rights do we have?

Anything that can so smugly lay a shit in a complete stranger's garden, has no rights at all.

30/04/2013 at 13:22

Dustin, maybe there is an element of double standards but even you can see that threads about "famous people" play out differently to a thread like this.

Mr X will get accused of something, someone will starts a thread about it, there will be some speculation and probably a lot of tasteless jokes. 

Those allegations are in the pubic domain, under investigation by the relevant authorities and not subject to influence by any of us. And in any case celebrities know their every move is being scrutinised, so they know they need to be careful what they say and do.

Compare that to making insinuations about complete strangers, that have no way to know that someone is looking through and discussing information about them and no way of defending themselves against it. And the fact that in this case we can actually to do something about it i.e. inform the race organisers.

It's more small scale, more personal, more intrusive and, therefore less acceptable.

 

Edited: 30/04/2013 at 13:37
30/04/2013 at 13:38

The tabby from over the road has just got a kick as it scrambled over the fence after I caught it digging up our veg garden 

30/04/2013 at 13:39

Screamy - definitely double standards...after all why make a comment about Danny Dyer? Wouldn't it be best to just ignore that thread?

Edited: 30/04/2013 at 13:39
30/04/2013 at 13:39
ghost of kittenkat wrote (see)
Pudge wrote (see)
ghost of kittenkat wrote (see)
What about kats, what rights do we have?

Anything that can so smugly lay a shit in a complete stranger's garden, has no rights at all.

What's wrong, I wipe.

... you bum along the grass like a dog with worms?

30/04/2013 at 13:40

Better tell Danny ( who ever he is ) that Screamy is slagging him off 

30/04/2013 at 13:41
JMopper wrote (see)
ghost of kittenkat wrote (see)
Pudge wrote (see)
ghost of kittenkat wrote (see)
What about kats, what rights do we have?

Anything that can so smugly lay a shit in a complete stranger's garden, has no rights at all.

What's wrong, I wipe.

... you bum along the grass like a dog with worms?

My grandad's dog used to do that - on the carpet 

30/04/2013 at 13:45

 

Wilkie wrote (see)
JMopper wrote (see)
ghost of kittenkat wrote (see)
Pudge wrote (see)
ghost of kittenkat wrote (see)
What about kats, what rights do we have?

Anything that can so smugly lay a shit in a complete stranger's garden, has no rights at all.

What's wrong, I wipe.

... you bum along the grass like a dog with worms?

My grandad's dog used to do that - on the carpet 

I believe the technical term is 'yachting' something to do with a dog trying to remove the barnacles from its keel perhaps (cheers Viz)

30/04/2013 at 13:57
Dustin wrote (see)

Screamy - definitely double standards...after all why make a comment about Danny Dyer? Wouldn't it be best to just ignore that thread?

 

Yes, fair enough, but see how that thread started (an appearance on the TV by someone who wants to be on the TV) and how it plays out. It's not someone looking up information on random strangers and discussing it. That's the difference. But, as I said before if you don't see it, you don't see it.

But anyway, another person stalking my posts. Two in one day. I must be fascinating....Jeez...

 

81 to 100 of 186 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW competitions

RW Forums