ABC Jury Changes

[Dean Torges]

LOL. Good point, Rusty. By that logic, they better fear you. Your posts are brief and your attention is obviously away from the keyboard. Now, since I have no bow in the Challenge, not only can I clack away, I can afford to go back a space to correct an error.

Considered doing it that way Doug, and there's something to be said for it, but the weights on the other side prevailed for several reasons. I'll tell you what they are and you tell me if they look heavier to you.

Since this becomes more and more an internet community, anchored by several magazines, the temptation to sleuthing would gain its own life as people try to figure out who belongs to which bow. And they would. It's only natural to puzzle over puzzles. If the speculation didn't appear on various threads, it would network through emails. Attention would divert from the bow to the bowyer.

Also, by hiding identities we'd be implying that the bowyer rather than the Challenge to the bowyer is important, that entrants as well as voters need protected from the knowledge.  Tree man and Scifres touched on what's good about this Challenge—that it's a personal matter, one of exploration and self-satisfaction. To have novice bowyers remove themselves from the Challenge because So-and-so is entered and they don't have a chance against him misses the point of the Challenge altogether, and by making no bones about who's entered, by treating each entry with equal respect, we hope to create a leveling of bows.

Lastly, the lessons of the first ABC reveal that name-recognition or reputation in the community does not automatically translate to results. I'm assuming that lesson was not lost on anybody who paid attention, and that given the bows and the entrants, some skinny little know-nothing from a marginal part of the country with just an unassuming sliver of solid wood under tension could walk away with the Grand Prize, and that an old man whom no one knows, one who is closer to Death's Door than you or I feel comfortable admitting, came within a shaving or two claming the prize.

It's always been my approach to be open and trusting. Easier on the digestive system to back off from that menu because something in good faith did not sit well than to assume a cynic's posture to begin with. When you think the best of people, you often get the best from them.

[John Scifres]

I have a few ideas.  

First off, because Timo isn't here to defend himself since he got all busy actually working on wood and not typing about it, I say we simply don't vote for him at all.

Secondly, I am hosting an ABC Jury party at my house this summer.  A keg, ice cold sweet tea, and all the bratwurst and dogs you can eat.  Unless your name is Dean, Brian, or Paul, you must have at least 7 eligible voters in your vehicle before I pay your gas money though.  Also, you must vote on my computer before I let you eat or drink.  Leemans and Dano, you guys are such good friends I know I don't have to bribe you so you are on your own.  

If you can't make it to my house, I am hosting a meat fest at Cloverdale that you are all welcome to attend.  Just show up at any camp and ask for meat.  You should be OK.

As a final prerequisite on entering the ABC, you must have posted at least 5 online buildalongs.

[Dano]

Must be cold out in your shop too, huh Deano?? I like your last sentence.


Humm, John's idea has some merit.

[Doug S]

I guess there is no perfect way and since I have suffered from a sour stomach at times I am all for what's easier on the digestive system.
I used to referee a bit and try as I might there were times when a call or 2 went toward the team I was happier with at the time. But it was better than no refs at all (I think).  

[Dano]

Yep, and ref's ain't always popular.  

[Tim Clark]

I hesitate to even write this. I haven't been very active on here for some time, and have not contributed to this forum or this sport after the manner of many that post here and elsewhere. I also do not wish to come off sounding pompous or puritanical in any way. And Dean, et al, are more than capable of defending themselves. Nevertheless I've got something to say on the subject of "The Rules Commitee."

Author.

Authorship.

Authority.

All have the same root. And you/us professing Christians ought to already know that. When you put something to paper, or to this medium (the internet), no one has any right to edit your words, except those parties that have created the forum on which you are allowed to post such words. You are the author of your work, but they are the author of the site, and while you have authority over what you write and the content therein, they have the greater authority by virtue of having authored the site within which you spout and are the final arbiter of those words and that content.

Along the same lines, the entire ABC is Dean's brainchild. He's the Author. He has, therefore, the authority to decide how, who, and what, and the why is none of our business. However, being cognizant of the realities of human limitations, and of the fact that none of us are perfect, omniscient beings, he opens up the process to those of us that would have an express interest in the plans he makes for the project, at the same time both listening to said input and giving us insight and extending to us a deeper sense of "ownership" and comraderie in the process.

If not veiwed in that light, then there exists the very real possibility on our part of overstepping our bounds and turning otherwise welcome "suggestions" into criticism, cynicism, condemnation and contempt. Kind of like biting the hand that feeds, if you will. Or criticizing Bill gates while doing so through the very media in which we vent such views, which he made possible. Ironic, eh?

I don't know Dean or most of you from Adam, except through this site. I know Linc, and I've met several of you at Tollgate, but really that's as far as it goes. I don't mean any of this toward anyone in particular, and really not to all in general. It's just that this kind of thing, by virtue of it being a challenge, incites from each of us according to our strengths, weaknesses, character and personalities. So look up, think forward, get in step with the spirit in which this was birthed, encourage each other, set aside personal bias, and whether or not you choose to participate, let your best shine forth.

I know I get on about these things and I know, by virtue of private messages and emails that I receive, that it doesn't sit well with some of you. So out of respect I don't post much on here anymore and besides, since the accident back in January and things still not being right, I'm not up to the task of doing much anyhow, whether physically, mentally or emotionally. And sniping saps our strength on all fronts.

Well, I suppose that's it for the next few months or so. Sorry for the rant. Just respect what's being done graciously for this community. And if I'm not stepping on your toes, please DON'T stomp on mine. It just means that I wasn't referring to you. There are other sites where people REALLY snipe, and many lurk here but rarely post here.

Sorry for the rant, Dean. Like I said, I know you don't need defending. If this is out of line then I'd appreciate it being deleted.

[Tom Leemans]

Wow John! That is soooo nice of you. All these years, it was you who hosted the meat fest? I never knew. You're so unassuming though.

BTW anyone wanting to attend John's feast at Cloverdale only need show up in the vicinity of Dano's, Otto's, or my shelter. Try not to trip over the running kids.

[Dano]

Very well said Tim, no more needs to be said.


Tom, you and your lovely girls can have my share of the meat this year, Gosh I'm going to miss you guy's and the RAIN!!!