Maybe the USMS leadership should recognize that the USMS Forum is a good source of information which can be useful in their policy making process. People use social media because it is easy, and doesn't the leadership appreciate a vehicle that helps people easily voice their opinions and concerns about USMS?
If USMS leadership ignore the Forums, this is more a statement about their insularity and cluelessness than about the critics' approach to influence and persuasion.
For the moment, let's put aside the irony of an open water devotee accusing anyone of insularity and compare the language used in the above two quotes. Both are saying the same thing, which do you think would be more persuasive in getting USMS leaders to the forums?
Why would volunteers who put in a lot of time and effort into something they love want to come here to be insulted? Evan, you seem to think that an abrasive style will somehow better further your goals of persuading or informing but I submit that the opposite is true. You all but call the OW Task Force a bunch of morons and your contempt for their efforts is pretty evident; this tone immediately puts people on the defensive and means they will not be in any frame of mind to evaluate your criticism rationally.
USMS leaders are certainly not alone in this. Almost anyone -- including most meet/race directors I know -- will not react very well if their efforts are denigrated when constructive criticism is being offered.
For the record, I agree that USMS leaders should visit the forums from time to time. The vast majority of posters and posts here are polite and well-intentioned. Unfortunately what usually sticks in one's mind are the nastier, less pleasant experiences.
And electronic arguments can get out of hand. If even a math problem on Facebook can lead to virtual fisticuffs, how about disagreements about things that people are truly passionate about? (Not to sell arithmetic short, of course!)
Maybe the USMS leadership should recognize that the USMS Forum is a good source of information which can be useful in their policy making process. People use social media because it is easy, and doesn't the leadership appreciate a vehicle that helps people easily voice their opinions and concerns about USMS?
If USMS leadership ignore the Forums, this is more a statement about their insularity and cluelessness than about the critics' approach to influence and persuasion.
For the moment, let's put aside the irony of an open water devotee accusing anyone of insularity and compare the language used in the above two quotes. Both are saying the same thing, which do you think would be more persuasive in getting USMS leaders to the forums?
Why would volunteers who put in a lot of time and effort into something they love want to come here to be insulted? Evan, you seem to think that an abrasive style will somehow better further your goals of persuading or informing but I submit that the opposite is true. You all but call the OW Task Force a bunch of morons and your contempt for their efforts is pretty evident; this tone immediately puts people on the defensive and means they will not be in any frame of mind to evaluate your criticism rationally.
USMS leaders are certainly not alone in this. Almost anyone -- including most meet/race directors I know -- will not react very well if their efforts are denigrated when constructive criticism is being offered.
For the record, I agree that USMS leaders should visit the forums from time to time. The vast majority of posters and posts here are polite and well-intentioned. Unfortunately what usually sticks in one's mind are the nastier, less pleasant experiences.
And electronic arguments can get out of hand. If even a math problem on Facebook can lead to virtual fisticuffs, how about disagreements about things that people are truly passionate about? (Not to sell arithmetic short, of course!)
