I'm Done. The Mezra death brought home how cycincal and damaging this website it to real people

Username Withheld wrote:

Frank’s family and friends didn’t work very hard to stop you from asking those questions.

I did not reference Frank's "family and friends", but his " family, supporters, and potential accomplices". Which one are you?

There are a plethora of posts in this thread declaring the whole Meza cheating thing a "dead issue" and aggressively calling for a halt to related discussion/investigation.

So, Yes, Frank's supporters are stifling questioning.

Significant unanswered questions remain.

It would be refreshing if Meza's supporters helped answer those instead of deflecting them or castigating those who ask.

Hiding facts mostly benefits those with something to hide.

thoughts and prayers wrote:

y wrote:

Can't you just leave it alone. Are clicks THAT important to you?

the story has basically lived through Dereks website and he's copped a lot of flak for it.

i think he deserves the opportunity to bring it to a conclusion.

It’s already been concluded.

Murphy is just trying to assuage the guilt for being involved in the media frenzy.

Regardless, Derek Murphy is synonymous with old man suicide.

What’s your point? I didn’t say we or Derek were the cause of his death.

I was pointing out that triathlete guru’s position that 90% or the public believes that Frank might have cheated in one marathon doesn’t make much sense when you Google him and get a bunch of discussion about his cheating.

That article is about journalists. Murphy isn’t a journalist. He isn’t an investigator. Derek is a blogger a lot like this lady.

https://ironfatblog.wordpress.com/

Ernest wrote:

Username Withheld wrote:

Frank’s family and friends didn’t work very hard to stop you from asking those questions.

I did not reference Frank's "family and friends", but his " family, supporters, and potential accomplices". Which one are you?

There are a plethora of posts in this thread declaring the whole Meza cheating thing a "dead issue" and aggressively calling for a halt to related discussion/investigation.

So, Yes, Frank's supporters are stifling questioning.

Significant unanswered questions remain.

It would be refreshing if Meza's supporters helped answer those instead of deflecting them or castigating those who ask.

Hiding facts mostly benefits those with something to hide.

How are Frank's "family, supporters, and potential accomplices" working hard to stop you from asking questions?

The Washington Post has done an obituary on Rosie Ruiz today with a Frank "name drop" at the end of the story.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/rosie-ruiz-who-won-boston-marathon-but-skipped-most-of-the-race-dies-at-66/2019/08/07/92f7e4a6-b91d-11e9-b3b4-2bb69e8c4e39_story.html

Username Withheld wrote:

Ernest wrote:

I did not reference Frank's "family and friends", but his " family, supporters, and potential accomplices". Which one are you?

There are a plethora of posts in this thread declaring the whole Meza cheating thing a "dead issue" and aggressively calling for a halt to related discussion/investigation.

So, Yes, Frank's supporters are stifling questioning.

Significant unanswered questions remain.

It would be refreshing if Meza's supporters helped answer those instead of deflecting them or castigating those who ask.

Hiding facts mostly benefits those with something to hide.

How are Frank's "family, supporters, and potential accomplices" working hard to stop you from asking questions?

You might as well have posted "I know you are, but what am I?!"

You're asking questions with obvious answers. Already answered. I literally just answered it. Again.

Do you read threads or posts you reply to?

An anonymous troll might get her/his giggles wasting people's time with puerile sophistry.

An anonymous troll might want to draw attention from uncomfortable issues by flooding a thread with with crap.

As suggested before, kindly sit this one out until you have something helpful or substantive to contribute. If you were close to Meza, perhaps offer up an insider's perspective.

Rosie Obituary in Washington Post wrote:

The Washington Post has done an obituary on Rosie Ruiz today with a Frank "name drop" at the end of the story.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/rosie-ruiz-who-won-boston-marathon-but-skipped-most-of-the-race-dies-at-66/2019/08/07/92f7e4a6-b91d-11e9-b3b4-2bb69e8c4e39_story.html

Can you reproduce the "name drop" quote? The link seems to require a subscription.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? The guy killed HIMSELF, nobody on the internet could have forced him to do it.

Not even defending the board, just pointing out simple facts.

Ernest wrote:

Rosie Obituary in Washington Post wrote:

The Washington Post has done an obituary on Rosie Ruiz today with a Frank "name drop" at the end of the story.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/rosie-ruiz-who-won-boston-marathon-but-skipped-most-of-the-race-dies-at-66/2019/08/07/92f7e4a6-b91d-11e9-b3b4-2bb69e8c4e39_story.html

Can you reproduce the "name drop" quote? The link seems to require a subscription.

Ms. Ruiz was far from the first person to cheat at a marathon. Fred Lorz finished first at the 1904 Olympics in St. Louis, only to acknowledge that he was helped by hitchhiking roughly 10 miles after suffering from cramps. (It was all a “joke,” he said.) More recent contestants have been caught doping and biking across racecourses. Last month, the marathon world was rocked when Frank Meza, a 70-year-old runner, died by suicide, after his record time at the Los Angeles Marathon was disqualified amid accusations of cheating.

I think he’s simply highlighting the fact that there may be a bit of excessive drama and handwringing going on. The Meza family isn’t doing anything other than local damage control.

Also, the idea that anyone who feels that continued efforts to demonstrate the depth and breadth of Frank’s cheating is a Frank sympathizer is a lame argument. You seem like a bright guy. That argument is beneath you intellectually.

Smoove wrote:

I think he’s simply highlighting the fact that there may be a bit of excessive drama and handwringing going on. The Meza family isn’t doing anything other than local damage control.

Also, the idea that anyone who feels that continued efforts to demonstrate the depth and breadth of Frank’s cheating is a Frank sympathizer is a lame argument. You seem like a bright guy. That argument is beneath you intellectually.

How are lurid denials, blame-and-shame speeches, and fundraising more than $15K for “Frank’s Law“ considered relatable “local damage control”?

Where did I state everyone calling for cessation of enquiry is a Frank sympathizer? They may well be, but it’s not a generalization I made.

As someone who’s put a lot of effort into legitimately running fast, one might expect you’d care more about integrity of the competitive result.

Let it Rupp wrote:

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? The guy killed HIMSELF, nobody on the internet could have forced him to do it.

Not even defending the board, just pointing out simple facts.

Ironic comment since I think this guy committed suicide to avoid personal responsibility

"How are lurid denials, blame-and-shame speeches, and fundraising more than $15K for “Frank’s Law“ considered relatable “local damage control."

What's "Frank's Law"?

Frank's Law?

Variably, and effort to (1) deny and shift attention from Frank's cheating, (2) blame anyone but Frank for his suicide, (3) raise cash, and (4) generally assail first-amendment rights.

$15,742 raised, apparently kicked off by $10 from his wife. No that's putting your money where you mouth is.

"Through your donation to the AltaMed Foundation... Efforts will also be made to pass legislation that provides protection to individuals who experience online aggression.

More:

Great work, people! The Meza group are working hard to stifle dissent. Also, several seem to have replaced Roderick as richly dramatic instigators. The Post article shows the same ruses, plus some new ones: “just a gag”; an accident; multiple additional scams; attempts to disappear; name changes; a million hokey alibis; references to cheating since 1904!

My personal favorite is, “It’s so much HARDER to cheat now, than before the Internet!” It may even be partly true, but there’s certainly more incentive now, when even the Robert Youngs of the world have sponsorship & large followings.

Ernest wrote:

Username Withheld wrote:

How are Frank's "family, supporters, and potential accomplices" working hard to stop you from asking questions?

You might as well have posted "I know you are, but what am I?!"

You're asking questions with obvious answers. Already answered. I literally just answered it. Again.

Do you read threads or posts you reply to?

An anonymous troll might get her/his giggles wasting people's time with puerile sophistry.

An anonymous troll might want to draw attention from uncomfortable issues by flooding a thread with with crap.

As suggested before, kindly sit this one out until you have something helpful or substantive to contribute. If you were close to Meza, perhaps offer up an insider's perspective.

What are you and Derek Murphy doing to get answers to your questions?

Why do you feel that these questions need to be answered?

The best answer to this question is that we are developing a (very long) list of typical cheaters’ alibis so that crooks don’t take over our sport. There’s plenty of room for liars in politics, etc. They don’t need to invade running.

Another favorite is to denigrate the runner who legitimately set a mark, even waiting 20-30 years to complain about it (and then say there isn’t much record of it). Funny guys!

It's one thing to call out and try to prove a guy cheated. He did cheat, fine. It's another level to have hundreds and thousands of people questioning his character and value as a person while slewing insults and unsubstantiative rumors. People are a lot more sophisticated than their ugliest moment. It paints an unfair and unintelligent/false label on to a person. Literally anyone can be cyber bullied/publically shamed for anything on the Internet in this day and age. The people online feel a sense of belonging and superiority by cyber bullying. A lot of people have voids to fill and secretly crave those feelings. Cheating is usually a hot topic because people can relate to it and know that it's not pleasant to be cheated in any way. If Frank robbed a bank, the only way people would care was if he was an accomplished person. To be publically shamed on a large scale means you're also successful and doing something right. These online shamers do not go after losers. They want to bring winners down to their level. The fact that Frank was a doctor and accomplished individual provided the vigilantes with psychological reasoning to pursue him. Unfortunately, things did not end well. He was definitely bullied to death but the fact that he did kill himself and did cheat for a long time probably reveals that he was a sad man inside for a long time. The bullies exacerbated his inner void and ultimately sealed his fate.