If half a billion dollars is going to be cut from university funding, what do you think will be eliminated by the schools - maybe cross country and track and field, etc. Perhaps Boyd was smart enough to see this coming down the road, and left on his own terms now.
Fred’s trying to thread jack in order to hide his douchebaggery
jimmyx wrote:
So in summary...he aint doin no time cause there aint no crime
Now I know you are a troll jimbo - I have relied to you at least twice in the past with the Supreme Court of Canada's decision which made this exact scenario a crime.
Here it is again because you obviously haven't read it. If you disagree, please list exactly why.
https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1996/1996canlii198/1996canlii198.htmlGuelph Alum wrote:
Fred’s trying to thread jack in order to hide his douchebaggery
Better increase your donations before Ford eliminates whole departments at the U of G.
Yes, I wavered, until speaking to his wife.
Back in time, the citizens got riled up, and they would have a witch hunt. You people are no different. I commend you on your humaneness, and being fully human.
That’s rich, Fred trying to pretend he’s the better man
Something tells me that Fred is unaware that Alum is used that way.
fred wrote:
Yes, I wavered, until speaking to his wife.
Back in time, the citizens got riled up, and they would have a witch hunt. You people are no different. I commend you on your humaneness, and being fully human.
Yes, DST's wife, there's an impartial party!
Putting aside how unbelievably creepy it is that you'd reach out to this dude's wife in order to satiate your own curiosity, keep in mind that Jerry Sandusky's wife TO THIS DAY proclaims his complete innocence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBNt8hYvn8Afred wrote:
Back in time, the citizens got riled up, and they would have a witch hunt. You people are no different. I commend you on your humaneness, and being fully human.
the truth, ruth wrote:
Putting aside how unbelievably creepy it is that you'd reach out to this dude's wife in order to satiate your own curiosity, .
I did not reach out. It just happened.
"syn·chro·nic·i·ty
/ˌsiNGkrəˈnisədē/
noun
1.
the simultaneous occurrence of events which appear significantly related but have no discernible causal connection."
Guelph Alum wrote:
Armchair lawyer still thinks it’s legal fir coaches to have sex with 17 year old athletes. Jimmy, you’re a joke.
That was to jimmyx but on a thread that I was on, so I am not sure whether it was partly to me. It seems that you are assuming that the worst statements about DST are true, and then concluding that he's a bad guy. A bit circular.
People believed the worst things that were said about MB for a time, too. That was unfair to her. As far as I have read, DST's lawyer did not dispute the firing for unprofessional conduct, nor the untruths in the 2006 investigation. But, the claims in the Globe article were disputed. Assuming that it's all true is unfair, given that DST was under legal jeopardy and not able to respond. It appears very likely that DST is not in the clear, but that some of the Doyle reporting is suspect. I will be looking into that if and when I have time.
What would be great would be a fair and objective investigation. Sadly, AC's directors (MB's friend KVB especially) have violated the Commissioner's guidance and acted on behalf of a friend and themselves (more on that in a minute). Doyle's reporting is also clearly written with an agenda in mind, that is not favorable to DST.
Let's hope that people stay with this until the truth is known as far as possible.
This may have been obvious to some people here, but it's new to me. Kate Van Buskirk has her own podcast and is trying to get traction in media and more listeners.
So, when she violated the Independent Commissioner's guidance and gave a statement and interviews, she was acting not only on her friend's behalf, but her own. Acting against the interest of your employer and on behalf of yourself and your friends is "conflict of interest" defined.
"A conflict of interest is a situation in which an individual has competing interests or loyalties because of their duties to more than one person or organization. A person with a conflict of interest can't do justice to the actual or potentially conflicting interests of both parties."
It would be great to hear from the Independent Commissioner, or Athletics Canada's head, as to whether they view the actions of KVB as acceptable. People do get fired for unprofessional conduct and violating terms of employment (see DST, Steve Boyd, etc etc).
It's OK to look after your friends, and it's OK to look after yourself. It is not OK to work against the interests of sport's governing body and the Canadian taxpayers when you do it.
Royal Canadian Athletics Farce wrote:
It's OK to look after your friends, and it's OK to look after yourself. It is not OK to work against the interests of sport's governing body and the Canadian taxpayers when you do it.
Yes, but all the parties work against the interests of the Canadian taxpayers every day, it's the nature of the game.
So the Canadian government is pumping x number of dollars into Canadian athletics via AC so that Canada can put on a valid show at the juiced Olympics. It's a joke and a BS shiteshow.
Has any DST athlete ever tested positive? So what's the point. He got clean athletes to meet their genetic potential, and millenials are pissed because he pushed them too hard. They call it abuse, when an athlete that must tolerate high levels of pain is toughened to meet the requirements of racing.
"Yes, but all the parties work against the interests of the Canadian taxpayers every day, it's the nature of the game.
So the Canadian government is pumping x number of dollars into Canadian athletics via AC so that Canada can put on a valid show at the juiced Olympics. It's a joke and a BS shiteshow.
Has any DST athlete ever tested positive? So what's the point. He got clean athletes to meet their genetic potential, and millenials are pissed because he pushed them too hard. They call it abuse, when an athlete that must tolerate high levels of pain is toughened to meet the requirements of racing."
Fred you still on these running boards. Holy moly.
Yeah, I'm still running. Ever see a cougar?
Why do you say employer?
go away wrote:
Why do you say employer?
Royal Canadian Athletics Farce wrote:
So, when she violated the Independent Commissioner's guidance and gave a statement and interviews, she was acting not only on her friend's behalf, but her own. Acting against the interest of your employer and on behalf of yourself and your friends is "conflict of interest" defined.
.
rekrunner wrote:
Man Overboard wrote:
She willingly slept with another woman's husband. She put herself in that position, and that choice was ultimately hers to make. Or do you think 17 year-olds are incapable of understanding the difference between right and wrong?
Sorry, we are not on the same page.
She did not do it willingly.
She was put in that position by her coach, who had a position of authority over her.
The choice was not hers to make.
But, yes, 17 year-olds are capable of understanding, just not always capable of saying no to a more powerful authority figure and insistent 38 year old man.
Uh....
She voluntarily engaged in a sexual relationship with a man she knew to be married, and did so willingly. Had her emails back to him been full of protestations and denials of her affections then I'm quite certain that these would have been heavily featured in the Globe and Mail article. She continued to pursue her (married) coach for several years as a fully legal adult. The choice WAS hers to make...and she made it.
Yup Backwoods BC. You ever see or hear a Sasquatch. Birds go silent when they are around.