Jump to content


Photo

USPSA vs IPSC cage match


  • Please log in to reply
1967 replies to this topic

#81 Mistadobalina

Mistadobalina

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 325 posts
  • LocationLocation, Location

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:02 PM

On a related note --

 

I hereby nominate myself to be Regional Director of IPSC-Murica.

 

I will gladly approve any and all applications for members to compete overseas, in exchange for cash, guns, trinkets, baubles, or sexual favors (I retain right of refusal for the last one -- no homo shit). This is in keeping with longstanding IPSC practices of corruption, graft, and influence peddling.

 

Thank you for your support.

114274-Mel-Brooks-work-work-work-gif-Ppn


  • Miculek is a Noob and DMRShooting like this

Mista Dobalina, Mista Bob Dobalina

Mista Bob Dobalina, won't you quit?

You really make me sick with ya fraudulent behavior
You're gonna make me flip and then an army couldn't save ya


#82 gmshtr

gmshtr

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 15 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:02 PM

Why didn't Phil think of this? Imagine the large quantity of bouquets of flowers he could have bought with that 100k!


Or more fuel for the private USPSA jet that I rented for 4 years! Fuckin hindsight....
  • Flexmoney, GuruOfGuns, bgary and 1 other like this

#83 Not Will

Not Will

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 135 posts
  • LocationAtlanta

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:13 PM


In terms of advancing the sport it seems counter productive to cut ourselves off from the global body.. unless they are really fucking with us.

 

Does requiring us to kick out and sue a bunch of dudes in the Philipines or else Papua New Guinea and Zimbabwe will vote to suspend us count as fucking with us?  If not, what would?

 

 

I understand that you are simply arguing for not quitting IPSC, but those resolutions passed and there are USPSA clubs in the Philipines.  If that post you linked to is correct, we won't even know if we've been sanctioned until after we've sent a delegation to France.   So when do we take the initiative and go our own way?



#84 not that bryan

not that bryan

    Fuckstick

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,876 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:19 PM


In terms of advancing the sport it seems counter productive to cut ourselves off from the global body.. unless they are really fucking with us.


It seems like the thinly veiled threat of sanctions being leveled once the us team is in France (making it difficult to return home with firearms) qualifies as fucking with us.
  • ncav8tor and LeadChucker like this

#85 Ben

Ben

    MFCEO

  • Administrators
  • 2,269 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:22 PM

Does requiring us to kick out and sue a bunch of dudes in the Philipines or else Papua New Guinea and Zimbabwe will vote to suspend us count as fucking with us?  If not, what would?

 


I don't see anything anywhere telling us to kick out foreign members residing in the Philippines. We have foreign members all over the world and have had them for a long time.

The current issue is that USPSA is sanctioning matches in the Philippines against the wishes of the Philippines IPSC RD. This is something that I (as a USPSA member) don't give a fuck about. Those guys in the Philippines don't need our sanction for anything. They can run outlaw whatever. I don't want to be involved in their infighting. Not interested.


  • Chili, beerbaron and MyNamesNotMike like this

#86 GuanoLoco

GuanoLoco

    Minister of Culture

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,245 posts
  • LocationMy Safe Space

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:22 PM

I have nothing against the sport of IPSC, but...

 

The idea of an IPSC World Council composed of a human triumvirate plus a bunch of country-wide regions with 1 vote per region, and the whole of USPSA counting as a single region/vote is frankly asinine. 

 

USPSA should have influence along the lines of a vote per SECTION, a permanent seat on the council, veto power and/or equivalent or we should tell them to pound sand.

 

Maybe we should send in a world-class negotiator to make sure we get a good deal for 'murica.  Donald should be available in a month or so.


Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Doodie Project?

You'll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

In Doodie, Veritas.

"You might be a little thin-skinned for this forum". -Scott.

#87 Ben

Ben

    MFCEO

  • Administrators
  • 2,269 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:24 PM

It seems like the thinly veiled threat of sanctions being leveled once the us team is in France (making it difficult to return home with firearms) qualifies as fucking with us.

That isn't a thing.

If you go to France for a match and get DQed you are going to get to be able to leave France with no issue. Foley is clueless on this point.

Hell, I have entered France with only a match invitation and my guns and the match invite wasn't even for a French match... again... no issue.


 


  • not that bryan and NWxSE like this

#88 snark

snark

    Aberrant Freak

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,098 posts
  • LocationNull Island

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:28 PM

The current issue is that USPSA is sanctioning matches in the Philippines against the wishes of the Philippines IPSC RD. This is something that I (as a USPSA member) don't give a fuck about. Those guys in the Philippines don't need our sanction for anything. They can run outlaw whatever. I don't want to be involved in their infighting. Not interested.

Wouldn't that be 'passively' supporting their match if we don't immediately send the Foleynator over there guns-a-blazing as soon as Burlington gets a whiff of somebody downloading the USPSA rulebook from overseas?

 

The 'passive' part is what sucks about the rule resolution.  Whack that and it's "stay in your lane", which is more palatable.

 

Based on the lack of shits given by French Customs ("Departez-vous with your guns to declare, nous fumons les cigarettes"), I'm in agreement with Ben that there will not be midnight raids on the match hotel if USPSA gets the Eiger Sanction in France.


Use the rules. Don't DQ someone who doesn't do anything DQable. -- Da Beard.

 


#89 Flexmoney

Flexmoney

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,765 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:29 PM

President Foley,

Why didn't the membership hear of the risk to our standing in IPSC before now? Will we still be going to the World Shoot? I hope you can settle things definitively as soon as possible so those who want to spend thousands of their own money to go to the next World Shoot can do so with confidence. If we are not going, and if USPSA is to leave IPSC, let us know. It seems there has been a lack of transparency into the wider implications of USPSA policies for too long.

 

 

I don't think you get it.  

 

The risk wasn't really there before.  Sure, the relationship has been rocky, however...  

 

What has really changed is that IPSC just ratified a clause that gives more power to IPSC leadership.  They can just decide to fuck region members at their whim.  Would they do something so petty?  In my experience the answer is yes.


  • ncav8tor likes this

Unless otherwise noted, expect that all my posting here is in true Doodie fashion.  If my post somehow upsets your sensibilities, well...there ya go.  


#90 Flexmoney

Flexmoney

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,765 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:31 PM

I feel the same, WS france 2017 is a big deal for me, and not beeing able to compete against shoot with the top US shooters is just sad. 

 

 

 

Fix it for ya.


Unless otherwise noted, expect that all my posting here is in true Doodie fashion.  If my post somehow upsets your sensibilities, well...there ya go.  


#91 Ben

Ben

    MFCEO

  • Administrators
  • 2,269 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:33 PM

Wouldn't that be 'passively' supporting their match if we don't immediately send the Foleynator over there guns-a-blazing as soon as Burlington gets a whiff of somebody downloading the USPSA rulebook from overseas?

 


No idea. That language in the rule doesn't make sense to me. Either we sanction the shit or we don't. If we don't, then we don't. If they use our rulebook without our sanction then I can't imagine that could be construed as any type of support. If the executive council wanted to make than an issue then I have no doubt the European dominated assembly would back us up.

On a side note, the tides in IPSC have been shifting. The establishment didn't want the last world shoot in the US. They lost. They didn't want the next Europeans to be in Serbia. They lost. 

Word is, this is Nick's last at bat as IPSC President and in France we will vote in a new President. Hopefully the US can be a part of steering IPSC in a better direction and bringing it out of its FIFA days.


  • poopgiggle, NickBlasta and beerbaron like this

#92 not that bryan

not that bryan

    Fuckstick

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,876 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:35 PM

That isn't a thing.

If you go to France for a match and get DQed you are going to get to be able to leave France with no issue. Foley is clueless on this point.

Hell, I have entered France with only a match invitation and my guns and the match invite wasn't even for a French match... again... no issue.



That clarifies it a bit. At least it wouldn't be difficult to get home. I know jack shit about traveling internationally with guns.

The prospect of IPSC sanctions preventing the US team from shooting being leveled AFTER they are already there is still a big threat though.

#93 Strick

Strick

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 119 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:36 PM



Word is, this is Nick's last at bat as IPSC President and in France we will vote in a new President. Hopefully the US can be a part of steering IPSC in a better direction and bringing it out of its FIFA days.

 

Again, what does USPSA and it's membership as a whole get out of being an IPSC region?


  • Alfred Salveti likes this

#94 Ben

Ben

    MFCEO

  • Administrators
  • 2,269 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:36 PM

That clarifies it a bit. At least it wouldn't be difficult to get home. I know jack shit about traveling internationally with guns.

The prospect of IPSC sanctions preventing the US team from shooting being leveled AFTER they are already there is still a big threat though.

If that happened (and I don't think it would) then it wouldn't be a surprise to anyone. It would have to be on the agenda for the assembly to ratify.

Here is a question for you, what is to stop Foley from suspending you from USPSA the minute you step off the plane at a nationals?



#95 bgary

bgary

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 406 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:37 PM

The idea of an IPSC World Council composed of a human triumvirate plus a bunch of country-wide regions with 1 vote per region, and the whole of USPSA counting as a single region/vote is frankly asinine.


That's the time-honored beauty of being part of the IPSC Executive Council.

You get to decide - somewhat unilaterally - what direction IPSC will go
If anyone objects, you pull out of your pocket dozens and dozens of proxy votes from small (10 member) regions that are beholden to you.
Amazingly, the vote then goes the way you want it to.
Every. Single. Time.
<fill in the name of some small country> has the same voting power as the US. Even if they don't actually have the right to own guns.
  • Miculek is a Noob and ncav8tor like this

Disclaimer: I post here as an individual member of USPSA, and speak only for myself...


 


#96 LeadChucker

LeadChucker

    CO

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,044 posts
  • LocationHC, Utah

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:39 PM

Please correct me if I am wrong, but Puerto Rico sends athletes to the olympics, so they might be a separate RD from the US, and they too have held USPSA matches in the past year. I think that IPSC sees this as a growing problem and is trying to stop it.

IPSC are a bunch of controlling bastards, fuck them.

I say we un-affiliate, and IF they get their collective shit together then we can revisit rejoining the IPSC.

There is not a downside besides some free trips to France at the expense of the rest of us.

I'll ask again, what is the benefit of the 26,940 USPSA members that do not go to the World Shoot?

I am asking again because no one has given me an answer previously
  • ncav8tor and GuruOfGuns like this

#97 not that bryan

not that bryan

    Fuckstick

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,876 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:41 PM

If that happened (and I don't think it would) then it wouldn't be a surprise to anyone. It would have to be on the agenda for the assembly to ratify.

Here is a question for you, what is to stop Foley from suspending you from USPSA the minute you step off the plane at a nationals?


There is basically nothing preventing Foley from suspending me at Nationals.

On the other hand he has not threatened to do it either. That is the difference in my eyes, IPSC is threatening to do it. It's not just some abstract thought.
  • DMRShooting likes this

#98 Ben

Ben

    MFCEO

  • Administrators
  • 2,269 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:44 PM

Every. Single. Time.
 

 

Wrong

This may have been the case in the past but there has been a real shift the last few years.

Hell, look at the blowback regarding the Europeans that just finished up 2 days ago. Major sponsors are shitting all over the way the match was run.... publicly. In the US that would have just been a big match with shitty weather. By European standards it was a disaster. Hell, just last year the EC backed down of a rule change for Standard Division. Maybe a few years ago the EC was running the board on IPSC issues, not any longer.



#99 Ben

Ben

    MFCEO

  • Administrators
  • 2,269 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:45 PM

There is basically nothing preventing Foley from suspending me at Nationals.

On the other hand he has not threatened to do it either. That is the difference in my eyes, IPSC is threatening to do it. It's not just some abstract thought.

All that happened was there is a rule for it now. I don't know that anyone has threatened Foley with anything.



#100 Flexmoney

Flexmoney

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,765 posts

Posted 10 October 2016 - 01:50 PM

Wrong

This may have been the case in the past but there has been a real shift the last few years.

Hell, look at the blowback regarding the Europeans that just finished up 2 days ago. Major sponsors are shitting all over the way the match was run.... publicly. In the US that would have just been a big match with shitty weather. By European standards it was a disaster. Hell, just last year the EC backed down of a rule change for Standard Division. Maybe a few years ago the EC was running the board on IPSC issues, not any longer.



Bullshit.


I'm not sure what the proper term might be for those that control votes? Nepotism is the term that comes to mind.
  • ncav8tor and Heckler like this

Unless otherwise noted, expect that all my posting here is in true Doodie fashion.  If my post somehow upsets your sensibilities, well...there ya go.  





3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users