From kirstens@u.washington.edu Thu Apr 8 21:59:18 2004 Received: from mxu4.u.washington.edu (mxu4.u.washington.edu [140.142.33.8]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.12.11+UW04.02/8.12.11+UW04.03) with ESMTP id i394xFpZ090466 for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2004 21:59:15 -0700 Received: from rwcrmhc13.comcast.net (rwcrmhc13.comcast.net [204.127.198.39]) by mxu4.u.washington.edu (8.12.11+UW04.02/8.12.11+UW04.03) with ESMTP id i394xEEW009796; Thu, 8 Apr 2004 21:59:14 -0700 Received: from turbo (c-24-18-239-141.client.comcast.net[24.18.239.141]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc13) with SMTP id <2004040904591301500aac2ae>; Fri, 9 Apr 2004 04:59:13 +0000 Message-ID: <00c501c41def$54c173d0$0200a8c0@turbo> From: "Kirsten Soelling" To: Cc: References: <00b301c41de2$132df590$0200a8c0@turbo> Subject: Re: Please read Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 21:58:42 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2727.1300 X-Uwash-Spam: Gauge=IIIIIIII, Probability=8%, Report='__HAS_MSGID 0, __OUTLOOK_MSGID_1 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __TO_MALFORMED_2 0, __REFERENCES 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __EVITE_CTYPE 0, __CTYPE_CHARSET_QUOTED 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __CT 0, __CTE 0, __HAS_X_PRIORITY 0, __HAS_MSMAIL_PRI 0, __OUTLOOK_MUA 0, __HAS_X_MAILER 0, __ANY_OUTLOOK_MUA 0, __HAS_OUTLOOK_IN_MAILER 0, __HAS_MIMEOLE 0, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, REFERENCES 0.000' Thanks for writing back to me. I definitely agree with you on all points and I hope that my email wasn't received as a criticism to how people have carried out their role as team mates. I simply felt that the angry responses to Joan's email were not in good taste. I personally don't have any complaints about the team. I'm a really sporadic member and regardless of how often or how little I ride with team members, everyone has always been kind, patient, and helpful to me. I hope that we can all continue this great camaraderie even in the face of criticism. -K ----- Original Message ----- From: "A. Hegyvary" To: "Kirsten Soelling" Cc: Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2004 9:39 PM Subject: Re: Please read > > Good point Kirsten, no one will be right or wrong so it's best that > everyone's heard. I've been privy to a number of conversations about the > subject of vs. , and while > they don't necessarily have to be contradictory, the focus of a team always > shifts from year to year. The juncture I've come to in each case is that > it is difficult for experienced riders/racers to help out new riders > without sacrificing their own racing and training. As far as I'm > concerned, "helping new riders" also shouldn't be a matter of babysitting > and hand-holding, as that type of attention leads only to dependence. > Cycling is an incredibly time consume pastime, and if a team member cannot > look up race information, wade through registration, figure out how to > feed/water himself, etc. independently, it's unfair to say that someone > more experienced is obligated to step in and instruct on a regular basis. > We've all had to figure stuff out at one time or another, and in many > ways it is your own personal failures and successes that will be most > informative. > > In any case, what wrongs may or may not have occured are in the past, and > there is no need to dwell on them. What seems to be important now is to > see who is having problems with the organization of the team, and what > those people want to be different. Though I'm relatively new to this > team, I've been on a number of other teams and can say with confidence > that this has been the best organized, best-supported program, especially > considering how little each rider has to commit individually. It's > impossible to have consistent equipment sponsors, race support, and good > training programs if a team does not field a successful bunch of riders, > yet a team also cannot place all its support on the fastest people or > there will be no successive generations to the team. Perhaps this > delicate combination is what we should focus on improving in upcoming > meetings and discussions, and hopefully we will be able to come up with > effective, implimentable remedies to whatever problems surface. > > -Adrian- > > > On Thu, 8 Apr 2004, Kirsten Soelling wrote: > > > To all of you who perhaps took offense to Joan's letter, or maybe just disagreed, please be patient. > > > > I think that it is inappropriate for people to respond in argument with Joan, or to "rebut" statements that she made in her email. It takes a lot of courage to put your name on something that reveals so much emotion and conviction and I think that her feelings are genuine. > > > > I feel that a more appropriate response would be to offer some insight as to how Joan could better enjoy this team. I think that it's wonderful that some people responded to her letter with their own positive experiences. It is, however, important to realize that Joan is not falsely reporting her experiences with the team and how they affected her, she's simply offering one perspective. > > > > To me, the responses that are accusatory or aggressively defensive only reinforce some of the negative aspects that Joan has experienced. It's incredibly important that each member of this team feels that his or her voice is being heard and considered. Instead of viewing Joan's letter as an attack (although criticism is hard to take at times), perhaps we should make an effort to improve Joan's experience with the team, instead of only continuing to make her feel alienated. I understand that the initial reaction to her letter is not going to be immediate support and encouragement, but hopefully people will be able to cast aside their anger or hurt feelings and recognize that Joan is not a quitter, but instead has written a letter to us all in hopes that other members will not encounter the same problems that she has. I appreciate her boldness, not everyone has the chutzpa to make such a strong statement. > > > > -Kirsten > > .