WindanSea/Surfcheck Meeting
Cyber Kahuna
As promised here are the results from the 5/5 meeting with the WindanSea
surf
Club.
First off, I want to express the everyone that the entire club are a
group of really
right on, concerned surfers. I have never been treated nicer, with
respect, and I
was given ample floor time to express my opinions on the surf cam issue.
I finally met Tom, who as you recall, was the catalyst for this meeting.
He and I
exchanged some heated e-mails and posts back and fourth over the last
two weeks
or so. As it turned out, he was a complete gentlemen and also respected
my opinions,
as I do his. I hope we have buried the hatchet so to speak.
First off, I did e-mail the survey from Surf Checks e-mail data base
asking the
general online surfing publics opinion about installing a cam at
WindanSea. I sent
out about 2,000 e-mails (southern Cal only)and received the following
results. (I left all the e-mails
with the club, for their information and amusement. Some were fairly
funny, some
were pathetic.)
As of noon yesterday, I received about 66 responses, and they are still
rolling
in, but I had to cut it off to make the meeting on time.
There were 12 e-mails against the cams.
There were 54 for the cams.
There were also another 10 or so, that I couldn't figure out what their
opinion was. They just sort of rambled.
Of the12 against, about three were from La Jolla Locals.
Of the 54 pro surf cams, about seven were from La Jolla / San Diego
locals
( I asked the respondents to identify where they lived)
Most of the pro responses were from surfers who really didn't care where
the cams went....they just want more cams.
OK. On to the issue at hand.
The club brought up some solid points against the cam:
1. The wave itself can only hold a small group since it is a short peak,
and
the crowd tends to be concentrated within a small area.
2. There is little or no parking in the area.
3. There are no rest room facilities
5. The wave itself is technical, and difficult to ride. With the
envisioned increase
in the crowd factor, injuries could result. ( I don't happen agree with
the crowd issue)
6. There are other beaches in the general area that can hold more people
that would be better suited for a cam.
I expressed Surf Checks three main points we look for before we install
any cam.
1. Either a NW or SW exposure to avoid evening the sun hitting the
lenses and blinding
the camera.
2. We look for a popular, expansive area so we can cover multiple breaks
with one camera, if possible.
3. We look for commercial locations within the beach area as potential
hosts
WindanSea does not meet any of the above points except for the SW
exposure.
Myself, not being a WindanSea local, I did not realize how small a surf
area this
spot really is. I was under the impression it was large enough to spread
out the weekend
crowds. Well, it isn't.
To get to the point, there will be no surf cam at WindanSea, at least
not by
Surf Check anyway.
My thanks go out to the WindanSea Surf Club and to Tom for
inviting me to their meeting and allowing Surf Check a chance to
present our offer.
Ted Deits
Surf Check
Lckahuna
Props to you Tom. BTW you didn't sell us out at South Bird did you? I know how
you wind and scene guys are always sending people down here.
LC
Maybe, for once,someone will call me 'sir' without adding, 'You're making a
scene'.
Surfing Vancouver Island
<cyber...@surfcheck.com> wrote:
>Myself, not being a WindanSea local, I did not realize how small a surf
>area this spot really is. I was under the impression it was large enough to spread
>out the weekend crowds. Well, it isn't.
>
>To get to the point, there will be no surf cam at WindanSea, at least
>not by Surf Check anyway.
don't ya love a happy ending?
Cam (the organic kind)
--
«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»
Surfing Vancouver Island ..... and other outdoor pursuits
http://www.island.net/~surfer/
surf ¤ kayak ¤ snowboard ¤ scuba ¤ fish ¤ windsurf
backcountry ¤ climb ¤ cave ¤ skateboard ¤ sail
whale watch ¤ camp ¤ resorts ¤ weather and sea conditions
Tweedt
<cyber...@surfcheck.com> writes:
[snipped]
>To get to the point, there will be no surf cam at WindanSea, at least
>not by Surf Check anyway.
Thank you, Ted. As several people pointed out, if the cams are inevitable, I
think Tourmaline Canyon and LJ Shores meet your criteria better, offer both SW
and NW exposure, with better facilities and extended surf zones.
>My thanks go out to the WindanSea Surf Club and to Tom for
>inviting me to their meeting and allowing Surf Check a chance to
>present our offer.
You are welcome, and I have to add that you showed exceptional sack coming into
the proverbial "lion's den" with no bodyguards or armaments. But then, you are
a pretty big guy (something I didn't expect- for some reason I had you pictured
as some nerdy, dweeb-type guy) and you look like you could take care of
yourself in a crunch (if you couldn't talk your way out first!). You have a
very glib and articulate style, very well-suited to salesmanship. Previously I
believed that you had no capacity for listening to others, however, you have
proven me wrong.
You proved your consideration for our opinions by driving 2-1/2 hrs. to make a
5-minute presentation and listen to 10 minutes of bitching. While all our
arguments may not have been totally convincing to you, it appears that enough
of them were to change your mind. I think that was a good decision, both
socially and business-wise. I'm glad that the "less reserved" Club members were
no more rude than normal. Luckily, Scot Cherry was absent. The lack of alcohol
on-site was a big help, I think. d:-)
I have to admit that the impersonal, online world makes it much easier to
dehumanize an individual and flame them. (BTW, this was one of the arguments
brought up against the net cams which Ted didn't mention, that the online world
is artificial and soul-less, that checking a web cam can never match the real
experience of going to the beach and checking it out). I allowed my resentment
toward this intrusion into my backyard color my judgment of Ted.
After meeting him in person, I realize that he is just another aggressive
entrepreneur trying to make a living out of his avocation. It's the AmeriKan
way. In conciliation, I promise to never use the P-word about him again. I
believe now that he is just trying to make a living by providing a service that
some people find valuable, even if I don't, and that he is a pretty slick
businessman, but no more unscrupulous or greedy than most playing that game.
He came, he listened, he changed his mind. It was the right call in this
situation.
-------------------------
Tom Tweed La Jolla, CA e-mail: twe...@ucsd.edu
or twe...@aol.com
"Use an accordian- go to jail."
-------------------------
Stephen Hull
Cyber Kahuna wrote:
> Greetings all:
>
> As promised here are the results from the 5/5 meeting with the WindanSea
> surf
> Club.
>
Ted,
I waited to hear Tom's version of the events and am pleased to hear that his
take pretty much reflects yours.
I am happy for the Windansea group but my thoughts turn more toward the
process.
I was very impressed that you made the effort to involve local surf crew in
the determination process. In this case there was a clear organization to
refer to, but the recognition that the surfing culture (some of which exists
separate from mainstream legal and social authority) might have a voice in
your enterprise was an excellent precedent. Unfortunately there are many
spots that do not have such a well known and authoritative group associated
with them. Do not assume that lack of formal organization equates with
complacency. I suggest that you make the extra effort to seek out a
knowledgeable group of surfers in any area you might target.
I hope your criteria remain consistent and are not inventions of
convenience.
I also recognize that you are trying to respond to the interests of your
clientele as much as possible. Your survey was good. It is vital that you
know who these people are in terms of location, ability, and frequency of
trips to the beach. It will help you, and it will help determine where
useful video sites might be located. The "more is better" mentality is not
a prudent or useful approach for surfing or for you.
I think Tim mentioned that client surveys are not representative however.
Avoid succumbing to the temptation to rely on customer opinion alone in
evaluating future sites.
In spite of the fact that in some cases we are going to disagree absolutely,
working together whenever possible will serve us all better in the long run.
Steve Hull
Neal Miyake
: As promised here are the results from the 5/5 meeting with the WindanSea
: surf Club.
<snipped cam poll and other stuff>
: The club brought up some solid points against the cam:
: 1. The wave itself can only hold a small group since it is a short peak,
: and
: the crowd tends to be concentrated within a small area.
agreed.
: 2. There is little or no parking in the area.
yep. About 12 stalls, Tom, not on the residential road area?
: 3. There are no rest room facilities
nada. Actually, there is... I better not say. Sacrilege!
: 5. The wave itself is technical, and difficult to ride. With the
: envisioned increase
: in the crowd factor, injuries could result. ( I don't happen agree with
: the crowd issue)
Technical? When I went there, it wasn't bad at all. I'd venture to guess
that there are a lot more difficult waves in La Jolla.
But yes, crowds do increase likelihood of injuries.
: 6. There are other beaches in the general area that can hold more people
: that would be better suited for a cam.
How about Blacks? Is nudity permitted on the Net? ;-)
Awesome resolution, Ted and Tom. Kudos (damned, I sound so Limbaughish).
sponge
DDaniel
> Cyber Kahuna (cyber...@surfcheck.com) wrote:
>
> : The club brought up some solid points against the cam:
>
> : 5. The wave itself is technical, and difficult to ride. With the
> : envisioned increase
> : in the crowd factor, injuries could result. ( I don't happen agree with
> : the crowd issue)
>
> Technical? When I went there, it wasn't bad at all. I'd venture to guess
> that there are a lot more difficult waves in La Jolla.
Technical? So, I gotta surf with a slide rule to plot my vector, Victor?
Tweedt
writes:
[snipped]
>: 2. There is little or no parking in the area.
>
>yep. About 12 stalls, Tom, not on the residential road area?
never counted them, maybe 15 or so, even fewer right now because of the
construction of the storm drain diversion project.
>: 3. There are no rest room facilities
>
>nada. Actually, there is... I better not say. Sacrilege!
Bad Sponge! Bacterial counts are high enough already!
>: 5. The wave itself is technical, and difficult to ride. With the
>: envisioned increase
>: in the crowd factor, injuries could result. ( I don't happen agree with
>: the crowd issue)
>
>Technical? When I went there, it wasn't bad at all. I'd venture to guess
>that there are a lot more difficult waves in La Jolla.
Yes, you're right. I think "compressed" is a better word than "technical" in
this case. There is only one peak on a good south, and room for one rider each
way. Competition is fierce, even among friends.
>But yes, crowds do increase likelihood of injuries.
>
>: 6. There are other beaches in the general area that can hold more people
>: that would be better suited for a cam.
>
>How about Blacks? Is nudity permitted on the Net? ;-)
You can't get close enough with a cam there for the required detail.... d;-)
TT
cor...@mediaone.net
Cyber Kahuna wrote:
> Greetings all:
>
> As promised here are the results from the 5/5 meeting with the WindanSea
> surf
> Club.
>
> First off, I want to express the everyone that the entire club are a
> group of really
> right on, concerned surfers. I have never been treated nicer, with
> respect, and I
> was given ample floor time to express my opinions on the surf cam issue.
(snip)
That is so fine, Cyberkahuna!....so wonderful that you went, met
everybody....and listened. Glad you and Tom got to meet and talk about it
all. I have followed the related threads on this subject with interest....it
is just great to see how is all being worked out. I continue to admire
alt.surfing's way!
Right On, Cyberkahuna!....Excellent Waves to You!
DeeDee
Gamivia
>Greetings all:
>
>As promised here are the results from the 5/5 meeting with the WindanSea
>surf
>Club.
Good on you for going down. You did the right thing.
Gamivia Duke, Esq.
"APE SHALL NOT KILL APE"
Lemming®
from now-
Timothy B. Maddux
Stephen Hull <sh...@cats.ucsc.edu> wrote:
[ snip! ]
Excellent posts all-round and I'm glad to see
this was resolved. We have so many flamewars
with people shooting off things like 'yeah, why
don't you come up here?' that it's good to see
it actually done and done right. Do Tom and
CK get alt.surfing points? How many?
>I think Tim mentioned that client surveys are not representative however.
>Avoid succumbing to the temptation to rely on customer opinion alone in
>evaluating future sites.
Yes! CK noted that
>>Most of the pro responses were from surfers who really
>>didn't care where the cams went....they just want more cams.
Which is of course to be expected from people who
are paying for the cams; they want more for their
money.
--
.-``'. Tim Maddux, Ocean Engineering Lab, UCSB
.` .`~ Santa Barbara Surfing - http://www.cs.ucsb.edu/~tbmaddux/
_.-' '._ "Let's hang ten for JUSTICE!" -- The Tick
WhirlaWhip
respect all
the others
local wishes?
San Francisco?
Neon?
Etc Etc?
ben blake
i'm in the tube and you are not
http://members.aol.com/whirlawhip/page/index.htm
Lou Rose
without surf-cams. I believe that
the locals who dislike surf-cams
aren't really affected on the days they consider
epic because most people lack either/both
the skill or the sack to paddle out.
I will also bet $$ to donuts that people aren't driving
from Sacramento to join Jeff Kaplan
in 2X O/H, Holland Tunnel style OB just because
they saw it on some web-site. And I will bet more that
even if they do, they never even make it out to
the line-up.
Regards,
Lou
WhirlaWhip <whirl...@aol.comDEEP> wrote in message
news:19990507012836...@ng-fb1.aol.com...
kda...@slip.net
>
> In article <3731B256...@surfcheck.com>, Cyber Kahuna
> <cyber...@surfcheck.com> writes:
> >To get to the point, there will be no surf cam at WindanSea, at least
> >not by Surf Check anyway.
>
> Thank you, Ted.
[snipped longwinded mutual blowjob between Dickhead Deits and the newly
neutered tweedt]
Here you have it folks. Because liar Deits caved he is now Mr. Niceguy.
Bullshit! Tweed sucked his snake only because he agreed not to install
surveillance.
He is a libelous, deceitful, lying huckster and I have the emails to
prove it. By attributing his activity as merely that of a businessman
then you miss the inherent deceit in his illwill.
Even if he should remove his cameras from San Francisco he will remain a
liar.
jeff kaplan
WhirlaWhip
>without surf-cams.
Then why
is it such
a big deal?
>I believe that
>the locals who dislike surf-cams
>aren't really affected on the days they consider
>epic because most people lack either/both
>the skill or the sack to paddle out.
Then why is
it a big deal?
>I will also bet $$ to donuts that people aren't driving
>from Sacramento to join Jeff Kaplan
>in 2X O/H, Holland Tunnel style OB just because
>they saw it on some web-site.
Then why is
it such a big deal?
If all this
is true then
why are cams
a big deal?
ben blake
i'm in the tube and you are not
**** Blocking all e-mail due to SPAM *****
http://members.aol.com/whirlawhip/page/index.htm
Lou Rose
First, let me say that I am not an advocate of any particular
service. And I am aware that there are plenty
of (currently) free resources that allow surfers
to check conditions, and some do not involve using the 'net.
Cams are not really a big deal for certain spots. In fact,
it MAY just be that they actually deter people from surfing
on certain occasions:
When many inland surfers hear that there
are waves (from telephonic reports or friends), they often
imagine it to be better than it is. So they drive down, realize
that it is marginal and paddle out despite this because...well
because they are there.
With surf-cams they may
actually see that it is marginal and skip it altogether (and as
an added benefit, refrain from burning fossil fuel). Perhaps this
is soul-less to some here (I can see why they may feel that way
but it is an emotional and not rational reaction) but they should
think of the "hard-core" surfer who is out enjoying those
marginal conditions (b/c sometimes crappy waves are fun).
It may be small and on-shore but at least
he/she is getting peaks. The less people that check
it in person and then feel compelled to go out because
they are there, the more he/she will enjoy the
session (assuming he wants waves to him/herself).
Finally, SF is a fickle, brutal, difficult spot where people
often see that it is epic from the beach and yet can not or will
not paddle out. On the margin, surf-cams there will do very little
to the overall number in the line-up. Now if a web-site could make
it off-shore all the time and, more importantly, set up channels
out through the impact zone - then I would be worried...
WhirlaWhip <whirl...@aol.comDEEP> wrote in message
news:19990513175324...@ng-fe1.aol.com...
Lou Rose
To answer your question: it is not a big deal
to have cams at OBSF. This is because
the break is self regulating. Even if it looks
good, many surfers lack the skill or intestinal
fortitude to paddle out.
Btw, this is a great troll on your part...
Lou
WhirlaWhip <whirl...@aol.comDEEP> wrote in message
news:19990513204206...@ng-cl1.aol.com...
> >First, let me say that I am not an advocate of any particular
> >service.
>
> Nor am I.
>
> You do not need
> to explain every
> thing you tried to
> expalin. It did not
> answer my question.
> and
> my question is this:
>
> If the Beach can "handle
> itself" and "people
> will not be charging with a
> guy named Kaplan" and
> they really have
> no effect the why is
> it a big deal to have
> cams there?
>
> PS - I hate Surfcheck
> and all associated
> big brother items.
>
> >Finally, SF is a fickle, brutal, difficult spot where people
> >often see that it is epi
>
> I know SF.
>
> >On the margin, surf-cams there will do very little
> >to the overall number in the line-up.
>
> With that resoning
> then who cares
> if the cams are up?
>
> PS - like I said
> I destest Surfcams but
> I love you.
>
> You do understand
> my question? No? I'll
> say it one more time:
>
> IF the cams have LITTLE
> or NO effect on SF, THEN
> why does it matter if the
> cams are up?
>
> I have my reasoning
> for dislike. I'm asking
> you yours.
>
> I still
> love you.
WhirlaWhip
NeoN
> Will you {Cybore Kook} now
> respect all
> the others
> local wishes?
> {like}
> Neon?
No way, he wont even bother to answer my question in regard to his, no
etiquette, in bad taste, right up about my beloved San Onofre...
Instead he lets Lou 'Brown Nose' Rose {CK's nom-de-plum?} do it for
him...
Come on down anytime if you would like to talk about it Ted...
I am not hard to find.
I'm the one not wearing a leash that you want your
subscribers dropping in on. Thanks for nuthing.
Leash wearing kooks suck!
latte'
NeoN
--
GoT WaX?
http://www.pcmagic.net/mst while I are lurking here,
I be lurkin here http://homestead.dejanews.com/user.sanobum
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---
Andrew G. Smith
> : surf Club.
> <snipped cam poll and other stuff>
> : envisioned increase
> : in the crowd factor, injuries could result. ( I don't happen agree with
> : the crowd issue)
>
> Technical? When I went there, it wasn't bad at all. I'd venture to guess
> that there are a lot more difficult waves in La Jolla.
>
Technical? TECHNICAL?
We are talking about surfing aren't we?
> : 6. There are other beaches in the general area that can hold more people
> : that would be better suited for a cam.
>
> How about Blacks? Is nudity permitted on the Net? ;-)
Heh-heh, When I went to San Diego this spring, and surfed the west coast
my first time, I saw some nekkid people walking by. It was pretty
funny. The demographics were something like this....
Fat Old Men 60%
Girlie Men 39%
Fat Women 1%
Ugh! Before you go walking around nekkid, ask yourself this question.
"Would I turn me on?"
a.
WhirlaWhip
>my first time, I saw some nekkid people walking by.
>The demographics were something like this....
>
>Fat Old Men 60%
>Girlie Men 39%
>Fat Women 1%
You should
have gone to
the boardwalk
in PB. Hottest
girls everwhere.
Ben likes.
Much love all
around.
an...@mindspring.com
<19990521171413...@ng-fe1.aol.com>...
>>When I went to San Diego this spring, and surfed the west coast
>>my first time, I saw some nekkid people walking by.
>
>>The demographics were something like this....
>>
>>Fat Old Men 60%
>>Girlie Men 39%
>>Fat Women 1%
>
>You should
>have gone to
>the boardwalk
>in PB. Hottest
>girls everwhere.
>Ben likes.
>Much love all
>around.
Just in case I get to go back, where's PB?
a.
DDaniel
an...@mindspring.com
Tom Keener
wrote:
>You should
>have gone to
>the boardwalk
>in PB. Hottest
>girls everwhere.
Sorry. You're off by about 4 miles. Ask TT.
Tom Keener
keensurf_at_cts_dot_com
WhirlaWhip
>(Tom Keener)
>Sorry. You're off by about 4 miles. Ask TT.
The Whip
loves PB. The Whip
love the grils
in PB as well.
PB Bar and Grill.
Whip gets girl
everytime.
God bless
PB and little
hotties.
I love you, Tom.
jb
wrote:
>>(Tom Keener)
>
>>(Tom Keener)
>
>>Sorry. You're off by about 4 miles. Ask TT.
>
>The Whip
>loves PB. The Whip
>love the grils
>in PB as well.
>PB Bar and Grill.
>Whip gets girl
>everytime.
>God bless
>PB and little
>hotties.
This is a switch from your expression to Tower7 about how
you like it with HEAT and take it deep.
I am proud of you Whip, you are starting to look at girls.
-jb
John4Surf
>you like it with HEAT and take it deep.
Wait a minute jb, Tower 7 is at the San Elijo River mouth :-)