Racquetball Graphics & line art for web or print
JordanISRA
(Someone inquired about racquetball graphics to promote racquetball)
I am (almost) sure the national organization of racquetball, the United States
Racquetball Association, should have racquetball graphics, line art or other
useful promotional pictures that could be used to promote racquetball.
Although I am not 100% sure if they do in fact have graphics and pictures
available, you would think so since the USRA has been producing "the" highest
quality Racquetball Magazine 6 times a year!
Also, any organization who has taken the initiative for the past 25 years to
promote Racquetball in the Olympics and on Television (like the USRA
successfully has) would surely have some type of existing racquetball graphics
for promotional use by the Regional and State associations.
If by any chance, the USRA does not have any promotional line art, pictures or
"screened" camera ready graphics, now is a good time to try to get this into
the USRA January 2000 Leadership Meeting as a upcoming project.
Rumor has it that the USRA is producing a new "easy to carry" RuleBook for the
State Associations.
If this rumor is true, maybe the USRA could include a separate "Print Media
Page" with various racquetball pictures, graphics and line art.
Maybe a "print Media Package" could also include "screened" artwork of the USRA
logos and sponsor logos for state run sanctioned tournaments and events?
The package could include press releases and newspaper ready pictures for state
associations or clubs to use to promote racquetball programs in local papers,
club flyers, posters, entry forms or mailers.
Might be a additional incentive for a club to sanction a USRA event if the club
received a FREE media kit when sanctioning ANY USRA event, from clinics to
tournaments!
Just a helpful thought,
Jordan
PS You need to contact Linda at the USRA to inquire what is available. Linda
does a great job for the USRA plus produces a fantastic racquetball magazine!
self
> I am (almost) sure the national organization of racquetball, the United
States
> Racquetball Association, should have racquetball graphics, line art or other
> useful promotional pictures that could be used to promote racquetball.
To promote USRA, yes. To promote USOC, yes. To promote IOC, yes. To promote the
insiders, and their chosen favorite personalities, yes. But to promote
racquetball as a participative sport, I doubt it.
> Although I am not 100% sure if they do in fact have graphics and pictures
> available, you would think so since the USRA has been producing "the" highest
> quality Racquetball Magazine 6 times a year!
Yeah. And our alternative has been....?
> Also, any organization who has taken the initiative for the past 25 years to
> promote Racquetball in the Olympics and on Television (like the USRA
> successfully has)
That is certainly debatable! Why can FFF( Fat Female Fishing) get on ESPN
weekly, but you can only see racquetball for 1/2 hour per year at 3:00 A.M. on
a specific Tuesday morning, and even then it is only five actual minutes of
play, sandwiched between 25 minutes of inane clips of insider-clique-goofs
screwing around?
> Rumor has it that the USRA is producing a new "easy to carry" RuleBook for
the
> State Associations.
This is the same organization which threatened people for posting copies of the
rules to their club walls for 'copyright infringement', and also threatened ASR
for logo infringement? Don't hold your breath.
I guess it's about time I just come out and say this:
IF the USRA's prime mission is simply Olympics for a few, and not sport
expansion for the many,
IF the USRA is too aloof to let the rank and file know where their membership
and tourney dollars go,
IF the USRA gets more dollars from the profoundly corrupt IOC than it does from
racquetball playing members, and is therefore beholden to *them* rather than
*us*,
IF the USRA sucks up State generated funds for tourney sanctioning, but the
States don't feel any benefit,
IF, in short, the USRA doesn't represent the player, then maybe it's finally
time to simply throw them off, and allow a new sanctioning body, who espouses
views more in line with the rank-and-file to guide us into the new millennium.
If USRA can no longer purport to represent the actual players, even the
disgusting IOC will have to quit funding them. Therefore, the USRA NEEDS US,
regardless of what they think and say!
Greg Stoner
JordanISRA
I just assumed that the USRA, the national office that promotes racquetball,
through the Olympics and pushes for racquetball on television, would have at
least a "few" pictures or graphics of racquetball players to use for print
flyers or brochures.
I was just informed they don't (e-mail from USRA is below).
I wonder how the USRA can promote racquetball to prospective organizations
without pictures or racquetball players?
I know my state association would like pictures.
How can the national association afford to promote racquetball for the
Olympics, National Open Tournaments and Television without spending a "few"
dollars to hire a photographer to take some promotional pictures that the USRA
could "own" to promote racquetball?
Here is the email from the USRA explaining why…
PS. Linda does a great job with the Racquetball Magazine. Perhaps someone could
tell her there are "contract" photographers that work "by-the-hour" available
to take pictures the USRA could "own". I am surprised they are not used at the
Olympic, National and US Open events!
Here is the Official USRA e-mail reply to me..
Linda (USRA)>
I have presented a "communications" module at Leadership Conferences over the
past
ten years, offering media & public relations advice, tips and resources to
state
directors and volunteers in attendance, for their use at the local level.
Preparing
that presentation for a wider audience (obviously via the usra.org website)
remains
on my list of things to do between issues of the magazine ...
Until that time, I know that the internet holds a wealth of information on
media
planning, marketing and event promotion -- what applies to any other sport is
equally useful in promoting racquetball.
As far as providing photography and graphics, the rights-holders of the work
(the
artists/photographers themselves) are the only persons legally able to offer
their
work for reproduction. It would be both illegal and unethical for the USRA to
provide artwork that it does not own as a public offering. And since we do not
have
the luxury of retaining full-time artists on staff, we technically have *no*
USRA
graphic holdings to speak of -- other than, of course, the USRA trademarked
logo.
Thank you for your kind words about the magazine,
--
Linda L. Mojer
USRA Associate Executive Director/Communications
Managing Editor, RACQUETBALL Magazine
http://www.usra.org & http://www.racqmag.com
JordanISRA wrote:
> If by any chance, the USRA does not have any promotional line art, pictures
or
> "screened" camera ready graphics, now is a good time to try to get this into
> the USRA January 2000 Leadership Meeting as a upcoming project.
> The package could include press releases and newspaper ready pictures for
Linda Mojer
permission of the author -- is an *incredible* breach of personal and professional
ethics. I specifically took the time to respond to Jordan directly (and the
original poster) with personalized replies to issues which did not seem to have a
broad appeal to the newsgroup (other than setting Stoner off on a tear). If I had
wanted to express a broad answer to the newsgroup, *I* would have posted directly.
I consider this particular action to be among the worst examples of unethical
behavior.
--
Linda L. Mojer
USRA Associate Executive Director/Communications
Managing Editor, RACQUETBALL Magazine
http://www.usra.org & http://www.racqmag.com
JordanISRA wrote:
> Sorry everyone.
>
> I just assumed that the USRA, the national office that promotes racquetball,
> through the Olympics and pushes for racquetball on television, would have at
> least a "few" pictures or graphics of racquetball players to use for print
> flyers or brochures.
>
> I was just informed they don't (e-mail from USRA is below).
I did not say that -- I indicated that what was being suggested had already been
presented on several occasions, plus that a follow-up project to offer such
services, in a somewhat limited fashion, was in the developmental stages.
JordanISRA
availability of "racquetball graphics" from the USRA was of a personal,
professional or "secretive" matter, I would not have posted it on the
newsgroup.
Your e-mail was only a simple answer to a question concerning "how to obtain
racquetball pictures", not gossip, personal matters or even a breach in
national security.
Sorry if I offended you or the USRA.
Jordan
Linda Mojer
> Linda Mojer <rbz...@webaccess.net> wrote in article
> <37ED5842...@webaccess.net>...
>
> > I've said this before ... reproduction of emails on the newsgroup -- without
> > permission of the author -- is an *incredible* breach of personal and
> professional
> > ethics.
>
> For what it's worth, I absolutely agree. In fact, I personally place it right
> up there with posting obscenely worded posts, or posting bin files on non bin
> newsgroups: it's just wrong (just as *I* have said before). Of course, those
> that encourage bad behavior of various types haven't got a leg to stand on,
> IMHO, when they are on the receiving end of similar misbehavior.
>
> > I specifically took the time to respond to Jordan directly (and the
> > original poster) with personalized replies to issues which did not seem to
> have a
> > broad appeal to the newsgroup (other than setting Stoner off on a tear).
>
> And, Linda, you sent a copy of that letter to me, as well, and I thank you for
> the opportunity. Now, since it was private, I responded to you in private,
> although I said exactly what I would have said here on ASR. So before you
> denigrate me just because I disagree with you, I wish you would think about
> exactly why you chose to include my name in your diatribe. I didn't do it.
>
> Greg Stoner
I included you in my email reply simply because you seemed to have an interest in
the subject matter ... or rather, in using it as yet another opportunity for some
USRA-bashing. You were one of *two* who posted to the thread -- so it seemed
reasonable to respond by email directly. Had I wanted to post *my words* to the
newsgroup, I would have done so myself -- I feel that to be *my* right and
perogative, not Jordan's. I'm pleased that you agree.
self
You had sent me some correspondence. To which I responded. So, if you don't
care to discuss things, that's certainly fine. Merely stop sending me
letters and replies! I am not bending your arm to talk to me, and *I* am
quite tired of *you* stating that I am some sort of one-off-crank - I
publicly have thrown you a bone, by saying my views are in the minority.
Well, the reality is that there is LARGE disaffection with how the USRA
runs things, and has run things. Not realizing that indicates your lack of
acuity. You said:
> Thanks for your now-standard input, but I've come to realize that no
matter
> *what* is accomplished by our office, it will never meet with your
expectations
> or approval.
As long as each interaction with USRA personalities are laced with
contempt, hubris and a general air of disconnect from the sport, of course
these self-described "accomplishments" (read "resume padding") will fail to
meet my own expectations! A question: WHO are your constituencies? For
example, my own concerns at work involve three distinct groups:
1) end-users of our products ("customers"),
2) shareholders ("owners"),
3) co-workers ("peers")
I constantly balance the desires and demands of these groups. When things
are serendipitous, all of them have harmonious requirements, i.e. 'make the
company more efficient'. But sometimes, my subordinates want more benefits,
at the exact time that shareholders want staff cuts, and the customers want
additional phone technical support personnel! That's a tough nut to crack,
and it takes thoughtful juggling to appease them all.
So who does USRA answer to: The IOC? Or the players? Because if the funding
scheme you describe is the prime indicator of staff loyalty, you probably
consider the AVERAGE (not elite) player merely a necessary nuisance as you
pledge fealty to the great and terrible IOC/USOC. I hereby dare you and/or
the USRA to take an official stance AGAINST the complete corruption at the
IOC/USOC, and to distance itself from the whole digesting mess. You won't
do it, because you won't bite the hand that feeds you.
>I refuse to take a defensive posture against all these unprovoked attacks
> whenever you get wound up.
Again, Linda, you give yourself far too much credit for thinking I'm
'attacking' you. What a typical response to criticism, by a thin-skinned,
defensive individual. If you consider my mild questioning of USRA policies
to be 'attacking', you are ill prepared for what I think will be the
eventual tide of unhappy 'customers' who stand the USRA on it's ear once
they have had enough.
> I am fully confident in what I do, and I get a great
> deal of personal satisfaction out of the many projects in which I am
involved.
EXACTLY! And that's clearly the problem! As a 501 (c)(3) non-profit org,
you are supposed to be beholden to ideals *other* than your personal
aggrandizement and smug detachment.
> But "filling in Greg Stoner" doesn't hold the type of return that
justifies any
> more effort on my part -- in fact, it takes too much away from far more
> important work ... you know, promoting racquetball to the masses ... not
just
> to one individual with an attitude. Have a great week,
Don't fill me in. Don't talk to me. But PLEASE think about what the moral
and correct thing to do for the sport is. I don't think your current
programs and policies reflect what those things ought to be. My opinion, of
course. (And not attacking you, just disagreeing. Please learn the
difference.)
Greg Stoner
Linda Mojer
the next, you turn around and take it upon yourself to post the contents of a
private email on the newsgroup without permission. And still have the gall to
preach to me about morality and correctness? Please ...
--
Linda L. Mojer
USRA Associate Executive Director/Communications
Managing Editor, RACQUETBALL Magazine
http://www.usra.org & http://www.racqmag.com
self
> Let's review, Greg ... one minute, you uphold the sanctity of email privacy
--
Indeed, I do. And so...?
> the next, you turn around and take it upon yourself to post the contents of a
> private email on the newsgroup without permission.
An emphatic NO, madam! I merely used information that had already been posted
on ASR. You are wrong yet again, Linda. Need proof? Gladly provided....
>And still have the gall to
> preach to me about morality and correctness? Please ...
<sigh> Since you emailed me, and then *immediately* your box doesn't accept
replies from me (How clever... Not.), I'll post my response to you, that would
not go through:
" Didn't say I had the only moral position. Many people may hold many views,
and consider themselves correct. I only asked you to please _think_ about
whether your own (and of course, the USRA) positions, esp. as regards
IOC/USOC, are healthy and right, in light of the ostensible purpose of
representing the interests of the *players*. That *is* what you say you
do, right? Or am I even wrong on that basic assumption?
Greg "
(BTW, since I authored that, but attempted unsuccessfully to send it to you via
email, do you consider it private? If you do, that is exactly the twisted logic
I would expect.)
Greg Stoner
Linda Mojer
> Linda Mojer accused:
>
> > Let's review, Greg ... one minute, you uphold the sanctity of email privacy
> --
>
> Indeed, I do. And so...?
>
> > the next, you turn around and take it upon yourself to post the contents of a
> > private email on the newsgroup without permission.
>
> An emphatic NO, madam! I merely used information that had already been posted
> on ASR. You are wrong yet again, Linda. Need proof? Gladly provided....
You clearly quoted material authored by me which had NOT already been posted on
ASR, but rather directed to you via private email. Look more closely, Greg, or
simply pay attention to the addressing of your communiques when you go online. You
posted your reply to me on the newsgroup - quoting a private email. An innocent
mistake?
> >And still have the gall to
> > preach to me about morality and correctness? Please ...
>
> <sigh> Since you emailed me, and then *immediately* your box doesn't accept
> replies from me (How clever... Not.), I'll post my response to you, that would
> not go through:
I've wouldn't *bother* to block anything from you ... again, perhaps a slipped
keystroke on your part?
> " Didn't say I had the only moral position. Many people may hold many views,
> and consider themselves correct. I only asked you to please _think_ about
> whether your own (and of course, the USRA) positions, esp. as regards
> IOC/USOC, are healthy and right, in light of the ostensible purpose of
> representing the interests of the *players*. That *is* what you say you
> do, right? Or am I even wrong on that basic assumption?
>
> Greg "
>
> (BTW, since I authored that, but attempted unsuccessfully to send it to you via
> email, do you consider it private? If you do, that is exactly the twisted logic
> I would expect.)
Quite obviously, you are certainly within your rights to post something that *you*
authored -- just not something that I had written, personally and privately, to
you. But you're right ... that was my *first* mistake.
self
<snip>
> You clearly quoted material authored by me which had NOT already been posted
on
> ASR, but rather directed to you via private email. Look more closely, Greg,
or
> simply pay attention to the addressing of your communiques when you go
online.
Looking... looking... still not seeing...
> I've wouldn't *bother* to block anything from you ... again, perhaps a
slipped
> keystroke on your part?
Since it was a simple "Respond To" click, I didn't have too much opportunity to
screw it up. But I guess I could have. I just now forwarded the original
message, and it didn't 'bounce' this time, so let's see if it goes through. An
'innocent' web-glitch, perhaps?
On a continuation of the "What's USRA's role"? question, I just got my issue of
Racquetball Magazine today. And there is Linda, chastising all current members
for not doubling the size of their powerbase instantly, all for the incentive
of <hold your breath, please>.... a can 'o balls. Gee, I wonder what the new
member growth rate was until this recent 'empowerment' of the masses to
recruit? My own general feeling is that I am so discouraged by the USRA these
days, that I couldn't recommend in good conscious that any new player I know
join. I'm not ready to quit myself yet, but I don't know how to 'sell' it to
others, if I can't even get anyone to tell me if USRA serves us, the players,
or the IOC and USOC with their elite chosen handful of Olympic hopefuls and
those who ply them with gifts and cash.... Linda says USRA stands by to
"provide services to...the...playing population...". Again, I don't know
exactly what those services would be any more - many unsanctioned tourneys
provide just as good competition, organization, hospitality, draws, etc. Only
thing missing is 'points'. Linda then asks in her editorial 'shouldn't we face
facts...'? to which I respond "Yes". But the facts are not pleasant. On the
same page as Linda's finger-wagging editorial, is the statement: "The USRA is
recognized by the U.S Olympic Committee" [USOC] "as the National Governing Body
[NGB] for the sport". Since that is obviously the exclusive driver of USRA
policy today, maybe the only way to wrest control back towards player's
interests is by means of challenging that status. Hell, they've even gone and
trademarked the very word "Racquetball". Think I'm kiddin'?
So....
Am I really the wide-eyed zealot that Linda would paint me, or do others also
feel the distinct lack of 'love' from our sanctioning body to the player? Just
like leaving ASR, I trust you guys enough that if a simple majority say I am
unfairly dogging USRA, I'll just quit it, including posting those gross links
to articles which detail the shocking, gaudy and illegal excesses of the
IOC/USOC.
Greg Stoner
NewsAce
rules of engagement, is it legal to <snip> a message from
Linda, if it's being quoted by Greg? I'll take that chance)
>
> self <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in article
> <01bf0a17$30263880$8dd96fd1@default>...
> <snip>
> > So....
> >
> > Am I really the wide-eyed zealot that Linda would paint
me, or do
others
> also
> > feel the distinct lack of 'love' from our sanctioning
body to the
player?
> Just
> > like leaving ASR, I trust you guys enough that if a
simple majority say
I
> am
> > unfairly dogging USRA, I'll just quit it, including
posting those gross
> links
> > to articles which detail the shocking, gaudy and
illegal excesses of
the
> > IOC/USOC.
> >
> > Greg Stoner
> >
> >
>
paying member of the USRA, you are so entitled. Likewise,
as a paid official of the USRA, Linda is entitled to take
exception to your posts, fire back at you, and every once
in a while actually respond to your questions.
Maybe you're "unfairly dogging USRA," maybe Linda's
unfairly dogging you, maybe you're both right and both
wrong. Regardless, last time I checked, ASR was still a
free and unmoderated forum, in which you're both allowed
to express your opinions.
I've said it before (probably in your straw poll about
your ASR residence): you, Linda, Ed (sorry, Ed, linking
you with your mortal enemies again), our former contributor
Kathy, Dropshot, JHard, and everyone else should be able to
say just about anything you wish (as long as it relates to
Racquetball(TM?)) here. Everyone comes up with an
interesting or thought provoking gem every once in awhile.
While I sometimes think you push a little too hard, I do
find myself agreeing with many of your points about the
USRA. The push for Olympic glory seems a dubious way to
promote our sport. I'd much rather see that effort put
into other promotional efforts, perhaps finding a way to
provide a copy of the rules without having the audacity to
charge money for it, or perhaps in hiring a proofreader for
the magazine (I'm sure that since I've brought that up,
someone will find several gramatical or typographical
errors in this post :), or increasing the magazine
publication to monthly, or anything else that would either
bring new players to the sport or increase the enjoyment
for those of us who're already familiar with it.
Mike Thornhill
Asheville, NC
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Linda Mojer
> This thread kind of makes one feel bad they were 'forced' to join the
> USRA just to play in a tournament. For whatever good the USRA does
> it continues to amaze me how far you've gotten with the attitude you
> put forth to your customers on this newsgroup.
>
> guesswhat
This is basically between Greg and I, which is why I attempted to "take it outside" by
communicating directly with him via email. That he tries to make his points by posting
those private emails on the newsgroup [Monday, 8:01 pm] is offensive to me personally,
and shouldn't be taken as any "institutional" viewpoint regarding the USRA and it's
members. It's a simple personality conflict between two individuals -- I am certain
that he understands that I respect his right to post whatever he cares to author, and
that I retain that same right for myself. It would be unfortunate if anyone interpreted
this "public sandbox" as being any sort of customer relations forum for the USRA (which
it clearly is *not*) -- on the basis of my personal interaction with Mr. Stoner on an
unrelated privacy issue.
JordanISRA
Back to the original question about Racquetball Graphics.
Linda has explained the USRA does not have any pictures of racquetball players
that the USRA owns because of the cost and ownership problem (rights to
pictures).
Here are a few suggestions that could be used to overcome the problem of "cost"
and "ownership".
1. Have a photo-shoot before major tournaments with "models" from the gallery
that are not sponsored players.
Get a few attractive people to pose for pictures. Since they are not
"sponsored" players, there will be no problems using their pictures.
2. Get all "models" to sign a standard "release" to use their images without
payment.
3. Get all "photographers" to sign a standard "release" to give USRA
"ownership" of photographs. This can be done without any payment, or, the USRA
could always waive the $20 USRA membership if a photographer did a real good
job.
4. After the USRA receives photographs, either "scan" into computer or bring to
a "reproduction company" for camera-ready "screened art-work" that can be
photocopied for brochures and flyers, or reproduced in newspapers.
The cost for "reproduction sheets" is about $10 per sheet, but the sheet can be
full or many images from many photographs that were "cut-and-pasted" on the
master sheet.
I have done this myself. I have even budgeted this into a "tournament" for
under $25 (including film) and taken the pictures myself.
Additional "screen" camera-ready sheets cost about a $1 each. I never had to
buy additional sheets since the reproduced "screened" images can be used over
and over.
5. After the USRA has used a reproduction company, the USRA can request the
company to "save" the pictures as digital computer images for future
reproduction as needed. Again, this would be about a $1 a page after
reproducing copies, but much less if reproducing more copies of the same page
upon request by AmPRO Instructors, Tournament Directors or Clubs.
Heck, there are 50 states that may want a copy for their own use in local State
Associations, not to mention over 2,000 clubs!
6. After the USRA has a full archive of photo sheets, they could create a "mini
book" of racquetball clip art graphics that could be used to promote "club"
USRA memberships in the 2,000 plus racquetball facilities.
This is just my thoughts of how a national organization could promote their
sport.
By the way, there are many states who have been using photographs in their
State Racquetball Newsletters (including my own) for years!
I have never heard anyone ever complain about "ownership" or "cost" and the
pictures (headshots mostly) reproduce great!
I don't pretend to be as smart as the USRA, but I think the USRA reply may be
"great, have your state do this project-
But some people may think if the States do all this work, why do they need a
National organization?
Jordan (not bashing, just suggesting)
PS. Why can't this subject be brought up at the next USRA Leadership meeting in
January? Who knows, you may even get some "volunteers" from various States to
do this.
Jeff Anthony
> On 29 Sep 1999 01:00:22 GMT, "self" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
> ...snipped a bunch...
>
> >So....
> >
> >Am I really the wide-eyed zealot that Linda would paint me, or do others
> >also feel the distinct lack of 'love' from our sanctioning body to the
> >player? Just like leaving ASR, I trust you guys enough that if a simple
> >majority say I am unfairly dogging USRA, I'll just quit it, including
> >posting those gross links to articles which detail the shocking, gaudy
> >and illegal excesses of the IOC/USOC.
> >
> >Greg Stoner
>
> Well you probably are a wide-eyed zealot (good for you) but keep on
> keeping on. You must be striking a cord because at least 'they' seem to
> be on a harangue-Greg kick. I tend to agree that this Olympics trend is
> of no real use to racquetball or it's future. Just think of the
> rediculous sports that are in the Olympics now. Who could argue that
> biathlon has not yet taken hold in the US despite it's Olympic presence?
> They did have a freely copyable rulebook though the last time I checked!
>
> While I could care less what the USRA does, I would like to see
> racquetball prosper - which means more players. The Olympics won't bring
> that about, IMO. I've been looking into this AmPRO thing-ie though and it
> looks promising. I've enjoyed reading everyone's thoughts on the program.
> Don't think I've heard one negative comment so far.
>
> So tally one in the Greg column. In otherwords, DOG ON!
>
> guesswhat
I'm coming to the same conclusion, guys. Keep on doggin'.
Here's my opinion.
The IOC's involvement, whether they do it intentionally or not, has the
effect of turning the sport organizers of any sport they sponsor, into IOC
organizers. The sport's rank and file then come second.
For most of this century, it didn't fit into the Olympic ideal to be
professional (that has changed somewhat lately). The IOC way has been to,
in effect, financially support less popular sports - ones with
international appeal - and give them a second life. The IOC are great
sports promoters, after all.
The biathlon example is perfect in that sense. Outside of school
athletics, where else can someone practice this sport? There aren't any
commercial sports complexes that cater to this need(?), are there? Is
there one in your town?
On the other hand, I don't think the IOC is the evil entity that Greg has
made it out to be. Yes, they have their problem children but I think
that's much more isolated than wide-spread. And yes, many IOC officials
are over-paid in our eyes. It just happens to be an extremely successful
organization that generates a lot of cash.
So what's the problem then?
Simple. We're not replenishing our player stocks in enough numbers to
sustain the sport at present levels.
Dumping the IOC won't help this at all but reallocating resources towards
introducing the sport to the fitness public, might. I do like AmPRO as a
delivery vehicle, and the Racquetball[tm] Across America idea as a theme,
but putting them together will take huge amounts of manpower and
coordination to make it effective. On the local level, those of us who
chose to, will continue to fumble along as best we can.
To summerize,
* I have to say that the IOC is definitely a bad influence on our sport,
but like other things that aren't good for us, we can manage it if we want
to.
* I personally think that a $20 membership ($25 in Canada) is very cheap.
If member services are inadequate, then raise the fee and provide
more/better services.
* And finally, I believe our first goal should be to promote our sport and
to welcome new players with open arms. The IOC can't help us with that; we
must do it entirely on our own.
thx for your time,
Jeff
Stu Young
> 1. Have a photo-shoot before major tournaments with "models" from the gallery
> that are not sponsored players.
> Get a few attractive people to pose for pictures. Since they are not
> "sponsored" players, there will be no problems using their pictures.
>
Jordan,
Are you saying sponsored players are ugly? Now that is controversial.
Stu "Looking for controversy anywhere I can find it" Young
JordanISRA
used when promoting a club program or tournament with a "Y" sponsored company.
Jordan (not even a "Z" sponsored player cause I am uglier than most "sponsored"
players)
PS. Does it count if my mommy thinks I am cute?
Stu wrote>
Will Waggoner
and pictures
>> available, you would think so since the USRA has been
producing "the" highest
>> quality Racquetball Magazine 6 times a year!
>
>Yeah. And our alternative has been....?
Personally, I think the online version of the mag looks like
dookie. Never gotten a real copy - is it designed like the web
page? Not to make you look bad, Linda - but the fact remains
that your web site, like so many others on the web, is not well
designed.
Sorry to step on your toes as designer, Linda, but now that I've
payed my first visit to www.usra.com, it's pretty hokey as well.
The layout isn't intuitive, the colors are hard to read and
distract the user, and the function of the graphics is
questionable at best. The banner ads on the top of USRA.com
aren't even standard size!
As a designer, I can assert that having someone who is not a
proffesional do a web page is akin to having a D player entering
a tournament for Sudsy or Cliff - a bad idea.
HTML isn't a toy - you could put your eye out! =]
----
Will Waggoner
self
<131ab36a...@usw-ex0108-057.remarq.com>...
> I've said it before (probably in your straw poll about
> your ASR residence): you, Linda, Ed (sorry, Ed, linking
> you with your mortal enemies again), our former contributor
> Kathy, Dropshot, JHard, and everyone else should be able to
> say just about anything you wish (as long as it relates to
> Racquetball(TM?)) here. Everyone comes up with an
> interesting or thought provoking gem every once in awhile.
I may regret saying this someday <grin>, but dang it, I miss seeing ol' JHard
and KGeels poke their heads in from time to time.
Greg Stoner
self
> The original post about "racquetball graphics" turned into a "bashing" post…
<snip idea-laden post>
Thanks for getting us back on track.
Greg "Head spinning" Stoner
self
#1. I was wrong. I just completed a DejaNews search on the terms "racquet" and
"non-standard"; fully expecting to see the following series of three posts: (a)
Linda pastes her email to me directly onto ASR (as she nearly always does,
BTW), (b) I respond by using her own points one by one in my rebuttal, c) Linda
blows up at the alleged 'privacy issue'. Guess what? Only posts '"(b)" and
"(c)" came up in the search, indicating that I did, indeed, INADVERTENTLY
(whether she chooses to believe it or not) quote a couple of absolutely
innocuous phrases from her email into the group. I was confused by the fact she
had just posted two of the three recent 'private' emails that she forwarded to
me (and others) into to ASR, in their entirety. So I wrongly thought the one I
quoted from was on ASR as well, otherwise, I would not have used the clips. I
hereby apologize.
#2. If she is 'offended personally' by that, through her 'personal interaction
on a privacy issue', I sure am befuddled. There was nothing in those quotes
that could have been construed, in the wildest extreme, to have been considered
'private' or 'sensitive', other than the mere route of transmission. To be
short, IMHO, she has purposefully chosen to make a mountain out of a molehill
to obfuscate whatever the damn conversation was about anyway (And it sure
worked, 'cause I have forgotten entirely what the deal was, following her
"got'cha" game <grin>.)
#3. I apologize to the group for having to watch this off-topic personal
privacy red-herring drivel.
Greg "Two apologies in one post!" Stoner
self
<snip>
> This is basically between Greg and I, which is why I attempted to "take it
outside" by
> communicating directly with him via email.
A quickie [final] follow-up:
In order for me to avoid making such an embarrassing mistake again, I have
killfiltered Linda on my email: anything she wants to say, I can just read in
public. As for me, I'm certainly willing to make any points I wish to,
regarding RB, right here.
Greg Stoner
self
<snippage involved>
Jeff, thank you for articulating the issues so well. Like a lot of things in
*real* life, there probably isn't any real black and white, but a whole lot of
gray. That said, however, as an admitted cynical-idealist (is *that* a weird
combo, or what?<grin>) I feel we should strive to be as up-front in our
positions, and what drives them, as is humanly possible. This is the view I
consider when I say that I think the actual players are most 'true' to the
sport, and that they generally enjoy promoting it for pure love of the sport.
That's where the word 'amateur' stems from. The further away people get from
that ideal, I feel the larger is the opportunity, and proclivity, to be
dissuaded from a racquetball-centric view of things; more to the Olympics or to
personal profits, or to whatever other influences might come into play. Now
that I know that at least someone else is aware of the concern, if not the
reality of this shift, I think I can afford to be a little less 'intense' in my
concerns over this whole thing <g>.
Thanks again.
Greg Stoner
Linda Mojer
> #1. I was wrong. I just completed a DejaNews search on the terms "racquet" and
> "non-standard"; fully expecting to see the following series of three posts: (a)
> Linda pastes her email to me directly onto ASR (as she nearly always does,
> BTW), (b) I respond by using her own points one by one in my rebuttal, c) Linda
> blows up at the alleged 'privacy issue'. Guess what? Only posts '"(b)" and
> "(c)" came up in the search, indicating that I did, indeed, INADVERTENTLY
> (whether she chooses to believe it or not) quote a couple of absolutely
> innocuous phrases from her email into the group. I was confused by the fact she
> had just posted two of the three recent 'private' emails that she forwarded to
> me (and others) into to ASR, in their entirety. So I wrongly thought the one I
> quoted from was on ASR as well, otherwise, I would not have used the clips. I
> hereby apologize.
> #2. If she is 'offended personally' by that, through her 'personal interaction
> on a privacy issue', I sure am befuddled. There was nothing in those quotes
> that could have been construed, in the wildest extreme, to have been considered
> 'private' or 'sensitive', other than the mere route of transmission. To be
> short, IMHO, she has purposefully chosen to make a mountain out of a molehill
> to obfuscate whatever the damn conversation was about anyway (And it sure
> worked, 'cause I have forgotten entirely what the deal was, following her
> "got'cha" game <grin>.)
> #3. I apologize to the group for having to watch this off-topic personal
> privacy red-herring drivel.
>
> Greg "Two apologies in one post!" Stoner
I appreciate the apology -- since I am very careful to do either one or the other
-- post publicly, or email privately. Your contention (a) that I post my emails to
you is erroneous (and no, I don't need you to research it to prove my point) --
when my replies are directed via newsgroup, they are in "post-reply" not email
reply. And, yes, I *do* think the distinction is important. What were we talking
about again?
JordanISRA
that says…
"I release all rights to the use of event photographs in which my image
appears."
My question is, "who" are the "rights" released to?
The entry checks are sent to the USRA office, but WHO owns the rights to
photographs taken at the event?
If the USRA owns the "rights", why cant' the USRA "hire" a photographer to take
pictures and contract for "ownership" of all pictures taken?
This will fill the void of the USRA having NO PICTURES of their own.
Just a question and idea for the upcoming event.
Jordan
PS. You could always have spectators send in pictures to be reproduced and used
with a standard release waiver. If it was at the US Open, you don't need the
release from the players since that was "waived" on the entry form.
Linda Mojer
> I noticed that there is a "waiver" on the USRA US Open Tournament entry form
> that says…
>
> "I release all rights to the use of event photographs in which my image
> appears."
>
> My question is, "who" are the "rights" released to?
The *individual* is releasing his/her rights as the *subject* of any photography,
and is meant to allow the USRA to publish its event photography without additional
permissions from each and every person who *might* appear in any given shot.
> The entry checks are sent to the USRA office, but WHO owns the rights to
> photographs taken at the event?
The photographers who *take* the photos own the rights to their work.
> If the USRA owns the "rights", why cant' the USRA "hire" a photographer to take
> pictures and contract for "ownership" of all pictures taken?
The USRA does not own those rights (as stated previously). RACQUETBALL magazine
does hire photographers to cover specific events, for which we pay for the
photographer's *time and expertise* (primarily) -- we do not negotiate for global
ownership rights. In fact, many photographers *prefer* to retain specific ownership
rights so that they can generate additional revenue of their own [that's their
business, after all] from reprints, enlargements and sales to other publications.
> This will fill the void of the USRA having NO PICTURES of their own.
We have no problem in working with our contract photographers to obtain permissions
to reprint their shots when needed. What we will *not* do is turn around and offer
work *which is not ours to give* for other use at no charge (that would be
stealing).
> Just a question and idea for the upcoming event.
>
> Jordan
>
> PS. You could always have spectators send in pictures to be reproduced and used
> with a standard release waiver. If it was at the US Open, you don't need the
> release from the players since that was "waived" on the entry form.
When we receive photos "from the field" they are accepted on the premise that the
photographer/spectator has provided them along with their permission for us to
publish them in the magazine. Even then, if someone *else* wanted to use them, I
would refer them back to the original photographer as a professional courtesy.
By way of an additional reference, you might try to obtain "generic" racquetball
photography from those manufacturers who routinely set up studio sessions to
generate action shots of their sponsored players -- *specifically for promotional
use.* In fact, that sounds more like what you described in an earlier post as
being exactly what you were looking for ...
Linda Mojer
rights. But I'm consistently flattered that just *anything* I post warrants a
flaming response by you ... irrespective of subject. In this instance, I wonder if
you'd have the same opinion, however, if *you* were a photographer by profession
and the USRA took those same great pains to respect/protect *your* rights.
--
Linda L. Mojer
USRA Associate Executive Director/Communications
Managing Editor, RACQUETBALL Magazine
http://www.usra.org & http://www.racqmag.com
self wrote:
> Linda Mojer <rbz...@webaccess.net> wrote in article
> <380E0DCE...@webaccess.net>...
>
> > The *individual* is releasing his/her rights as the *subject* of any
> photography,
> > and is meant to allow the USRA to publish its event photography without
> additional
> > permissions from each and every person who *might* appear in any given shot.
> >
> > > The entry checks are sent to the USRA office, but WHO owns the rights to
> > > photographs taken at the event?
> >
> > The photographers who *take* the photos own the rights to their work.
> >
> > > If the USRA owns the "rights", why cant' the USRA "hire" a photographer to
> take
> > > pictures and contract for "ownership" of all pictures taken?
> >
> > The USRA does not own those rights (as stated previously).
>
> Linda:
>
> Given USRA's absolute junk-yard-dog type aggressive stance on logo
> infringement, and purporting to "own" the rules, ad nausem; couldn't they
> simply exercise right of license over the whole event, including descriptions
> and photos of matches and participants, much like the NFL does? What would be
> the difference? Didn't USRA sanction, promote, sponsor, and endorse the event?
> What is our entry fee going for, anyway?
>
> In short, why have a dang junk-yard-dog on the chain, that needs constant
> feeding, if all he does is bite the owner's leg?
>
> Greg Stoner
Ed Arias
the patience you exhibit with "us". Thanks for sticking around and
enlightening those of us...and not just the "piss and moaners".
We appreciate it very much. Thanks.
Ed.
self
self
> Great snip, Greg -- pretty much omits the entire point of talking about photo
> rights.
Linda, I am frankly plain-old dog-tired of YOUR acting so unhappy, and put
upon, time and again, by a simple direct quoting of the applicable *portions*
of interest in your posts. It is simply the *right* way to do things: not
quoting at all is wrong, and attaching entire unsnipped post attached to post
is equally as wrong. So, tell me, do you think that my snip is, or was ever,
designed to misconstrue something purposefully? Really? Because if you _don't_
believe that (and I tell you now that I snip for CLARITY, not to obfuscate)
then GET OVER IT! Quit using it as a smoke-screen. Tackle the issues head-on.
At first, I tried to be sensitive to your bizarre concerns, but it is
abundantly clear that you will forever use any quote that you have made that
doesn't include the *entire* post, as an excuse to avoid the point being made.
Just exactly WHAT IS THE PROBLEM WITH MY SNIPPAGE?
> But I'm consistently flattered that just *anything* I post warrants a
> flaming response by you ... irrespective of subject.
I believe my original input was quite even-handed, not a flame at all. Now,
this one, on the other hand, is in response to your TIRESOME WHINING about some
sinister plot by me to partial quote you right into oblivion somehow (simply
LUDICROUS on the face of it) and warrants a bit of flame-like discharge from my
virtual-pen, IMHO.
> In this instance, I wonder if
> you'd have the same opinion, however, if *you* were a photographer by
profession
> and the USRA took those same great pains to respect/protect *your* rights.
If I was told that upon entering the arena of a sporting event, that I had to
relinquish my camera, because photo rights were reserved, I would simply do so,
or chose to leave, whether I was a professional photo-hack, or not.
So, you are worried about free-lance photogs 'rights' in a sanctioned, paid
sporting event, but you don't give a WHIT about the participants, other than
their dollars furthering your twisted Olympic schemes? Jeez, who is off-base
here?
Greg Stoner
self
<380E78DB...@facstaff.wisc.edu>...
Even while I am in the heat of disagreeing with both her methods and her
concepts, I too, would be glad to thank Linda and, of course, *all* of the
knowledgeable posters who add to the information and debate on ASR. I don't
think of this forum as a place where one should try to remove people for mere
opposing opinions, even if some others might. It is (to me) psychologically
interesting that Ed Sucko takes this exact moment of red-faced embarrassment to
choose to seek out the warm outstretched hand of Linda for support &
butt-kissage. "My enemies enemy is my friend"?
Anyhoo, thanks to ALL posters, even apparent newbies, who turn out to be just
another visage of Dr. Ed under the mask.
Greg Stoner
Leo
Leo R. Vasquez
Team E-Force
AmPRO Professional Instructor
http://www.flash.net/~lvasquez
Ed Arias <eba...@facstaff.wisc.edu> wrote in message
news:380E78DB...@facstaff.wisc.edu...
Ed Arias
Ed.
Leo wrote:
> does that include me?
Linda Mojer
> Linda, I'd just like to say one simple thing...I am simple AMAZED with
> the patience you exhibit with "us". Thanks for sticking around and
> enlightening those of us...and not just the "piss and moaners".
>
> We appreciate it very much. Thanks.
>
> Ed.
My objective in posting to the newsgroup is to provide accurate
information to those who might seek it out here (even if they don't choose
to take part in the discussions). That some can't resist the urge to argue
*any and all* of my points often falls under the "sticks & stones"
category of playground behavior. I have to believe that -- for every
ridiculous, negative, unfounded "sidebar" -- there must be a far larger
percentage of readers who have accessed the information at its intended
face value.
Leo
i needed to hear that from the Webmaster
himself!
Leo
Ed Arias <eba...@facstaff.wisc.edu> wrote in message
news:380F393C...@facstaff.wisc.edu...
> Leo, I believe you've answered you're own question.
>
> Ed.
>
> Leo wrote:
> > does that include me?
>