Check it Out!
Re: passing up in VCs
I firmly disagree !
----- Original Message -----
From: Glenda R. Snodgrass <grs@TheNetEffect.com>
To: Ridecamp <email@example.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2000 5:38 AM
Subject: RC: passing up in VCs
> > I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT EVERYONE SHOULD BE TREATED EQUALLY
> > AT VET CHECKS. I do not believe that 50's deserve more consideration
> > than 25's nor do I think that 100's deserve to go in front of 50's who
> > have been waiting their turn, either. If some 100-milers get extra
> > consideration then they have been given an unfair advantage over other
> > 100 milers - and the 50's and 25's that they pushed aside are at an
> > advantage to others in their ride that did not get that bad treatment.
> > That was the point of my post. And yes, ride management should have
> > enough vets to handle the crowd at its worst.
> Hmmmm, this is what I think:
> 1 - RM should have enough vets, no doubt about it.
> 2 - As a general rule, if there are not enough vets, I think that 25s
> should gracefully offer to let 50s ahead of them, and 50s should
> gracefully offer to let 100s ahead of them. I consider that good manners,
> consideration of those who have a longer row to hoe that day than Lakota
> and I do.
> Extenuating circumstances could change that, however (if my
> horse were in trouble, if I were in danger of missing cutoff and not
> completing in time, if all 13 100-milers were standing behind me I might
> not want to let all 13 of them pass me <BG>).
> 3 - I do not think that 100s and 50s should push ahead of those riding the
> lesser distance, because that's bad manners.
> We all have to get along with limited resources, eh? Good manners and
> consideration of others makes it much easier.
> Glenda & Lakota
> Mobile, AL
> AERC # M18819 & H27310
> SE Region
> Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
> Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp
Check it Out!
Back to TOC