Check it Out!    
RideCamp@endurance.net
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index] [Subject Index]

Fwd: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender



In a message dated 2/26/2002 7:53:44 AM Pacific Standard Time, mailer-daemon@xmission.com writes:



Well, with no vested interest in the present situation, but considering that
we will have in the future, it is still breathtakingly foolish to assume that
our sport should be exempt from the very tenets that govern other and varied
sports and their "play-offs, regionals and championships". No team goes to
the Final Four or the World Series without having FIRST qualified by virtue
of performing consistently at a given level - and in the end, for THOSE
sports, it means enough success and consistency to have WON their division.
So what is so terribly offensive about setting minimum requirements for
inclusion in a National Championship ride?



---- Begin included message ----
This message was created automatically by mail delivery software (Exim).

A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:

  sundown@xmission.com
    unknown local-part "sundown" in domain "xmission.com"

------ This is a copy of the message, including all the headers. ------

Return-path: <SandyDSA@aol.com>
Received: from [198.60.22.202] (helo=mgr2.xmission.com)
    by mail.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1)
    id 16fjus-00050w-00
    for sundown@xmission.com; Tue, 26 Feb 2002 08:53:22 -0700
Received: from [64.12.136.162] (helo=imo-m07.mx.aol.com)
    by mgr2.xmission.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #1)
    id 16fjus-0003cW-00
    for sundown@xmission.com; Tue, 26 Feb 2002 08:53:22 -0700
Received: from SandyDSA@aol.com
    by imo-m07.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v32.5.) id c.180.431d4b0 (4215);
    Tue, 26 Feb 2002 10:52:55 -0500 (EST)
From: SandyDSA@aol.com
Message-ID: <180.431d4b0.29ad0957@aol.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 10:52:55 EST
Subject: Re: [RC]  AERC National Championship ride qualfications
To: Magnumsmom@aol.com, Merryben@aol.com, bigcreekranch@cruzio.com,
        MikeitaFarm@aol.com, NdurN@aol.com, Sschom@mail.platte1.k12.wy.us,
        cancer@simplyweb.net, danefrazier@hotmail.com, DocDuane@aol.com,
        jimbaldwindvm@hotmail.com, endurancevet@writeme.com,
        gailwilliams@nwinfo.net, jerryfruth@us-etc.org, sundown@xmission.com,
        LRiedel769@aol.com, ltbeason@worldnet.att.net, mike@tomlinson.com,
        mmsprice@ptd.net, randomrio@earthlink.net, renegade12@juno.com,
        rutter@dakotacom.net, steph@endurance.net, Oldwaggy@aol.com,
        mmaul@flash.net, roger@vmaxept.com
CC: ridecamp@endurance.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_180.431d4b0.29ad0957_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 256


--part1_180.431d4b0.29ad0957_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Well, with no vested interest in the present situation, but considering that 
we will have in the future, it is still breathtakingly foolish to assume that 
our sport should be exempt from the very tenets that govern other and varied 
sports and their "play-offs, regionals and championships". No team goes to 
the Final Four or the World Series without having FIRST qualified by virtue 
of performing consistently at a given level - and in the end, for THOSE 
sports, it means enough success and consistency to have WON their division. 
So what is so terribly offensive about setting minimum requirements for 
inclusion in a National Championship ride? Frankly - at the risk of offending 
a few (but offending those who SHOULD be offended is a good thing) - there 
are people who demonstrate their continued unsuitability for even the regular 
sanctioned rides through their lack of education about the equine athlete, 
absence of good sense and common courtesy on the trails, and ultimately the 
demise of some equines at the end of the day. I can't put it any more kindly 
- the system HAS to weed out the imminently unqualified - and demonstrating 
the ability to complete a given level of competition miles safely and with a 
SOUND PARTNER should be a minimum. I am under no illusions - after 30 
something years of experience in every equine sport imaginable, as well as 
having shanked and assisted vets at many and varied procedures and functions; 
having stood a stallion and foaled out about 60 mares; raised and trained 
most of said foals, shown to the National level - and cared for the Leisure 
World equine crowd - I still consider myself not suitable for say 100 miler. 
COULD I do it? Probably. Do I have the experience to make it a good idea? 
Nope. 

We have few rules and safeguards in endurance. We like it that way. But in 
the interest  of protecting both equines and other competitors from the 
growing population of the ignorant and insistent - in our sport and out - 
certain levels of participation simply MUST be more highly governed. Period. 

Sandy (who would LOVE to see the Angels in the World Series....someday)

--part1_180.431d4b0.29ad0957_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  COLOR="#0000ff" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SERIF" FACE="DellaRobbia BT" LANG="0">Well, with no vested interest in the present situation, but considering that we will have in the future, it is still breathtakingly foolish to assume that our sport should be exempt from the very tenets that govern other and varied sports and their "play-offs, regionals and championships". No team goes to the Final Four or the World Series without having FIRST qualified by virtue of performing consistently at a given level - and in the end, for THOSE sports, it means enough success and consistency to have WON their division. So what is so terribly offensive about setting minimum requirements for inclusion in a National Championship ride? Frankly - at the risk of offending a few (but offending those who SHOULD be offended is a good thing) - there are people who demonstrate their continued unsuitability for even the regular sanctioned rides through their lack of education about the equine athlete, absence of good sense and common courtesy on the trails, and ultimately the demise of some equines at the end of the day. I can't put it any more kindly - the system HAS to weed out the imminently unqualified - and demonstrating the ability to complete a given level of competition miles safely and with a SOUND PARTNER should be a minimum. I am under no illusions - after 30 something years of experience in every equine sport imaginable, as well as having shanked and assisted vets at many and varied procedures and functions; having stood a stallion and foaled out about 60 mares; raised and trained most of said foals, shown to the National level - and cared for the Leisure World equine crowd - I still consider myself not suitable for say 100 miler. COULD I do it? Probably. Do I have the experience to make it a good idea? Nope. <BR>
<BR>
We have few rules and safeguards in endurance. We like it that way. But in the interest  of protecting both equines and other competitors from the growing population of the ignorant and insistent - in our sport and out - certain levels of participation simply MUST be more highly governed. Period. <BR>
<BR>
Sandy (who would LOVE to see the Angels in the World Series....someday)</FONT></HTML>

--part1_180.431d4b0.29ad0957_boundary--
---- End included message ----


    Check it Out!    

Home    Events    Groups    Rider Directory    Market    RideCamp    Stuff

Back to TOC