KCBS Says Cheating Better Than Offending TOTY

[deguerre]

This has been pointed out before, but it bears repeating. This forum is not an official communications vehicle for the KCBS BOD. Some Board members are also members here and may see and participate in this thread, but it is unlikely that the rest of the BOD will even see this thread. Any official communications with the board should go through, and come from, KCBS directly.

Yep. I understood that, and knew that several board members were members here too, and like the Moderators or Admin, could voice their own opinions as forum members and not members OF the board. However, not a tightrope I'd personally wish to walk though so silence is understood.

 

[dmprantz]

I have no problem with an organization that is more lienent with a long time member that makes a mistake than a person that is unwilling to be part of our process yet sees fit to criticize from without. That is what paying dues every year gets you. You get to be part of process and call it your own. If you are not willing to accept that, why should an organization accept you? Some may call it the old boys network, I call it reward for being a contributing member and I have no problem being part of an organization willing to take a stong stance against an outsider and giving long time members the benefit of the doubt.

I guess something that I didn't make clear is that while you may not have an issue with this, from what I understand, the IRS does. It's the Private Bennefit Doctrine. From what I understand, if it is the position of the KCBS that they punished one person harder because he wasn't a dues paying member, they best be prepared to start paying income taxes. This is why you don't have to be a member to compete in competitions. Since the KCBS exists to promote BBQ for the public good, and not for those who increase its bottom line, I don't think it's right punish outsiders more.

Then again, what do I know? I'm just a malcontent with years of history hurting the organization. I've never been a member and never competed in the organization's events. I'm just here to stir stuff up. </sarcasm>

dmp

 

[Hawg Father of Seoul]

I have no problem with an organization that is more lienent with a long time member that makes a mistake than a person that is unwilling to be part of our process yet sees fit to criticize from without. That is what paying dues every year gets you. You get to be part of process and call it your own. If you are not willing to accept that, why should an organization accept you? Some may call it the old boys network, I call it reward for being a contributing member and I have no problem being part of an organization willing to take a stong stance against an outsider and giving long time members the benefit of the doubt.

Three things. I like your fair and balanced approach.

Secondly, the state of Missouri and the IRS has a real problem with your above paragraph. If damages and your above paragraph were proven..... Dan would have standing in a FEDERAL court.

Obviously Dan should not sue even if he can prove damages and I think he has more character than that. However, I would rather he or his phallic (ex)friend have my back than an incompetent rep.

Celebrate mediocrity and see who is left with you.

 

[landarc]

Three things. I like your fair and balanced approach.

Secondly, the state of Missouri and the IRS has a real problem with your above paragraph. If damages and your above paragraph were proven..... Dan would have standing in a FEDERAL court.

Obviously Dan should not sue even if he can prove damages and I think he has more character than that. However, I would rather he or his phallic (ex)friend have my back than an incompetent rep.

Celebrate mediocrity and see who is left with you.

Me :becky:

 

[deguerre]

Me :becky:

You're about as mediocre as cat turd coffee. Disgusting? Assuredly. Mediocre? Assuredly not.

 

[nthole]

Geez. I STRIVE to even get close to mediocrity. Bob you aren't even close to mediocre. Serious lack of integrity there. Wait... wrong thread.

 

[Smoke'n Ice]

In both cases all parties were able to explain and issue statements on thier behalf to the BOD during a closed Executive Session.

Scores were faslified at a contest under a rep's control. It seems that the rep team in question was made aware of the mistake and corrected the situation during the process. This is evidenced by only 2 of the 4 categories used "falsified" scores, the other 2 categories were apparently scored correctly IAW established procedure.

I either read a different set of notes or was not privy to private information. The rep, Sonny Ashford, could not, would not, did not explain what happened on the phone call to executive session according to the notes.

Additionally, it appears that either the front office or the BOD made the corrections after the fact and insured that the final results as reported were correct by established procedures according to the notes as presented. The rep did not make the correction nor did he have an explaination about the issues.

He does have an alledged business relationship with KCBS and the new Score program and this may have been a mitigating factor in decisions, but, who knows.

 

[Muzzlebrake]

I either read a different set of notes or was not privy to private information. The rep, Sonny Ashford, could not, would not, did not explain what happened on the phone call to executive session according to the notes.

sorry about that, I can see how what I wrote can be confusing.

What I was trying to say that the act of falsifying score cards was stopped and the last 2 categories were correctly scored. I agree that it was the action of the BOD at a later time that corrected the scores tabulated using the falsified results.

 

[BBQchef33]

Dan was caught up in "penisgate" I know, but just because he likes to bi*ch about things doesn't mean he should be treated different, or have the book thrown at him

Sonny messed up, didn't follow the rules, and it effected the outcome of a contest. In business, do you allow your managers to get away with things because you like them better than others, yep...are you setting yourself up for a fair labor lawsuit...you betta believe it.

The difference between the two...Absolutely nothing. They both had people under them do stupid things. They both have to deal with the consequences handed down...

One mistake compromised the integrity of an entire contest, the other compromised a teams integrity... Big difference.

And that ^^^^ right there IMO, is what this thread is all about...

The Schwantz apron reflected poorly on a single team withh ZERO impact on the competitors, the outcome of the contest, the payouts, etc.. It made one team look bad, and ticked off some folks in the crowd, but had no bearing on the outcome of the event.

Now, if you look back in our archives, you will find multiple discussions over the years regarding sanctioning..'why sanction a contest?"; "Why pay the additional fees?", "what does sanctioning do for a contest?".. in everyone of those threads, you will find it stated that sanctioning, and more specifically, the reps, 'guarantees the integrity of the contest".

The scoring issue could have possibly effected EVERY team from GC down, it could affect payouts, where teams placed, who got the walks, who got the trophy and who got the checks and ultimatly, it could, if it hasnt already effected many members trust in the organization. The integrity of the contest was compromised by the very people tasked with ensuring it.

In business, and in any company(and KCBS IS a corporation)Tenure and service should never be considered when it comes to enforcing policy and procedure, so the service of the reps involved should not be part of the equation when deciding disciplinary action. What should be considered is their performance in their statements of work which in this case was an 'F'.

One was nothing more than an embarrassment, the other well.... Much worse than some bad judgment that reflects poorly on a team and an individual with no bearing on the outcome of the contest. Ever hear of a company hire back an employee that falsified a document?.. maybe as simple as lying on a resume?. Not likely. You're fired, and escorted to the door with your chit in a box.

IMO, If KCBS wants to restore member faith(of those that lost it) in their charter, the reps should have been let go for an extended period, if not permanently..



to comment briefly on the other issue, the punishment for the weenie apron, imo, should have been along the lines of other rule infringements, ie, fighting, quiet time violation, etc...

 

[Haastyle]

Wow. I read all 17 pages of that....

Apron- funny. Dumb, really, really dumb, but funny. Grow some thicker skin, no wonder so many shrinks are needed. Imagine what the "offended" would do or act if something that was actually serious happen, like a car wreck, or house burn down, or one of the thousands of things that could be worse. MELT DOWN MUCH?. Sack up, pun intended.

False Scores- Unforgivable, period. You can not "kind of" walk off a cliff. The reason rules are set is to ensure the field is 100% level and judged the same. Either it is, or it isn't. If it isn't, then what is the purpose of holding a Competition? There isn't one. Some are more equal that others? Nope, no way man. Total BS.

That truly concerns me. I have only competed in a few event but I will say the leap of faith I'm taking is in question. I personally need to be assured in the integrity of the process or I'm out. I don't have that kind of cash to fling around on a maybe.

 

[Muzzlebrake]

One mistake compromised the integrity of an entire contest, the other compromised a teams integrity... Big difference.

I agree with all of you who say this. The difference in my view is the compromised integrity of the contest was repaired using established procedures. That is why you pay for KCBS sanctioning (IMO). Did a representative of the organization make an error? Yes. Were there steps in place to correct that error? Yes. In the end everyone affected by Sonny's error was made whole and the correct scores were used following the correct procedure. KCBS not only did guarantee the vaiidity of the contest, they ensured the fair outcome by taking the proper corrective action after a mistake had been made on site. Everyone involved was made whole.

How does the KCBS repair the damage done to someone offended by a lewd act? They cannont go back and correct scores. How do they repair the integrity lost by a competitor who offended someone? They only way I see available is to not allow that entity to continue to compete.

That is the problem many of us have...They don't treat everyone the same.

the problem I have is that while many in this thread are saying this, nobody is complaining about the other person and team that was involved in the same incident of inappropriate behavior being given a lesser sentence. I have a problem with the fact that we are comparing 2 very separate and distinct acts that are not equal. I get rules are rules and everyone should be held accountable, but all rules are not the same. Murder and larceny are not equal crimes in the eyes of the law.

Lots of people in this thread have complained about everyone not being treated equally, nobody had talked about the other party involved getting a lesser sentence. Why is it that one team was put on probation for a year and the other was banned for 3? Thats comparing apples to apples. Same incident, 3 people involved, not all treated the same.

To use another separate dissimilar incident involving a KCBS official for a basis of comparison to me is just another blatant attempt at smearing the organization as a whole and is not about inequality of treatment.

The Schwantz apron reflected poorly on a single team withh ZERO impact on the competitors, the outcome of the contest, the payouts, etc.. It made one team look bad, and ticked off some folks in the crowd, but had no bearing on the outcome of the event.

In business, and in any company(and KCBS IS a corporation)Tenure and service should never be considered when it comes to enforcing policy and procedure, so the service of the reps involved should not be part of the equation when deciding disciplinary action. What should be considered is their performance in their statements of work which in this case was an 'F'.

One was nothing more than an embarrassment, the other well.... Much worse than some bad judgment that reflects poorly on a team and an individual with no bearing on the outcome of the contest. Ever hear of a company hire back an employee that falsified a document?.. maybe as simple as lying on a resume?. Not likely. You're fired, and escorted to the door with your chit in a box.

I think I addressed the contest integrity above, I dont agree that the inappropriate behavior had no effect on other teams or the integrity of the contest. Like it or not the world of competition BBQ has become a much more business like affair over the past few years. Do you really think that competitor acting lewdly during awards has no bearing on a team's or contest's ability to attract sponsorship? In my opinion it wasnt so much the act as it was its timing. Awards are the showcase of the entire weekend. Its the time that everyone from teams, sponsors and spectators all gather in one spot to showcase the best of what took place during the contest. It is the only time that such a thing happens. If companies are willing to separate themselves from the Super Bowl because Janet flashed a nipple for few seconds do you really think they are willing to sponsor a BBQ contest with people wearing a dildo to the award ceremony?

And you are right not many people are rehired after accused of falsifying documents, even fewer are rehired after a case of sexual harrassment.

 

[dmprantz]

And you are right not many people are rehired after accused of falsifying documents, even fewer are rehired after a case of sexual harrassment.

I've tried my best to keep this thread on topic. I also tried to not make it about me complaining my punish, but rather the punishment of the two acts. I even walked away for a while thinking that it was time to let it be. Still it seems that those who don't know me, or know me through conversation on this site alone, are willing to muddy the waters and assault my character because I dare to call into question the integrity of the KCBS. To quote a previous post in this thread, "That thing you did there. I saw it."

In direct response to you, how many times is a co-worker or supervisor who had no knowledge of it fired for sexual harrassment acts committed of another employee? When a member of the BOD used this defense the last time a rep (who happened to be a member of the BOD) received a slap on the wrist for a screw up, I asked the same question. Not surprisingly, there was never a response to that question, and I do't expect people to respond to this one.

And by the way, I'll say again for the umpteenth time that the point was never to say in this thread "I was punished too hard." The point was to say "Punishment for the falsifying of score cards was only 1/3 as severe as wearing an innappropriate apron." It doesn't matter if I was punished for 6 months, or 5 years. Should the punishment for this rep not have been at least as long?

dmp

 

[TooSaucedToPork]

I've been around competition BBQ for over 2 decades.

I have seen crazy stuff way worse than what happened during "penisgate". I have seen women flashing for beads held by bbq teams. I have seen two drunk rednecks goin hot and heavy in the corner of a teams tent. I have seen teams to drunk to function puke and fall off the stage at awards. I have seen blow up dolls in team tent enteranceways.

This was all before my 16th birthday. I am now 34 years old and have grown up with BBQ. A penis apron is tame compared to a lot that happens at contests. Those shenanigans while lewd and wrong are part of the fabric of this great sport that we hold so dear to our hearts.

I remember when someone cheating at a contest was sent running from the contest, with cooks with torches and pitchforks close behind. Those days are gone, but in my mind, cheating should be dealt with harshly.

BBQ used to be about fun, and I'm sorry, wieners are funny...Cheating is not.

 

[Sawdustguy]

I agree with all of you who say this. The difference in my view is the compromised integrity of the contest was repaired using established procedures. That is why you pay for KCBS sanctioning (IMO). Did a representative of the organization make an error? Yes. Were there steps in place to correct that error? Yes. In the end everyone affected by Sonny's error was made whole and the correct scores were used following the correct procedure. KCBS not only did guarantee the vaiidity of the contest, they ensured the fair outcome by taking the proper corrective action after a mistake had been made on site. Everyone involved was made whole.

How does the KCBS repair the damage done to someone offended by a lewd act? They cannont go back and correct scores. How do they repair the integrity lost by a competitor who offended someone? They only way I see available is to not allow that entity to continue to compete.



the problem I have is that while many in this thread are saying this, nobody is complaining about the other person and team that was involved in the same incident of inappropriate behavior being given a lesser sentence. I have a problem with the fact that we are comparing 2 very separate and distinct acts that are not equal. I get rules are rules and everyone should be held accountable, but all rules are not the same. Murder and larceny are not equal crimes in the eyes of the law.

Lots of people in this thread have complained about everyone not being treated equally, nobody had talked about the other party involved getting a lesser sentence. Why is it that one team was put on probation for a year and the other was banned for 3? Thats comparing apples to apples. Same incident, 3 people involved, not all treated the same.

To use another separate dissimilar incident involving a KCBS official for a basis of comparison to me is just another blatant attempt at smearing the organization as a whole and is not about inequality of treatment.



I think I addressed the contest integrity above, I dont agree that the inappropriate behavior had no effect on other teams or the integrity of the contest. Like it or not the world of competition BBQ has become a much more business like affair over the past few years. Do you really think that competitor acting lewdly during awards has no bearing on a team's or contest's ability to attract sponsorship? In my opinion it wasnt so much the act as it was its timing. Awards are the showcase of the entire weekend. Its the time that everyone from teams, sponsors and spectators all gather in one spot to showcase the best of what took place during the contest. It is the only time that such a thing happens. If companies are willing to separate themselves from the Super Bowl because Janet flashed a nipple for few seconds do you really think they are willing to sponsor a BBQ contest with people wearing a dildo to the award ceremony?

And you are right not many people are rehired after accused of falsifying documents, even fewer are rehired after a case of sexual harrassment.

Sean,

The weenie apron damages the KCBS far less than the Reps falsifying documents. The apron was worn by a person that had no affiliation with the KCBS. The rep could have given the KCBS a big time black eye. Also falsifying documents is usually a criminal matter and sexual harassment is usually a civil matter. It sounds to me like the BOD took advantage of the opportunity to punish DMP for not being a member of the KCBS and his vocal opinion of the KCBS.

 

[Slamdunkpro]

.....Did a representative of the organization make an error? .....

NO!
An error is "I forgot crackers" or "We've only got 7 bread trays and we need 8". Creating false score cards and skewing the contest results is not an error, it's a deliberate act.

 

[Fat Freddy]

Muzzlebrake, I havent figured out how to only quote a small area so i chose not to quote at all but in regards to everyone affected being made whole, I respectfully disagree. There is at minimum ONE TEAM that feels still they were CHEATED because of the actions of Mr. Ashford. So again they have never been made whole in mine or their opinion.

 

[deguerre]

Muzzlebrake, I havent figured out how to only quote a small area so i chose not to quote at all but in regards to everyone affected being made whole, I respectfully disagree. There is at minimum ONE TEAM that feels still they were CHEATED because of the actions of Mr. Ashford. So again they have never been made whole in mine or their opinion.

Within the body of the quote, just hilite what you don't want and hit your delete key. Bam.

 

[bbqczar]

And BTW,doesn't anyone remember about how KCBS came out after the teams suspension for the Apron incident and said they were going to ,"clean up events, and make SURE comps were family friendly,and BS, and BS, and BS" ? I remember people being worried about the Royal coming up,and people worried about having to change their logos,shirts,banners,etc.,HOWEVER,KCBS NEVER did anything to anyone else since(at least that I know of)and their has been ALOT worse seen and done at some comps since,so why no KCBS action on anyone else ? There was a reason that team was singled out,I know of at least 2 reasons,but yet some really crazier stuff went on, and has gone on, at comps since and KCBS is blind,and done nothing.Hmmmmm,yeah,just makes you go hmmmmm.

 

[BBQchef33]

I agree with all of you who say this. The difference in my view is the compromised integrity of the contest was repaired using established procedures. That is why you pay for KCBS sanctioning (IMO). Did a representative of the organization make an error? Yes. Were there steps in place to correct that error? Yes. In the end everyone affected by Sonny's error was made whole and the correct scores were used following the correct procedure. KCBS not only did guarantee the vaiidity of the contest, they ensured the fair outcome by taking the proper corrective action after a mistake had been made on site. Everyone involved was made whole.

Answer me this, AS A FELLOW COMPETITOR, would you accept 'averaged' scores with a grain of salt? Would you feel whole if 2 of your categories received fictitious scores, or would you feel royally screwed? I dont think everyone feels as though they were made whole, and as a member of KCBS, I'm disillusioned that acts of a contest official that negatively effect the outcome of a contest were not dealt with harshly.

I think the crux of the comparison between the 2 scenarios referenced in this thread is that one was a stupid joke in bad taste thats NOT under the pervue of KCBS(i see no dress code) and yet a harsh penalty was handed down, and the other, which IS DIRECTLY KCBS' RESPONSIBILITY was handled no worse than separating the pork butt and returning to the cooker. Although I am not one to call the scorecard debacle 'cheating', it does however equate to something paramount. The scoring of our contests is the holy grail and to do anything that screws that up should be dealt witht he harshest of penalties.

How does the KCBS repair the damage done to someone offended by a lewd act? They cannont go back and correct scores. How do they repair the integrity lost by a competitor who offended someone? They only way I see available is to not allow that entity to continue to compete.

Not their job, but if they do, they will have a full time job.. walk around the dark side of the American Royal lately? Its not KCBS job to make sure no one is offended(id say that falls more on the organizer). It IS KCBS job to enure the scoring is fair and accurate.

the problem I have is that while many in this thread are saying this, nobody is complaining about the other person and team that was involved in the same incident of inappropriate behavior being given a lesser sentence. I have a problem with the fact that we are comparing 2 very separate and distinct acts that are not equal. I get rules are rules and everyone should be held accountable, but all rules are not the same. Murder and larceny are not equal crimes in the eyes of the law.

true, they are NOT equal. One is done buy a contest official, the other is done by a unnamed/unlisted participant. KCBS is responsible for their officials behavior. If DMP is responsible for the actions of his team, then KCBS should be responsible for theirs.

Lots of people in this thread have complained about everyone not being treated equally, nobody had talked about the other party involved getting a lesser sentence. Why is it that one team was put on probation for a year and the other was banned for 3? Thats comparing apples to apples. Same incident, 3 people involved, not all treated the same.

To use another separate dissimilar incident involving a KCBS official for a basis of comparison to me is just another blatant attempt at smearing the organization as a whole and is not about inequality of treatment.

I think I addressed the contest integrity above, I dont agree that the inappropriate behavior had no effect on other teams or the integrity of the contest. Like it or not the world of competition BBQ has become a much more business like affair over the past few years. Do you really think that competitor acting lewdly during awards has no bearing on a team's or contest's ability to attract sponsorship? In my opinion it wasnt so much the act as it was its timing. Awards are the showcase of the entire weekend. Its the time that everyone from teams, sponsors and spectators all gather in one spot to showcase the best of what took place during the contest. It is the only time that such a thing happens. If companies are willing to separate themselves from the Super Bowl because Janet flashed a nipple for few seconds do you really think they are willing to sponsor a BBQ contest with people wearing a dildo to the award ceremony?

The apron had ZERO effect on the teams or the outcome of the event and KCBS does not give a rats behind about the sponsorship a contest acquires. Someone speak up.. is there any team out there that cares if a contest has no significant sponsorship as long as the prize pool is intact.? if sponsors dropped out becase of the apron, again, no effect on teams, no effect on the event. Teams dont care about sponsors, but they care about scoring.

And you are right not many people are rehired after accused of falsifying documents, even fewer are rehired after a case of sexual harrassment.

fine, but they are BOTH FIRED.

My responses are in blue. :caked:

 

[Wampus]

The scoring of our contests is the holy grail and to do anything that screws that up should be dealt witht he harshest of penalties.

if sponsors dropped out becase of the apron, again, no effect on teams, no effect on the event. Teams dont care about sponsors, but they care about scoring.

:thumb: