JV reaches out to anonymous critic.

Page 19 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
email to Paul Kimmage


Dear Mr. Kimmage,

My name is (redacted). I'm a regular on the cyclingnews forum using the forum name of "buckwheat." I've been very critical of Jonathan Vaughters' reluctance to speak in clear unequivocal terms about doping and I feel that this undermines his desire to be seen as an advocate of clean sport. Because of his lack of complete transparency on the issue, doubts have crept in regarding his commitment to a drug free competition, and also to the purity of his own team.



Jonathan Vaughters sent me a personal message and encouraged me to contact you in order to possibly allay my doubts, I suppose? I got your contact information from a guy known as "(redacted)" from the cyclingnews site. I was waiting for JV to provide this info but (redacted) suggested I just use your email.



I was hesitant to contact you for a couple of reasons. First, I think it's JV's obligation to speak candidly on the issue. Secondly, I was kind of confused that he volunteered for you to vouch for him, because you are a journalist who makes his living doing research, conducting interviews, and writing books and articles. I didn't think it was his place to volunteer for you to give away your bread and butter for free.



I realize it's presumptuous of me to ask this of you. Is there any comment you can give about Jonathan Vaughters and his anti doping stance and efforts? This is just for use on cyclingnews forums and I will only paraphrase your comments if you are so generous to provide them.



Finally, I would just like to say that I appreciate that you've asked the hard questions of people who are involved in cycling. Knowing what you know, I think your characterization of Armstrong as a cancer returning to the sport was fair, and I share the opinion of many that he hides his fraud behind the disease and any charity he may be doing.



Sincerely,

(redacted)
 
Jun 16, 2009
3,035
0
0
buckwheat said:
We don't know what's in the bolded is true or not.

The altenative is that he has returned here and either not logged in or used somebody else's account to sneak in and watch the conversation without flagging his presence.

Given that there is nothing in his past history to indicate that level of deception, I choose to believe he hasn't see this conversation
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Martin318is said:
The altenative is that he has returned here and either not logged in or used somebody else's account to sneak in and watch the conversation without flagging his presence.

Given that there is nothing in his past history to indicate that level of deception, I refer you to the recent Delusional comments. I choose to believe he hasn't see this conversation
Honestly, I don't know that I'd even characterize it as a deception. I really didn't feel like writing the letter to Paul Kimmage.

Maybe JV feels like he's doing the right thing and doesn't want to bother with something he views as a PITA?

Procrastination and avoidance isn't necessarily deception.

I don't even know if I view JV as a deceptive person.

I just don't think he's coming off as well as he could be if he'd just get it all off his chest.

The Federal Investigation may have put a self imposed gag order on all the participants though so he can't speak freely on the advice of Novitsky.
 
Jun 16, 2009
3,035
0
0
buckwheat said:
I was kind of confused that he volunteered for you to vouch for him,
From the piece of text I saw that you posted form JV's message to you, I don't think he suggested that Kimmage would vouchh for him, I think he just said go ask what he thinks about JV. There didnt seem to be an implication that Kimmage was going to automatically back up JV.
 

Bilirubin

BANNED
Nov 3, 2010
77
0
0
In my opinion JV should not be pledging to handout contact details for respected figures in the anti doping world to anonymous people on the internet. For all he knows these details could be used to launch another "spineless" spam attack. If these figures want to provide their contacts to internet forums then they should decide themselves, not have JV decide for them.

Maybe JV now realises his error which is why he hasn't come back.
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Martin318is said:
From the piece of text I saw that you posted form JV's message to you, I don't think he suggested that Kimmage would vouchh for him, I think he just said go ask what he thinks about JV. There didnt seem to be an implication that Kimmage was going to automatically back up JV.
"and find out if your opinions of me bear weight......"

I think my letter is a fair characterization.


Anyway, this goes to the absurdity of the whole thing. JV has had many opportunities to speak for himself such as when PK directly asked him.

This isn't on me in the least btw....

If any journalist in the world wants to speak with me for attribution, I'll gladly do so. That situation hasn't arisen yet.
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Bilirubin said:
In my opinion JV should not be pledging to handout contact details for respected figures in the anti doping world to anonymous people on the internet. For all he knows these details could be used to launch another "spineless" spam attack. If these figures want to provide their contacts to internet forums then they should decide themselves, not have JV decide for them.

Maybe JV now realises his error which is why he hasn't come back.
I'm hoping that's not it and that JV just hasn't seen my request.

I had the same reservations as you state in your first sentence, and I got attacked for that.

I can't win. I have the feeling that may be the reason JV has not said anything. Because he feels he can't win.
 
Martin318is said:
The altenative is that he has returned here and either not logged in or used somebody else's account to sneak in and watch the conversation without flagging his presence.

Given that there is nothing in his past history to indicate that level of deception, I choose to believe he hasn't see this conversation
Not that I would ever do it myself, but it is really easy to set up a sockpuppet and have it go completely unnoticed as long as you don't create a lot of noise. If I was JV and had an account here that I had identified as me, I would certainly set up another one that I could use for simple surveillance. I'm just sayin'.
 
Jul 6, 2010
2,340
0
0
Martin318is said:
The altenative is that he has returned here and either not logged in or used somebody else's account to sneak in and watch the conversation without flagging his presence.

Given that there is nothing in his past history to indicate that level of deception, I choose to believe he hasn't see this conversation
Haha! If I'm on the record, I'm going to have to politely mutter a "no comment"...
 
Mar 10, 2009
504
0
0
buckwheat said:
I said the ball's in his court, relax.

Again, quaalude, 714. Relax.....

C'mon, stop. You're making me feel like I'm Pharmstrong, up on the dais in Las Vegas, steamrolling GL.. Ok, ok...

I asked legitimate questions, probably not unlike your questions to JV, and your response was not an answer to my questions, but rather, an off-putting attempt to denigrate me, and my questions and concerns.

Thank you for the blinding insight.

I find your use of "relax" to be indicative of someone who uses force to get what they want, all the while telling the one who should "relax" that it won't hurt a bit... Interesting, given you'll probably say something similar to JV -- right before you take his words (context optional) to the internet or mainstream press.

Good luck. You have a lawyer, right?
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
tifosa said:
I asked legitimate questions, probably not unlike your questions to JV, and your response was not an answer to my questions, but rather, an off-putting attempt to denigrate me, and my questions and concerns.

Thank you for the blinding insight.

I find your use of "relax" to be indicative of someone who uses force to get what they want, all the while telling the one who should "relax" that it won't hurt a bit... Interesting, given you'll probably say something similar to JV -- right before you take his words (context optional) to the internet or mainstream press.

Good luck. You have a lawyer, right?
Good grief, I was joking. You know how many people have told me to relax in these two JV threads? A lot. Another poster even commented about that fact.

I may be mistaken but you were a little condescending to me previously.

Anyway, your post I just responded to consisted of assumptions rather than questions.

Also I probably made a lot of assumptions about JV rather than asking him questions. The issue is whether they're valid or not.

Here are the legitimate questions you asked....

tifosa said:
If you (and others of like mind) understand the "ball's is in his court", then let it be.
Wait for JV's return of serve.
If he does not engage, it's because he does not want to, or cannot--through legal restraint--engage in a dialogue of this particular matter on a public forum or in a private message.


Again, he does not personally owe you ANY explanation about ANYTHING--cycling or otherwise--even if YOU feel he made you a promise (and that "promise" would not be legally binding.


I have never seen such concerted nagging on an internet forum!
And to what effect?
To wear JV down, berate, and otherwise emasculate him to prompt a response?
It's worse than a toddler hounding his parents for a treat, and then throwing a tantrum when the parent doesn't respond.
I would like answers too - but that doesn't mean I'm entitled.


Is this how an intelligent cycling community demands attention?

See, they weren't really questions. More rhetorical and condescending in nature....
 
Jun 16, 2009
3,035
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
Not that I would ever do it myself, but it is really easy to set up a sockpuppet and have it go completely unnoticed as long as you don't create a lot of noise. If I was JV and had an account here that I had identified as me, I would certainly set up another one that I could use for simple surveillance. I'm just sayin'.
Its not as easy as it once was - so I think he would have had to do it several months ago...

particularly since he will probably get caught out later on if he accidentally uses the same account on the same PC.
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
I didn't see this

tifosa said:
If you (and others of like mind) understand the "ball's is in his court", then let it be.
Wait for JV's return of serve.
If he does not engage, it's because he does not want to, or cannot--through legal restraint--engage in a dialogue of this particular matter on a public forum or in a private message.


Again, he does not personally owe you ANY explanation about ANYTHING--cycling or otherwise--even if YOU feel he made you a promise (and that "promise" would not be legally binding.


I have never seen such concerted nagging on an internet forum!
And to what effect?
To wear JV down, berate, and otherwise emasculate him to prompt a response?
It's worse than a toddler hounding his parents for a treat, and then throwing a tantrum when the parent doesn't respond.
I would like answers too - but that doesn't mean I'm entitled.


Is this how an intelligent cycling community demands attention?
http://www.cervelo.com/en_us/news-blog/article/team-garmin-transitions-and-cervelo-team-up-for-2011/2510/

Team Garmin-Transitions and Cervélo team up for 2011
August 28, 2010 - Filed under: CompanyComments (28)..Team Garmin-Transitions and Cervélo SA will join forces for the 2011 season to create a new team that will be known as Garmin-Cervélo.

"Slipstream Sports and Cervélo share the key philosophies of developing the next generation of cycling champions and an unwavering commitment to ethical sport," said Jonathan Vaughters, CEO of Slipstream Sports and Director Sportif of Team Garmin-Transitions. "We are happy to work with another company that, like Garmin, so closely shares our goals. We will be adding great talent to an already outstanding roster and we believe the new team will build on past successes and will produce incredibly exciting racing in 2011. The possibilities are endless - on the road and off - and we look forward to what we can achieve."

"As we have often mentioned, our primary goal has always been to have some control over the direction that cycling will take," said Phil White, Cervélo co-founder. "With Slipstream Sports, we share common goals and values. Together we will be in a stronger position to keep moving the sport forward."

Slipstream Sports pioneered the most stringent anti-doping program in all of professional sports and that will continue with Team Garmin-Cervelo. In addition to the new Team Garmin-Cervelo and the Holowesko Partners U23 Development team, Slipstream Sports will, for the first time, also run a professional women's cycling team.
 
Jul 29, 2010
431
0
0
Asking for money ain't easy --

I think the one thing you guys seem to forget is that every 2-3yrs, a cycling manager like JV has to go cold-calling on potential new sponsors -- many of whom know NOTHING about cycling. At the ProTour level, he is asking these corporate officers to support a budget of $8-12M per year.

Now imagine if all they know about cycling is, "Isn't that sport really corrupt?". That makes his job pretty damn difficult. Now imagine if they say, "Hey, aren't you the skinny guy w/ the sideburns who's been in the news lately for saying the whole sport is rotten to the core??". Would make his job of securing $$ pretty much impossible.

He may have his personal belief and convictions, but until pro cycling can charge roadside admission fees, sponsorship is the name of the game, and even anti-doping managers have to play nice...
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Martin318is said:
yeah but my point is - did he give you a promise of a time frame? Was there anything to suggest to him that it was expected that he do so immediately or that he be watching daily for your response?
I'd like to make a motion that we end this thread. If JV ever responds to BW, I'm sure we'll all hear about it.
 
NashbarShorts said:
I think the one thing you guys seem to forget is that every 2-3yrs, a cycling manager like JV has to go cold-calling on potential new sponsors -- many of whom know NOTHING about cycling. At the ProTour level, he is asking these corporate officers to support a budget of $8-12M per year.

Now imagine if all they know about cycling is, "Isn't that sport really corrupt?". That makes his job pretty damn difficult. Now imagine if they say, "Hey, aren't you the skinny guy w/ the sideburns who's been in the news lately for saying the whole sport is rotten to the core??". Would make his job of securing $$ pretty much impossible.

He may have his personal belief and convictions, but until pro cycling can charge roadside admission fees, sponsorship is the name of the game, and even anti-doping managers have to play nice...
And that's why today we have the farcical situation which the UCI has got itself into over the past decade.
 
BotanyBay said:
I'd like to make a motion that we end this thread. If JV ever responds to BW, I'm sure we'll all hear about it.
Yeah, I second that. Pages and pages of squabbling about a private message is not really in the spirit of a public message board about doping. If there was a point to be made about whether or not JV's non-continuance of a personal correspondence with a random internet person was the straw that broke our backs in the opinion as to whether he's part of the omerta, then it's been made long, long before the last 100 posts talking about when the was the last time he logged on.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
NashbarShorts said:
I think the one thing you guys seem to forget is that every 2-3yrs, a cycling manager like JV has to go cold-calling on potential new sponsors -- many of whom know NOTHING about cycling. At the ProTour level, he is asking these corporate officers to support a budget of $8-12M per year.

Now imagine if all they know about cycling is, "Isn't that sport really corrupt?". That makes his job pretty damn difficult. Now imagine if they say, "Hey, aren't you the skinny guy w/ the sideburns who's been in the news lately for saying the whole sport is rotten to the core??". Would make his job of securing $$ pretty much impossible.

He may have his personal belief and convictions, but until pro cycling can charge roadside admission fees, sponsorship is the name of the game, and even anti-doping managers have to play nice...
Until you realize that most of these sponsors really care purely about the financial value of a press-hit. The people at USPS did a great interview about this some years ago. It was all about investment versus payoff. They felt they needed to see their name in the European media more often, and $8MM was a small price to pay for what would otherwise cost them $75MM through advertising and PR efforts. Once they'd achieved their objective (verified through measurement), it was time to get out. And they did. They considered the entire undertaking a success. Doping had no impact. As a matter of fact, the more their name was mentioned, the better.

Rarely does some CEO sit in a chair and go, "Hey, neat, I like bike racing and what you guys stand for, here's $10MM". It's pretty much a media purchasing management decision. There are even consultants that specialize in presenting these marketers with the wide variety of options such as these. It's not all that more complicated than checking the rate-card for a magazine. The people shelling-out F-1, Nascar, ProTour, Football and other sponsorship dollars are all the same people.

Sure, does JV get some rejections from people who want nothing to do with doping controversy? Sure, just like some sponsors won't want to work with Nascar team owners who get caught breaking the engine modification rules. But there are always sponsors who'll always look first to the spreadsheet and the investment - to - payoff ratio.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
BotanyBay said:
Until you realize that most of these sponsors really care purely about the financial value of a press-hit. The people at USPS did a great interview about this some years ago. It was all about investment versus payoff. They felt they needed to see their name in the European media more often, and $8MM was a small price to pay for what would otherwise cost them $75MM through advertising and PR efforts. Once they'd achieved their objective (verified through measurement), it was time to get out. And they did. They considered the entire undertaking a success. Doping had no impact. As a matter of fact, the more their name was mentioned, the better.

Rarely does some CEO sit in a chair and go, "Hey, neat, I like bike racing and what you guys stand for, here's $10MM". It's pretty much a media purchasing management decision. There are even consultants that specialize in presenting these marketers with the wide variety of options such as these. It's not all that more complicated than checking the rate-card for a magazine. The people shelling-out F-1, Nascar, ProTour, Football and other sponsorship dollars are all the same people.

Sure, does JV get some rejections from people who want nothing to do with doping controversy? Sure, just like some sponsors won't want to work with Nascar team owners who get caught breaking the engine modification rules. But there are always sponsors who'll always look first to the spreadsheet and the investment - to - payoff ratio.
You ask for the thread to be closed and then jump right back in.

One way you could kill this thread is to stop posting in it.
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Scott SoCal said:
You ask for the thread to be closed and then jump right back in.

One way you could kill this thread is to stop posting in it.
Scott, I was getting hit from all sides about the nothingness, asked a mod for the thread to be closed, and didn't get a reply.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
Scott SoCal said:
You ask for the thread to be closed and then jump right back in.

One way you could kill this thread is to stop posting in it.

I should have apologized for the violation of my own request, but there was an off-topic comment that I wanted to react to. I'm not a mod. It really had little to do with JV's PM to Buckwheat, as you can see.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
buckwheat said:
Scott, I was getting hit from all sides about the nothingness, asked a mod for the thread to be closed, and didn't get a reply.
It's been a circular agrument for some time now... surely we can all agree on that?
 

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
buckwheat said:
Scott, I was getting hit from all sides about the nothingness, asked a mod for the thread to be closed, and didn't get a reply.
You asked at a moment when I wasn't really online, afterwards which you continued debating in this topic. So that it is still open is largely due to yourself, also debate still continues and does not really violate any guidelines or anything, so there is no real reason to close this thread
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Barrus said:
You asked at a moment when I wasn't really online, afterwards which you continued debating in this topic. So that it is still open is largely due to yourself, also debate still continues and does not really violate any guidelines or anything, so there is no real reason to close this thread
Oh ok!

I have no power on this.

If it stays open......

You'll be blamed then!;)
 
Jun 16, 2009
3,035
0
0
buckwheat said:
Oh ok!

I have no power on this.

If it stays open......

You'll be blamed then!;)
Um, no....

anyone that posts in this thread after THIS post can be blamed for keeping the thread open.

As Barrus said, discussion continues and doesn't breach forum rules, so if you want it to die out then stop posting in it, period.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY