AR Marking Discussion

[Spiderman]

Not ignoring it, i adressed it mate.

OK if i was leading the Ar and asked "who wants to be a marker" and you and a number of others ive never met or ridden with, thus have no idea of their riding style or capability, volunteered then how on earth would i be in a positin to decide if those people were up to the job?

You see the difficulty there surely?

Originally Posted by Spiderman

Not ignoring it, i adressed it mate.

There we disagree, only your last post, that I'm now replying to addressed it IMO.

Originally Posted by Spiderman

You see the difficulty there surely?

I do, I also see it as a fine balancing act. But you asked for ideas on how to help people feel included, so I gave it.

If you give people the chance to volunteer, surely they are then incapable of saying later they weren't included. Yes, it makes organisation more of a headache, but that's inevitable if you're going to include more people in the process.

As to "how would you determine who was capable"... that's the whole point of the discussion up front, before the AR, surely? Once volunteers have come forward, the organiser(s) can talk to them properly, either publicly or otherwise.

[Spiderman]

I have and i did address it for you mate

Originally Posted by Spiderman

Only problem i see with this sugestion is that it implies that the Ride Leader (RL) will be familiar with the riding ability and style of each of those who volunteered. If they're not then surely those are the first names the RL will chuck out and will only be left with the names of people who they are familiar with and have ridden with before....leaving them open again to accusations of favouritism.

Originally Posted by Spiderman

I have and i did address it for you mate

I'll hold my hands up there & admit I missed that.

But I still see no reason why the RL cannot discuss it with anyone that wants to be a marker. Then after talking it through with them, and perhaps utilising the search function of the site if needed, make a more informed decision as to the riding ability of any given person.

[Spiderman]

Originally Posted by Baph

As to "how would you determine who was capable"... that's the whole point of the discussion up front, before the AR, surely? Once volunteers have come forward, the organiser(s) can talk to them properly, either publicly or otherwise.

Baph i appreciate your input, i really do and i'm not being condesceding saying that. But for all the talk in the world unless the ride leader or TEC has ridden with those who voluntee,r all the talk in the world is cheap tbh.

the ride leader or tec would be amiss in my opinion if they chose markers based on what they said about their riding. I think for something with such large groups they really would have to be picked on the say of people who have ridden with them on the road in appropriate situations.

Originally Posted by Spiderman

But for all the talk in the world unless the ride leader or TEC has ridden with those who voluntee,r all the talk in the world is cheap tbh.

Then there we disagree. If you maintain that attitude towards it, marking on the AR will always be limited to those that know each other personally, and especially those new to the site (who may of been riding for years to an advanced level) will feel excluded.

I personally felt that the group of markers on AR07 were the "elitest few" for want of better words. But I'd also only been riding for a little over 6 months, so there's no way I'd of wanted to mark at that stage anyway. I still had the feeling of exclusion though.

To answer your question of "would you of felt better if we'd of asked you?" To be frank, no. Not unless such questionning was done publicly, and everyone was invited. Otherwise I'd of turned the offer down on principal, due mainly to the above paragraph.

[fizzwheel]

Originally Posted by Baph

I personally felt that the group of markers on AR07 were the "elitest few" for want of better words.

OK, so did you feel the same about that with regard to AR08 ?

As you werent there I wander if you'll find it hard to answer the question, but did the process and my thoughts help you understand where I was coming from with it.

Also which is better

1. Marking done right by a group of experienced people who are all properly breifed and know what they are doing

2. Marking done by 2nd man regardless of who that is who

Might not stop
Might stop in the wrong place
Might not wait for TEC to come along
Might then ride like a tw*t all the way back up the pack buzzing everybody else in the process
Might do a thorougly excellent job

3. Some other solution

Is it better to sacrifice a feeling of "participation & Transparency" so that the over all safety of the ride, those doing the ride is put first ?

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

OK, so did you feel the same about that with regard to AR08 ?

As you said, I wasn't there, so I really don't feel able to comment period.

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

Also which is better
1. Marking done right by a group of experienced people who are all properly breifed and know what they are doing
2. Marking done by 2nd man regardless of who that is...

I personally believe option 1 is the better, but it's how those riders are picked that I'm suggesting is looked at.

Originally Posted by fizzwheel

Is it better to sacrifice a feeling of "participation & Transparency" so that the over all safety of the ride, those doing the ride is put first ?

I fail to see why it must be one or the other. The above reads to me as if you believe that if random people were asked to volunteer, and the ride leader went through that list & discussed things with those people to work out who was suitable, that more people would get lost automatically?

this is going round and round.Ive been riding for over 25 yrs and as Far as I can see,on a rideout of this size then Im inclined to go with Fizzes first option.
As anyone who as ridden with me will know I ALWAYS volunteer to be tec,and get fed up with people flying off in all directions because a junction is left unmarked.
We had one ocasion on the Welsh TT where people ended up 20 miles in the wrong direction

[Stu]

Am I right in thinking that:
1) The decision has been made to have dedicated markers for the AR
2) That the leaders have to have "utmost faith" in those markers
Therefore the decision making process is going to be is some way closed i.e. the leaders have the final decision.
3) Fizz, to his credit, would like to be all inclusive and avoid another Them & Us situation on the forum & AR

So...why not put in place some format for those keen to be a dedicated marker to make themselves known? and publicise it far & wide with those putting themselves forward knowing that they are subject to being either an unknown quantity, or a known hazard and will not be selected.