LOST JEEPS
http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/

Discussion - How to determine club sponsorship of runs.
http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=19081		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  pixeldzn [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Discussion - How to determine club sponsorship of runs.
Please discuss how you would determine whether a run is a club-sponsored run, or just an informal trail run.

This issue has come up after a policy was made that others took issue with, so instead, lets discuss here and try to come up with a new policy that keeps everyone happy.
Author:  moose [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
per my post in the other thread, I think all runs should be unofficial except for a few such as a Club run to Badlands, or the LBL future event. Everything else should just be a herd of KJ's out for fun (otherwise, wouldn't everyone on those runs need to sign waivers?). If you want to know if anyone on the run knows what they are doing, look at a sticky post to be maintained by the moderators where your peers nominate you as "trail tested jeeper" - meaning you know how to spot and recover. Still informal, but should be effective. just my $.02 worth...

ps - yes, I have strong libertarian traits. I'm sure it shows...
Author:  Jeepjeepster [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
moose wrote:
per my post in the other thread, I think all runs should be unofficial except for a few such as a Club run to Badlands, or the LBL future event. Everything else should just be a herd of KJ's out for fun (otherwise, wouldn't everyone on those runs need to sign waivers?). If you want to know if anyone on the run knows what they are doing, look at a sticky post to be maintained by the moderators where your peers nominate you as "trail tested jeeper" - meaning you know how to spot and recover. Still informal, but should be effective. just my $.02 worth...

ps - yes, I have strong libertarian traits. I'm sure it shows...


I agree with that. The only thing, some people may get offended if they were not put on the list when they believe they should be. Some people may think they should be on there but do not have the experience they need to be on there. :?

I had no idea that we had to sign a waiver to go on a club run. I also had not idea that I could pay $15 a year for the club and sign the Harmless Agreement. Guess I should get on that... I also need to become a lifetime member.. Been wanting to do that. :?
Author:  tommudd [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:54 pm ]
Post subject: 
OK since we have grown quite a bit since I first found LOST (FOUND LOST ??? OH WELL) back in late August 2004 maybe we need to back up and have the President explian how new rules are made on here. I thought (which if I am wrong tell me) that I paid dues, and had a say in the way things would be done if and when there were rules made. I never voted on any president/ Board of directors or anything like that. I have found this to be almost my second home and want to be invovled but if rules/ policies are made by a few that affects many then I will speak my mind!!
So how did this new policy come up and did you have a meeting to come up with a plan or who came up with it?. You have to realize that I have been working for various government agencies for years and I question everything.
Now I am with moose on this pretty much at this time although I think all runs should have some sort of hold harmless waiver signed so now we are back to sort of square one. I was on a run a few years back that a newby was on and tried to sue the guy who set up the run due to him (newby) tearing up his vehicle showing off! Lots of stupid people and lawyers out there! my pennies thoughts for the day
Author:  Bakerkj [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 11:23 pm ]
Post subject: 
I thought they were all un-sponsored unless jk-Bol was making t-shirts.

Get rid of the list. If a paid member wants to organize a run they should take responsibility for it, get the waivers signed and provide experienced trail guides for the participants. If they don't want to do that, the run should be marked "un-sponsored" to protect the club and officers from lawsuits.
Author:  AndySRT [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 11:42 pm ]
Post subject: 
Bakerkj wrote:
I thought they were all un-sponsored unless jk-Bol was making t-shirts.

Get rid of the list. If a paid member wants to organize a run they should take responsibility for it, get the waivers signed and provide experienced trail guides for the participants. If they don't want to do that, the run should be marked "un-sponsored" to protect the club and officers from lawsuits.


I'm gonna have to agree with this. It seems like a good plan for whoever sets up a run and wants it to be club organized. we just have to make sure people can easily find the waivers easier than having to go to the midwest website.
Author:  tskalil [ Thu Mar 29, 2007 2:35 am ]
Post subject: 
Don, I can see what you're trying to do with the best of intentions. Just like government, though, the more you regulate things the more complicated and distasteful they become. And then the question of who is qualified to conduct runs? Ugh! Lots of bad feeling could be generated there.

I think things have gone well in the past and that they continue to improve (nothing's perfect). Everyone does sign a waiver when they are safety checked and the trail options are varied. Descriptions are given and if a person wants further info they can get it from some publications, like Charles Wells' Moab book. I've seen where some people think Wells' difficulty ratings are wrong, and I stongly disagree - I think he's very objective. He writes for everyone.

In my experience, there is a tendency of many to downgrade the difficulty of a trail. My personal opinion of such downgrading is to elevate the abilities of the person who says "it's easy", or "no problem", meaning it was easy for THEM! That's not obective and has gotten some people well past their area of experience and comfort. While many are happy about doing something that they thought they couldn't do, some are definitely not. What I'm saying here is that it's difficult to rely on someone's rating unless you know how that person rates.

So, in the final analysis, people always have to individually decide whether the run is suitable for them and their vehicle, and whether they trust the guides. Trying to pre-qualify guides and runs would probably put a kink into the ease of operation in assembling a group of people who just want to do a run and have fun. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Ted
Author:  Science_Guy [ Thu Mar 29, 2007 9:54 am ]
Post subject: 
I am on the same page as Baker. I have to admit I was surprised to see my own name on the list since I have only been wheeling for about 14 months. I make a point to go with those who I know have much more experience then myself. I can also see Don's point that it would be hard for a new member to know who the people are with "more experience." It seems reasonable to assume that the club runs are organized by the board and none-club runs are not. Some of the none-club runs will seem like club runs if they are popular destinations but I think most of us will get it.

Thanks for thinking of finer details like this Don and for all your hard work. Someone has to blaze the trail for me and show me what lines to take :)
Author:  Jeger [ Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:10 am ]
Post subject: 
I think this is real simple. It was my understanding that all of these runs as of late were more or less just a bunch of folks getting together for a good time on the trails, I just automatically assumed there was no "Official" organization of the run. I think it should stay that way, everyone just assumes its unofficial, just like going out by yourself and accidentally meeting up with some friends, your are responisible for yourself, if you decide to trust someone you dont know to spot you then its on your shoulders etc.

It would be nice if there were a few Official club runs, it would be easy to distinguish these from the others....."OFFICIAL LOST MIDWEST CLUB RUN...BADLANDS, LIVINGSTON, REDBIRD,OR WHEREVER 00/00/date. Type of format. These could be the runs that you dont have to have your own straps and stuff, you are guaranteed an experienced spotter, there is a cookout, t-shirts, and waiver, etc.

Maybe someone could type up a standard header to be attached on the first post of every non official trip, that way the new folks that come along will be informed, something that states you will be responsible for you own stuff etc. It can be discussed later in the thread if someone will be willing to let another use their recovery gear, if anyone knows how to spot, and who is bringing the hot dogs.

Too simple maybe?
Author:  meh_kick [ Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:47 am ]
Post subject: 
I agree with Jeger. If official runs were more regular (once a month, every other month, or 3 times a year, etc) it would reduce the need to distinguish between sanctioned and non-sanctioned.

With that however, I realize the headache that comes with logistics and organizations, but these sanctioned runs can be as informal as the February Livingston run.

Any others not falling on the date planned by LOST midwest shall be deemed unsanctioned, unsponsored, wheel-at-own-risk, runs.

We can even make a calender to be posted on the Midwest Website. Locations can be determined, as long as dates are set.
Author:  Video Guy [ Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:48 am ]
Post subject: 
I second Jeger's stance. I also want to address one other issue that deals with hard feelings from someone who thinks they should be on "the list" but isn't. To keep things objective and create a level playing field, we could require people on "the list" to be certified by completing a training course like Bill Burke's "On the Road" (see http://www.bb4wa.com/default.html for details) or something comparable. That training experience could serve as credentials for club trail leader status. We won't have people complaining about unfairness and cliques if people on "the list" are held to the same standards. Any run having at least one club trail leader could be considered club sanctioned. Cost of certification would be each person's responsibility, not the club's.

To me, having a certified club member on a run would be enough of an advantage for me to consider it club sanctioned.

The forum moderator and L.O.S.T. Midwest Board of Directors can maintain a list of certified trail guides and post that list, as Moose said, as a sticky in the Midwest forum. (I am assuming that the L.O.S.T. Midwest club board has ownership of the L.O.S.T. Midwest web forum.) L.O.S.T. trail guides could also be required to include their trail guide status in their signature for easy identification.

That's my two cents. Keep the change....

T.J.
Author:  Video Guy [ Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:53 am ]
Post subject: 
meh_kick wrote:
Any others not falling on the date planned by LOST midwest shall be deemed unsanctioned, unsponsored, wheel-at-own-risk, runs.

I've always assumed that any and all offroad driving is "wheel-at-your-own-risk." How could it not be? I'd love to see that language.
Author:  moose [ Thu Mar 29, 2007 11:43 am ]
Post subject: 
You realize that by making it "sanctioned", everyone will need to fill out waivers and such for each one of these. I'm no lawyer, but I think this opens the club to much more possibility of liability. I don't think I would want the burden of being on "the list", even if I was a club member. Because I would then potentially be obligating the Club to financial/legal issues through my actions or inactions.

So, lets say we go to KY in May. Eddo said he'd go on the 12th, so that would make it "sanctioned". What happens if I get into an accident on the way down in the caravan and kill someone in a yugo - the club & I would both get sued. How about an 3rd party who helps put stone under a tire to help, but gets injured in the process? I've seen litigation for less.

What ever though. I'll continue to post here, and Don can modify my posts as he sees necessary. I am not a Midwest Club member (only of the forum), so I'm not going to have kittens over how y'all want to run this railroad.
Author:  Video Guy [ Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:37 am ]
Post subject: 
moose wrote:
So, lets say we go to KY in May. Eddo said he'd go on the 12th, so that would make it "sanctioned". What happens if I get into an accident on the way down in the caravan and kill someone in a yugo - the club & I would both get sued. How about an 3rd party who helps put stone under a tire to help, but gets injured in the process? I've seen litigation for less.

1. Why wouldn't your car accident would be treated like any accident? Did the club make you drive the way you did? I don't see how a highway accident is related to the discussion. Victim's estate would file a claim against your insurance company. Cops would conduct an accident investigation. Hopefully you wouldn't have done anything wreckless enough to be charged with vehicular homicide or anything like that.

2. If the rock stacker guy was in a park like Black Mountain or Badlands, he would have signed a liability waiver upon admission. Play at your own risk.

Isn't anyone held accountable for their behavior any more? :roll:
Author:  Jeger [ Fri Mar 30, 2007 11:00 am ]
Post subject: 
Thats just the problem, you can sue whoever you want for whatever you want. And if someone finds out that we were on the road becuase of a club "sanctioned" (if you will) run then they will throw the club in the lawsuit as well. It is stupid, wrong, immoral, and a whole bunch of other stuff, but im sure cases similar to what moose described have been won before. Remember the person that sued Mcdonalds for burning themselves with hot coffee? Soon we will all have rear bumpers with a disclaimer "Warning severe injury or death may occur if you collide with this object" :roll:


I know it really is ridiculous but that just how it is nowdays.
Author:  Video Guy [ Fri Mar 30, 2007 1:48 pm ]
Post subject: 
Jeger wrote:
Soon we will all have rear bumpers with a disclaimer "Warning severe injury or death may occur if you collide with this object" :roll:

Reminds me of the wreck I saw yesterday. I little car (Civic, I think) hit the back of a lifted Chevy 4x4 pickup. The tailgate was resting on the car's windshield. The truck's tires stopped the car from going further forward under the truck bed.
Author:  Bakerkj [ Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:17 pm ]
Post subject: 
Lawyers will take the "victims" case for free and then we have to hire an attorney to defend ourselves on a B.S suit that has no chance of winning. Say Bye bye to 5k just to get it dismissed.
Author:  moose [ Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:47 pm ]
Post subject: 
Video Guy wrote:
moose wrote:
So, lets say we go to KY in May. Eddo said he'd go on the 12th, so that would make it "sanctioned". What happens if I get into an accident on the way down in the caravan and kill someone in a yugo - the club & I would both get sued. How about an 3rd party who helps put stone under a tire to help, but gets injured in the process? I've seen litigation for less.

1. Why wouldn't your car accident would be treated like any accident? Did the club make you drive the way you did? I don't see how a highway accident is related to the discussion. Victim's estate would file a claim against your insurance company. Cops would conduct an accident investigation. Hopefully you wouldn't have done anything wreckless enough to be charged with vehicular homicide or anything like that.

2. If the rock stacker guy was in a park like Black Mountain or Badlands, he would have signed a liability waiver upon admission. Play at your own risk.

Isn't anyone held accountable for their behavior any more? :roll:


1. "sanctioned club event" = club would be sued too, but like I said, I'm not a lawyer.

2. Wheel in the National Forest and there's no waivers.

It doesn't matter what's right, only what's the law...
Author:  Talon 1 [ Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Good Lord...
I don`t see what`s the problem here. You are asked to just label it sanctioned or non club sanctioned. Just type it in. Simple enough. Last time I checked, typing a few extra words didn`t kill you.

In any case if you want to make it easy Don, put up a calendar in the Midwest forums with all the runs for the year and keep it updated. Label any that are not "official" club runs as such. Look at the Mid Atlantic one for an idea and go from there. If needed, throw a disclaimer at the bottom of the calendar.

For sanctioned runs, you MUST sign a waiver if you haven`t already from the club. That`s a no brainer. If a bunch of people getting together just for fun, then none needed. We all assume risks when we go out. I can`t sue Chris because he asked if I wanted to go wheeling for some fun on a weekend and I got in an accident or damaged my vehicle on a rock. That`s my own fault. Chris didn`t cause it.
Author:  meh_kick [ Sun Apr 01, 2007 2:07 pm ]
Post subject: 
Ditto. I think the calendar is a great idea.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/