G oog le BadWeB | Login/out | Topics | Search | Custodians | Register | Edit Profile Ads by Motorcycle.comMotorcycle InsuranceMotorcycle PartsMotorcycle Helmets Motorcycle Tires Buell Motorcycles

Buell Motorcycle Forum » Quick Board Archives » Archive through October 29, 2003 » AMA Pro Racing Seeks to Please Japanese Benefactors » Archive through May 18, 2003

« Previous Next »

Author Message   Blake Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 08:57 am:        Harrassment... It seems some offending parties have taken notice of our discussion here. Received three phone calls this morning threatening legal action. The wife hung up on the first call. She got my lazy arse out of bed for the 2nd. I could tell right away the guy was serious. He sounded as if he was fresh from of a south Dallas trailer park. You know the type, earned a law degree on the internet and got past the bar exam on his 7th try. We didn't mix words, just told him to "bring it on" and hung up the phone. He actually had the nerve to call back.   Elvis Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 09:12 am:        I would imagine the last thing the AMA would want is attention drawn to this through legal action. It seems to me the publicity from such a suit would be the best thing in the world for you and the worst thing for the AMA. It seems clear to any reader with more than a fourth grade education that your comments are based on your opinion and interpretation of actions the AMA has taken. You haven't tried to claim any specific instances of documented wrongdoing that could be challanged. The pattern of the AMA's behavior speaks for itself. If they want to dispute your interpretations of that behavior, I'm sure you will allow any AMA representatives to post.   Reepicheep Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 09:40 am:        Blake... Keep encouraging that lawyer... sounds like a very direct route to a 5 page free "add" in cycle world for badweatherbikers.com, Buell racing, and all the problems with AMA pro racing.   Hans Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 11:48 am:        Blake, take care and behave. Not the ghost of a chance, fighting with a sword against a dagger when the dagger is poisoned. It is apparently not your area, nor mine, but the best man can never win when he keeps rules of a fair play, when there is fact only one secret rule: Slaughter the opponent. "We have called him thrice on the phone, on the most friendly and courteous way to blahblahblah, but he hung the phone ": 0-1 Against Blake. Keep us reported precisely: Together we have unforeseen power. Hans   Jssport Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 11:53 am:        Legal action for what? Slander/Libel ?? from who ?? da AMA PR group ?? Blake said,... "It seems some offending parties have taken notice of our discussion here. Received three phone calls this morning threatening legal action."   Blake Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 12:27 pm:        The guy claimed to be representing AMAPR.   Aaron Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 12:35 pm:        You know you're getting pretty close to the truth when people try to shut you up.   Davegess Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 12:53 pm:        I can certainly see how many of the statements made here could be libel. Libel is written, Slander is verbal. The classic definition is: "a publication without justification or lawful excuse which is calculated to injure the reputation of another by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule." (Parke, B. in Parmiter v. Coupland (1840) GM&W 105 at 108) Can you succeed in law?In a libel action, the plaintiff must prove three elements of the tort of libel: The statement has been made to a third party. The statement referred to the plaintiff. (This does not mean that the statement has to refer expressly to the plaintiff. A statement can be actionable if it is reasonably capable of referring to the plaintiff). The statement must be defamatory, which means that it must be a false statement to the plaintiff's discredit. Defences There are three principal defences to an action for libel: Truth/justification. The defendant will succeed if they can substantially justify or prove the truth of the "sting" of the offending statements. Close analysis of the defamatory statement will avoid launching an ill-considered lawsuit. Fair Comment. This defence will succeed if it can be shown that the statement is comment on facts truly stated. It can be defeated by evidence of malice. Blake I think you need to be very careful. A lot of this thread is libelous. some of the comments about specific people are pretty nasty. There is precedent for a BBS owner being responsible for allowing libelous comments to appear. If it was me I would apolgise and promise to keep the most offensive statements under control and promise not to publicise that they even asked. I would think that the AMA would not want to go to court over this nor would they want publicity they would gain for even sending you a nasty letter. This would bring a wider audience to this discussion than it deserves.   Elvis Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 01:20 pm:        "a publication without justification or lawful excuse which is calculated to injure the reputation of another by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule." (Parke, B. in Parmiter v. Coupland (1840) GM&W 105 at 108) A broad interpretation of this would prevent newspapers from editorializing, but there is clearly a protected right for individuals to express hatred, contempt and ridicule for individuals and institutions as long as it is clear that the speach or writings represents the author's opinion and not some specific fact. If someone writes: "The AMA is taking pay-offs under the table." He may be guilty of libel, but if he writes: "I think the AMA is taking pay-offs under the table." he is within his rights. Blake may have been a bit careless to not specifically state that his statements were his opinion, but any thinking people will clearly read his statements as opinion. It would probably be wise for Blake to specifically state that certain of his comments are based on his opinions rather than proven fact in future posts. While there might be enough questionable legal content to call for a trial, the AMA would certainly never do that. As suggested previously, the publicity of a trial would hurt them much more than they would ever be hurt by this board. Assuming the call was legitimate, I'm sure the intent was to frighten Blake into submission, not to actually serve as a precursor to legal action. (Message edited by elvis on May 14, 2003)   Gravedigger Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 01:31 pm:        I knew there was a reason, I never joined the AMA! At this point, I'd like to thank them for justifying my decision!   Dynarider Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 01:44 pm:        The AMA can kiss my lily white ass & thats no opinion..thats a damn fact. Tell em to go screw themselves Blake. This is a public board & the opinions stated on here are just that..OPINIONS..everyone here has a right to their opinion on how the AMA is trying to use Harley style gestapo tactics to silence the little guy or prevent him or her from competeing.   Rick_a Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 02:01 pm:        Well, it's my opinion that they'd do well looking here for pointers   Rick_a Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 02:04 pm:        ...and Rocket, about the Kawi Z...I have no doubt in its abilities...but I'd have to fool myself into thinking I actually need that...   Jssport Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 02:44 pm:        AMA and AMAPR are two different groups. The AMA is the only force fighting for motorcycle rights in Washington DC. They have been instrumental in repealing several anti-motorcyclist laws around the country as well as keeping and re-opening off-road riding areas. I have never 100% agreed with any groups methods or direction, but we should all support the AMA and become members. AMAPR,.... well now that's a horse of a different color   Blake Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 02:48 pm:        AMA and AMPR are two separate and distinct entities. Like I said, the guy *claimed* to represent AMAPR. He said some things in his third call that lead me to suspect otherwise. Like when he dropped the white trash accent and totally twisted my brain's aural language interpretation center, at least until I was able to download my internal Yorkshire to American translator. The impudent harrasser was none other than Rocket! He totally fooled me. I did actually hang up on him. The wife accidentally hung up on him. He sure started my day out with a good laugh. I owe him! Felt like y'all would enjoy sharing my experience. Am I a tool or what? BTW, I agree with Elvis' analysis. No worries here. "Bring it on!...click... rrrrrrrrrrrrrr" LOL! Rocket must have been rupturing his gut laughing at the success of his ruse.   Davegess Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 04:28 pm:        Rocket, good work LOL   Elvis Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 08:21 pm:        "AMA and AMAPR are two different groups." Thanks Jssport! I was assuming AMAPR was a division of the AMA, but if they're different organizations, I'm very glad you clarified that.   Chainsaw Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 10:18 pm:        ...Just when I was about to start selling "Free Blake!" t-shirts for his legal defense fund. ..it was a JOKE? Damn Rocket, he's good. Seems he did this once before to Blake, got him to fly on short notice to Berthoud, Colorado for the hopes of hangin' with Erik Buell himself.   Blake Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 10:32 pm:        Chainsaw, Don't believe everything that Yorkshire hooligan tells you.   Hans Posted on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 - 11:33 pm:        Rocketman: That was an extremely good one. You are a very special kind of brick thrower. What would we have done when the provider would have bend his knees for a mild legal threat and BADWEB would have been pulled out off the air (because "certain problems" ). Just to isolate Blake and break up the coherence of the group ? I don`t even have Blake`s email address on my computer, cause he asked us to do so. Maybe lurking at Sacborg to get track of people and to reorganize on a new forum ? No use anymore to think out strategies... LOL Hans   Rocketman Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2003 - 02:22 pm:        Well I had to get him back somehow didn't I now. Actually I owe Blake an early morning phone call since last year when he was kind enough to wake me one EARLY morning just to see if I was still alive. Rocket's never been an early riser!! Pay back's great ain't it LOL Hey Blake you changed the title of this topic. Any reason why? Wouldn't have anything to do with John Vredenstein, he of the AMA (Anonymous Motorcycle Adventures) would it? Thanks for your sense of humour old fart, lovely to talk to you again. Rocket   Crusty Posted on Friday, May 16, 2003 - 07:53 pm:        This weekend, while the AMAPR is trying to please its Japanese Benefactors, I'll be in front of the tube watching Miguel DuHamel with a broken collarbone racing his RC51. The best riders on the best bikes in the best series. Of course, this is only my opinion.   Rick_a Posted on Saturday, May 17, 2003 - 07:13 pm:        I'd rather watch a motley field of ok racers on all makes and manner of machines.   Turnagain Posted on Saturday, May 17, 2003 - 08:06 pm:        Rocket, Good show mate! by-the-way, don't go Cecil on us back to racing: How about Yates? Even if he is a cocky sheet, he rode the tires off that bike, but not as much as Mladin. Got the impression, from the broadcast, a lot of folks aren't happy with the rule makers.   Blake Posted on Saturday, May 17, 2003 - 08:43 pm:        Crusty, Best bikes? By whose measure? I happen to own the world's best bike. I don't see it racing in AMA Superbike. Neither do I see the RC211V or the Ducati Desmoquatro in AMA Superbike. I enjoy watching the racers too. In other words, when it comes to AMA Pro Racing, I support the troops, but not their administrators.   Blake Posted on Saturday, May 17, 2003 - 09:01 pm:        Steve, What was said that gave the impression that a lot o folks were unhappy with the rules changes? And are you referring to the 2003 season rules changes or those for 2004?   Turnagain Posted on Saturday, May 17, 2003 - 10:08 pm:        Blake, Wish I'd recorded it, to get it right, but I believe they were talking about '04 and the advantages (weight I think) the Suzuki's have. could be wrong -- wouldn't be the first time & certainly not the last.   Crusty Posted on Saturday, May 17, 2003 - 10:47 pm:        Blake; I put the RC211V in the same category that I put Formula 1 cars in. Vehicles that excel in an artificial environment, bearing only marginal resemblance to practical and realistic modes of transportation. As for the Duck,I despise desmodromic valve actuation. It's a Rube Goldberg concept engineered and perfected to a level that keeps it competitive at a cost of extreme complexity and intense maintenance. As far as the best series, there were 4 brands in the top 10. Ducati, Kawasaki and Suzuki all led at some point. Watching Aaron Yates slide both tires while trying to pass Eric Bostrom had my whole family on the edge of our seats. And even though I don't care for Mat Mladin, I have to respect someone who has a blowout at 170 MPH and rides it to a controlled and low speed tip over. I don't have a vocabulary extensive enough to express my admiration of Miguel DuHamel. With a broken collarbone, he raced and finished a Superbike race. Have you ever broken a bone? Do you have any idea how tough he has to be? Maybe they replaced his blood with novocaine. He is definitely one of my heroes. Blake, in your eyes, AMAPR can do no good. In my eyes, they put on the best races in any series, by any sanctioning body. And next week is the Springfield Mile. There is no equal to Springfield. By the way, a Buell made the main event last fall.   Blake Posted on Sunday, May 18, 2003 - 02:08 am:        You think AMAPR puts on the best races? You should try reading RRW's reviews of their incompetent escapades. You think a MotoGP bike only margninally resembles "practical and realistic modes of transportation"? Is a superbike any different in that respect? Is ANY repli-racer sportbike? I think all the AMAPR superbike series road racers are great. I think the guy who runs the road racing series and make the rules is a lying scumbag. Next year, Duc won't be competitive in Superbike. How does that improve the series?   Crusty Posted on Sunday, May 18, 2003 - 07:51 am:        quote: Next year, Duc won't be competitive in Superbike. How does that improve the series? All right, I'll bite. What do you think would be a change for the better? Personally, I think they should go back to the 750cc flathead/500cc OHV formula.