Two Landis case rumours

dbrower said:

First rumour I got, from an unidentified emailer, was that the USADA
review board passed the case on without looking at the merits because
they couldn't get the 370 page LDP translated from French, so they just
punted.

The second rumour, also from an email, is a specific example of the
kind of "gross errors" alluded to in Jacobs summary of the filing.
The ISL protocol for corrections on forms requires a crossout that is
initialled by the person making the change along with the change. Many
of the forms in the pack are properly corrected in this way, by people
familiar with the protocol. However, some of the forms contain changes
that are not done properly -- there is white-out over the "error", with
a "correct" value filled in, and no attribution of who made the change.

-dB http://trustbut.blogspot.com for Landis news, research, and
comment.

Whiteout? Medical labs in the U.S. are specifically prohibited from using
whiteout in any records. You must just put one line through the wrong
value, initial and date and put new value. Strikeout but not obliterate
what the original value was.

nobody said:

dbrower said:

First rumour I got, from an unidentified emailer, was that the USADA
review board passed the case on without looking at the merits because
they couldn't get the 370 page LDP translated from French, so they just
punted.

The second rumour, also from an email, is a specific example of the
kind of "gross errors" alluded to in Jacobs summary of the filing.
The ISL protocol for corrections on forms requires a crossout that is
initialled by the person making the change along with the change. Many
of the forms in the pack are properly corrected in this way, by people
familiar with the protocol. However, some of the forms contain changes
that are not done properly -- there is white-out over the "error", with
a "correct" value filled in, and no attribution of who made the change.

-dB http://trustbut.blogspot.com for Landis news, research, and
comment.

Whiteout? Medical labs in the U.S. are specifically prohibited from using
whiteout in any records. You must just put one line through the wrong
value, initial and date and put new value. Strikeout but not obliterate
what the original value was.

I wonder if they can remove the whiteout w/o ruining what it covers.

nobody said:

dbrower said:

First rumour I got, from an unidentified emailer, was that the USADA
review board passed the case on without looking at the merits because
they couldn't get the 370 page LDP translated from French, so they just
punted.

The second rumour, also from an email, is a specific example of the
kind of "gross errors" alluded to in Jacobs summary of the filing.
The ISL protocol for corrections on forms requires a crossout that is
initialled by the person making the change along with the change. Many
of the forms in the pack are properly corrected in this way, by people
familiar with the protocol. However, some of the forms contain changes
that are not done properly -- there is white-out over the "error", with
a "correct" value filled in, and no attribution of who made the change.

-dB http://trustbut.blogspot.com for Landis news, research, and
comment.

Whiteout? Medical labs in the U.S. are specifically prohibited from using
whiteout in any records. You must just put one line through the wrong
value, initial and date and put new value. Strikeout but not obliterate
what the original value was.

You do realize we're talking about a French lab, right? Maybe it
wasn't whiteout. Maybe it was brie.

Fred

dbrower said:

First rumour I got, from an unidentified emailer, was that the USADA
review board passed the case on without looking at the merits because
they couldn't get the 370 page LDP translated from French, so they just
punted.

The second rumour, also from an email, is a specific example of the
kind of "gross errors" alluded to in Jacobs summary of the filing.
The ISL protocol for corrections on forms requires a crossout that is
initialled by the person making the change along with the change. Many
of the forms in the pack are properly corrected in this way, by people
familiar with the protocol. However, some of the forms contain changes
that are not done properly -- there is white-out over the "error", with
a "correct" value filled in, and no attribution of who made the change.

Useless trivia:
The Monkees' Mike Nesmith's mom invented Liquid Paper.
http://www.answers.com/topic/liquid-paper

Having to initial changes is fairly cynical. It should be done on the
honor system. If any of the changes are initialed D^2P^2 that's [censored]
"Double Penetration" Pound. It's his jailhouse nickname and he's quite
proud of it.

R

If you had the original the value can often be seen from the back side, but
if photocopy, no can do.

"Tere" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

nobody said:

dbrower said:

First rumour I got, from an unidentified emailer, was that the USADA
review board passed the case on without looking at the merits because
they couldn't get the 370 page LDP translated from French, so they just
punted.

The second rumour, also from an email, is a specific example of the
kind of "gross errors" alluded to in Jacobs summary of the filing.
The ISL protocol for corrections on forms requires a crossout that is
initialled by the person making the change along with the change. Many
of the forms in the pack are properly corrected in this way, by people
familiar with the protocol. However, some of the forms contain changes
that are not done properly -- there is white-out over the "error", with
a "correct" value filled in, and no attribution of who made the change.

-dB http://trustbut.blogspot.com for Landis news, research, and
comment.

Whiteout? Medical labs in the U.S. are specifically prohibited from using
whiteout in any records. You must just put one line through the wrong
value, initial and date and put new value. Strikeout but not obliterate
what the original value was.

I wonder if they can remove the whiteout w/o ruining what it covers.

I presume USADA passed on it as it didn't want the responsibility and
ridicule assuming they would agree with the Landis legal arguments. The an
open hearing while won't neutralize all detractors and dissenters, it will
allow Landis his day(s) and those in the world who give a flip to see the
arguments from both sides to agree with whatever conclusion.

Most likely also if the USADA ruled without a hearing, then the world would
think it was patriotism and that the UCI and WADA would have openned their
investigation. This isn;t going to be over until all sides exhaust their
paths as each side has too much to loose.

"dbrower" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

First rumour I got, from an unidentified emailer, was that the USADA
review board passed the case on without looking at the merits because
they couldn't get the 370 page LDP translated from French, so they just
punted.

The second rumour, also from an email, is a specific example of the
kind of "gross errors" alluded to in Jacobs summary of the filing.
The ISL protocol for corrections on forms requires a crossout that is
initialled by the person making the change along with the change. Many
of the forms in the pack are properly corrected in this way, by people
familiar with the protocol. However, some of the forms contain changes
that are not done properly -- there is white-out over the "error", with
a "correct" value filled in, and no attribution of who made the change.

-dB http://trustbut.blogspot.com for Landis news, research, and
comment.

Chris said:

I presume USADA passed on it as it didn't want the responsibility and
ridicule assuming they would agree with the Landis legal arguments. The an
open hearing while won't neutralize all detractors and dissenters, it will
allow Landis his day(s) and those in the world who give a flip to see the
arguments from both sides to agree with whatever conclusion.

Most likely also if the USADA ruled without a hearing, then the world would
think it was patriotism and that the UCI and WADA would have openned their
investigation. This isn;t going to be over until all sides exhaust their
paths as each side has too much to loose.

I missed the r.b.r speeling reg on loose, lose and luge.
If ingles ain't yer native tongue, I'm awful sory.

If you speak the Kings English, its "lose" with no u as in "colour".

(perhaps it would be best if we eliminate "lose" and go with "looze"
just to pay homage to the muther country).

-bdbafh

in message <[email hidden]>,

(') said:

Chris said:

I presume USADA passed on it as it didn't want the responsibility and
ridicule assuming they would agree with the Landis legal arguments. The
an open hearing while won't neutralize all detractors and dissenters, it
will allow Landis his day(s) and those in the world who give a flip to
see the arguments from both sides to agree with whatever conclusion.

Most likely also if the USADA ruled without a hearing, then the world
would think it was patriotism and that the UCI and WADA would have
openned their
investigation. This isn;t going to be over until all sides exhaust
their paths as each side has too much to loose.

I missed the r.b.r speeling reg on loose, lose and luge.
If ingles ain't yer native tongue, I'm awful sory.

That's 'too much Toulouse', dumbass.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
"This young man has not the faintest idea how socialists think and does
not begin to understand the mentality of the party he has been elected
to lead. He is quite simply a liberal"
-- Ken Coates MEP (Lab) of Tony Blair

In article <[email hidden]>,

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,

(') said:

Chris said:

I presume USADA passed on it as it didn't want the responsibility and
ridicule assuming they would agree with the Landis legal arguments. The
an open hearing while won't neutralize all detractors and dissenters, it
will allow Landis his day(s) and those in the world who give a flip to
see the arguments from both sides to agree with whatever conclusion.

Most likely also if the USADA ruled without a hearing, then the world
would think it was patriotism and that the UCI and WADA would have
openned their
investigation. This isn;t going to be over until all sides exhaust
their paths as each side has too much to loose.

I missed the r.b.r speeling reg on loose, lose and luge.
If ingles ain't yer native tongue, I'm awful sory.

That's 'too much Toulouse', dumbass.

Or 'born Tolouse.'

--
tanx,
Howard

Never take a tenant with a monkey.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Simon Brooke said:

Quoted message said:

That's 'too much Toulouse', dumbass.

Howard Kveck said:

Or 'born Tolouse.'

However the next time a tdf stage finishes in the city in the south of
france it will be spelled Tooloose.

By Decree,
rbr ministir of spelink and gramar

Donald Munro said:

Simon Brooke said:

Quoted message said:

That's 'too much Toulouse', dumbass.

Howard Kveck said:

Or 'born Tolouse.'

However the next time a tdf stage finishes in the city in the south of
france it will be spelled Tooloose.

By Decree,
rbr ministir of spelink and gramar

It won't be long before this gets too lewd.

I *love* topic drift.

-dB

In article
<[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

,

Howard Kveck said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>,

(') said:

Chris wrote:
> I presume USADA passed on it as it didn't want the responsibility and
> ridicule assuming they would agree with the Landis legal arguments. The
> an open hearing while won't neutralize all detractors and dissenters, it
> will allow Landis his day(s) and those in the world who give a flip to
> see the arguments from both sides to agree with whatever conclusion.
>
> Most likely also if the USADA ruled without a hearing, then the world
> would think it was patriotism and that the UCI and WADA would have
> openned their
> investigation. This isn;t going to be over until all sides exhaust
> their paths as each side has too much to loose.

I missed the r.b.r speeling reg on loose, lose and luge.
If ingles ain't yer native tongue, I'm awful sory.

That's 'too much Toulouse', dumbass.

Or 'born Tolouse.'

No time Tolouse. I'm outta here.

--
Michael Press