dan, Donald Boswell, unlike other people in similar positions, has been willing to sit here through criticisms and explain things from his perspective while posting this (very difficult to read, but still appreciated) report.


==Brian, Donald did not explain anything *in this thread*, "while posting this report".

btw, its not difficult to read -if you have a high school education. it's just unecessarily long winded and says very little. Its esentially a GAO report on the degree to which the various state and tribal commissions have complied with the PAPERWORK- or *proof submitted* (generally affidavits) which are mandated by the muhammad ali act.

(by the way, the GAO is the most notorious group of bureacrats in the USA-and they dint know squat about boxing.

Yiou doubt it? well just read this longwinded "report" that you find "diffult" to understand) I'll be happy to explain it to you, and put it in little bite sized bits for eas y digestion. but, I cant tonite. It will be a few weeks- I am taking a course and and I have a ton of writing to do over the next ten days.


as for Mr Boswell, Donald did not make any points. he simply copied and pasted this verbiage onto the board with his recommendation that we "have a look"?

I am curious: What "point" do you think he was trying to make???
I don't think he was actually trying to make any points at all -other than just "have a look at a long report" He didnt say anything else, or make any points at all-nor did he intend to-other than that we should "be informed" about the shocking lack of paperwork submissions (about 25% ommissions) coerced from promoters to the big government liberals.====




If you truly think that report is "bureaucratic horse shit" then argue against them. Take up that challenge.





==its no "challenge" at all, Brian. Glad to do it.

BTW, I pasted it into microsoft word just to get a word count. Guess what? the "report" contains 21,848 words and is 67 pages long.
And before it even gets into its "simplistic findings about the % of compliance with governmental paper work requirements foisted upon promoters by this unfunded big governnemt mandate know as the "Muhammad Ali act" it has an introduction of legislative history that is 420 words and 2 pages long.==



Your strong stance insinuates that you understand the points made in the report.


==Yes thats correct. I do understand it. (such "points" as it made) which were relatively few.

Now, tell me what did *you* find in this document worth killing a tree for?===



You couldn't logically dismiss something that you don't understand.




====No I couldnt. And I wouldn't. I understand it, and I summed it up succinctly in a previous post-. ===


So please explain to us the finer points of the above report.


===it has no "fine" points. It's just a hodgepodge of government statistics reporting on the degree of compliance with government mandated paperwork submissions from promoters and sanctioning bodies-mandated by the Muhammad Ali act-which btw, I have read, and complied with when I created my sanctioning body. read it yourself-then please favor us with the "fine" points and nuggets that *you* gleaned from this claptrap.. =====



I know that I'm certainly not going to be swayed by any quick and non-detailed dismissal of someone else's points
.

=====actually...No one was trying to sway you. Nevertheless, if you like, I'll get back to you when I have some time with a paragraph by paragraph exegesis of these 63 pages of bureaucratic Fluff.
(aka "Horseshit" "BS"- or whatever you prefer to call tautology, and circumlocution.)

But, hopefully by then you will have read it for yourself, and recognized it as inflated, bureacratic verbiage devoid of much substance. certainly what was said did not require 63 pages. 3 pages would have sufficed to report the compliance by promoters and commissions with this unfunded governmentally mandated paper work submissions. (which are actually just time consuming affidavits stating they (commissions, promoters, sanctioning bodies) have complied with the act.)

FYI, the lack of 100% compliance with mandated affidavits stating they complied with the terms of the act-doesnt mean they didnt actually comply with the actual requirements. It just means they aren't skilled clerical workers.

oh yea, over the past 30 years about 2 deaths from boxing occur every three years in pro boxing-and none in KB.

And the deaths have remained statisically constant- despite all this do-gooder legislation, and big government unfunded mandates.


This act just raises expenses for promoters, and fighters, and lowers profits and purses-that was my main point.

But, you chose to jump on the poor choice of words. To wit: the vernacular "horsehit". Ok, fair enough.My mistake. I shouldnt have given you such a golden opportunity to flyspeck.

I should have said "excess verbiage devoid of anything profound". (instead of "bureaucratic horeshit") live and learn. :)

dan