121–130 of 197 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I agree that now she's come clean any identifying information should be removed. How?
Ah, yes, that's a good point. Once it's on the internet it's there forever.
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=6479539
There's also the case of the guy who was faking his run accross America
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7355147
For whatever reason, this group of people in the online running community gets really into discovering who is cheating.
Personally I am fascinated by marathon cheats. Every time I see a story about someone cheating in a marathon I can't help but wonder what was going through the person's head before, during, and after. I also wonder how often they do it, and why. You don't win any money, there is no incentive I can make out beyond bragging rights. I mean, they aren't exactly footraces, right? It's an endurance test, IMO. Usually for c…
What exactly is the point of this post? I second the opinion that this shouldn't be on HN. It's just doxxing the poor girl.
Regardless of the cheating, this type of post doesn't fully sit right with me. Given the permanence of record on the internet, this does bring up the issue of how we police bad behavior, and how we incorporate forgiveness into that. That said, the poster was pretty fair, and generally refer to her as "the runner". It definitely reads as an obsessive sleuthing, no doubt in part because there were follow-on discoveries…
And cheating at public events is not innocent. Its a rupture of the social contract, up there with stealing and libel. It should be dealt with promptly and vigorously. She should be banned from all further events. This is not the sort of person you want in your society, in your business, in your life.
I'm more disturbed with the evident impulse to forgive. Is nothing important any more? Is character and honesty so worthless?
Regardless of the cheating, this type of post doesn't fully sit right with me. Given the permanence of record on the internet, this does bring up the issue of how we police bad behavior, and how we incorporate forgiveness into that. That said, the poster was pretty fair, and generally refer to her as "the runner". It definitely reads as an obsessive sleuthing, no doubt in part because there were follow-on discoveries…
To have their rewards for that effort and commitment stolen by someone who didn't earn it is not fair and should be scrutinized and called out.
To call this "trivial" seems like maybe you have no interest or experience with marathons? It might be trivial to you, but substitute marathons for some challenging endeavor in your life. If your success was stolen by someone who cheated, you wouldn't think it was trivial either.
Certainly mass internet lynch mobs are a bad thing. But what this site does is necessary. There are many instances this kind of behavior documented on sites like this.
Some of these cheaters are obsessive and do it over and over again. It is very unfair to other competitors (even those who have no chance of being winners...), taking credit for the commitment to something that you don't have.
Maybe this kind of thing bothers me more because I've seen it with people who pretend to have military service ("stolen-valor"). It's just frustrating seeing people blatantly pretend to have done something difficult just to get the accolades.
Anyways, I agree that these are self-inflicted wounds for sure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should someone who cheated at a PUBLIC event and very publicly claimed the prize and actively misled other runners and the judging committee not be exposed publicly? Is it not in the public interest to punish these peoples? Or should we never report on such misdeeds for fear of any personal and professional retribution? Isn't that part of being a responsible adult in a civil society? She's a sponsored running/lif…
I don't think there's any reason this post shouldn't have happened, or the cheating shouldn't have been given a public, lasting record. And yeah, the sponsorship and team membership raise this from "costing someone else a medal" to "serious manipulation". But I share the sense that something is weird here. Maybe it's just the section trying to cast doubt on the claim that she was feeling nauseous - there's a sentimen…
She was feeling so nauseous that she couldn't finish the extra 1.5 miles all by herself but could bike the entire course to falsify data on Strava to double down on her cheating? Give me a break. The fact that she only recanted after all the evidence was presented to her about the depths of her cheating tells us all we need to know about her character in this instance. Positions of public trust bring with them public responsibility, and this is what it looks like, for better or for worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should someone who cheated at a PUBLIC event and very publicly claimed the prize and actively misled other runners and the judging committee not be exposed publicly? Is it not in the public interest to punish these peoples? Or should we never report on such misdeeds for fear of any personal and professional retribution? Isn't that part of being a responsible adult in a civil society? She's a sponsored running/lif…
I don't think there's any reason this post shouldn't have happened, or the cheating shouldn't have been given a public, lasting record. And yeah, the sponsorship and team membership raise this from "costing someone else a medal" to "serious manipulation". But I share the sense that something is weird here. Maybe it's just the section trying to cast doubt on the claim that she was feeling nauseous - there's a sentimen…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this case the runner needed to achieve a certain qualification time for another event. So she was under pressure, which led to the poor decision.
I wish people would not refer to dishonest decisions as poor decisions. It's an example of spin and was doubtless invented by a PR company for some politician caught with his pants down.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think there's any reason this post shouldn't have happened, or the cheating shouldn't have been given a public, lasting record. And yeah, the sponsorship and team membership raise this from "costing someone else a medal" to "serious manipulation". But I share the sense that something is weird here. Maybe it's just the section trying to cast doubt on the claim that she was feeling nauseous - there's a sentimen…
Yes I agree. It went beyond proving the simple facts of the case, into attempts discredit the runner's character in other ways.