NVSL All-stars

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USA Swimming rules state 4 ft as the minimum depth for starting from blocks or a deck. Under 4ft, in the water starts (eg push off from the wall) should be performed. NVSL makes exceptions to the USA swimming rules to accommodate the inadequate facilities.

I guess the naysayers know more than USA swimming as they are unable to admit it is a danger.

1. I don't think anyone said that it's not a danger. It's a calculated risk, it's not ideal, and the only other option was to not have IAS. If you feel this is too much of a risk, you are welcome to sit your child out. No one is forcing you to let your child swim. If you believe the option of not having a meet - you are making yourself judge and jury to determine the amount of risk you feel everyone else should be comfortable with. Once more for those in the back - if you feel the risk is too great YOUR CHILD DOESN"T HAVE TO SWIM.

2. I would wager 80% of NVSL pools (and other Northern VA summer leagues to Colonial Swimming League, Reston Swim Team Association, and Country Club League) do not have a 4ft deep start end.

There is merit to the argument that summer leagues should find safer venues. Yes, your child doesn’t have to participate. This is the same argument that people made when a few disgruntled parents argued for 12 and under soccer players not to head the ball, or for safe sport rules that prohibit coaches from being alone with a child, or for coaches to stop weight-shaming children. Of course, your child doesn’t have to participate. But that’s a dumb argument that ignores whether or not the organization should improve. The only argument that is worthwhile is that shallow diving is a low risk, and therefore acceptable. And since shallow diving can have a catastrophic consequence, the risk has to be very very very low.

Is it unsafe to dive into shallow water? Yes, but maybe it’s not unsafe enough to warrant spending money to rent a large venue that could host a SCM meet. In this country, it’s usually the insurance that determines the answer. Who is liable if someone gets injured diving into a shallow pool?

The thing is, it's not just one meet a year. If it's unsafe for IAS, then all pools with shallow dive-in ends are unsafe for the meets they host all season, not to mention all of the practices. In fact it's probably more dangerous at practices, when kids are learning to dive in.

So do you shut down all of those pools for any swim team activity that involves diving in?

I think you'd have to look at how many decades they've been operating, assess how many injuries have occurred in that time, and then decide whether it's really enough of a risk to warrant closing the pools to swim teams. If it's safe enough to operate for the teams themselves, it's safe enough to host a large meet.

I don't think that USA Swimming guidelines are relevant, the use of blocks makes a huge difference here.

[Anonymous]

You all want to cherry pick the USA Swimming rules followed at NVSL. One thread says NVSL is a group of volunteers on a thin budget so must to defer to USA swimming rules on topics like transgender swimmers, but on safety rules the group of NVSL volunteers get to overrule USA swimming safety rules.

The USA rule is NOT just for block starts. Not sure where that misinformation started.

The USA Swimming rule is for pool depth says it’s for racing starts. A racing start is defined as “the dive used to begin a race. The swimmer may start from the starting platform, the pool deck, or in the water.” Therefore, the 4ft minimum depth applies to deck starts.

However, the rule book allows for local and state regulations may override the USA swimming rules.

IMO Pinecrest should be allowed to participate in NVSL, but should utilize in pool starts. Growing up swimming in NVSL, some facilities were not ideal for swimming. I remember an Annandale pool that was like 33yards in length. We’d have to end in the middle of a pool and not a wall. Yes it was weird, but NVSL accommodated for the differences. No reason for safety to be compromised for Pinecrest to participate in NVSL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You all want to cherry pick the USA Swimming rules followed at NVSL. One thread says NVSL is a group of volunteers on a thin budget so must to defer to USA swimming rules on topics like transgender swimmers, but on safety rules the group of NVSL volunteers get to overrule USA swimming safety rules.

The USA rule is NOT just for block starts. Not sure where that misinformation started.

The USA Swimming rule is for pool depth says it’s for racing starts. A racing start is defined as “the dive used to begin a race. The swimmer may start from the starting platform, the pool deck, or in the water.” Therefore, the 4ft minimum depth applies to deck starts.

However, the rule book allows for local and state regulations may override the USA swimming rules.

IMO Pinecrest should be allowed to participate in NVSL, but should utilize in pool starts. Growing up swimming in NVSL, some facilities were not ideal for swimming. I remember an Annandale pool that was like 33yards in length. We’d have to end in the middle of a pool and not a wall. Yes it was weird, but NVSL accommodated for the differences. No reason for safety to be compromised for Pinecrest to participate in NVSL.

I wonder how many others have start ends less than 4” in depth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all want to cherry pick the USA Swimming rules followed at NVSL. One thread says NVSL is a group of volunteers on a thin budget so must to defer to USA swimming rules on topics like transgender swimmers, but on safety rules the group of NVSL volunteers get to overrule USA swimming safety rules.

The USA rule is NOT just for block starts. Not sure where that misinformation started.

The USA Swimming rule is for pool depth says it’s for racing starts. A racing start is defined as “the dive used to begin a race. The swimmer may start from the starting platform, the pool deck, or in the water.” Therefore, the 4ft minimum depth applies to deck starts.

However, the rule book allows for local and state regulations may override the USA swimming rules.

IMO Pinecrest should be allowed to participate in NVSL, but should utilize in pool starts. Growing up swimming in NVSL, some facilities were not ideal for swimming. I remember an Annandale pool that was like 33yards in length. We’d have to end in the middle of a pool and not a wall. Yes it was weird, but NVSL accommodated for the differences. No reason for safety to be compromised for Pinecrest to participate in NVSL.

I wonder how many others have start ends less than 4” in depth.

Quite a few. We swam against several and they all did shallow side starts which was annoying. Most of them had a deeper end which they have started from and would have made times faster too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all want to cherry pick the USA Swimming rules followed at NVSL. One thread says NVSL is a group of volunteers on a thin budget so must to defer to USA swimming rules on topics like transgender swimmers, but on safety rules the group of NVSL volunteers get to overrule USA swimming safety rules.

The USA rule is NOT just for block starts. Not sure where that misinformation started.

The USA Swimming rule is for pool depth says it’s for racing starts. A racing start is defined as “the dive used to begin a race. The swimmer may start from the starting platform, the pool deck, or in the water.” Therefore, the 4ft minimum depth applies to deck starts.

However, the rule book allows for local and state regulations may override the USA swimming rules.

IMO Pinecrest should be allowed to participate in NVSL, but should utilize in pool starts. Growing up swimming in NVSL, some facilities were not ideal for swimming. I remember an Annandale pool that was like 33yards in length. We’d have to end in the middle of a pool and not a wall. Yes it was weird, but NVSL accommodated for the differences. No reason for safety to be compromised for Pinecrest to participate in NVSL.

I wonder how many others have start ends less than 4” in depth.

Quite a few. We swam against several and they all did shallow side starts which was annoying. Most of them had a deeper end which they have started from and would have made times faster too.

And then they’re doing flip turns in the shallow end - there goes your “it would be faster” argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USA Swimming rules state 4 ft as the minimum depth for starting from blocks or a deck. Under 4ft, in the water starts (eg push off from the wall) should be performed. NVSL makes exceptions to the USA swimming rules to accommodate the inadequate facilities.

I guess the naysayers know more than USA swimming as they are unable to admit it is a danger.

1. I don't think anyone said that it's not a danger. It's a calculated risk, it's not ideal, and the only other option was to not have IAS. If you feel this is too much of a risk, you are welcome to sit your child out. No one is forcing you to let your child swim. If you believe the option of not having a meet - you are making yourself judge and jury to determine the amount of risk you feel everyone else should be comfortable with. Once more for those in the back - if you feel the risk is too great YOUR CHILD DOESN"T HAVE TO SWIM.

2. I would wager 80% of NVSL pools (and other Northern VA summer leagues to Colonial Swimming League, Reston Swim Team Association, and Country Club League) do not have a 4ft deep start end.

There is merit to the argument that summer leagues should find safer venues. Yes, your child doesn’t have to participate. This is the same argument that people made when a few disgruntled parents argued for 12 and under soccer players not to head the ball, or for safe sport rules that prohibit coaches from being alone with a child, or for coaches to stop weight-shaming children. Of course, your child doesn’t have to participate. But that’s a dumb argument that ignores whether or not the organization should improve. The only argument that is worthwhile is that shallow diving is a low risk, and therefore acceptable. And since shallow diving can have a catastrophic consequence, the risk has to be very very very low.

Is it unsafe to dive into shallow water? Yes, but maybe it’s not unsafe enough to warrant spending money to rent a large venue that could host a SCM meet. In this country, it’s usually the insurance that determines the answer. Who is liable if someone gets injured diving into a shallow pool?

This is not an apples to apples argument. Both of your examples involves behavioral/rule changes. What you’re proposing would mean that 80% of the summer pools in NOVA would no longer be able to host swim meets. It’s logistically not possible.

[Anonymous]

Can this thread just die already. This comes up every year and nothing new is said. We are 13 pages into this thread and we get it.

Thanks Pinecrest for stepping up and being a gracious host. If someone else wants to host next year please volunteer. If you aren't volunteering to host, keep it to yourself. If you think you have something novel and exciting to say, please go read the numerous other posts on shallow starts before offering up your drivel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can this thread just die already. This comes up every year and nothing new is said. We are 13 pages into this thread and we get it.

Thanks Pinecrest for stepping up and being a gracious host. If someone else wants to host next year please volunteer. If you aren't volunteering to host, keep it to yourself. If you think you have something novel and exciting to say, please go read the numerous other posts on shallow starts before offering up your drivel.

No.

[Anonymous]

You know what?
There are risks in everything we do. Every time we ride in a car, every time we walk down the stairs, all day long, every day. Yet you don’t keep your kid out of peewee soccer, you drive them to unnecessary activities, you don’t bubble wrap them.
Pinecrest has been around for a pretty long time and hosted many meets, and without significant incidents. Yes, an accident could happen, just as an accident could happen at another pool. Overall, the difference in risk between getting in the car, driving to and swimming in Pool A vs. Pool B and a child experiencing a serious injury is just incredibly negligible. If you are that anxious about things that are incredibly unlikely to happen then at least be consistent about them and just stay in your house and don’t let your kids do anything. But I doubt you do that, you just want to keep picking at this one thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's talk about pools that would be a good alternative. I'll start.

Waynewood, Stratford, Springboard, they've all hosted IAS and definitely fit the criteria. Waynewood and Springboard in particular have big fields for team areas.

I think WW is a great option!! They hosted Division 7 Relays this year and did an excellent job. They have two pools so warm-ups and cool downs can go on during the meet, huge soccer field next to pool area for team areas, lots of parking between the neighborhood streets, elementary school and the 2 churches nearby.
They also have a dedicated rectangular 6 lane lap pool so you’re not navigating around a diving well or shallow/play area attached to the lanes. Much better for officials! Honestly the only negative is that it’s kind of far for some of the teams from the western side of the county.

I would also suggest Sleepy Hollow, they also have two pools and lots of grassy space (although less than WW), they have much less parking.

Great -- so when approached, what did they say?

Exactly. Nobody wants to host, and I don't blame them. If NVSL or its members want more suitable pools to host IAS, then they need to make it more a more enticing or profitable proposition.

Have you seen NVSL financials? They are tight. They give the host pool $10k and that just about covers expenses.

Makes perfect sense. This is the largest swim league in the US after all, with 102 teams and 17,000 swimmers. Teams charge an extra dollar per swimmer = $17k.

Could also charge swimmers a $10 per even fee just like in USA swim meets, host pools keeps the $8640

And start paying timers and officials. I think it probably time to at least consider this.

Using volunteers for timing isn’t unique to the NVSL. All swim meets use manual stop watches, even with primary and secondary electronic timing systems in place. Club and major USA Swimming meets use volunteers to time. Heck, I’ve attended D1 swim meets at top programs where they’re begging for volunteers to come down and time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USA Swimming rules state 4 ft as the minimum depth for starting from blocks or a deck. Under 4ft, in the water starts (eg push off from the wall) should be performed. NVSL makes exceptions to the USA swimming rules to accommodate the inadequate facilities.

I guess the naysayers know more than USA swimming as they are unable to admit it is a danger.

1. I don't think anyone said that it's not a danger. It's a calculated risk, it's not ideal, and the only other option was to not have IAS. If you feel this is too much of a risk, you are welcome to sit your child out. No one is forcing you to let your child swim. If you believe the option of not having a meet - you are making yourself judge and jury to determine the amount of risk you feel everyone else should be comfortable with. Once more for those in the back - if you feel the risk is too great YOUR CHILD DOESN"T HAVE TO SWIM.

2. I would wager 80% of NVSL pools (and other Northern VA summer leagues to Colonial Swimming League, Reston Swim Team Association, and Country Club League) do not have a 4ft deep start end.

There is merit to the argument that summer leagues should find safer venues. Yes, your child doesn’t have to participate. This is the same argument that people made when a few disgruntled parents argued for 12 and under soccer players not to head the ball, or for safe sport rules that prohibit coaches from being alone with a child, or for coaches to stop weight-shaming children. Of course, your child doesn’t have to participate. But that’s a dumb argument that ignores whether or not the organization should improve. The only argument that is worthwhile is that shallow diving is a low risk, and therefore acceptable. And since shallow diving can have a catastrophic consequence, the risk has to be very very very low.

Is it unsafe to dive into shallow water? Yes, but maybe it’s not unsafe enough to warrant spending money to rent a large venue that could host a SCM meet. In this country, it’s usually the insurance that determines the answer. Who is liable if someone gets injured diving into a shallow pool?

This is not an apples to apples argument. Both of your examples involves behavioral/rule changes. What you’re proposing would mean that 80% of the summer pools in NOVA would no longer be able to host swim meets. It’s logistically not possible.

The behavioral change would be to change the starts from a dive to a push.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USA Swimming rules state 4 ft as the minimum depth for starting from blocks or a deck. Under 4ft, in the water starts (eg push off from the wall) should be performed. NVSL makes exceptions to the USA swimming rules to accommodate the inadequate facilities.

I guess the naysayers know more than USA swimming as they are unable to admit it is a danger.

1. I don't think anyone said that it's not a danger. It's a calculated risk, it's not ideal, and the only other option was to not have IAS. If you feel this is too much of a risk, you are welcome to sit your child out. No one is forcing you to let your child swim. If you believe the option of not having a meet - you are making yourself judge and jury to determine the amount of risk you feel everyone else should be comfortable with. Once more for those in the back - if you feel the risk is too great YOUR CHILD DOESN"T HAVE TO SWIM.

2. I would wager 80% of NVSL pools (and other Northern VA summer leagues to Colonial Swimming League, Reston Swim Team Association, and Country Club League) do not have a 4ft deep start end.

There is merit to the argument that summer leagues should find safer venues. Yes, your child doesn’t have to participate. This is the same argument that people made when a few disgruntled parents argued for 12 and under soccer players not to head the ball, or for safe sport rules that prohibit coaches from being alone with a child, or for coaches to stop weight-shaming children. Of course, your child doesn’t have to participate. But that’s a dumb argument that ignores whether or not the organization should improve. The only argument that is worthwhile is that shallow diving is a low risk, and therefore acceptable. And since shallow diving can have a catastrophic consequence, the risk has to be very very very low.

Is it unsafe to dive into shallow water? Yes, but maybe it’s not unsafe enough to warrant spending money to rent a large venue that could host a SCM meet. In this country, it’s usually the insurance that determines the answer. Who is liable if someone gets injured diving into a shallow pool?

This is not an apples to apples argument. Both of your examples involves behavioral/rule changes. What you’re proposing would mean that 80% of the summer pools in NOVA would no longer be able to host swim meets. It’s logistically not possible.

The behavioral change would be to change the starts from a dive to a push.

Thanks for explaining what the behavioral/rule change would have to be because the prior 200 posts on this issue didn't make it perfectly clear already. Maybe next you could explain why other pools should step up to volunteer. Or better yet, the NVSL should make them host something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USA Swimming rules state 4 ft as the minimum depth for starting from blocks or a deck. Under 4ft, in the water starts (eg push off from the wall) should be performed. NVSL makes exceptions to the USA swimming rules to accommodate the inadequate facilities.

I guess the naysayers know more than USA swimming as they are unable to admit it is a danger.

1. I don't think anyone said that it's not a danger. It's a calculated risk, it's not ideal, and the only other option was to not have IAS. If you feel this is too much of a risk, you are welcome to sit your child out. No one is forcing you to let your child swim. If you believe the option of not having a meet - you are making yourself judge and jury to determine the amount of risk you feel everyone else should be comfortable with. Once more for those in the back - if you feel the risk is too great YOUR CHILD DOESN"T HAVE TO SWIM.

2. I would wager 80% of NVSL pools (and other Northern VA summer leagues to Colonial Swimming League, Reston Swim Team Association, and Country Club League) do not have a 4ft deep start end.

There is merit to the argument that summer leagues should find safer venues. Yes, your child doesn’t have to participate. This is the same argument that people made when a few disgruntled parents argued for 12 and under soccer players not to head the ball, or for safe sport rules that prohibit coaches from being alone with a child, or for coaches to stop weight-shaming children. Of course, your child doesn’t have to participate. But that’s a dumb argument that ignores whether or not the organization should improve. The only argument that is worthwhile is that shallow diving is a low risk, and therefore acceptable. And since shallow diving can have a catastrophic consequence, the risk has to be very very very low.

Is it unsafe to dive into shallow water? Yes, but maybe it’s not unsafe enough to warrant spending money to rent a large venue that could host a SCM meet. In this country, it’s usually the insurance that determines the answer. Who is liable if someone gets injured diving into a shallow pool?

This is not an apples to apples argument. Both of your examples involves behavioral/rule changes. What you’re proposing would mean that 80% of the summer pools in NOVA would no longer be able to host swim meets. It’s logistically not possible.

The behavioral change would be to change the starts from a dive to a push.

The rule change proposal window closes in October. I'm sure you'll be submitting this. Can't wait for the debate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USA Swimming rules state 4 ft as the minimum depth for starting from blocks or a deck. Under 4ft, in the water starts (eg push off from the wall) should be performed. NVSL makes exceptions to the USA swimming rules to accommodate the inadequate facilities.

I guess the naysayers know more than USA swimming as they are unable to admit it is a danger.

1. I don't think anyone said that it's not a danger. It's a calculated risk, it's not ideal, and the only other option was to not have IAS. If you feel this is too much of a risk, you are welcome to sit your child out. No one is forcing you to let your child swim. If you believe the option of not having a meet - you are making yourself judge and jury to determine the amount of risk you feel everyone else should be comfortable with. Once more for those in the back - if you feel the risk is too great YOUR CHILD DOESN"T HAVE TO SWIM.

2. I would wager 80% of NVSL pools (and other Northern VA summer leagues to Colonial Swimming League, Reston Swim Team Association, and Country Club League) do not have a 4ft deep start end.

There is merit to the argument that summer leagues should find safer venues. Yes, your child doesn’t have to participate. This is the same argument that people made when a few disgruntled parents argued for 12 and under soccer players not to head the ball, or for safe sport rules that prohibit coaches from being alone with a child, or for coaches to stop weight-shaming children. Of course, your child doesn’t have to participate. But that’s a dumb argument that ignores whether or not the organization should improve. The only argument that is worthwhile is that shallow diving is a low risk, and therefore acceptable. And since shallow diving can have a catastrophic consequence, the risk has to be very very very low.

Is it unsafe to dive into shallow water? Yes, but maybe it’s not unsafe enough to warrant spending money to rent a large venue that could host a SCM meet. In this country, it’s usually the insurance that determines the answer. Who is liable if someone gets injured diving into a shallow pool?

This is not an apples to apples argument. Both of your examples involves behavioral/rule changes. What you’re proposing would mean that 80% of the summer pools in NOVA would no longer be able to host swim meets. It’s logistically not possible.

The behavioral change would be to change the starts from a dive to a push.

The rule change proposal window closes in October. I'm sure you'll be submitting this. Can't wait for the debate.

I won’t, because I don’t care enough about your local summer swim. In my area, summer swim is done with blocks, touchpads, and USA swimming approved pool depths.

People have changed rules and procedures about sports in the past for the better (requiring helmets in ice hockey, requiring neck guards in ice hockey, banning heading for 12u in soccer, instituting pitching limits in baseball, eliminating kickoffs in football, reducing contact drills in football practice). All of these changes were met by the same arguments about how hard it would be logistically to comply, how everything in life has risks, and how you can simply choose not to participate. I find it strange that people here are so recalcitrant to the idea of change. It’s okay to discuss whether organizations should change their rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USA Swimming rules state 4 ft as the minimum depth for starting from blocks or a deck. Under 4ft, in the water starts (eg push off from the wall) should be performed. NVSL makes exceptions to the USA swimming rules to accommodate the inadequate facilities.

I guess the naysayers know more than USA swimming as they are unable to admit it is a danger.

1. I don't think anyone said that it's not a danger. It's a calculated risk, it's not ideal, and the only other option was to not have IAS. If you feel this is too much of a risk, you are welcome to sit your child out. No one is forcing you to let your child swim. If you believe the option of not having a meet - you are making yourself judge and jury to determine the amount of risk you feel everyone else should be comfortable with. Once more for those in the back - if you feel the risk is too great YOUR CHILD DOESN"T HAVE TO SWIM.

2. I would wager 80% of NVSL pools (and other Northern VA summer leagues to Colonial Swimming League, Reston Swim Team Association, and Country Club League) do not have a 4ft deep start end.

There is merit to the argument that summer leagues should find safer venues. Yes, your child doesn’t have to participate. This is the same argument that people made when a few disgruntled parents argued for 12 and under soccer players not to head the ball, or for safe sport rules that prohibit coaches from being alone with a child, or for coaches to stop weight-shaming children. Of course, your child doesn’t have to participate. But that’s a dumb argument that ignores whether or not the organization should improve. The only argument that is worthwhile is that shallow diving is a low risk, and therefore acceptable. And since shallow diving can have a catastrophic consequence, the risk has to be very very very low.

Is it unsafe to dive into shallow water? Yes, but maybe it’s not unsafe enough to warrant spending money to rent a large venue that could host a SCM meet. In this country, it’s usually the insurance that determines the answer. Who is liable if someone gets injured diving into a shallow pool?

This is not an apples to apples argument. Both of your examples involves behavioral/rule changes. What you’re proposing would mean that 80% of the summer pools in NOVA would no longer be able to host swim meets. It’s logistically not possible.

The behavioral change would be to change the starts from a dive to a push.

The rule change proposal window closes in October. I'm sure you'll be submitting this. Can't wait for the debate.

I won’t, because I don’t care enough about your local summer swim. In my area, summer swim is done with blocks, touchpads, and USA swimming approved pool depths.

People have changed rules and procedures about sports in the past for the better (requiring helmets in ice hockey, requiring neck guards in ice hockey, banning heading for 12u in soccer, instituting pitching limits in baseball, eliminating kickoffs in football, reducing contact drills in football practice). All of these changes were met by the same arguments about how hard it would be logistically to comply, how everything in life has risks, and how you can simply choose not to participate. I find it strange that people here are so recalcitrant to the idea of change. It’s okay to discuss whether organizations should change their rules.

Thank you for letting us all know that you--who do not participate in the NVSL--will not be proposing a rule change for the NVSL. And thank you for letting us know that sports have risks and change can be challenging. Obviously it is ok to discuss whether organizations should change their rules. This organization has an October deadline for rule changes.

Anything else you won't be doing that is irrelevant to the conversation?