# The Jurisprudence of Bad Budo



## Matt Stone (May 27, 2003)

When initiating a line of questioning toward an individual whose claims, background, lineage and/or skill are of a questionable nature, what standpoint does the entire discussion take on?

I offer that the individual who has made the claims that are the instigating factor in the questioning takes on the role of a prosecuting attorney and/or the client thereof, and that the people asking the individual to provide proof to support his/her claims is more akin to the defense attorney whose primary role is simply to create reasonable doubt, or to air same publicly as a means by which further examination can occur...

I have been told, and heard elsewhere, that the person asking the questions is the prosecutor, and the person being asked is the defendant...  But that goes against the entire judicial analogy.

The defendant is assumed innocent until proven guilty.  However, the defendant is the one against whom allegations are made.  Up to that point, I can see the connection to the counter-argument against my position.

However, since the responsibility for providing evidence to support an allegation lies in the lap of the prosecution, and all the defense really needs to do is to have a sound argument against which the evidence must be measured, I feel that the person making the questionable claims is responsible to provide the proof to support their claims...  Not the other way around.

How do the rest of you feel?

Gambarimasu.
:asian:


----------



## RyuShiKan (May 28, 2003)

Yiliquan1, 

I agree.

I would also like to add to this if I may some common tactics made by those people claiming certain things when they do come under fire.

When cornered and pretty much found dead to rights they whine everyone has skeletons in their closet they dont want to talk about
This is nonsense.
People have skeletons in their personal life.be it a nasty divorce, getting a DUI, being fired from a job etc..
However, those that claim they have skeletons in their martial life I have to ask why?
People that willing take rank they didnt earn, or buy a Soke license from a known bogus organization DO have skeletons because they knowing did the wrong thing.
Folks that got duped by a bogus instructor or organization have no skeletons since they were merely victims.


anyone else have any they have noticed?


----------



## Zepp (May 28, 2003)

I'm not entirely sure what you just wrote, but I think I at least partially disagree with you.  I believe that it depends what the claims in question are.  If its something along the lines of Ashida Kim's super secret ninja club actually having something to do with ninjutsu, then of course the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim.  But as for claims about one's lineage or training, the burden of proof definitely lies with the person challenging the claim.

Ya know, for all I really know, all you Yili people could just be a cult of circus midgets trying to recruit people to train in a made up art so you can brainwash them into helping you take over the world.  If I thought this, is there really anything any of you could do to prove otherwise beyond a doubt over the internet?  I'm sure you could in person, but not between computers.

I accept your claims about who you are and what you do at face value because they sound reasonable and because I have no evidence to the contrary.  I think that's the only way a place like Martial Talk can work.


----------



## RyuShiKan (May 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Zepp _
> *.......  But as for claims about one's lineage or training, the burden of proof definitely lies with the person challenging the claim.*



Actually thats not really true.
If someone were claiming rank in the style I teach and I had never hear of them and found their claim to be suspicious then they would have to cough up some proof. An ID card or certificate would door even a personal reference.


----------



## Zepp (May 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by RyuShiKan _
> *If someone were claiming rank in the style I teach and I had never hear of them and found their claim to be suspicious then they would have to cough up some proof. An ID card or certificate would door even a personal reference. *



Yes, but that's because you have first hand knowledge of the training they claim to have.

Would an ID card, or certificate or personal reference from me really prove anything to you about my Tae Kwon Do rank?

I'm not trying to make a statement about about anyone's fraud-busting activities in particular.  I just think that Yiliquan1's statement is too general.


----------



## RyuShiKan (May 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Zepp _
> *Yes, but that's because you have first hand knowledge of the training they claim to have. *



That wouldnt really matter because there are many people in our Assoc. I dont know. All I would need to do is ask for an ID card and I could see their rank, when they joined etc.




> _Originally posted by Zepp _
> *Would an ID card, or certificate or personal reference from me really prove anything to you about my Tae Kwon Do rank? *



Yes it would as a matter of fact.
Several folks have scanned their certificates and emailed them to me.
All but one was an obvious fake.
Most had improper stamps/seals that Japanese teachers would never use on certificate.2 were actually upside down.
Several had hand written kanji that was obviously done by someone that didnt read or write Japanese.
One was supposed to be for Karate but had Kung Fu written on it.
Some were done on word processors.
The others had Japanese that made no sense.


----------



## Zepp (May 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by RyuShiKan _
> *Yes it would as a matter of fact.
> Several folks have scanned their certificates and emailed them to me.
> All but one was an obvious fake.
> *



So then you must be the final authority on what constitutes legitimate rank in all Asian martial arts?
So what if a certificate was done with a word processor?
What if someone learned Karate from an American instructor with no knowledge of the Japanese language and no formal ties to any organization you recognize?  Does that make the rank they award to their students illegitimate?
Are you a judge of what constitutes legitimate rank in Filipino martial arts?  Howabout in Capoeira?
Just what are the limits of your knowledge in this matter?


----------



## RyuShiKan (May 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Zepp _
> *   So then you must be the final authority on what constitutes legitimate rank in all Asian martial arts? *



Nope, but I can spot fakes supposedly issued by Okinawan or Japanese systems when I seem them.



> _Originally posted by Zepp _
> *   So what if a certificate was done with a word processor? *



Legit ranks issued by Okinawans or Japanese are not done on word processors.



> _Originally posted by Zepp _
> *   What if someone learned Karate from an American instructor with no knowledge of the Japanese language and no formal ties to any organization you recognize? *



Fine by me.



> _Originally posted by Zepp _
> *
> Are you a judge of what constitutes legitimate rank in Filipino martial arts?  Howabout in Capoeira?
> Just what are the limits of your knowledge in this matter? *



Judging from the tone of your questions it sounds like you are either trolling or picking issue with every word in my posts.
As my previous posts states the certificates were in Japanese,
Therefore one would conclude that I am talking about Japanese or Okinawan arts.


----------



## TargetAlex (May 28, 2003)

I am going to use an example to try to demonstrate the way the law looks at it.

"X" is a martial arts instructor, runs a school, and claims to have certain qualifications and lineage.


"Z" is a member of the public, perhaps even a former student of "X", who comes to this forum (for example) and claims that "X" has misrepresented himself, and been dishonest about his claims.

Once "Z" has posted the allegation of 'fraud' in writing, it can be subject to a libel suit by "X". In court, "Z" is now the defendant, and "X" is the prosecutor.

Under libel law, it is up "Z" to prove that his allegation that "X" misrepresented himself is true. If he cannot prove that his claims are true, he will be ruled to have been libelous in his claims, and suffer the penalty. "X" is under no legal obligation in a libel suit (as prosecutor) to prove his claims were true, the court assumes they are true unless during his defense, "Z" can prove beyond reasonable doubt the claims were false.

Of course, proving libel can often be difficult to prosecute, and each state has their own definition of what constitutes libel, although there is some common ground among the state laws.

You can post anything you want about anyone, SO LONG AS IT IS TRUE (and you have evidence), without fear of being sued for libel; the one common ground in libel law is that if the statement was true, then no libel occured.

Questioning a person's credentials on a forum such as this, in my opinion, does not have a prosecutor and/or defendant. There is the investigator (questioner) and the investigated. Anyone who is prepared to make claims in public about their business, be it a martial arts instructor or a house painter, should be prepared to have their credentials scrutinized by the public. If you want the public's business (money), you should be prepared to demonstrate why you deserve it.


----------



## jdmills (May 28, 2003)

You guys are using a criminal standard of proof for a civil claim.  In a criminal case, the standard of proof for a conviction is "beyond a reasonable doubt" but that is NOT true for a civil case where the standard is "more likely than not" in most states.  That's why O.J. Simpson was acquitted in the criminal case but forced to pay damages in a civil action, there is a lower standard of proof.

Jim


----------



## Matt Stone (May 28, 2003)

*Alex and Jim* - 

Thanks for reminding me about civil practice...  We don't get a lot of that in the military, at least not in the areas that I have worked.  We don't deal with libel nor slander (we charge it as insubordination), and the only lower standard of proof we deal with is in administrative actions (not the area I work in).

So, essentially, we have the issue of a lower standard of proof (more likely than not, a 51% / 49% ratio), and an expectation on the part of the claimant to both have their claims scrutinized as well as being prepared to demonstrate proof of their claims...

Good discussion.  Thanks for correcting my perceptions.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:


----------



## jdmills (May 28, 2003)

Of course, for libel or slander the language used is critical.  If I say "I do not believe XYZ ever earned a black belt" and ask him to prove it, my statement is merely a statement of opinion and would probably not support a slander or libel claim.  However, a statement that "XYZ has falsified his certificates" probably would support a libel or slander claim, unless, as Alex pointed out, the statement is true.

Proving libel and slander are not easy since it directly conflicts with a constitutional right to free speech.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (May 28, 2003)

1 point: free speech

"constitutional right to free speech." does not apply outside the US.  Inside the US, I believe it only applys to the government and press.  Otherwise, it is different.  Online, its a whole new world.



:asian:


----------



## TargetAlex (May 28, 2003)

jdmills:
You are correct, 'reasonable doubt' is a criminal standard. The standard of proof in a civil case, is, as you said, lower. 
However, in libel we must remember that it is the defendant's responsibilty to prove his allegations are true. The court assumes that the Plaintiff's claims are true unless the defendant can give verifiable evidence that they are false.

You are also absolutely correct when you said "for libel or slander the language used is critical."

Generally, from the little bit of precedent that I have seen, when I post something on a bulletin board, the laws of the state, country or province where I was when I posted the comments prevail. There have been exceptions in some Spamming cases though.

Law...there are always exceptions, LOL!


----------



## jdmills (May 28, 2003)

It's certainly true that the US Constitution, and the resulting right to free speach only applies in the US.  It does NOT only apply to the Government or the press, it applies to everyone in the US.  See Cohen v. California, 91 S.Ct. 1780 (1971) where an individual who walked through a courthouse wearing a jacket with the words "F**K THE DRAFT written on it was found to have a constitutionally protected right to do so.  Discussions forums such as this are precisely they type of speech that is intended to be protected.  I do not worry too much about being sued in a foreign jurisdiction since another country would have a nearly impossible time obtaining jurisdiction over me and in a US court I have a constitutionally protected right.

Now, that does not mean that the administrators of this board cannot establish their own rules regarding what is permissible and what is not and I either need to abide by them or get barred from the site.  I think that is where you are a bit confused, the government cannot limit my constitutional right to free speech except in certain situations but you can.  The right, however is mine, and yours and everyone elses.

Enough of this, this is a Martial Arts forum and this is starting to sound too much like work.


----------



## Matt Stone (May 28, 2003)

So it seems we have reached something of a consensus, based on legal procedure...

Essentially, a person posts his disagreement with claims made publicly by some individual.  So long as his disagreements are framed in such a fashion as not to be libelous, e.g. "I do not believe XY and Z claims made by Mr. Q," or words to that effect.

Then we allow the claimant to either provide (or fail to provide) the proof necessary to substantiate their claims.

In the event that they fail to provide such proof, or an argument sufficiently convincing to substitute for such proof, then in accordance with the rules of the board, we allow the thread to stand as is, the lack of proof _being_, in a certain sense, proof to support the original disagreement...

I think we can move on now...  

Gambarimasu.
:asian:


----------



## jdmills (May 28, 2003)

Of course, none of this is set in stone, at least as far as who will believe what.  Any individual reading any post will reach their own decision and there is no way to determine a "standard of proof", at least not to dictate one that everyone must use.  If you question my rank (such that is is) for example, and I did not respond with anything to show that I actually trained with X or whatever, then readers could (if they wish) infer that my ranking is bogus.  Of course, those that know me may also infer that you are an idiot for questioning me and that I do not need to justify myself to you.  I think this is what we are encountering here and there is just no way around it.  People are free to ask whatever questions that they like and others are free to provide supporting documentation, or not.  Everyone then draws their own conclusions and both camps are right:

1.  If I claim to have a certain rank or degree (I claim a Juris Doctorate) then I should be able to back it up

However, it is also true that:

2.  I have no obligation to prove anything to anyone if I do not want anything from that individual or organization

It's really a complete impass if you ask me.


----------



## kkbb (May 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Yiliquan1 _
> *When initiating a line of questioning toward an individual whose claims, background, lineage and/or skill are of a questionable nature, what standpoint does the entire discussion take on?
> 
> I offer that the individual who has made the claims that are the instigating factor in the questioning takes on the role of a prosecuting attorney and/or the client thereof, and that the people asking the individual to provide proof to support his/her claims is more akin to the defense attorney whose primary role is simply to create reasonable doubt, or to air same publicly as a means by which further examination can occur...
> ...



I think its funny to see people who have vendettas against people (justified or not) carry on in such a fashion as this thread and on this board.  I have read throughout MT your posts and you just don't "let it rest"  

First of all, if I was on the recieving end of you and your friends accusation I would do 2 things
1) ignore the hell out of you
2) ignore the hell out of you

Whether someones rank is "verifiable" or not is really none of your or anyone elses business.   If the people that this "someone" teaches finds value in what they learn then who is anybody to question their validity.  

Consumer beware.  

Rather than "internet" vendettas's, the next time you or your friends have a problem with someone's rank or claims would it not be wise  to go to thier place of business and confront personally?

After all, this would be the sign of true maturity, would it not.  And if this person was truly "bogus" then you could let his/her students know in person.

But, before you let thier students know... ask them if they find value in what they are learning.  Then make that decision.

All of this said without predjudice or malice.


----------



## Zepp (May 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by RyuShiKan _
> *Judging from the tone of your questions it sounds like you are either trolling or picking issue with every word in my posts.
> As my previous posts states the certificates were in Japanese,
> Therefore one would conclude that I am talking about Japanese or Okinawan arts. *



Sorry, I didn't mean to for my tone to sound so strong.

When you replied that a certificate from me would be proof of my training, and then went on to explain what was wrong with the certificates people had sent you, I took it to mean that you felt you could judge the authenticity of a certificate from any Asian martial art.  I guess that's not what you meant. :asian: 

(That's the danger of posting when it's 1:00 am and you're tired. :shrug: )

kkbb,
That's the healthiest attitude I've heard yet about this whole thing.


----------



## Matt Stone (May 28, 2003)

> _Originally posted by kkbb _
> *I think its funny to see people who have vendettas against people (justified or not) carry on in such a fashion as this thread and on this board.  I have read throughout MT your posts and you just don't "let it rest" *



Let what rest?  What vendetta?  I started this thread to try to determine what the overall opinion was regarding the stance I took.  I was rewarded with good insight and corrective commentary to better align my thinking with comparable examples in the legal community.  Any questions I have for persons in particular have been levied elsewhere directly toward them.  This thread was about the method of questioning and approach to the topic, that is all...  If you read more into it, it would seem that is _your_ problem and misunderstanding, not mine.  



> *First of all, if I was on the recieving end of you and your friends accusation I would do 2 things
> 1) ignore the hell out of you
> 2) ignore the hell out of you*



Well, good for you.  Feel free to ignore your way out of the thread then...  If you were so inclined to ignore me, Mr. Mysterious Incomplete Profile, then you should have done so.  Having chimed in makes me believe you are just making the above statements for show...  Feel free to ignore me to prove me wrong... 



> *Whether someones rank is "verifiable" or not is really none of your or anyone elses business.*



Really?  Then whose business is it?  Someone makes a public claim, they need to be prepared to defend it.  If they don't want to defend it, fine.  But the possible repurcussions of failing to at least make a modest effort at correcting misperceptions about their claim will follow them.



> *If the people that this "someone" teaches finds value in what they learn then who is anybody to question their validity.*



Well, folks found value in the teachings of Jim Jones, and look where it got them.  David Koresh, too, and a host of others.  But I think most right minded folks won't deny the fact that the folks who were busy finding value were more than a little too subjective to determine whether there was value or not.  Sometimes folks just don't know any better, and can only go with what they see in front of them.  If all they see in front of them is fraud, then they won't see it for what it is, and they will be the next victims on the hit parade.  



> *Consumer beware.*



Well, that is a rather handy and simplistic argument, but I really don't think it applies.  Consumer beware is fine if you are buying second hand clothing, or something else relatively safe, but it just isn't enough when what the consumer may not know could potentially endanger their lives...  At that point I think a higher standard applies.



> *Rather than "internet" vendettas's, the next time you or your friends have a problem with someone's rank or claims would it not be wise  to go to thier place of business and confront personally?*



That's a very mature and well thought out response...   You're right...  I should instead approach the person face to face (especially when there is a large amount of distance to cover in such a commute), and run the risk of a verbal altercation turning physical when they take issue with my questioning...  Or not.  Or are you suggesting I simply show up with a challenge hanging from my belt?  Not wise, either.  Either way, doing such a thing in person is beyond most people's means, and isn't that what the internet is here for, to decrease the distance between people, provide information and education and to increase communication?



> *After all, this would be the sign of true maturity, would it not.  And if this person was truly "bogus" then you could let his/her students know in person.*



See the above comment regarding the wisdom of issuing challenges in this litigation-happy society.



> *But, before you let thier students know... ask them if they find value in what they are learning.  Then make that decision.*



Without the benefit of information to the contrary, how would they know whether it was of value or not?  To paraphrase an old story, three blind men will all describe the elephant they grope in completely different terms.  Without knowledge of what is beyond their experience and perception, they are limited in their ability to make decisions.



> *All of this said without predjudice or malice.
> *



Sure it was. 

Gambarimasu.
:asian:


----------



## kkbb (May 28, 2003)

I think the whole point missed here is:

The internet has made the whole world smaller, but, less personal.  We can easily sit at our keyboard and assume that we can say what we want, when we want (even if it is right and just). We sit in the safety of our home or office, sometime oblivious to the damage our words do to others.  Not to mention the colateral damage to the people around them.  

It is alot easier to take a "stance" on the internet than it is to take a "stance" in person, where it has real value.  If I were out to prove someone a fake, then my first and foremost mission would be to meet, then confront (not with belt in hand) the person.  Bouncing back and forth in type, over the net usually does not achieve the desired results, regardless....  & if the acusatations of fraud are acccidently levied at some one who may be legitimate then their reputation may be damaged or ruined.  The worst part of that is the accuser walks away (or logs off  ) without repercussions for their accusations.  

A personal meeting, (not a pound fest either) asking for some sort of validation would be wiser and less damaging to the person who is being validated.   

If this person is a fraud, then the appropriate authorities should be notified or the media may be another route.

Because you are at a great distance, it is understood that you would try to do something but, did it accomplish anything?  Probabley not.  And judging by thier supporters response, you probabley made them dig thier heels in more....

Matter of fact, from what I read, I think that they do find value in what their instructor teaches (I doubt Kool Aid is on the menu in this case), and what is wrong with that?

Oh, and by the way,  I know some very legitimate martial artists who teach total crap, these people are not frauds, but would be just as dangerous or more dangerous to thier students than the person you persue.   

Keep in mind, someone with a personal agenda can wilfullly do a lot of damage to some ones reputation just by accusation.  Burdon of proof should be on the accuser, not on the accused.  Someones BB certificate can be legit but the accuser could still question its authenticity.... leaving some doubt in everyones mind....

Not fair is it?


P,S.
"All of this said without predjudice or malice"
I meant it.


----------



## Matt Stone (May 28, 2003)

When I moved to this area, the first thing I did was to identify the local martial arts schools.  I always do this.  As long as I have been studying and teaching in the military, I have found that folks are often interested in martial arts, but have no idea what is available.  By learning about what is offered in the local area, I am able to help refer folks to whatever they may be interested in.

Part of this, however, is learning who is questionable and who is legititmate.  I won't send a friend of mine to a school I know has "issues" that may end up in screwing that friend of mine in the long run.  Sure, it may not really be my problem, but I certainly don't want anyone coming back at me later on down the line saying "well, you introduced me to them, so you were part of the problem."

Anyway.

One local instructor struck me as interesting because of a really unique children's program he had.  I went, checked out the school and watched the class with my son (he was really impressed and excited about starting up).  I was really impressed with the way the instructor handled the kids - he really had a knack for getting and keeping their attention, while teaching them something as well.  However, in our discussion later on, some of the things he said caused me a little concern.

So guess what I did?

No, I didn't flame him on the internet...  I went to the school a few weeks later after having prepared a rather lengthy list of questions for him.  He and I sat down, and I told him that I had some questions about his art (which he created from his Korean and Okinawan martial arts background), his background (he claimed he used to be a LEO and a military instructor - both red flags folks here know I am very sensitive to) and the way he teaches.

We talked for about 40 minutes, and I asked every question I had, including the hard ones.  He didn't bat an eyelash, and answered everything I asked.  Some answers didn't set all that well with me, but I couldn't deny that at least the premise of his answers, if not their specific content, were sound.  He had material that was of good quality (though of his own creation in terms of the manner in which it is presented), a good program that got and kept the interest of the students, all of whom found value in what he presented...

So, despite my initial kneejerk reaction to some things that sounded questionable, despite my natural reaction to criticize what seemed to be another wannabe McDojo, I walked away feeling that his program and school are worthwhile (just not my personal cup of tea).

I still plan on enrolling my son (he is only 7, and is interested in soccer more than martial arts), and I will likely take classes with my son to help spur his interest.  I plan on inviting the instructor to events with our training group, and to seminars with our teacher.

I'm really not the a-hole I may seem to be on the internet.  I just feel that folks need to be able to produce answers to questions posed.  If they have nothing to hide, then answers should be readily forthcoming.  If they are offended that I ask, then they are poor businessmen.

I am fully prepared to accept that Mr. Phelps (since his issues, along with those recently discussed regarding other MT members, inspired this thread), as well as others who claim outlandish backgrounds and training, are fully legitimate and that their stories are completely true.  That doesn't mean, however, that I need to swallow their stories right off the bat, anymore than they should accept anything I present without some sort of qualification...  When I post, should someone disagree with anything I say, I don't fall back into a defensive position and start citing my "vast" (yeah, right) experience, nor my "extensive" training.  I cite what I have done as matter-of-factly as I can to allow for an understanding of where my position may stem, but I don't offer it as a definitive certification of my cosmic correctness...  I still have a lot to learn as far as MA goes, and I'm the first to say I am really no more than a beginner.  

But I have lived for a while, and I've been burned before.  I take Caveat Emptor seriously and see no reason not to.

Sorry to have ruffled feathers.  Didn't mean to.  But I don't retreat on my stance.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:


----------



## kkbb (May 29, 2003)

Thank you for your response.  It was along the lines of what I was hoping you would respond like.  

Your right.  As we get older and oh so wiser, we have a tendency to be very guarded when it comes to family and friends.  Not wanting to see any body get burned or hurt is a priority for myself and many others. 

Your "person to person" talk with this school owner was a very good thing and actually brave thing to do.  More than most would do.  If he was feeding a load of bull you would have caught it and made your next move acordingly.  Whether to expose or keep quiet.

More than likely, *that* decision would have been based on what you seen in the childrens class.   

Did they find value, obviously yes they did, did you find value, in this case you definatley did, so much so, that you will probabley enroll your son.

If you had discovered, this man was a fraud through your questioning, and already having seen the childrens class VS not seeing the children's class, how then would you have reacted?

Do I expose him for what he truly is?
Do I dash the dreams of the little ones who seem to be learning so well?

Tough one isn't it? 

Where am I going with with this?

a.) The results in your questioning would more than likley have not been the same results on the net as they were in person.

Results:
Fraudulant claims? maybe. Good intructor? Seems to be.

b.) Could not have seen the children's class.
Results:
Might even enroll own son!

c.) Because of personal interaction,  No collateral damage.  No one is harmed, dreams are not dashed.

Don't get me wrong, I do not challenge your right to persue such fakes and frauds.  I agree that these people are the downfall of this industry...but we must be ever diligent of the damage we do to those around them, including their own immediate families.  

This has been a great discussion, and have enjoyed reading your posts on MT.  I find your posts intelellegent and worth the time spent.

I don't think I am aiming this post and the previous post at you in particular.  I think I am aiming them at everyone.  Hopefully to just plant seeds of caution.



Thanks
Jim


----------



## chufeng (May 29, 2003)

> Ya know, for all I really know, all you Yili people could just be a cult of circus midgets trying to recruit people to train in a made up art so you can brainwash them into helping you take over the world.



Pinky (aka yiliquan1), they're on to us...

signed, 
the Brain (aka, chufeng) 

:asian:
chufeng


----------



## Matt Stone (May 29, 2003)

> _Originally posted by kkbb _
> *Thank you for your response.  It was along the lines of what I was hoping you would respond like.*



Glad I didn't disappoint...



> *Your right.  As we get older and oh so wiser, we have a tendency to be very guarded when it comes to family and friends.  Not wanting to see any body get burned or hurt is a priority for myself and many others. *



I feel like it is more than just a tendency toward helping my fellow man...  It is a responsibility, one that all "professional" (not meaning working for pay, but meaning those who do MA as more than just a hobby) martial artists need to take seriously.  By failing to remain vigilant in policing our own ranks and taking steps to determine whether the new guy in town is running a good school or McDojo, by failing to disseminate information about what the standards for martial arts _really_ are (and there are standards, accepted widely by the bulk of all martial arts - some things are acknowledged to be crap, other things are simply debated as stylistic preferences), and failing to protect the innocent from the predators (be they abusive, obscene or financially motivated), then we cheapen our arts, we belittle our training, and we erode the respect that some folks once had for our arts.



> *Your "person to person" talk with this school owner was a very good thing and actually brave thing to do.  More than most would do.  If he was feeding a load of bull you would have caught it and made your next move acordingly.  Whether to expose or keep quiet.*



I will admit that there are still some things I don't care for that this man has done...  

* He has levied the "chief instructor of XXXX military base" claim, one I take special exception to as civilians typically are unaware of the relationship the military (at least the Army, with whom this person makes his claim, and for whom I have taught at three installations) has with contracted instructors.  The post sports office will solicit contracted instruction from anyone they can get their hands on as a benefit they can offer to the community.  The gym houses the instruction, the contracting office works out the details, the instructor is either paid by the installation and the class' revenues go directly to the post, or the instructor's fee comes out of the revenues as a percentage split.  Ultimately, most folks that say "I was the chief instructor of XXXX base" are really nothing more than the guy/gal that taught a class for the gym or youth center...  But most folks don't know that, so it sounds like that instructor carries the endorsement of the military somehow.

* He has "blended" his Korean martial art (which I have never heard of before, and I think I am pretty well rounded in most things) and his Okinawan karate (some of which he claims training with a particular instructor, but, beyond possible seminar attendance, his actual training has yet to be fully verified; he makes use of photos with that instructor posted around the school, however...), into a "new" style, even though what it really amounts to is some Korean forms, mostly Okinawan forms, and some new techniques.

But the overall "taste" I got from him, from the way his school runs, from what I saw of the classes, doesn't seem like he is the embodiment of evil...  Perhaps he is a little culturally shallow in his approach (so what, right?), perhaps his "new" style is not really "new" but only a reorganization of extremely similar material.  Ultimately, I walked away thinking that he would be less likely to damage than he would be to assist, so I don't sweat him that much.



> *More than likely, that decision would have been based on what you seen in the childrens class.*



Actually, I was more concerned with his responses and replies to my questions...  Some folks can run a really good class, even though they are the biggest frauds in the world.



> *Did they find value, obviously yes they did, did you find value, in this case you definatley did, so much so, that you will probabley enroll your son.*



Well, while I might enroll my son, that doesn't mean I necessarily think his art is all that worthwhile for _adults_.  What a 7 year old needs and can comprehend is far different from what an adult needs and can comprehend.



> *If you had discovered, this man was a fraud through your questioning, and already having seen the childrens class VS not seeing the children's class, how then would you have reacted?*



Again, the kid's class was the least of my concerns.  If I found through my questioning that his class was truly a danger for the adults in it, I would have said something.  Especially since the instructor also claims to teach military, law enforcement, etc.  At that point, if his program is crap, he is endangering the lives of the people he has snowed, and since I may have to rely on the skills of these people, I want to know that at least I did what I could to ensure they had the benefit of the best training available...  Of course, they could always just quit whatever they are doing and just dedicate their lives to Yiliquan...   



> *Where am I going with with this?
> 
> a.) The results in your questioning would more than likley have not been the same results on the net as they were in person.*



Actually, I have had similar encounters right here on Martial Talk...  In one, the person's claims were completely fraudulent, all of his association memberships were with mutual recognition belt mills, all the name dropping he did was of local area teachers with whom he was mutually recognized and promoted, all of his comments were collections of circular logic and big words he wasn't quite sure how to use.  Much of his information appeared to come from books, and even that information was misunderstood and poorly interpreted.

In the other, while I still take issue with some of the person's background claims, the arguments explaining some of the surrounding facts are plausible enough.  The person doesn't seem to be the embodiment of evil.  While I can't validate the technical skill of this person, and that person claims to teach law enforcement and military personnel, I have to go on that person's presentation of argument and his ability to explain his theories and thinking.  The end result was that, while I don't fully approve of some of the background details, the overall picture is again one that I feel the person will do more good than harm...



> *Don't get me wrong, I do not challenge your right to persue such fakes and frauds.  I agree that these people are the downfall of this industry...but we must be ever diligent of the damage we do to those around them, including their own immediate families.*



I admit that I haven't thought about it in the context you present, I _do_ think about it in the context of being diligent regarding the damage that those around them could do to the students receiving poor instruction...



> *This has been a great discussion, and have enjoyed reading your posts on MT.  I find your posts intelellegent and worth the time spent.*



Nah...  I just tapdance really well.  I can write clearly enough to put my thoughts down in an understandable form.  I'm no more intelligent than your average chimp.  Just ask Chufeng...  



> *I don't think I am aiming this post and the previous post at you in particular.  I think I am aiming them at everyone.  Hopefully to just plant seeds of caution.*



Caution is good.  Concern for the feelings of those involved is needed, but so is concern for the danger they may well find themselves in if they need to put their skills to the test.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:


----------



## Matt Stone (May 29, 2003)

> _Originally posted by chufeng _
> *Pinky (aka yiliquan1), they're on to us...
> 
> signed,
> ...



Brain...

I'm still trying to figure out how to get the monkey into the rubber pants...

NARF!!!


----------



## A.R.K. (May 31, 2003)

Yiliquan 1, kkbb & Zepp,

Very much enjoyed reading your observations.  Good insight in many regards.  

Are there bogus claims in the world of martial arts?  Sure there are.

Are there bogus claims to have busted a fraud?  Yes again.

When someone continues to present basesless and unsubstantiated inueno as fact then there is a problem.  Yes there are some people that can verify information or certificates in some areas of the martial arts, but no one knows every discipline/organization/school/instructor/certificate out there.  

If Mr. Smith claims to be a 4th Dan in style X and presents a certificate that people are unfamilar with...what does it prove either way?  If they say their instructor is Mr. Leroy Jones and here is his phone number, what does that prove either way?  At some point, in most cases trust either enters into it or the matter should be left alone.  Only if you can prove the certificate is fake in THAT particular discipline is your accusation valid.  Only if you personally know Mr. Jones can you prove either way if Mr. Smith was or was not trained by him.  Otherwise it needs to be left alone and not continually dragged out.  

If someone claims to hold rank in the Kukkiwon then it is an easy matter to check.  If someone doesn't claim rank in the Kukkiwon then the Kukkiwon doesn't even come into the equation.

Just my humble opinon
:asian:


----------



## MartialArtist (May 31, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Yiliquan1 _
> *When initiating a line of questioning toward an individual whose claims, background, lineage and/or skill are of a questionable nature, what standpoint does the entire discussion take on?
> 
> I offer that the individual who has made the claims that are the instigating factor in the questioning takes on the role of a prosecuting attorney and/or the client thereof, and that the people asking the individual to provide proof to support his/her claims is more akin to the defense attorney whose primary role is simply to create reasonable doubt, or to air same publicly as a means by which further examination can occur...
> ...


That's for CRIMINAL cases, not CIVIL cases

The two are entirely different matters.  And it also differs as you go up.  A city court cannot do things that the Supreme Court can do.

The difference between a criminal case and a civil case is what you need to prove.  In a criminal court of law, the defendant needs to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and it's the prosecutor's job to get that done.  In a CIVIL court of law, which is more comparable to Martial Talk, is that the person making the claims needs to prove it with reasonable evidence.

[Edit] looks like most of the stuff I've said before was already said.  Ignore it


----------



## MartialArtist (May 31, 2003)

> _Originally posted by Yiliquan1 _
> *Alex and Jim -
> 
> Thanks for reminding me about civil practice...  We don't get a lot of that in the military, at least not in the areas that I have worked.  We don't deal with libel nor slander (we charge it as insubordination), and the only lower standard of proof we deal with is in administrative actions (not the area I work in).
> ...


Military courts...  I'm sure you know that even if you are found innocent in a military court of law, it is still a pain in the @$$ to straighten everything out.


----------



## tonbo (Jun 2, 2003)

Yeah, like my opinion matters fer a hilla beans.

And that's the topic, here.

Okay, I have a certificate on my wall that says I am a legitimate Black Belt in my given style.  My school belongs to no national affiliate, save it's own.  My head instructor is known outside of our state, and has friends in the MA, nationwide, who can vouch for his abilities, and his MA lineage can be traced back far enough to validate his legitimacy.

Now, so what?  If I want to back up my rank, I can and will scan my certificate for anyone who wants to see it.  However, the person I scan it for may just snort at it and say, "Yeah, well....it's not a nationally known school or instructor, so it's pointless.".

What if I say the same thing back about anyone else's style or art?  It's legitimate enough if I *believe* it is.  Look at all the followers of the McDojos, who honestly believe that the art is legit, and will find any and every avenue to prove it.

That having been said.......I *do* think that it is up to the person making the claims to validate the claims they are making.  Anyone making exceptional claims should *expect* to be challenged on them, and should expect to be able to prove them, internet notwithstanding.  If I said that I was the highest-paid actor in Hollywood, I should be able to point to some proof before being accepted as such.  If I can't, and am trying to capitalize on that claim, then I am committing fraud.  

Sure, let those who want to believe that they are the reincarnation of countless masters and have mastered 90 styles by the age of 12 think what they want.  However, if they expect people to take them seriously, then they should be prepared to put up or shut up.

There is a lot of depth and "wiggle-room" in this whole debate.....such as, how do you work the guy that has faith in his organization and has a certificate of rank he believes is real, but which his "master" copied off the internet and ran through a word processor?  Is that person legit or not?  As I said.....lots of angles on this one.

Again, though....if you make a claim, you should be ready to back it up, one way or another.

Peace--


----------



## A.R.K. (Jun 3, 2003)

Tonbo,

Yes, but again I have to say it all boils down to if the person can use what was taught to them.  Is that not the reason for the martial arts in the first place?  Yes, some begin for discipline or exercise, but the real root reason is self defense.

What good is any Dan ranking if the person can't, or hasn't actually used it to defend themselves?  A person can have excellent lineage, great instructors, a solid backing organization and get their butt handed to them in a dark alley.  Coversely, a street-hardened nobody with no 'official' training, with tactics picked up here and there that no official organiztion would touch could well be MUCH more dangerous as an attacker or to an attacker.

Look at my Dan in Pangainoon.  Yeah I've got solid training, from many fine instructors around the world.  Is it backed up by an organiztion, no it is not.  Is it a simple school cert with a name probably nobodies ever heard of, yes it is.  To some it's fine, to some it's garbage.  Either way isn't it what I can or have done with that training?

Should I let the whole Pangainoon/Dan thing drop in favour of the Dan's that I have that are backed up by organizations?  Probably, just in terms of positive image for my system.  Is it politics?  Of course it is.  And as much as I hate politics, some times you have to enter in.  But the bottom line in my humble opinon is what you can do, not what is printed on paper.  I'm a stickler on this point I know, but I think it is a valid position.  

:asian:


----------



## jdmills (Jun 3, 2003)

Dan rank is one thing, 8th ,9th, 10th dan is another.  It seems to me that someone that claims a rank that high is something that should either be verifiable or the person should be very well known.  Yes, there is nothing stopping me from declaring myself a 10th dan in Kenmillsyjukan and opening a school teaching this "rare and unique system".  Maybe I can even fight.  I can even make the argument that I deserve a 10th dan in this obscure system since I am the only person on earth authorized to teach this "rare and unique system".  Somehow it doesn't make me a legitimate 10th.


----------



## A.R.K. (Jun 3, 2003)

Describe a legitimate 10th Dan....

At some point or another, all disciplines where new and were founded by someone.  Whether they caught on or not varies.

You mentioned that 8th and up would be well known.  I ask you, do you know all the 8th and up Dans in the world today?  Don't even count the smaller, unaffiliated disciplines.  Do you know all the 8th and up Dans in all of the major organizations?  

That would be quite a feat.  And I should point out Kanbun Uechi for example.  To my knowledge he never officially belonged to any organization.  Hell, he had to be coaxed into even talking about karate much less anything else.  His background in China is steeped in mystery and there may well be good evidence to suggest that Pangainoon was not even the name of the discipline he learned while there.  

I don't know what kind of rank he 'wore' if any, but he is the recognized founder of Uechi ryu (renamed in 1947 by his son Kanei upon Kanbun's death).  As founder would he be considered a 10th Dan?  I know that is what his son and now his grandson wear.  They are their own world organization now.  But who recognized them [Kanei] originally?  People who wanted to be taught by him is how he was recognized.  

Food for thought.  

:asian:


----------



## RyuShiKan (Jun 3, 2003)

> _Originally posted by A.R.K. _
> *
> At some point or another, all disciplines where new and were founded by someone.  *



Most of the styles that are still around were founded by people that had train assiduously for many years..2 key words one being assiduously  and the other being many. 
Most of these new systems were not new as far as technique went just new as in the name.
My teacher studied from Mr. Uhugushuku, Mr. Wakinaguri as well as  Nakamura Shigeru who studied from Kuniyoshi Shinkichi, Motobu Choki, Itosu Anko as well as his own relatives. Most of them didnt have a name for their style.the whole name game is rather new to Karate anyway.

During these mens lifetime public displays of karate were considered rather crass. You have to remember that some of these men lived during the feudal days when there were still Bushi in Okinawa and folks were very conservative about what they said and did in public concerning MA. To them a karate demo would be like some 18 year old grandmaster putting on a Keyratee demo in a Shopping Mall to break-dance music to us. 
This is most likely why Uechi didnt speak much on the subject of his training.
My own teacher rarely spoon feeds us technique but rather shows us where they are and we can go get them for ourselves if we train seriously enough. Different generation and VERY different mind set.


----------



## jdmills (Jun 3, 2003)

No, I can't even name all the 10ths in kenpo anymore.  There's a 10th (as far as I can tell a legitimate 10th) in TKD that has a school (actually he has a chain of schools but this is the main one) that is 5 miles or so from my house and I never knew it until I started looking for a place for my daughter to study.

All I'm saying is the inability to verify a persons dan rank is probably not, in and of itself, questionable until the dan rank gets very high.


----------



## RyuShiKan (Jun 3, 2003)

JDmills, 

Do you ever get over to Hackensack or Teaneck, NJ ?


----------



## jdmills (Jun 3, 2003)

I used work in Teaneck.


----------



## A.R.K. (Jun 3, 2003)

Ryushikan,

You make a valid point.  The Uechi history recounts of one of Kanbun's students killing an attacker, presumably in self defense in a property dispute.  This may also have reflected on his reluctance to teach an/or speak about his training.

JD,

I would assume that both of these individuals are assoiciated with the appropriate organizations in their respective disciplines.  Some of us were either not that lucky due to locale to have the opportunity to train under and organizionally recognized individual or were unwise to choose them as instructors.  Or a combination of the two.  What you are left with is a non-affiliated ranking.  Good training, yes.  Applicable training, yes.  Recognizable world wide, no.  

Would I rather have a Uechi ryu Dan under someone like Ric Martin or Frank Gorman, most definately.  I have trained under these gentlemen, but that was over twenty years ago and it was not long enough to earn a Dan with them.  Military service placed me into the middle East.  Back then you took what you could get in the way of training.  What was available to me was not organizationally affiliated.  My loss.  And just to lay it on the line, I have pretty much dropped any claim because there is no organizational affiliation and no plausible way for me to reference any living instructor.  That is fine, I have other training.

20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing   

:asian:


----------



## RyuShiKan (Jun 4, 2003)

> _Originally posted by A.R.K. _
> *Ryushikan,
> 
> You make a valid point.  The Uechi history recounts of one of Kanbun's students killing an attacker, presumably in self defense in a property dispute.  This may also have reflected on his reluctance to teach an/or speak about his training.
> *



That student was actually my friend's father.


----------



## tonbo (Jun 4, 2003)

A.R.K.:



> Either way isn't it what I can or have done with that training?



Absolutely.

When I was talking about the many angles to this whole question, that one one of them.  Personally, I don't care if someone has studied TKD, Kenpo, White Eyebrow Kung Fu, or Generic-Do.  There are too many offshoots of styles out there for me to know each one and know whether they are a "real" style or not.  Furthermore, I don't frankly care.  I *do*, however, care about how someone trains.  Sure, I personally know two "Black Belts" who have worked their ways through video courses.  Yep, they're Black all right, but they don't know squat.  

The main point to my post was just that, if someone is making exaggerated claims, then they should be willing to back those claims up, and should expect to be called on those claims.  When it comes to "legitimacy", well.......those that know what to look for will see it or not.  Those that don't know what to look for will either be impressed or not.  Paper, Dans, belts, etc......they may be nice, but they ultimately don't mean much.

Quick case in point:  I can legitimately claim to be a colonel in a national army.  True fact:  I was a colonel in the army of a micronation based in the Netherlands.  (For those that don't know, "micronations" are small, self-defined "nations", often just tongue-in-cheek.  They do not have international recognition, and are often no more than groups of friends on the internet, and so on.  I mean NO disrespect to the army!!). This, despite the fact that a) I have *never* had any military experience, and b) have never set foot in, on, around, or near the micronation itself.  So, if I go around telling people I'm an army colonel, should I expect people to call me on it?  Yes.  Am I a real army colonel?  NO.  

*shrug*.  Anyway, point being that hey, if you want to make big claims, fine.  However, as the saying goes, you should be able to walk the walk if you talk the talk.

Thanks for the response!!

(Again, all respect to those who serve and who have served.  Thanks!!)

Peace--


----------



## A.R.K. (Jun 4, 2003)

Tonbo,

:asian: 

Ryushikan,



> That student was actually my friend's father.



That is actually quite interesting.  Any information on the incident or Kanbun's training passed down?

:asian:


----------

