dannyreeves
Nov 21 2005, 10:55 PM
Blake wanted me to post and let you all know that he cannot login because he is not current. He can't afford to pay his membership dues but would still like to answer throwing and disc related questions.
You can find him at http://www.discgolfreview.com/forums/index.php or at http://forums.stickitdg.com/smf/index.php
Thanks.
will24411
Nov 21 2005, 11:04 PM
Yep, he talks alot at www.stickitdg.com (http://www.stickitdg.com)
and of course his website http://www.discgolfreview.com
krazyeye
Nov 21 2005, 11:15 PM
He should get some sort of membership for free.
Chris Hysell
Nov 21 2005, 11:28 PM
He could sell some old plastic to PIAS and get his membership current.
bfunkyp
Nov 22 2005, 01:41 PM
Or they could just let everyone post on the forum...
Chris Hysell
Nov 22 2005, 02:09 PM
Members only is cooler. I heard that next year you will need a 975 or better player rating to post.
Luke Butch
Nov 22 2005, 02:13 PM
I guess I better start practicing my putting game so I can get my rating up a little bit.
As for Blake T, I think he just won't renew because he doesn't want anyone to see his 880 player rating! :eek:
Boneman
Nov 22 2005, 08:02 PM
Tell Blake to get a paypal account, put a link on his site, and ask for donations ... should be able to cover a PDGA membership pretty quickly ... I know people will be happy to donate, including myself. I wouldn't know half of what I know now without discgolfreviews.com.
paerley
Nov 23 2005, 12:05 AM
Blake seems like the type of guy who, if he were going to play in multiple tourneys, he would come up with the money. I bet he just doesn't have the time to compete, so he hasn't renewed.
MTL21676
Nov 23 2005, 01:20 AM
As for Blake T, I think he just won't renew because he doesn't want anyone to see his 880 player rating! :eek:
Yeah - like your 937 is paying the bills
bschweberger
Nov 23 2005, 01:31 AM
Members only is cooler. I heard that next year you will need a 975 or better player rating to post.
Then you will not be able to POST Christopher.
Luke Butch
Nov 23 2005, 10:30 AM
As for Blake T, I think he just won't renew because he doesn't want anyone to see his 880 player rating! :eek:
Yeah - like your 937 is paying the bills
It will be next year.
AviarX
Nov 23 2005, 02:41 PM
It's pretty sad that Blake and Felix (fore) are now effectively banned (not to mention all the young or broke enthusiasts out there). Blake, the absence of yourself and Felix Sung here will make this board a less informative place.
maybe we should start a petition to have an area of the board where non-members can post... :confused:
fore is my all-time favourite poster, so I'll second. ;)
esalazar
Nov 23 2005, 02:47 PM
wow , that is sad !! I feel Blake was one of the best contributers on this board !! He has helped so many people with different aspects of their game !! The pdga should make an exception in his case and let him do his thing on here!! :Dmy2cents
eddie_ogburn
Nov 23 2005, 03:13 PM
You know when he was the 3rd person to respond to the How do I throw my MRV (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Board=Throwing%20Techniques&Number=67436&Searchpage=0&Main=67422&Search=true&#Post67425) thread, hes been on here for a loooong time. We will miss you fore.
AviarX
Nov 23 2005, 03:16 PM
They could, but Felix is already on record that accepting such an exception would go against his principles. (some already volunteered to pitch in and pay for a membership for him)
Blake might also. Afterall, new (potential future PDGA joiners?) players make up about half of the people he's helped.
the simple solution is to have an area of this board open to non-members. is that too inclusive? /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
Why can't non members apply for message board usage directly to the BOD? They could then grant guys like fore and BlakeT access to post.
mugilcephalus
Nov 23 2005, 03:26 PM
I do not believe Felix has ever been a member of the PDGA. I am not even sure if he wants to join but if he does I would gladly pay for his membership. He has fished many a disc out of the water for me.
AviarX
Nov 23 2005, 03:26 PM
here is what Felix posted earlier:
Goodbye, folks.
It was fun while it lasted. I certainly have benfitted from my conversations with folks on the board; and I hope I have, in some small way, contributed positively to the conversation.
I very much regret that the '05 Bull City Showdown marks the last occasion that I will be volunteering at a PDGA-sanctioned event, at least for the forseeable future. Had I known of this decision by the PDGA Board earlier, I would have rearranged my schedule to be able to attend today as well.
While I have very much enjoyed my time volunteering and getting to know�and learn from�many of the players in this region over the past 5-6 years, and while I do not dispute the right of the PDGA to establish whatever policies it chooses or to limit the use of its resources in any way it chooses, as a non-PDGA member for both personal and vocational reasons, I am simply unable to answer to my own satisfaction the question of why I should continue to donate my time, energy, and sponsorship monies to an organization whose officers apparently believe that the only people whose thoughts and opinions are worthy of being heard are those of dues-paying members.
To the several members (and you know who you are) who have offered over the past several weeks and months that, in the event the PDGA were to implement a members-only posting policy for the board, you would pay the dues for me to become a member: while I am touched by the generosity of your offer deeply appreciate the vote of confidence it represents, I trust you will understand why, as a matter of principle, I must decline your offer.
To my fellow NC disc golfers (and you, Chris Hysell :)), my thanks for your good will and your cameraderie. I trust that our paths will cross on occasion, be it at monthlies, random doubles, or out on the course during casual rounds.
To the many of you, such as Dave Dunipace, Harold Duvall, Rhett, Keith Johnson, Bruce and Jon Brakel, Discette, gnduke, et al., whom I have not met in person but have known only as a name or an avatar here on the DISC_ussion board, thanks for making the board an informative and entertaining place.
Again, goodbye and Godspeed.
Respectfully,
Felix Sung
ck34
Nov 23 2005, 04:02 PM
Perhaps Gotta Go will pay for Blake's renewal considering all of the effort he put into developing Joe's flight chart. I'm glad to know Felix has been a positive force on the NC scene even if he didn't/doesn't become a member. Southwick and Dodge have certainly made a positive impact on the sport regardless whether they are members and that's what counts in the big picture.
Chris Hysell
Nov 23 2005, 04:14 PM
They're being a bunch of babies. If they were true volunteers they would pay money to help others.
BTW, thanks for the shout out Felix. I miss you too.
eddie_ogburn
Nov 23 2005, 04:35 PM
here is what Felix posted earlier:
Goodbye, folks.
.....
I very much regret that the '05 Bull City Showdown marks the last occasion that I will be volunteering at a PDGA-sanctioned event, at least for the forseeable future. Had I known of this decision by the PDGA Board earlier, I would have rearranged my schedule to be able to attend today as well.
While I have very much enjoyed my time volunteering and getting to know�and learn from�many of the players in this region over the past 5-6 years, and while I do not dispute the right of the PDGA to establish whatever policies it chooses or to limit the use of its resources in any way it chooses, as a non-PDGA member for both personal and vocational reasons, I am simply unable to answer to my own satisfaction the question of why I should continue to donate my time, energy, and sponsorship monies to an organization whose officers apparently believe that the only people whose thoughts and opinions are worthy of being heard are those of dues-paying members.
.....
Does this mean no more Felix in the water??
Lyle O Ross
Nov 23 2005, 05:40 PM
I think some of the things being posted here are really important. IMO there should be some exceptions and Felix and Blake are such exceptions. The point is that we want to promote the sport and while I won't miss UPM and his negative approach I will miss these posters. Furthermore, I will miss Jason and Dodge. As much as I've gone head to head with them overall, they care more than they simply trash. It is sad that a few jerks are going to hurt the positive contribution that could be made by some.
BTW - If anyone converts Blake or Felix into taking a membership send me a PM and I will also contribute. Blake made my game!
teamtrim
Nov 23 2005, 06:16 PM
Goodbye, folks.
It was fun while it lasted. I certainly have benfitted from my conversations with folks on the board; and I hope I have, in some small way, contributed positively to the conversation.
I very much regret that the '05 Bull City Showdown marks the last occasion that I will be volunteering at a PDGA-sanctioned event, at least for the forseeable future. Had I known of this decision by the PDGA Board earlier, I would have rearranged my schedule to be able to attend today as well.
While I have very much enjoyed my time volunteering and getting to know�and learn from�many of the players in this region over the past 5-6 years, and while I do not dispute the right of the PDGA to establish whatever policies it chooses or to limit the use of its resources in any way it chooses, as a non-PDGA member for both personal and vocational reasons, I am simply unable to answer to my own satisfaction the question of why I should continue to donate my time, energy, and sponsorship monies to an organization whose officers apparently believe that the only people whose thoughts and opinions are worthy of being heard are those of dues-paying members.
To the several members (and you know who you are) who have offered over the past several weeks and months that, in the event the PDGA were to implement a members-only posting policy for the board, you would pay the dues for me to become a member: while I am touched by the generosity of your offer deeply appreciate the vote of confidence it represents, I trust you will understand why, as a matter of principle, I must decline your offer.
To my fellow NC disc golfers (and you, Chris Hysell :)), my thanks for your good will and your cameraderie. I trust that our paths will cross on occasion, be it at monthlies, random doubles, or out on the course during casual rounds.
To the many of you, such as Dave Dunipace, Harold Duvall, Rhett, Keith Johnson, Bruce and Jon Brakel, Discette, gnduke, et al., whom I have not met in person but have known only as a name or an avatar here on the DISC_ussion board, thanks for making the board an informative and entertaining place.
Again, goodbye and Godspeed.
Respectfully,
Felix Sung
And I didn't think I could think less of the PDGA, but now that they have taken a GREAT ambassador of our sport away from NC disc golf, I sincerely hope that the PDGA burns in the depths of the ninth circle...maybe even make a new level for them...
Felix...we really hope that you will continue to grace us here in NC with your presence at NC tournaments. You have always been a stimulating conversationalist as well as the best spotter and disc retreiver on earth...Saturdays won't be the same without Felix!!!
Thanks PDGA.
tbender
Nov 23 2005, 06:29 PM
As much as I appreciated Felix's knowledge from my distant location, if this small thing (and it is a small thing in the scope of the entire organization) removes him from volunteering at PDGA sanctioned events, so be it.
The reasons were clear for the move and not made in haste. When you have limited resources for monitoring the board, one bad apple can and did spoil the bunch. This board is funded by the dues-paying members and enough of them apparently complained about the non-member abuse to warrant the change.
AviarX
Nov 24 2005, 12:55 AM
You are jumping to conclusions if you think the message board abuse was created by non-members. They could just as easily have been card-carrying PDGA members.
It seems to me, this was not a well-thought out solution to the problem and it will hurt more than help the PDGA. Maybe the proximity of the new PDGA HQ is a little too close to ball golf for our own good...
discglfr
Nov 24 2005, 12:49 PM
We are talking about $40 people. Enough with the "I'm too poor to spend $40." This organization has done more for the growth of disc golf than any other organization - why wouldn't you spend the $40 and just become a member?
That's like buying 2 or 3 less Candy/Z discs per year. That's like buying 2 or 3 less cases of (cheap) beer in a year. That's like the amount you could save by not going out to dinner at a decent place in a year.
Support our organization. Donations shouldn't even be needed. Just pay $40 (or get a real job that allows you to afford that amount).
dannyreeves
Nov 24 2005, 12:51 PM
We are talking about $40 people. Enough with the "I'm too poor to spend $40." This organization has done more for the growth of disc golf than any other organization - why wouldn't you spend the $40 and just become a member?
That's like buying 2 or 3 less Candy/Z discs per year. That's like buying 2 or 3 less cases of (cheap) beer in a year. That's like the amount you could save by not going out to dinner at a decent place in a year.
Support our organization. Donations shouldn't even be needed. Just pay $40 (or get a real job that allows you to afford that amount).
That is what I have been saying.
the_kid
Nov 24 2005, 01:37 PM
We are talking about $40 people. Enough with the "I'm too poor to spend $40." This organization has done more for the growth of disc golf than any other organization - why wouldn't you spend the $40 and just become a member?
That's like buying 2 or 3 less Candy/Z discs per year. That's like buying 2 or 3 less cases of (cheap) beer in a year. That's like the amount you could save by not going out to dinner at a decent place in a year.
Support our organization. Donations shouldn't even be needed. Just pay $40 (or get a real job that allows you to afford that amount).
Then again what if you are a pro who is too young to get a job? I mean GG was 13 when he moved up. :D
reddman
Nov 24 2005, 01:53 PM
Then be good enough to win some cash which will pay for your membership. Yes, I know you have won enough to pay for your dues. :)
the_kid
Nov 24 2005, 02:43 PM
I still don't think this was a good decision :(
atxdiscgolfer
Nov 24 2005, 03:44 PM
Blakes helped out a lot of people on this message board and I think that everyone should donate a dollar to pay his membership. I got 1.00 on it, if I can donate a dollar with a commission only job then everyone else should as well.
AviarX
Nov 24 2005, 08:04 PM
We are talking about $40 people. Enough with the "I'm too poor to spend $40." [....] Just pay $40 (or get a real job that allows you to afford that amount).
You evidently do not understand Felix's principles, and you also are apparently failing to consider younger persons interested in the sport who either don't work yet or maybe have a part time job after school already but their extra income goes to help their single parent family pay bills. Once someone is seriously interested int he sport and can afford to anti up for tournaments, they have little excuse not to join unless they prefer to pay the $5 renters fee and support the PDGA that way. But for persons interested in the sport, being able to post here for free may very well turn them into avid disc golfers who become future lifetime PDGA members. the fact that this move turned Felix away alone points shows it was an ill-conceived carpet bomb approach to attempting to rid us of bad apples. (it may have rid of us at least as many good apples). having a section for members only and a section that was as it was before would have been an interim step that imo should have been tried (or should be tried in the near future).
Chris Hysell
Nov 24 2005, 08:59 PM
I bet they spend more than $40/year on internet. Cancel the net and get a membership. I'm not sure how they'll post but that's another issue.
AviarX
Nov 24 2005, 09:08 PM
you have got to be kidding. a PDGA membership is more valuable to an economically challenged teen-ager than the internet is? maybe if he is the next Climo -- but what are the odds?
the_kid
Nov 24 2005, 11:27 PM
you have got to be kidding. a PDGA membership is more valuable to an economically challenged teen-ager than the internet is? maybe if he is the next Climo -- but what are the odds?
37,499,141.06/1 :D
AviarX
Nov 24 2005, 11:39 PM
i wish i could put your avatar on ignore :D
how about changing it to a Wizard ... or something?
dannyreeves
Nov 25 2005, 12:04 AM
after the page loads, just click the stop button on the IE window. it will freeze it.
AviarX
Nov 25 2005, 12:06 AM
Thank You!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! now i have some relief from the two most irritating avatars on this board (My_Hero's being the other /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif )
AviarX
Nov 26 2005, 01:30 PM
J Brightbill (former regular here until all non-PDGA disc golf enthusiasts were banned) asked me to post the following for him:
<font color="blue"> Blake had the third post in the MRV thread...I started the MRV thread, and now I'm gone. If you could post this in the thread with the message from Blake and Felix, that would be great:
-------
$40...just pay...etc. They just screwed over a college student who has more important things to put money towards, like loans, and books. Had I wanted to join the PDGA, yes, I had. I suffered a back injury in '03 that has kept me out of sports for 2 years, so I had no use for a membership. I was just getting back into the sport and considering joining when this happens. Every time I get really interested in disc golf, somebody or some organization has to shoot themselves in the foot. 3 years ago I was cussed out by a Sarasota Sky Pilots member and his group for "interrupting the weekly handicap round" when I showed up on a Saturday for a round with my dad- his only available off day. Never played a Sky Pilots event after that. Skip 2 years of injury time, I get back. Play a round or two with Vince Whorley and some locals in their last weekly of the season, have a great time. I hang around the PDGA discussion board (which I have been using since around '01-02), only to get booted off by a horrible decision by whoever makes such horrible decisions. I get the distinct impression the PDGA and the "serious" disc golf community is out to nail their feet to the floor with the treatment of fringe players. Try to remove yourself from the situation and look at yourselves the way a casual person would..."it's just frisbee." Call them ignorant, call them stupid, but in doing so, you've driven off the future.
I could rant for pages about the poor economic planning involved. Nobody, NOBODY, will pay $40 for something they see no value in. It's basic people. All these benefits, services, etc, the PDGA provides, only valuable to people who believe they are being benefitted. Fringe players don't see any of it, new players, Joe frisbee player at your local course won't fork over $40 for the benefits and ooooh, discussion board privileges. The disc golf player base is not large enough to start getting exclusive. The only expansion can come from within, and word of mouth. Disc golfers aren't mating and maturing at the speed of rabbits, so I doubt that's a good way to expand membership. Word of mouth may draw some casuals, but casuals are the very people the PDGA drives away.
Am I angry, yes I'm angry. Angry that such a fantastic sport is being run by such mindless morons. The sad part is that while I was still playing, I was good. Very good. Near the top of advanced am when I was 15-16. I would have been the so-called future of disc golf, had poor management and slaps in the face not driven me away. I doubt anybody will take this seriously, but I'm a living breathing example of the spiraling decline of organized disc golf expansion. Watch me go PDGA, watch me go.
Jedidiah L. Brightbill
</font>
- - - -
Hopefully, the signs of change on the horizon will come to full light. If nothing else, it shows the PDGA leadership is open to less exclusive ways to solve the problem of abusive anonymous posts, which was a serious enough problem to warrant a lot of complaints being sent to the PDGA:
In another thread, Theo recently posted the following:
" <font color="green"> I'm working with Jon Lyksett to get someone to take overall responsibility for the message board, and that person could manage a group of moderators to help out. Then we can reevaluate the options for opening up the Affiliate Clubs sections, a PDGA Q & A section, and possibly a couple more non-member areas. Thanks for volunteering!
-Theo
</font> "
Erroneous
Nov 26 2005, 01:52 PM
If they were SMART they would Just sale 3 disc & get a membership with that!!!
Paul Taylor
Nov 26 2005, 02:07 PM
Okay,
This decission has been in the making for about a year now. We discussed this when several non-members started to abuse members and this board. People were asked to register and not post anonymously anymore, but they continued to do so. Some were banned from the board or put on restrictions and then later were allowed to return only to continue their assult on the PDGA and on the members. One even went as far as starting his own crybaby board to bash the PDGA. It is because of people like this that a decision was made to make it a members only DISCussion.
People, you were given the chance to police the board as members, but we didn't and now you have to live with the outcome. Does this effect the good people that posted beneficial conversations and topics, yes. It is sad that a few bad apples will ruin the whole barrel, but some things are what they are.
This B*S* has gone on long enough. Accept it or join, there is no other discussion. These are the rules and they should be followed and not cried about. I have never heard so much whinning from a group of grown men.
AviarX
Nov 26 2005, 11:23 PM
Mr. Taylor, when you say *we* discussed this who do you mean by we? Are you a PDGA board member or is there a thread you can cite? Also, what proof do you have that the offenders were non-pdga members?
characterizing the grievances of those who feel the PDGA has made a hasty, inconsiderate decision as "whiny" is a cheap shot that avoids even acknowledging their perspective. I hope you aren't a PDGA representative...
ck34
Nov 27 2005, 12:44 AM
Am I angry, yes I'm angry. Angry that such a fantastic sport is being run by such mindless morons.
Mindless [I'm a potty-mouth!] here. Jedidiah, if you're in the Cincy area, I'll go out on a limb and guess you haven't volunteered as much as many PDGA members in your community, including myself, to enhance your playing experience over the years. We're going to continue doing that whether you join or not, because that's what we do. Even if you get nothing personally from your $40 membership, it would show that you support the efforts of those who have made your disc golf experience better in your community. But then, I can understand not supporting mindless morons.
$40...just pay...etc. They just screwed over a college student who has more important things to put money towards, like loans, and books.
I can understand the costs of college. Many players drop out of competitive PDGA play for several years and come back later. No reason to slam the people who still make your local experience better when you have time to get in a round or two. My guess is that even though you pay lots of tuition, you still don't get to stand up and teach any of your classes. Why would you expect to get posting rights here when you're not even a member?
I hang around the PDGA discussion board (which I have been using since around '01-02), only to get booted off by a horrible decision by whoever makes such horrible decisions. I get the distinct impression the PDGA and the "serious" disc golf community is out to nail their feet to the floor with the treatment of fringe players.
My guess is that PDGA members, on balance, have treated "fringe" players better by installing and maintaining courses than "fringe" players have treated the foliage and courses installed by volunteers, many who are PDGA members. And fringe players have benefited more from leagues and events run by PDGA members than vice versa.
I would have been the so-called future of disc golf, had poor management and slaps in the face not driven me away. I doubt anybody will take this seriously, but I'm a living breathing example of the spiraling decline of organized disc golf expansion.
<font color="blue"> "I could have been a contender, I could have been somebody..." </font>:D
I wouldn't call Jed a bum, but he shouldn't expect to be taken seriously, making such excuses! :o
Paul Taylor
Nov 27 2005, 01:12 AM
Rob,
You asked if there was a discussion of this on a thread, yes, several, some of them have been deleted because of the irresposibility of others. Are some of them members?, yes, but some of them are not.
Check with Terry Calhoun and see what he has. I remember doing a survey and I will PM you the responses that I gave him. It was in February of this year. He was going to have some discussion on these topics at the next couple of PDGA Summits.
You also asked if I was part of the BOD or a PDGA representative...BOD member, No. Representative, YES, I am a proud card carrying member of the PDGA.
Do I agree with everything, not all of the time, but I will abide by the rules. Does it hurt players and posters who contributed constructively, YES. But I do not think that someone who cites that this is not fair and so they will go and leave and take their toys with them, is of that much benefit. Someone who cites that this is not fair and work constructively on a solution to this 'problem' is of benefit.
Nonmembers have not been banned from the discussion board, they can still read, they just cannot post. Will this be resolved in a way that everybody will be happy?, NO. But other alternatives were tried in the past and I will support the decissions of the ELECTED board. If you want to change this or something else then I would suggest that you run for a BOARD position next year or get involved more than this discussion.
I will miss Blake and others, they had some positive contributions, but I will not miss others. Will this totally stop the rude comments, no, but it should slow them down a lot.
Am I in the minority? maybe, maybe not
You have a PM.
AviarX
Nov 27 2005, 01:26 AM
Am I angry, yes I'm angry. Angry that such a fantastic sport is being run by such mindless morons.
Mindless [I'm a potty-mouth!] here. Jedidiah, if you're in the Cincy area, I'll go out on a limb and guess you haven't volunteered as much as many PDGA members in your community, including myself, to enhance your playing experience over the years. We're going to continue doing that whether you join or not, because that's what we do. Even if you get nothing personally from your $40 membership, it would show that you support the efforts of those who have made your disc golf experience better in your community. But then, I can understand not supporting mindless morons.
<font color="blue"> Chuck, I have no idea where J. Brightbill is from, but i am pretty sure it isn't Cincinnati. </font>
$40...just pay...etc. They just screwed over a college student who has more important things to put money towards, like loans, and books.
I can understand the costs of college. Many players drop out of competitive PDGA play for several years and come back later. No reason to slam the people who still make your local experience better when you have time to get in a round or two. My guess is that even though you pay lots of tuition, you still don't get to stand up and teach any of your classes. Why would you expect to get posting rights here when you're not even a member?
I hang around the PDGA discussion board (which I have been using since around '01-02), only to get booted off by a horrible decision by whoever makes such horrible decisions. I get the distinct impression the PDGA and the "serious" disc golf community is out to nail their feet to the floor with the treatment of fringe players.
My guess is that PDGA members, on balance, have treated "fringe" players better by installing and maintaining courses than "fringe" players have treated the foliage and courses installed by volunteers, many who are PDGA members. And fringe players have benefited more from leagues and events run by PDGA members than vice versa.
<font color="blue"> when our local message board was being dragged down by abusive posts, the problem was solved by requiring a log-in id linked to a verifiable email address -- not by banning non-members from posting which would push away the very population we would do well to court.
I can't speak for others, but the volunteer work i have done on local courses and in helping to run local course challenges has been done by me as a disc golf lover and not so much as a PDGA member. Maybe i am missing something, but i don't understand how denying non-members a voice on this message board helps promote the sport given that the same sweep of the proverbial PDGA hand that wiped away the bad apples also wiped away a lot of good apples -- Felix Sung and Blake T. being more prominent examples. Plus, there is no guarantee that the abusers were non-members or that a discouraging tone of discourse will be deterred by only allowing members to post. your point that many PDGA members do things to help disc golf in general is sound, but it seems to me it was both predictable and natural that persons who care a great deal about disc golf have become upset with the decision to deny them the ability to communicate with other disc golf enthusiasts across the globe on the basis that an abusive few misused the privileges this site offers. what percentage of the membership voted to deny non-members message board access?</font>
ck34
Nov 27 2005, 09:51 AM
It's not easy to come up with member benefits. Limiting posting to members is apparently a benefit, probably not worth $40 by itself, or posters wouldn't care so much about giving it away. Many local discussion boards echo the same important topics on this board where nonmembers can post. It's also "easier" to maintain some order on these local boards because there's additional peer pressure when these people are more likely to see each other around town. I doubt Jed would call Theo, Stork or Terry morons to their faces.
AviarX
Nov 27 2005, 01:15 PM
Probably not, but i think Jed was responding to a member that suggested he should pay 40$ or shut the he.ll up. It is that kind of member attitude which it seems to me he was addressing. If the shoe fits wear it, if it doesn't don't.
Blake recently sent me a very thoughtful email and if he gives me permission i will post it.
imo, we should be encouraging non-members to visit and interact here as a benefit to the PDGA.
discglfr
Nov 27 2005, 02:13 PM
<font color="blue">Chuck hit is on the head with this line</font> "I'll go out on a limb and guess you haven't volunteered as much as many PDGA members in your community, including myself, to enhance your playing experience over the years. We're going to continue doing that whether you join or not, because that's what we do. Even if you get nothing personally from your $40 membership, it would show that you support the efforts of those who have made your disc golf experience better in your community."
<font color="blue">I guess what my point in posting was this - I signed up for the PDGA when I was about 15. I didn't have to ask mommy and daddy nor did I have to sell my right testicle to come up with membership money. In fact, now that I'm 27 I can say that I paid each and every year by means of ... get this ... having a job. As I posted before, $40 is not that much money (to ANYONE). If if the poor college student example could buy 1 less case of beer in a year along with 1 less CE disc in a year along with 1 less case of ordering a late night pizza in a year - he/she could afford this $40.
It's not just about posting rights. It's about supporting this sport. If my arms and legs were cut off today and I could never play a round of disc golf again I would still send my money into the PDGA every single year. It's about supporting an organization that does more for you than you'll probably ever realize. Maybe if people would stop posting useless nonsense on here or worrying about the 1 point their player rating appears to be off - they could better focus their energy on doing something that's productive? Wait - it's easier to just come to a message board and whine about everything.
I'm not going to even attempt to turn this into polotics at the national level but you may love or hate Bush or you may love or hate the war but at the end of the day you still pray and support the troops we have there!</font>
uwmdiscgolfer
Nov 27 2005, 08:10 PM
T-doog, your so right.....40$ is nothing. I had stopped playing disc golf for 4 years while i went to college...I wasnt active, but i wasnt active becuase i was not involved with disc golf, period, at that time in my life. I also, got my PDGA number when i was 15 and i didnt cry to my dad, i had a part time job and paid the then 25$ to get that pdga number. I grew up playing with barry schultz and at the time, i did not see the reason to get a pdga number. He told me that by paying that small amount of money, that it will support the future of Disc golf and hoepfully make it something that will grow into a national sport. Its not quite there yet, but its heading in the right direction, im my opinion.
Side note, terry dosnt even have a real job, and he pays his dues!!!!
So pay your dues!!!!
AviarX
Nov 28 2005, 02:25 AM
if your line of reasoning and your economic assumptions are sound across the board regardless of age or socio-economic class -- explain to me why it is that of the many people who play disc golf regularly at public parks so few are PDGA members?
The PDGA performs an important function -- they sanction tournaments at which the best can compete against each other by throwing down whatever each participant is required to put into the pot. They also standardize the rules of disc golf and have created an excellent rating tool for PDGA members. They seek to gain corporate sponsorship for our sport, and they also would like to get television coverage.
Also, doesn't about half of the membership fee go to DGWN and not to the PDGA?
Don't get me wrong, i appreciate what people like Rick Rothstein does and i love the DGWN -- i also appreciate what Chuck Kennedy and Theo and the Rules Committee members do. A lot of people volunteer their time and that is to be commended.
But a lot of people do things for disc golf independent of the PDGA. I do not only mean the significant contributions to our sport that the owners of Innova, Discraft, and Gateway have made -- but also the things less prominent individuals contribute. Why should the one disc golf message board that can be a hub for newbies, ex-players who now for health reasons no longer play, and other disc golf enthusiasts shut out all but a chosen few? It just isn't smart given the goals of our organization. National forums are rare and it enhances the PDGA to have non-members frequent this site. It gives them exposure to the PDGA and helps show off the reasons why they might want to join. Telling them $40 has never been much of a sacrifice to you is not the best way imo to promote our sport.
If you really want to force users of this site to contribute you could have a message board fee or a "disc golf community service hours requirement that a PDGA member would have to sign off on (say 10 hours a year helping improve/maintain a local course or for assisting a TD of a PDGA event). Even that seems over-the-top to me. Getting non-members to frequent this site adds to the "hits" that corporate interests care most about. maybe it is no less absurd to suggest that we should pay people to come here than to suggest they should pay to use this site...
ck34
Nov 28 2005, 10:53 AM
I would guess that just a small percentage of all nonmember disc golfers who have ever visited the PDGA site for information have posted on the Discussion Board (Theo could probably determine from site stats). Ability to post is the only thing being limited to members, not the ability to see the whole site or contact people for info by email. I guarantee that thousands of players and interested parties like Park Directors and sponsors will still visit the site. The bulk of them will be fine with contacting the listed people for more info if they don't find what they need from info that's already online. In fact, we should do a better job of orgainizing and posting information on the website because providing it via Discussion Board is very inefficient for people to find it and then becomes repetitive and time consuming for volunteers to continually have to repost the same info over and over.
I've never once felt the need to post on any of the hundreds of websites I visit regularly for information or was mad because I couldn't login to their company network to chat with employees. I always get responses from their listed contacts when I have questions about their products or services. It's just posturing and hyperbole to post chicken little pleas that the sky will fall if nonmembers cannot post on a members only Board.
klemrock
Nov 28 2005, 12:24 PM
Thanks, Chuck and Terry.
Your posts are right on the mark.
Jroc
Nov 28 2005, 01:51 PM
I second that!! It just slays me to see all this 'woe is me' c.rap regarding a silly message board. As I have posted before...if this message board or how it is run is such an important part of your PDGA support decisions...maybe you need to re-evaluate why you are even involved in the first place.
Am membership = about <font color="red">11 cents </font> per day!!
Pro membership = about <font color="red">15 cents </font> per day!!
I wouldnt mind seeing non-members allowed in Affiliate club areas, but the rest of this belly aching is just plain silly
Lyle O Ross
Nov 28 2005, 02:16 PM
We are talking about $40 people. Enough with the "I'm too poor to spend $40." [....] Just pay $40 (or get a real job that allows you to afford that amount).
You evidently do not understand Felix's principles, and you also are apparently failing to consider younger persons interested in the sport who either don't work yet or maybe have a part time job after school already but their extra income goes to help their single parent family pay bills. Once someone is seriously interested int he sport and can afford to anti up for tournaments, they have little excuse not to join unless they prefer to pay the $5 renters fee and support the PDGA that way. But for persons interested in the sport, being able to post here for free may very well turn them into avid disc golfers who become future lifetime PDGA members. the fact that this move turned Felix away alone points shows it was an ill-conceived carpet bomb approach to attempting to rid us of bad apples. (it may have rid of us at least as many good apples). having a section for members only and a section that was as it was before would have been an interim step that imo should have been tried (or should be tried in the near future).
Actually,
As I read through this message thread I find that I don't understand Felix's principals. It may be that I will come to some point where this is already discussed (I've not read beyond this post) but right now I don't get it.
I'm coming at this from the observation that Felix has never been a member. How could he have known in advance (5 years ago that is) that some day the Board would vote to make this site members only? That is some serious clairvoyance!
Perhaps it is something else; some other fine principal that we've missed here. Is it that he doesn't support the PDGA? Is it that he doesn't support any organization? Is it that he doesn't believe in spending his money on private organizations?
Was he always morally opposed to joining the PDGA - a rebel without a cause so to speak?
As for his current assertion that he can't support an organization that won't listen to outside voices (again that clairvoyance thing in retrospect) even this is misplaced. Is there anyone out there that thinks the PDGA hasn't listened to Steve Dodge, Jason, or even UPM? Are we really that naive? Even now, I suspect the Board is discussing Blake and Felix along with others. The notion that the PDGA only listens to it's members is absurd and I would have expected at least a reasonable excuse from Felix - perhaps "I'm morally opposed to joining any club started by a bunch of freakin' hippies!"
It is equally absurd to assume that the major (only?) way to communicate to the PDGA is via this site or that the desire of the Board to control this site has anything to do with that. Many Board members and volunteers never come here. They find the kind of antics played out by UPM, The [I'm a potty-mouth!] and others to be disgusting and hurtful.
So, while I greatly enjoy Felix's posts, his intelligence, and his passion, I'm not buying, no more than I buy Blake's I can't afford $40. Especially given the number of offers to pay Blake's way. (You should know that I support a life time membership for Blake due to his contributions!)
So Felix, send us another e-mail telling us why you aren't willing to play and this time, be a little more honest.
BTW - let us be clear, the PDGA spent a lot of time thinking about the desision to limit this site to members. They waded through tons of [I'm a potty-mouth!] and UPM vitriol. They asked us to play nicely and when that didn't work they asked us what to do. We told them in polls and by other means - "bring in some responsibility, that is make those of us who can't, act their ages." Bravo! I am sorry for the loss but I say, goodby UPM, goodby to multiple personalities - maybe now we can focus on... disc golf or at least know who is behind those nasty comments that all to often get posted!
(I keep forgetting that A*N*G*R*Y C*L*O*W*N is a potty mouth word...)
greenbeard
Nov 28 2005, 05:53 PM
Or they could just let everyone post on the forum...
Sorry this is a club of Exclusion not Inclusion
gnduke
Nov 28 2005, 07:37 PM
No, It's a club that includes all those that join.
greenbeard
Nov 28 2005, 08:09 PM
sorry, forgot sarcasm emote :D
AviarX
Nov 29 2005, 02:23 AM
I would guess that just a small percentage of all nonmember disc golfers who have ever visited the PDGA site for information have posted on the Discussion Board (Theo could probably determine from site stats). Ability to post is the only thing being limited to members, not the ability to see the whole site or contact people for info by email. I guarantee that thousands of players and interested parties like Park Directors and sponsors will still visit the site. The bulk of them will be fine with contacting the listed people for more info if they don't find what they need from info that's already online. In fact, we should do a better job of orgainizing and posting information on the website because providing it via Discussion Board is very inefficient for people to find it and then becomes repetitive and time consuming for volunteers to continually have to repost the same info over and over.
I've never once felt the need to post on any of the hundreds of websites I visit regularly for information or was mad because I couldn't login to their company network to chat with employees. I always get responses from their listed contacts when I have questions about their products or services. It's just posturing and hyperbole to post chicken little pleas that the sky will fall if nonmembers cannot post on a members only Board.
<font color="blue"> i am not suggesting the sky will fall, just that you are denying me and other members the ability to talk around the nation and around the globe to other disc golf enthusiasts on this forum. Blake T and Felix Sung are two of the best presences i have found here, but now they are effectively banned. Add to that list all of the international discers who can't interact with us. i will greatly miss that. i am not suggesting the sky will fall, just that we are shooting mosquitoes with skud missles. there is a cost which goes with the benefit, and we are blowing up more than just our target.
when i go to mlb.com i can post all day on the team i like's message board (da Cubs). it's not like they limit the site to pro ball players LOL. the message board adds to the fanfare for the sport.
the other thing about this decision that seems counterintuitive is that people are suggesting those who feel shut out should now feel motivated to pay $40 for a membership. If we had a members only section and a non-member section that might hold water. especially if we had a member only section where top pros like Ken, Barry, and Nate had a thread where they responded to questions -- then you might get non-members signing up. but even then i think the decision on whether or not to join the PDGA is more a practical one -- something like: "will i enter enough PDGA events to save money if i am a member (verses paying the $5 fee per event) minus what i value the DGWN subscription at?"
some people contribute with money others with time (Felix, Blake, all the great people who help maintain courses, etc.).
i do appreciate how much you do for disc golf Chuck.
but asking that non-members be allowed to post here unless they abuse the privilege is not really asking a lot. it actually enhances this site if the message board, or part of it, is an inclusive environment.
let's hear from some of the non-members on this topic /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
</font>
AviarX
Nov 29 2005, 03:04 AM
We are talking about $40 people. Enough with the "I'm too poor to spend $40." [....] Just pay $40 (or get a real job that allows you to afford that amount).
You evidently do not understand Felix's principles, and you also are apparently failing to consider younger persons interested in the sport who either don't work yet or maybe have a part time job after school already but their extra income goes to help their single parent family pay bills.
Actually,
As I read through this message thread I find that I don't understand Felix's principals. It may be that I will come to some point where this is already discussed (I've not read beyond this post) but right now I don't get it.
I'm coming at this from the observation that Felix has never been a member. How could he have known in advance (5 years ago that is) that some day the Board would vote to make this site members only? That is some serious clairvoyance!
Perhaps it is something else; some other fine principal that we've missed here. Is it that he doesn't support the PDGA? Is it that he doesn't support any organization? Is it that he doesn't believe in spending his money on private organizations?
Was he always morally opposed to joining the PDGA - a rebel without a cause so to speak?
<font color="blue"> if i remember correctly, Felix is a Christian minister (or pastor or something -- i don't pretend to know much about organized religion). he probably is against taking money from others for his own personal benefit when he feels the money could be better spent on those who have more pressing needs. he probably also is against spending his income from his church on personal luxuries like the PDGA membership. He has donated plenty of time to help the PDGA at events and on this message board, and the guy is a beacon and a great ambassador to our sport. or was...
he can no longer post and though i hope he will, it won't surprise me if he declines to try and enlighten those who don't understand his principles. i hope i haven't mischaracterized where he is coming from, but i do wish people would be a wee bit more magnaminous when they post their opinions ... </font>
let's hear from some of the non-members on this topic /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
Am I allowed to go-back in time? :)
AviarX
Nov 29 2005, 04:22 AM
<font color="blue"> Blake T. sent this message to my yahoo email address Sunday, but it is not my main email address so i was delayed in posting this. </font>
--------------------------------------
Blake T. writes:
Here are my thoughts/comments on this and I would like to thank Rob for posting it for me.
I support the PDGA in the ways that I can. I was a current member from 2001-2003. After my injury in 2003 I lost a lot of interest in disc golf and spent most of 2004 rehabilitating my shoulder before I was drawn back into the sport. I had planned to renew in the fall but due to a wrist injury that my doctor said would likely keep me sidelined through all of 2005, I again pushed the renewal back and I lost interest in disc golf again as some very serious things in my life popped up.
2005 has been a tight year in that the first three months of this year and the last two months have held events beyond my control that have set me back financially. Let it be known that I consider $40 a year to be a quite fair, reasonable, and worthwhile endeavor to support the PDGA.
The situation I am in at this moment is difficult but not one I see as permanent. It is one of those "fallen on hard times" situations. Anyone who has ever had a large, unexpected expenditure or period of unexpected wage-loss probably knows what this feels like. If you have not experienced this, hopefully you consider yourself fortunate for that. I equate my situation to say, having your car die the same week your mortgage payment, insurance payment, and other bills are due. The money exists, it is just allocated elsewhere and things are tight for a time until things stabilize. With the upcoming holidays, this just happened at a very inopportune time for me.
I had Danny post on my behalf not to whine about it, but to simply inform those seeking my input where they could find me for the time being.
What I can say is that it goes against my ethics to accept donations unless they are in exchange for something directly tangible, e.g. discs, private lessons, etc. as I do have $40, it's just going towards other things right now that I deem more important: Christmas gifts, physical rehabilitation, eating healthy/vitamin supplements, the occasional dinner out with my girl-friend, and things of that nature. It also goes against my ethics to expect/accept any kind of special treatment in terms of the pdga.com board that is different from any other non/non-current member.
I estimate I will be in a position to renew in the spring. It was never a goal of mine to not renew, it just sort of happened that way.
As for the decision to limit posting, my opinion on it would be the same as if I were a current member and able to post. The PDGA.com message board has grown into being the number one meeting place on the internet for disc golfers around the world, both members and non-members. The downside I see of this is that it gives more of an exclusive feel rather than inclusive, and generally that is negative when it comes to promoting growth. Many potential members have wandered their way here and posted their questions. Now that is not really possible for them to do so.
It is the newer player that has the questions really looking to be answered. The future of the sport is to get more serious players involved in disc golf. Nearly all serious players were once curious recreational players with similar questions about disc golf, its organizations, and competitive play. It is the newer player that needs this board the most.
What this message board has served as for many people is a place that gives the PDGA a more personal voice and says, "We are here for you and we want to get you involved." I feel the recent limitations in a way have severed that voice.
I'm always a bit hesitant when basing decisions upon surveys. From my experiences with surveys, only the people that feel the strongest about something will actually step up and respond. However, the decision has been made and I will deal accordingly.
Overall, my feelings are that I am guessing that the number of potential members that would have joined based upon their positive experiences here will outnumber the number of members that would not renew based upon negative experiences here.
As for my understanding of volunteerism, it usually comes in the form of time and effort and not from the wallet. People generally have either money OR time and they in turn offer what they can. Both contribute, but one is through donation and the other through volunteering. In my position, it is time, words, and personal attention that I have to give.
Just for the record, I bought around five discs (all DX) this year and all of my non-throwing stock was sold this spring to pay for my website hosting, domain renewal, and misc. bills.
Thanks for the support. Hopefully I'll be back to post here this spring or sooner if they open a non-member/non-current member area. Until then I can be found on other DG message boards.
blake t.
http://www.discgolfreview.com
----------------------------------------------
jeffash
Nov 29 2005, 10:32 AM
Good to hear from you Blake!
Chris Hysell
Nov 29 2005, 11:52 AM
Tell Blake to read this.........
http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=477620&Main=473581#Post477620
discglfr
Nov 29 2005, 12:02 PM
I've got a crazy idea - how about everyone that can't afford a membership and still feel like they need a place to voice their opinion - go out and get your OWN message board?
Allow whatever posters and postings you want ... complain about whatever you want ... and do whatever you want. It takes about 30 seconds to go out and find a website that will host YOUR VERY OWN MESSAGE board for free! Heck, I'll even volunteer some time to help you out.
Open an internet browser
Go to www.google.com (http://www.google.com)
Type in "free message board service"
Blake said it himself - he has the money it's just that he is spending it on more important things. That's his choice and my choice is to pay my membership and recieve the benefit of being able to post.
Also - why would new people need to post? If they did a few minutes of research they could probably find an answer to just about any question ever asked. They could read all of those nifty links at the top of pdga.com or they could read the millions of posts. I don't see what POSTING really gets them anyway.
Lyle O Ross
Nov 29 2005, 01:32 PM
We are talking about $40 people. Enough with the "I'm too poor to spend $40." [....] Just pay $40 (or get a real job that allows you to afford that amount).
You evidently do not understand Felix's principles, and you also are apparently failing to consider younger persons interested in the sport who either don't work yet or maybe have a part time job after school already but their extra income goes to help their single parent family pay bills.
Actually,
As I read through this message thread I find that I don't understand Felix's principals. It may be that I will come to some point where this is already discussed (I've not read beyond this post) but right now I don't get it.
I'm coming at this from the observation that Felix has never been a member. How could he have known in advance (5 years ago that is) that some day the Board would vote to make this site members only? That is some serious clairvoyance!
Perhaps it is something else; some other fine principal that we've missed here. Is it that he doesn't support the PDGA? Is it that he doesn't support any organization? Is it that he doesn't believe in spending his money on private organizations?
Was he always morally opposed to joining the PDGA - a rebel without a cause so to speak?
<font color="blue"> if i remember correctly, Felix is a Christian minister (or pastor or something -- i don't pretend to know much about organized religion). he probably is against taking money from others for his own personal benefit when he feels the money could be better spent on those who have more pressing needs. he probably also is against spending his income from his church on personal luxuries like the PDGA membership. He has donated plenty of time to help the PDGA at events and on this message board, and the guy is a beacon and a great ambassador to our sport. or was...
he can no longer post and though i hope he will, it won't surprise me if he declines to try and enlighten those who don't understand his principles. i hope i haven't mischaracterized where he is coming from, but i do wish people would be a wee bit more magnaminous when they post their opinions ... </font>
<font color="red">WOW! How noble! Maybe this is true, but if so, Felix is being a little hard on himself relatively speaking. I've seen enough Priests, Popes, Ministers etc. enjoying life and partaking in clubs to know that it is the norm rather than the exception. I'm still not buying unless Felix has a martyr complex.
As for Felix's principals, again, I'm dealing with what he wrote. What was posted doesn't fit. It's a little too patronizing in it's moralizing about communication. My guess is that Felix does have a good reason, but I haven't seen it yet. What I have seen is Felix tearing into the PDGA because they are not listening to outside voices. This is untrue at best and an attempt to mislead at worst. That bothers me and makes me... cranky :D. If Felix wishes to withhold his volunteerism because of restrictions placed on the MB then he should say so and I can accept that but to lead us down some other path is a mistake.</font>
Lyle O Ross
Nov 29 2005, 01:36 PM
Full retratction... :o. Blake can't afford a membership! Blake, I still have $40 burning a hole in my pocket, as do many others. You should know if I don't hear from you I'm going to reup you in December regardless. Best investment I'll ever make in terms of my game!
Lyle O Ross
Nov 29 2005, 01:39 PM
So, you mean the PDGA isn't trying to eliminate non-paying members. Did it ever occur to anyone that the main goal is make people identify themselves so they might feel a little accountable for what they write here?
AviarX
Nov 29 2005, 02:52 PM
Blake can't afford a membership! Blake, I still have $40 burning a hole in my pocket, as do many others. You should know if I don't hear from you I'm going to reup you in December regardless. Best investment I'll ever make in terms of my game!
did you miss where Blake said why it is against his principles to accept your paying his dues? Did you miss too where he said he'd be against the new policy even if he were in better financial straits and was a current member? It's not that he can't come up with $40, it is just that right now it would be a poor economic decision.
To use an example that Blake shared with me, it is one thing to help the Salvation Army or a Volunteer Fire Dept. by giving them money -- it is quite another to help by standing in the freezing cold each night, donating your time clinking a bell and collecting money. It is also much different to help a volunteer fire dept. by donating your time (service). Both types of contributions (time and/or money) are necessary and help the organization meet its goals. Felix and Blake are shining examples of people who donated their time, but now may be less inclined to do so thanks to this (unintended) slap in the face.
As for Felix's principals, again, I'm dealing with what he wrote. What was posted doesn't fit. It's a little too patronizing in it's moralizing about communication.
One of the beautiful things about Felix is he doesn't moralize and he doesn't patronize. your comment above however appears to fail that test. one of the things that has impressed me most about Felix is that unlike many 'religious' persons who act holier-than-thou and try to convert you, Felix is just another disc golf lover who is a great human being and happens to be a Christian (apparently in the truest sense)
So, you mean the PDGA isn't trying to eliminate non-paying members. Did it ever occur to anyone that the main goal is make people identify themselves so they might feel a little accountable for what they write here?
the goal of making people accountable is fine, it is the unintended consequence and effect of the method being used to achieve said goal that is serving to harm the PDGA's mission.
AviarX
Nov 30 2005, 02:51 PM
Tell Blake to read this.........
http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=477620&Main=473581#Post477620
what exactly do you mean?
LouMoreno
Nov 30 2005, 03:24 PM
Steve Dodge wrote
I'm back baby! It turns out you don't have to be a current member, you just need to have been a member. Special thanks to Lorrie for pointing this out to me, and for getting me my password (which I obviously lost).
The point is, Blake T can still sign in.
What up Lou ! we played on the same card in the second round at live oak, it's Douglas by the way. If your ever in Temple stop by the 5th street course. Or check out our thread 'o' smack . :D
AviarX
Dec 01 2005, 02:01 AM
Steve Dodge wrote
I'm back baby! It turns out you don't have to be a current member, you just need to have been a member. Special thanks to Lorrie for pointing this out to me, and for getting me my password (which I obviously lost).
The point is, Blake T can still sign in.
But that is a temporary situation that -- unless the PDGA leadership changes its decision to ban non-members from posting -- won't last long. Besides, even if Blake could take advantage of the temporary window he probably would feel the same way about that as he does about letting someone pay his membership fee for him. Posting as a non-current member is intentionally breaking the spirit of the new PDGA message board policy. I won't be posting any more messages from non-members either, since that too violates the spirit of this latest decision :mad:
Chris Hysell
Dec 01 2005, 08:51 AM
Temporary solution will give them time to earn $40. I'll give each one $50 to rake my leaves.
AviarX
Dec 01 2005, 01:57 PM
i think they (Blake; Felix) are making their decisions with a more magnaminous mindset than many seem to appreciate. First, joining would literally buy-into the decision to close this message board to the contributions of non-members. Second, it indirectly de-values the time and energy each has contributed to the PDGA -- by only valuing how much $ exchanged hands.
Theo suggested the leadership is considering opening up all or some of the board to non-members. Hopefully that will take place; i think the PDGA would be well-served by such a decision.
Lyle O Ross
Dec 01 2005, 02:39 PM
Rob,
Felix in fact did moralize, very strongly in fact. He sold the idea that he doesn't want to take out a membership because the PDGA isn't listening to outside voices. Indeed that is taking a moral stand on an issue. Second, it is patronizing because he has stated that the PDGA isn't listening to outside voices, by his definition - that is, if you won't let me post on your site, you aren't listening to anyone. That is a pretty blanketing commentary and IMO fairly patronizing; you might even say judgemental, given that Felix knows almost nothing about how the PDGA does or does not communicate outside it's own membership. It's also assuming, he's assumed that the only way the PDGA can communicate is via this MB; a venue where in fact I suspect they do very little communication. Furthermore, I think I have clearly shown that his arguments make no sense, either from the PDGA's overall actions nor from Felix's actions prior to his decision.
I understand that Felix is a good guy, he's smart, savy, and a previously great volunteer, but in this he is letting his desire, his morals, and possibly his misunderstanding of the situation, drive his position.
As for whether or not Blake and Felix should be given full access, obviously it is in the best interests of the sport to accomplish that. A number of methods to accomplish that have been put forward but in Felix's desire to, dare I say, moralize, he has refused those options.
Finally, the notion that one's ability to post on this site is hugely important to the health and growth of disc golf is... possibly naive. Wow, how did the sport ever grow prior to the invention of the internet. Do we really believe that the 200 to 300 people that post here are the majority of players out there? Let's be honest, this is one method of having some impact but it is mostly just entertainment. If Felix is really concerned about Freedom of Speach (that is after all what this comes down to) he should take a shot at the Patriot Act and some of the other things that local and state governments have enacted in the past few years to limit our rights. :D
AviarX
Dec 01 2005, 02:58 PM
Lyle, i have conversed with persons from Europe and California here that have greatly enriched my appreciation of disc golf and also of related sports like MTA. Local message boards just don't command the geographic diversity a place like this *can* foster. This is a potential gathering place world wide for enthusiasts. If the PDGA wants to make that not possible, it's their call, but as a member who feels it isn't in our best interests i am going to disagree.
Your opinion on Felix is noted. As Felix cannot post, it seems a bit of a cheap shot though for you to [mis-] judge him. maybe others will weigh in on whether they agree with you about Felix.
....given that Felix knows almost nothing about how the PDGA does or does not communicate outside it's own membership...
Please remind me, just so I follow you, WHY is this a given, and HOW is it that you, but not Mr. Sung, DOES in fact know how the PDGA communicates outside its own membership? Thanks.
Lyle O Ross
Dec 01 2005, 05:29 PM
....given that Felix knows almost nothing about how the PDGA does or does not communicate outside it's own membership...
Please remind me, just so I follow you, WHY is this a given, and HOW is it that you, but not Mr. Sung, DOES in fact know how the PDGA communicates outside its own membership? Thanks.
This one's easy so I'll do it first.
"I am simply unable to answer to my own satisfaction the question of why I should continue to donate my time, energy, and sponsorship monies to an organization whose officers apparently believe that the only people whose thoughts and opinions are worthy of being heard are those of dues-paying members."
This statement, written by Father Sung states very clearly that the only opinions the PDGA feels are worthy of being heard are those of dues paying members.
1) Felix is a sharp guy, his English is impecable, I will give him credit for knowing what he wants to say and saying it.
2) His statement clearly demonstrates that he thinks he knows how the PDGA communicates, it is through the MB and only to paying members.
Now, it is possible that wasn't Felix's intent, but that is what he wrote.
Why do I feel that Felix is wrong about how the PDGA communicates and that I am right. I know of numerous cases of the PDGA communicating via other means than the MB and I know of numerous cases of them communicating with non-members.
Felix made the mistake of stating something as an absolute (O.K. he used the word apparently but his intent is clear). His intent was to punish the PDGA for doing something he was morally opposed to. Since I feel his postion is wrong I am taking advantage of that absolute position.
Let me be clear. It is my feeling that Felix took his absolute position for a reason. To make his point. He wanted to make the PDGA look as bad as possible. Taking absolute stands that put others in a bad light to make your point bugs the living cow pucky out of me.
Lyle O Ross
Dec 01 2005, 06:13 PM
Lyle, i have conversed with persons from Europe and California here that have greatly enriched my appreciation of disc golf and also of related sports like MTA. Local message boards just don't command the geographic diversity a place like this *can* foster. This is a potential gathering place world wide for enthusiasts. If the PDGA wants to make that not possible, it's their call, but as a member who feels it isn't in our best interests i am going to disagree.
Your opinion on Felix is noted. As Felix cannot post, it seems a bit of a cheap shot though for you to [mis-] judge him. maybe others will weigh in on whether they agree with you about Felix.
This one is tougher. There is no question that your point has merit. That is the internet can be a powerful communications device. Excellent point and I agree. However, my son will soon be of an age to post on this site. I am afraid that I will have to limit his access. I don't want him reading Hawk's and Morgan's garbage, period. It was even worse when the non-members who could hide behind annonymity were posting here.
Much the same as spam, posters who feel the need to express their sexual proclivities and personal hate are lessening the use and power of the internet. Asking them to be responsible by forcing them to reveal their identities sits well with me.
Your notion that I am mis-juding Felix is based in your desire to recognize only those points of merit in Felix. In essense you are deifying Felix, he can do no wrong. On the other hand, I have clearly stated that Felix is a standup guy who has made great contributions, is highly intelligent, is a clear and thoughtful writer, and who in my opinion, is wrong in the approach he took on this issue. Simple enough.
As for letting Felix have it when he "can't" defend himself. I assure you, Felix doesn't need you to fight his battles. There is e-mail, and a number of ways that Felix can step up to the plate and let me know how he feels. Point of fact, that's what Blake did.
Your feeling that I'm taking cheap shots at Felix has some validity. I might point out that Felix fired the opening salvo. He laid into the PDGA making assumptions and incorrect statements that served his position. The PDGA Board is in the unenviable position of not having a lot of recourse. That is, they can't step up and do battle with Felix because of their postion and the need to stay above the frey (I know this unspoken rule gets broken on occasion but by in large it is maintained). So, is it any more fair that Felix attack the PDGA who can't readily defend themselves than I should point out the flaws in Felix's postion?
Once again, I wish to point out that I support Felix as a participant in disc golf, PDGA or no. My position is that Felix went overboard in the postition that he took concerning the PDGA on this issue. Part of the reason I argue so strongly is because of what Felix is. He is a strong voice that carries a lot of weight. When in that position one needs to think carefully about the accusations one throws out and what one's intent is.
gnduke
Dec 01 2005, 07:10 PM
I might also point out that there have been many occaisions where the few members of the BOD that do post on the board have instructed people wishing to communicate with the PDGA do so through the links on the Contact page.
The PDGA has stated that it has no wish to communicate officially through the discussion board with anyone whether they be a member or not.
There has been no restrictions placed on who is able to send messages through the contacts page, except that a working email account is required to receive a response.
AviarX
Dec 02 2005, 01:50 AM
....given that Felix knows almost nothing about how the PDGA does or does not communicate outside it's own membership...
Please remind me, just so I follow you, WHY is this a given, and HOW is it that you, but not Mr. Sung, DOES in fact know how the PDGA communicates outside its own membership? Thanks.
This one's easy so I'll do it first.
"I am simply unable to answer to my own satisfaction the question of why I should continue to donate my time, energy, and sponsorship monies to an organization whose officers apparently believe that the only people whose thoughts and opinions are worthy of being heard are those of dues-paying members."
This statement, written by Father Sung states very clearly that the only opinions the PDGA feels are worthy of being heard are those of dues paying members.
wow. Try reading Felix's comment the way it seems to me he obviously meant it
(i added the note in brackets to make explicit what seems to me to have been implicit):
<font color="blue">
"I am simply unable to answer to my own satisfaction the question of why I should continue to donate my time, energy, and sponsorship monies to an organization whose officers apparently believe that the only people whose thoughts and opinions are worthy of being heard </font> [on this message board] <font color="blue"> are those of dues-paying members." </font>
the PDGA policy on use of their message board does however say a lot about their present valuation of non-members, which apparently has been skewed by the behavior of a few anonymous posters (who may or may not be PDGA members)... Instead of finding a solution that didn't punish indiscriminately, the PDGA carpet bombed the place ... i guess to you the loss of Blake and Felix (and several others) is merely 'collateral damage' :confused:
adogg187420
Dec 02 2005, 04:12 AM
"I am simply unable to answer to my own satisfaction the question of why I should continue to donate my time, energy, and sponsorship monies to an organization whose officers apparently believe that the only people whose thoughts and opinions are worthy of being heard are those of dues-paying members."
This statement, written by Father Sung states very clearly that the only opinions the PDGA feels are worthy of being heard are those of dues paying members.
[/QUOTE]
Cmon man. This is just a message board. Please dont base your entire opinions on this thing.
Lyle O Ross
Dec 02 2005, 11:17 AM
Well Rob,
As FlyinHigh pointed out, Felix was pretty clear in what he wrote (although I would like the luxury of going back and more favorably interpreting some of the more stupid things I've said).
As I've pointed out, Felix is a very sharp guy, if he had meant the MB, he would have said the MB. Don't get me wrong, Felix knew exactly what he was doing. He was trying to make a point. One which has some validity. But, in making that point he misrepresented the truth to support his argument.
Now, in all fairness, there are several possibilities. Felix may have believed what he wrote. I doubt it, he's too sharp. Felix may have written in anger without full thought (I find this very likely). Felix stated things as strongly as he could to support his argument (I believe there may be some truth to this). Regardless, I'm not going to sit back and let what he wrote stand when I know it isn't true. That has nothing to do with Felix, it has everything to do with what the truth is. Felix just happens to be the medium by which the untruth was delivered. IMO Felix owes the PDGA an apology and a restatement of what he feels the issue is so that we can all be clear. A simple enough thing, wanting to communicate clearly.
AviarX
Dec 02 2005, 02:33 PM
your opinion on Felix are noted, and i am not sure why you are referring to him as Father? (unless you are a member of his church, if not i guess you're being condescending because he isn't as secular as you and i)
given the type of presence Felix was on this message board -- it seems to me it's the PDGA leaders who owe Felix an apology for their decison to indiscriminately carpet bomb all non-members off of this message board. i guess i just don't see the merit of turning a blind, obedient eye to whatever the authorities decide when a less destructive solution is achievable.
i'm not a conspiracy-junkie so i won't suggest that maybe it was decided banning Felix and Blake would be a good thing because these two bahstads are a little too smart and make too many of the rest of us feel a little bit stupid... :o:D :eek: :p
<font color="blue">IMO Felix owes the PDGA an apology and a restatement of what he feels the issue is so that we can all be clear. A simple enough thing, wanting to communicate clearly. </font>
...side-stepping the fact we're talking about a misinterpretation here, HOW do you suggest this 'simple thing' is carried out? Remember, this isn't a "$$" stance by Mr. sung, but rather a "principle" stance. I don't expect to hear from him before any policy change.
rhett
Dec 02 2005, 04:42 PM
I don't understand what the big deal is. Posting is a benefit of membership. If you choose not to be a member for whatever reason, why is it a big deal? It's your choice.
"Banned" is not apt, that's correct. But there is a 'loss' of favourite Posters to cope with, due to the action. 'Big' is relative.
Lyle O Ross
Dec 02 2005, 05:21 PM
your opinion on Felix are noted, and i am not sure why you are referring to him as Father? (unless you are a member of his church, if not i guess you're being condescending because he isn't as secular as you and i).
<font color="red"> Actually, it is the norm to refer to a priest as Father. Furthermore, it's an honorific that Felix has earned by attending seminary and serving the needs of his parishioners. Does this bother you? </font>
given the type of presence Felix was on this message board -- it seems to me it's the PDGA leaders who owe Felix an apology for their decision to indiscriminately carpet bomb all non-members off of this message board. i guess i just don't see the merit of turning a blind, obedient eye to whatever the authorities decide when a less destructive solution is achievable.
<font color="red">You'd make a good politician Rob. Of course given that I have little respect for politicians you can read that how you want. What you've done is dug out one of the most harmful derogatory terms to describe the situation - Carpet Bomb. It's a horrible event. Think about Dresden, Japan, Viet Nam and the other areas where this was used; the loss of life, the total destruction; do you really think this is a Carpet Bombing? </font>
i'm not a conspiracy-junkie so i won't suggest that maybe it was decided banning Felix and Blake would be a good thing because these two bahstads are a little too smart and make too many of the rest of us feel a little bit stupid... :o:D :eek: :p
<font color="red">Wow! Now you've taken it to conspiracy? More like constipation. Come on, do you really think the PDGA had it out for these two guys? Blake is almost up with Dunipace in service to the sport, and Felix is a voice of reason. The PDGA in being fair, probably didn't think about who would be affected when the made the change. </font>
I want to give you a slightly different perspective on what Felix has done.
The PDGA often does things I disagree with. For example, I am a strong advocate of the 2 Meter rule. The PDGA has decided to remove it. I don't like that decision, but as an adult I realize that in all things there is compromise. Now, I could take the position that Felix has - Oh fine, change something I don't like... Well, I quit! Or I can wait and see what the outcome is. Maybe the PDGA will change its mind. Maybe they will find that elimination of the 2M rule isn't such a good idea. As an adult, I'm willing to wait and see.
Felix has taken the slash and burn route. No compromise. You eliminate the MB except for current and past members well I'm done! To me this seems to be a very harsh approach. No compromise, no discussion, simply a harsh good by. My experience is that those who take such absolute approaches often miss the bigger picture but I could be wrong.
I enjoy the volunteer work I do. The first time I helped out at a tournament was before I even knew about the PDGA. I don't volunteer for the PDGA, I volunteer for the TDs and for the players. Even if I hated the PDGA, I wouldn't be willing to punish those guys to make my point to the PDGA.
rhett
Dec 02 2005, 05:34 PM
...has taken the slash and burn route. No compromise. You eliminate the MB except for current and past members well I'm done!
I do not believe that this is correct. The disaffected parties made the decision to no longer be current members of the organization before any changes were made to the message board. No one should try to characterize this non-membership move as a reaction to message board policy because it was not.
Lyle O Ross
Dec 02 2005, 05:35 PM
<font color="blue">IMO Felix owes the PDGA an apology and a restatement of what he feels the issue is so that we can all be clear. A simple enough thing, wanting to communicate clearly. </font>
...side-stepping the fact we're talking about a misinterpretation here, HOW do you suggest this 'simple thing' is carried out? Remember, this isn't a "$$" stance by Mr. sung, but rather a "principle" stance. I don't expect to hear from him before any policy change.
Alright Steve,
You caught me out. I was reaching on the apology thing. :D
I think Felix used the term principal a little loosely. Go back and read my posts. I think I've clearly demonstrated that Felix's principal is a matter of convenience. It doesn't fit his actions concerning this issue - nor is the PDGA's action one that really requires a principled position. Let me ask you, is it really a principled action to punish local players and TDs because Felix is mad at the PDGA? Not in my book.
I also know from personal experience that if you want to affect change you have to communicate. Are you saying that Felix is so childish that he wouldn't initiate a discussion with the PDGA by some other means? That is, "until I get back my MB I'm not budging?" I disagree with you. The Felix whose posts I've read seems a little more (O.K. a lot more) adult than that. I know of few people who are successful in life that take that hard of a stance on positions like this. Most that I do know are young and grow out of it, as they get older. They quickly learn that to wield influence, you have to talk, even when you're so mad that you want to swat that arrogant jerk (me in this case) on the end of the nose with a newspaper.
Lyle O Ross
Dec 02 2005, 05:40 PM
"Banned" is not apt, that's correct. But there is a 'loss' of favourite Posters to cope with, due to the action. 'Big' is relative.
No one was banned. They were simply asked to be a member. In point of fact, I don't think membership was the goal (in fact I know it wasn't) the goal was a tool to identify the user so as to bring pressure for people to post responsibly.
One could argue that an alternative path would be to give all users access and then set up a database for non-members to collect accurate e-mails, addresses etc. This is possible but costly. Should I as a member have to pay for this? That� is an interesting dilemma.
Lyle O Ross
Dec 02 2005, 05:49 PM
...has taken the slash and burn route. No compromise. You eliminate the MB except for current and past members well I'm done!
I do not believe that this is correct. The disaffected parties made the decision to no longer be current members of the organization before any changes were made to the message board. No one should try to characterize this non-membership move as a reaction to message board policy because it was not.
While the statement slash and burn may be overt and out of place I'm not sure that sentiment is incorrect. Both parties stated that they were opposed to the decision to make MB access members only and Felix clearly stated that as the reason for his decision to remove his support from local events.
You are correct that their initial non-membership has nothing to do with this decision; in Blake's case he has low resources and better things to do with his money. In Felix's case, well he never was a member going back to the beginning of his participation (he states 5 years ago). His motivation for non-membership is unclear.
But, he has taken a position that he can't join now because he is morally opposed to the decision to make the MB members only. This discussion is centered on my belief, that that may be misleading
BTW - Good on you for your help in moderation. I wouldn't want the job. :D
<font color="blue"> Are you saying that Felix is so childish that he wouldn't initiate a discussion with the PDGA by some other means? That is, "until I get back my MB I'm not budging?" I disagree with you. </font>
�....are you responding to me here Lyle, because IF so this would be one PRIME example of YOU speaking from others' shoes! Just for-the-record, I'm saddened by fore's choice, but I'm not in a position to question the logic behind it, because the thought-process wasn't mine. P.S., I doubt if said decision was made hastily.
Good show, however, on mentioning one result of his actions: Some events will 'miss out'. Western culture being what it is, somebody will feel obliged to point-out the 'guilty' party for this 'crime'. Some will blame Mr. Sung. Others, the 'party' making the decision to discriminate, because this left Felix in an untenable position.
I'm stopping-short of saying the decision was bad, but I am disappointed at the results....I'm verklempt....talk amongst y'selves....*honk*
...however, I'm quite certain Felix didn't mention "principals"...what, was school out? :o :D
rhett
Dec 02 2005, 06:20 PM
The disaffected parties made the decision to no longer be current members of the organization before any changes were made to the message board. No one should try to characterize this non-membership move as a reaction to message board policy because it was not.
Lyle O Ross
Dec 02 2005, 08:13 PM
<font color="blue"> Are you saying that Felix is so childish that he wouldn't initiate a discussion with the PDGA by some other means? That is, "until I get back my MB I'm not budging?" I disagree with you. </font>
�....are you responding to me here Lyle, because IF so this would be one PRIME example of YOU speaking from others' shoes! Just for-the-record, I'm saddened by fore's choice, but I'm not in a position to question the logic behind it, because the thought-process wasn't mine. P.S., I doubt if said decision was made hastily.
Good show, however, on mentioning one result of his actions: Some events will 'miss out'. Western culture being what it is, somebody will feel obliged to point-out the 'guilty' party for this 'crime'. Some will blame Mr. Sung. Others, the 'party' making the decision to discriminate, because this left Felix in an untenable position.
I'm stopping-short of saying the decision was bad, but I am disappointed at the results....I'm verklempt....talk amongst y'selves....*honk*
...however, I'm quite certain Felix didn't mention "principals"...what, was school out? :o :D
But Steve,
Felix gives us his reasoning. He wrote it out clearly. If, as you stated, it was clearly thought out, then Felix was purposely misleading. Go back and read all the posts on this. His stated postion doesn't fit his actions.
I too am saddened by Felix's decision. I've enjoyed his lively wit and intelligent writing. That doesn't change the fact that what he <font color="red"> wrote </font> doesn't fit!
Your notion that I'm speaking from someone else's shoes means you haven't read my posts. I've stated clearly that I am simply interpreting what Felix wrote. I've also stated that there may be, and likely are other things going on. Given that I'm not sure what you mean by saying I'm putting myself in other peoples shoes? In fact, it seems just the opposite to me. You and Rob seem to feel you know exactly what Felix's intent was and are completely unwilling to interpret it in any way but the one that serves your agenda, an open MB by your definition of open. Taking that a step further, I simply asked you a question. Your original statement implied that Felix would not as a matter of his position talk to the PDGA in any fashion. To me that is a pretty hard core postion and somewhat childish.
So, let me make it simple. Do you believe that Felix feels the best way to address his issue is to refuse to talk to the PDGA until they give into the unstated demand of re-opening the MB? That he feels there is no room for negotiation on a different level? That his way is the only way?
As for blaming Father Sung, I don't blame him for anything, I simply feel that he mistated the situation and overreacted, punishing innocent local golfers and TDs in his attempt to punish the PDGA.
Finally, I understand that you and Rob want to present the notion that somehow I dislike or disrespect Felix but that is not true. I know it would enhance your arguments but you will have to do without it. I like Felix, I think he's very smart. I just think he blew it on this one. Having blown things like this before myself I understand it is human to ear :D. O.K. bad joke.
In point of fact, I don't think membership was the goal (in fact I know it wasn't) the goal was a tool to identify the user so as to bring pressure for people to post responsibly.
If that statement is indeed fact, then can you explain why Sandalman is working on the coding to have non-current members posting privelidges removed?(that is a serious question, not baiting)
rhett
Dec 02 2005, 08:40 PM
Why are you attributing that quote to me? I didn't type that remark.
I must have copy/pasted from his post then hit reply on your last post when I posted, sorry :)
rhett
Dec 02 2005, 09:09 PM
tzokay.
AviarX
Dec 02 2005, 09:12 PM
The disaffected parties made the decision to no longer be current members of the organization before any changes were made to the message board. No one should try to characterize this non-membership move as a reaction to message board policy because it was not.
right, this move does however now mean that PDGA members will no longer have the privilege of communicating with any non-members who are disc golf enthusiasts at this site. imo, that's a huge loss.
hopefully another site will siphon off those of us who wish to interact with a wider audience. Maybe Europe will step up to the plate or perhaps Innova or -- maybe Blake's website (http://www.discgolfreview.com/forums/) will fill that niche...
Rhett, earlier Theo posted:
<font color="green"> " I'm working with Jon Lyksett to get someone to take overall responsibility for the message board, and that person could manage a group of moderators to help out. Then we can reevaluate the options for opening up the Affiliate Clubs sections, a PDGA Q & A section, and possibly a couple more non-member areas. Thanks for volunteering!
-Theo </font>
where do you as moderator stand on this? are you against any such inclusive ammendment? If you look at sites like mlb.com, it is fans (not MLB players) who fill the message boards there. some fans are extremely knowledgeable. We are a sport with a small fan base so most of the admirers of our top pros are also PDGA members. Hopefully we will grow into a sport where the fan base will one day greatly outnumber PDGA members. when that happens, will fans have to go elsewhere to post or will our board be open :confused:
rhett
Dec 02 2005, 09:17 PM
where do you as moderator stand on this? are you against any such inclusive ammendment?
Well, you can start by being willing to discuss stuff instead of posting questions in such a slanted and inflammatory manner.
AviarX
Dec 02 2005, 09:34 PM
your opinion on Felix are noted, and i am not sure why you are referring to him as Father? (unless you are a member of his church, if not i guess you're being condescending because he isn't as secular as you and i).
<font color="red"> Actually, it is the norm to refer to a priest as Father. Furthermore, it's an honorific that Felix has earned by attending seminary and serving the needs of his parishioners. Does this bother you? </font>
<font color="blue"> well if you're correct, it bothers me a little bit that my inclination that only Catholics have priests and that the appropriate title depends upon what denomination Felix represents is off. however, i don't go to church so it's not too important to me. i was just trying to guage why you are using a religious title now to refer to Felix... </font>
given the type of presence Felix was on this message board -- it seems to me it's the PDGA leaders who owe Felix an apology for their decision to indiscriminately carpet bomb all non-members off of this message board. i guess i just don't see the merit of turning a blind, obedient eye to whatever the authorities decide when a less destructive solution is achievable.
<font color="red">You'd make a good politician Rob. Of course given that I have little respect for politicians you can read that how you want. What you've done is dug out one of the most harmful derogatory terms to describe the situation - Carpet Bomb. It's a horrible event. Think about Dresden, Japan, Viet Nam and the other areas where this was used; the loss of life, the total destruction; do you really think this is a Carpet Bombing? </font>
<font color="blue"> well, it is a virtual carpet-bombing of non-members capacity to post on this site. or maybe we could call it a "no-fly zone" /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif your saying i make a good politician is a classic case of a pot calling a kettle black :p </font>
i'm not a conspiracy-junkie so i won't suggest that maybe it was decided banning Felix and Blake would be a good thing because these two bahstads are a little too smart and make too many of the rest of us feel a little bit stupid... :o:D :eek: :p
<font color="red"> Wow! Now you've taken it to conspiracy? More like constipation. Come on, do you really think the PDGA had it out for these two guys? Blake is almost up with Dunipace in service to the sport, and Felix is a voice of reason. The PDGA in being fair, probably didn't think about who would be affected when the made the change. </font>
<font color="blue"> wow, i said "if" and i used four smileys but you choose the reading that gives you the most rhetorical bang for your buck! you would probably crush me in a political race /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif </font>
<font color="red">
I want to give you a slightly different perspective on what Felix has done.
The PDGA often does things I disagree with. For example, I am a strong advocate of the 2 Meter rule. The PDGA has decided to remove it. I don't like that decision, but as an adult I realize that in all things there is compromise. Now, I could take the position that Felix has - Oh fine, change something I don't like... Well, I quit! Or I can wait and see what the outcome is. Maybe the PDGA will change its mind. Maybe they will find that elimination of the 2M rule isn't such a good idea. As an adult, I'm willing to wait and see. </font>
<font color="blue"> actually Felix agrees with you about the 2 meter rule -- i PM'ed him once hoping to get him in the no 2 meter rule camp. But he never suggested walking away or quitting all contact simply because he disagreed with the 2 meter rule change. </font>
<font color="red"> Felix has taken the slash and burn route. No compromise. You eliminate the MB except for current and past members well I'm done! To me this seems to be a very harsh approach. No compromise, no discussion, simply a harsh good by. My experience is that those who take such absolute approaches often miss the bigger picture but I could be wrong. </font>
<font color="blue"> actually you need to back up the proverbial bus. It was the PDGA who told Felix he was done [here]. He merely wrote a post saying goodbye to some of the posters here who he was going to miss and then voiced his disappointment with the decision citing what imo were some very good reasons why the PDGA officers were making the wrong decision </font>
<font color="red">
I enjoy the volunteer work I do. The first time I helped out at a tournament was before I even knew about the PDGA. I don't volunteer for the PDGA, I volunteer for the TDs and for the players. Even if I hated the PDGA, I wouldn't be willing to punish those guys to make my point to the PDGA. </font>
[/QUOTE]
<font color="blue"> i appreciate the work you do. i appreciate the work Felix did. Felix loves disc golf. A poor, and hopefully temporary, decision on the part of the leadership in its haste to do away with abusive postings has taken away the ability for him to communicate with us and us to communicate with him [here on this message board for those who need things literally spelled out and in the absence of which will take rhetorical advantage]
in a nutshell, you think Felix is being a weenie? </font>
AviarX
Dec 02 2005, 09:44 PM
where do you as moderator stand on this? are you against any such inclusive ammendment?
Well, you can start by being willing to discuss stuff instead of posting questions in such a slanted and inflammatory manner.
do you read my use of the word inclusive as inflammatory? :confused:
Does all this rhetoric have something to do with Throwing Equipment?
I don't know about the mlb msg bd but on the avalanche msg bd you get banned for as little as posting off topic. Whole threads are regularly locked, banned or moved. Trolls are banned without warning, etc.
Posters/Trolls have been taking advantage of the freedom found on this msg bd.
THROWING EQUIPMENT thread.
AviarX
Dec 02 2005, 11:40 PM
the connection is that Blake T. was the throwing techniques go-to guy here, prior to the decision to restrict posting privileges to members only.
you are of course free to start a new throwing techniques thread or resuscitate a dead one...
Sorry it's taken a while...sore typing muscles.
This is what we're talking about, the 'manifesto' which Felix wrote: <font color="blue">"....I am simply unable to answer to my own satisfaction the question of why I should continue to donate my time, energy, and sponsorship monies to an organization whose officers apparently believe that the only people whose thoughts and opinions are worthy of being heard are those of dues-paying members." </font>
To answer your question Lyle, which was: <font color="red"> Do you believe that Felix feels the best way to address his issue is to refuse to talk to the PDGA until they give into the unstated demand of re-opening the MB? </font>
I do not know if this is the case; I do not monitor his correspondence - "donate my time" would seem to preclude this, but can we be sure? To answer another way, I really don't know WHAT fore is thinking [or doing, if anything], and I don't mean that in an existential way, but to admit I am slightly confused. It seems a tad extreme, but that's from my moccasins. However I certainly don't disrespect his decision. I sense some posters feel apathy, or even anger; perhaps these sentiments are more >>>a manifestation of disappointment, due-to-a loss.
<font color="red"> Your notion that I'm speaking from someone else's shoes means you haven't read my posts. </font>
I don't know about that; what I want to say is that you seem to be extrapolating on others' thought process, using personal reasoning. No harm, no foul, because what else can we do? This is certainly a protest, yes, but....to accomplish WHAT? "A reversal of policy" would certainly [b]seem to be the logical goal to we readers, but it's entirely possible the 'Professor' might be "gone", regardless.
<font color="red"> If, as you stated, it was clearly thought out, then Felix was purposely misleading. Go back and read all the posts on this. His stated position doesn't fit his actions.
</font> L'il help? I don�t get where you're going? Has there been any action other than being done, like he said? What is the 'mislead' bit?
Felix gives us his reasoning. He wrote it out clearly. If, as you stated, it was clearly thought out, then Felix was purposely misleading. Go back and read all the posts on this. His stated postion doesn't fit his actions.
I too am saddened by Felix's decision. I've enjoyed his lively wit and intelligent writing. That doesn't change the fact that what he <font color="red">wrote</font> doesn't fit!
oh for cripes sake! You, slo, and AviarX are arguing semantics and personal interpretation of a text... Derrida would love this. what did felix mean, what did he write, in what state of haste was it written!?
does it even matter!?
ya'll are discussing like you have a point to prove or a solution to be reached, but all it really amounts to is textual masturbation.
stroke it out already.
krazyeye
Dec 04 2005, 11:27 PM
The intention all along was to only allow current members There will be other things in the future that will be current members only, like viewing stats of non-current members (ie., current members will be able to see anyone's historical stats, non-current members and the public in general will only be able to see stats for current members)..
-Theo
That all seems really pointless, considering I can keep a user current and all of my buddies can check out the nonmember stats if I give them access. I mean, I can show any of my friends a note a girl wrote to me :DIt is quite highschool. Maybe you should consider assigning an ID number to ANYONE who participates in a PDGA event. Then once you award points force people to play in the division they should be playing in.
tpozzy
Dec 04 2005, 11:42 PM
In point of fact, I don't think membership was the goal (in fact I know it wasn't) the goal was a tool to identify the user so as to bring pressure for people to post responsibly.
If that statement is indeed fact, then can you explain why Sandalman is working on the coding to have non-current members posting privelidges removed?(that is a serious question, not baiting)
The intention all along was to only allow current members to post. It's just that in the initial implementation the non-current check wasn't finished. Having parts of the website be a current membership benefit is something the board has been discussion for a couple of years now. We're just now getting around to making it happen. There will be other things in the future that will be current members only, like viewing stats of non-current members (ie., current members will be able to see anyone's historical stats, non-current members and the public in general will only be able to see stats for current members)..
-Theo
AviarX
Dec 05 2005, 02:41 AM
The intention all along was to only allow current members to post. It's just that in the initial implementation the non-current check wasn't finished. Having parts of the website be a current membership benefit is something the board has been discussion for a couple of years now. We're just now getting around to making it happen. There will be other things in the future that will be current members only, like viewing stats of non-current members (ie., current members will be able to see anyone's historical stats, non-current members and the public in general will only be able to see stats for current members)..
-Theo
<font color="blue"> Theo, i ask that you to give serious thought to whether it is in the PDGA's best interests to completely close this board to posted messages from non-members. In my opinion, the top section -- <font color="black"> "PDGA Topics" </font> -- should be restricted to members only with non-members having read-only privileges. That leaves plenty of room for those members who want message board interactions to be exclusively between members.
The middle section -- <font color="black"> "General Disc Golf Topics" </font> -- should be open to members and non-members alike, all of whom must have a verifiable email address and an IP address associated with their posts to enhance accountability. Persons who abuse the privilege would have their message deleted and would be subject to a ban.
The third section -- <font color="black"> "PDGA Affiliates" </font> -- could be monitored by the respective clubs.
The fourth section -- <font color="black"> "General Discussion" </font> -- could be the same as section 2.
My rationale for this is that we should be encouraging non-members to frequent our website as it is a potential way to grow our base. The majority of disc golf players and disc golf merchandise consumers are non-members. I can't speak for the hosts, but I would guess that the threads hosted by Dave Dunipace of Innova, Keith Murray of Discraft, and David McCormack of Gateway help those companies sell more product if they are open to members and non-members alike... Also, this message board can serve as a hub for communication between disc golf enthusiasts from Europe, Asia, Australia, America and just about anywhere else. Local message boards do not cast that wide of a geographic net. If by banning non-members from posting the PDGA site no longer fills that function, some other site likely will...
Though presently non-members do come here, i think the no-post rule will slowly drive them away and i think that is not in our sport's best interests. Our goal should be to have a huge non-member fan base (in addition to a large membership). I am posting one email message i received to give you an idea of what some non-members have to say about the present policy:
[an email i received from Brian reads:]
</font>
Hi Rob,
I've been following the thread "A Message from Blake T" and truly appreciate you fighting for our (non-members) right to post there. I agree that this was a horrible decision by the PDGA.
You recently posted " Hopefully we will grow into a sport where the fan base will one day greatly outnumber PDGA members."
I'd say the sport was already at & past that level. If only 9000 people were playing disc golf then this sport would be dead, disc golf retailers would be out of business and the PDGA would not exist. It's the casual player (and their money) that keeps this sport alive & their recent decision to exclude us from it is a huge kick in the face.
I can say their recent decision has cost them at least one membership. Mine.
I've only started playing in May and thanks to help from this forum alone my game has improved enough to where I now want to compete in tournaments.
However, right now $40 IS a lot of money too me so I thought I'd wait until the start of next season to join.
With the PDGAs recent exlusion, I've decided that my money will be better spent supporting my local disc golf club as I'm sure they'd have more to offer me.
Anyways, thanks for fighting for us....if you want to post this feel free too.
I'm a member over at the stickit forums (OldTyme) so that's where you'll find me.
Thanks,
Brian
evilee13
Dec 05 2005, 08:27 AM
oh for cripes sake! You, slo, and AviarX are arguing semantics and personal interpretation of a text... Derrida would love this. what did felix mean, what did he write, in what state of haste was it written!?
does it even matter!?
ya'll are discussing like you have a point to prove or a solution to be reached, but all it really amounts to is textual masturbation.
stroke it out already.
I'd like to give this post an A+ rating for it's content. It's the most rational point on this thread. I've been thinking the same thing, just couldn't think exactly how to state it, and didn't feel like interuppting your circle jerk.
oh for cripes sake! You, slo, and AviarX are arguing semantics and personal interpretation of a text... Derrida would love this. what did felix mean, what did he write, in what state of haste was it written!?
does it even matter!?
ya'll are discussing like you have a point to prove or a solution to be reached, but all it really amounts to is textual masturbation.
stroke it out already.
I concur. Well said. Put a bandaid on it - it's got to be getting sore.
Lyle O Ross
Dec 05 2005, 12:45 PM
Felix gives us his reasoning. He wrote it out clearly. If, as you stated, it was clearly thought out, then Felix was purposely misleading. Go back and read all the posts on this. His stated postion doesn't fit his actions.
I too am saddened by Felix's decision. I've enjoyed his lively wit and intelligent writing. That doesn't change the fact that what he <font color="red">wrote</font> doesn't fit!
oh for cripes sake! You, slo, and AviarX are arguing semantics and personal interpretation of a text... Derrida would love this. what did felix mean, what did he write, in what state of haste was it written!?
does it even matter!?
ya'll are discussing like you have a point to prove or a solution to be reached, but all it really amounts to is textual masturbation.
stroke it out already.
Language is language. That reality has nothing to do with interpretation. English isn't hard to understand.
Neither slo nor Aviar X have taken the text at it's word. Their point of view is that the closing of the message board is bad. They use the loss of Felix and Blake to make that point. You are correct, the discussions about Felix's motivations are... a waste of time.
You want something clearer. Alright, I've been hanging out on this MB for almost 6 years now. There was a time when guys like KC and other established mentors used to post here. To all appearances they stopped coming because they got tired of dealing with the garbage that goes on here.
My observation is that the turnover on this MB is higher than the turnover in the sport as a whole. I don't see the majority of players leaving this site because of actions taken by the Board, I see them leaving because of the flamming and useless garbage that is a substantial part of what occurs here.
Most of the players I talk to have no use for this MB, even those that come to this site to get other information. The honest truth is that the quality of information posted here (on the MB) is limited at best. Any person can pose as an expert and any opinion is valid. Basically, it's all gossip. If I want to know what the pros do, I go to their sites (including Blake's) or I pick up a video.
Given that, what is the purpose of this MB? The info here is often misleading and should be taken with a grain of salt; a lot of flamming occurs, a bunch of sexual innuendo and political gossip occurs and that's about it. What is the true value? A common gathering place, period. If that is it's role, then should it at least not be a controlled environment that is not damaging to the PDGA, the sport or it's players?
The Board is trying, and already with some success, to clean it up and make it a better place to be. For the good of the sport, I give that my full support.
Lyle O Ross
Dec 05 2005, 12:48 PM
In point of fact, I don't think membership was the goal (in fact I know it wasn't) the goal was a tool to identify the user so as to bring pressure for people to post responsibly.
If that statement is indeed fact, then can you explain why Sandalman is working on the coding to have non-current members posting privelidges removed?(that is a serious question, not baiting)
The intention all along was to only allow current members to post. It's just that in the initial implementation the non-current check wasn't finished. Having parts of the website be a current membership benefit is something the board has been discussion for a couple of years now. We're just now getting around to making it happen. There will be other things in the future that will be current members only, like viewing stats of non-current members (ie., current members will be able to see anyone's historical stats, non-current members and the public in general will only be able to see stats for current members)..
-Theo
Open mouth insert foot. See, just when ya think ya know it all the head comes along and shows ya how stoopid ya are. :o
rhett
Dec 05 2005, 01:41 PM
Given that, what is the purpose of this MB? The info here is often misleading and should be taken with a grain of salt; a lot of flamming occurs, a bunch of sexual innuendo and political gossip occurs and that's about it. What is the true value? A common gathering place, period. If that is it's role, then should it at least not be a controlled environment that is not damaging to the PDGA, the sport or it's players?
This a great observation/statement. The purpose of the MB is in need of definition. Once defined, it will simplify deciding what actions, if any, need to be taken moderation-wise.
dscmn
Dec 05 2005, 04:24 PM
message board: n. a place that used to be funny.
AviarX
Dec 06 2005, 02:23 AM
Given that, what is the purpose of this MB? The info here is often misleading and should be taken with a grain of salt; a lot of flamming occurs, a bunch of sexual innuendo and political gossip occurs and that's about it. What is the true value? A common gathering place, period. If that is it's role, then should it at least not be a controlled environment that is not damaging to the PDGA, the sport or it's players?
This a great observation/statement. The purpose of the MB is in need of definition. Once defined, it will simplify deciding what actions, if any, need to be taken moderation-wise.
it might be a good idea too to think about what we see as the future of this message board. If our sport grows as much as many of us would like it to, it seems pdga.com would want to provide a forum for fans of Professional Disc Golf. Giving non-members a place to post is likely to help grow both the member and fan base. I have no problem with this message board being moderated -- i help moderate a local disc golf message board in my locale. But i do see a problem with not allowing non-members to post -- if we want to encourage greater interest in professional disc golf it makes ense to encourage members and non-members to come to this site.
A members only section makes a lot more sense than not allowing non-members to post (contribute) here at all...
uwmdiscgolfer
Dec 06 2005, 10:20 AM
you guys are still complaning about the message board.....wow. I got to go, my 7th grade science class is about to start.......
discette
Dec 06 2005, 10:43 AM
Quote from Theo Pozzy on 11/25/05 08:16 AM
I'm working with Jon Lyksett to get someone to take overall responsibility for the message board, and that person could manage a group of moderators to help out. Then we can reevaluate the options for opening up the Affiliate Clubs sections, a PDGA Q & A section, and possibly a couple more non-member areas. Thanks for volunteering!
Rob -
I enjoy reading your posts and I believe that you have much to contribute to many discussions on the message board. I think the readers of this thread are very aware of your position on this matter and understand that you are a voice for several of those who can no longer post. As stated by Theo above, the option of non-member posting is being considered.
Please allow the PDGA time to review with this new policy in a thorough and thoughtful manner. It may or may not be possible given the current resources. If the PDGA does not have the volunteer resources to allow non-member posting, the message board will still remain a place where many can come and share our resources, but only members will be able to post.
gnduke
Dec 06 2005, 12:20 PM
The issue is acountability. A verifiable email address does not bring accountablility, only a possible method of contact. I can go out today and gather a few dozen email addresses, I can redirect my connection from a few differnet servers, and be a dozen different people on this board.
If the general public is allowed to post with merely a email address and a unique IP, there is no way to ban disruptive posters.
AviarX
Dec 06 2005, 02:12 PM
On our local message board, we found that once inappropriate posts were censored by moderators, they stopped. I'm guessing the purpotrators figured if it their mud didn't stick and start a fracas they would find an audience elsewhere...
there will always be people who abuse freedoms. there is always the option of taking freedoms to curb lowest common demonitator-types. we went from one extreme (anything goes) to the other and maybe we'll find a happy medium.
Suzette, thanks for your comments.
Moderator005
Dec 06 2005, 02:36 PM
The issue is acountability. A verifiable email address does not bring accountablility, only a possible method of contact. I can go out today and gather a few dozen email addresses, I can redirect my connection from a few differnet servers, and be a dozen different people on this board.
If the general public is allowed to post with merely a email address and a unique IP, there is no way to ban disruptive posters.
But you can always delete the posts and the accounts that make them.
"But that takes resources and energy we don't have!" is usually the next response.
But if you get a group of volunteers who all manage one small section of the board, you have it covered.
I'll volunteer.
<font color="blue">The issue really isn't accoutability though.They want you to pay for the privelidge of posting......
</font>
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In point of fact, I don't think membership was the goal (in fact I know it wasn't) the goal was a tool to identify the user so as to bring pressure for people to post responsibly.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If that statement is indeed fact, then can you explain why Sandalman is working on the coding to have non-current members posting privelidges removed?(that is a serious question, not baiting)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The intention all along was to only allow current members to post. It's just that in the initial implementation the non-current check wasn't finished. Having parts of the website be a current membership benefit is something the board has been discussion for a couple of years now. We're just now getting around to making it happen. There will be other things in the future that will be current members only, like viewing stats of non-current members (ie., current members will be able to see anyone's historical stats, non-current members and the public in general will only be able to see stats for current members)..
-Theo
dscmn
Dec 06 2005, 04:09 PM
isn't this like re-gifting?
yes, being a non-current member i feel like I got regifted /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
fore is my all-time favourite poster, so I'll second. ;)
That hurts. Here I thought it was me. :(
I've said before many times: Anonymous=bad - Members Only=bad.
It would seem this was the lesser of two bads. Unfortunate, but something had to give.
This morning is the first time I've posted since the switch. :)
gnduke
Dec 07 2005, 03:50 PM
Does she make you cut your own switch ?
My Grandmother used to do that. :cool:
esalazar
Jan 22 2006, 09:50 PM
welcome back BLAKE!!!! :D