theres a lot of food for thought in here, form the summit minutes. especially that without the message board we'd lose the bulk of our hits and therefore ad revenue. the message board may be the one place where we the members have the most power after all. no wonder some wnat to kill it off.


<font color="purple"> Message Board: presented by Rick Rothstein
Rothstein lead a discussion regarding the rise to prominence that the message board has seen
damage that he feels it does when PDGA officials or staff post. Not sure what good it does us.
Stork answered the question of utility with the fact that it is by far the largest draw of the PDGA
and increases our hits significantly which in turn makes us more interesting to potential sponsors.
Rothstein emphasized the use of e-newsletters to communicate with the membership instead
announcements on the message board.
Gentry believes that the new FAQ section of the new website will help alleviate the need for
on the message board.
The possibility of shutting down part of the message board to the public was brought up.
Stork suggested that we create a task force to look at the options. There are many other people
organizations that are dealing with the same issues. This is something that keeps coming up and
should work on addressing it.
Gentry is researching a possible shift to a new message board. If we go with a new message
old stuff will at least be archived and searchable. Gentry is trying to get people from the message
involved in the process.
A task force was formed with Gentry, Korver, and possibly Jeff Legrassa and Theo Pozzy.
</font>

that last line scares me though. in a fox/henhouse kind of way.

I generally agree with Rick on a lot of things, but not this. IMO, the leadership of the PDGA is way too timid, way too sensitive to criticism and way too cynical to trust the better nature of the majority of members.

Communication to members via posts may generate a lot of criticism, some of which might be juvenile, but so what? This communication also gives members a reference for discussion (sorely lacking), some measure of confidence that decisions were made using some rationale, and gives the impression that leaders are not weak-kneed elitists. They should also realize that their communication is aimed at a membership that is intelligent and reasonable. Stop assuming that just because the next ten posts might be ankle biting that the post didn't also reach twenty people who might feel differently.

A few recent examples from my perspective: BDH posts, while riling some up, at least let me know that there were reasons behind actions. These reasons are an important frame of reference, vital to any meaningful discussion, and believe me, discussion will take place whether this board exists or not. Eliminating the board will hardly eliminate criticism of the PDGA.

The second example is Addie posting a link to the benefits of membership. These benefits are all debatable, and I'm not super-fond of the PDGA at the moment, but it is nice to see the PDGA staff and representatives stand up, whether you agree of not. The alternative of passivity and seclusion just makes me think they are weak, and weak people rarely lead organizations forward.

In sum, the seclusion and distance of the BOD has always made me think less of them, and therefore less of the PDGA. Their constant aversion and sensitivity to criticism is maddening, and a glaring sign of weakness. Eliminating the discussion board is just another signal of eventual defeat.

Their constant aversion and sensitivity to criticism is maddening, and a glaring sign of weakness.



This has not been my experience; in fact it has been completely the opposite. In my years of working with PDGA executive staff and BoD members, their ability to desensitize themselves to perennial petty criticism is nothing short of superhuman, imo. I can honestly say that these are some of the strongest people I have ever met in my entire life, and I don't doubt for a minute that very few of you would last a week in their shoes without completely losing your cool.

I know I wouldn't.

Their constant aversion and sensitivity to criticism is maddening, and a glaring sign of weakness.



This has not been my experience; in fact it has been completely the opposite. In my years of working with PDGA executive staff and BoD members, their ability to desensitize themselves to perennial petty criticism is nothing short of superhuman, imo. I can honestly say that these are some of the strongest people I have ever met in my entire life, and I don't doubt for a minute that very few of you would last a week in their shoes without completely losing your cool.

I know I wouldn't.




I'm pretty sure you posted something similar to that mess right there a few days ago. The fact remains that many people who do not have hands on experience with these individuals seem to feel that they are in the business of avoiding conflict to the point where many things are ignored.

It would be nice to have someone from the board come on here and take ideas from the members and maybe present them at the Board meetings. Then again that would be good customer service and would go far from the normal send us money and everything will be ok PDGA.

Scooter you forgot to mention collecting a dollar from everyone so you can get an umbrella in your player pack next year.

Heh heh, I can see the agenda now...

Item 1: Peter wants some more divisions
Item 2: Craig want less divisions
Item 3: Mike hates rating
Item 4: Dave loves ratings
etc
;)

All items presented at the board level should be well researched proposals and include some impact statement on what happens with and without implementation. Very few things brought up on the discussion board are developed a level I would feel comfortable presenting to a board of directors.

It would be nice to have someone from the board come on here and take ideas from the members and maybe present them at the Board meetings.



That's a litle bit like throwing your trash in the road and expecting the garbageman to pick it up and put it in the truck.

no it's like voicing your opinion and hoping leadership cares and listens. not everyone with valuable input contacts the PDGA directly so if the leadership wants to serve its members it should at least listen and try to separate the wheat from the chaff... it is to everyones detriment if they do not. it's clear they read the message board. (though i doubt anyone reads all of it ). it is almost like Rick wants them to be like the Wizard of Oz but make sure the curtain is never pulled back ... :D

no it's like voicing your opinion and hoping leadership cares and listens. not everyone with valuable input contacts the PDGA directly so if the leadership wants to serve its members it should at least listen and try to separate the wheat from the chaff...



If the input is so important that leadership simply must know about it, then the answer is very simple. Bury it in a pile of you-know-what and then complain because no one digs it up to see if it still stinks.

Sorry, but if it looks like you-know-what, is buried in a pile of you-know-what and smells like you-know-what, then it probably is you-know-what :)

Bury it in a pile of you-know-what and then complain because no one digs it up to see if it still stinks.

Sorry, but if it looks like you-know-what, is buried in a pile of you-know-what and smells like you-know-what, then it probably is you-know-what :)



ah, but here you, i, and they are... sometimes you find what you're looking for and miss everything else. unless you keep your mind open ... /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I like reading the banter between some of the posts. Its entertaining. Without the mess board the whole site would not be worth visiting. The board banter changes by the minute the rest of the site is pretty much the same week after week. Hits to the site would fall by exactly 84.349%. See on here you can make stuff up just for fun.

I like reading the banter between some of the posts. Its entertaining. Without the mess board the whole site would not be worth visiting. The board banter changes by the minute the rest of the site is pretty much the same week after week. Hits to the site would fall by exactly 84.349%. See on here you can make stuff up just for fun.




That is probably pretty accurate and I wouldn't renew if they did away with the MB but because of the A-tier thing the PDGA will keep on getting my money to spend on things that I don't feel do anything for the sport.

Everyone,

I was a Board Member who communicated frankly and before-the-fact with the Membership via the Discussion Board. Here are the main reasons why I still believe I was correct in so doing.

1) Although I worked ON the Board, I felt that I was working FOR the Membership, and that they deserved to know my opinion on important issues.
2) I learned a lot. On some issues (ie, the disc technical standards review), membership opinion on-line and through PM's was very helpful in refining my position. I always found it useful to know what everybody thinks, even (perhaps especially) if they disagree with me.
3) If I had run again, my expressed attitudes would have made it easy for the Membership to decide whether or not they wanted to vote for me.

Most Board Members on "my" Board did not feel the same way. I had no problem with that -- not everyone is well-suited to it. Certainly no Board Member should be coerced to communicate in that way if it feels uncomfortable. At the same time, no Board Member should be prevented from doing it.

There is apparently no current Board Member who believes in sharing opinions with the Membership. Personally, I regret this, because it places a wall between the Board and the Membership that will often be opaque from both sides. Still, I do not condemn it because, as noted above, it is mainly a matter of temperament.

But I would hope that no changes are made in the structure of the Discussion Board or in Board policies that would restrict Board Members from communicating with the Membership if they so desired. Although this Board may not wish to communicate, there may be Board Members in the future who would feel differently.

This message board is dead already. Comapare the traffic here to the traffic at www.discgolfersr.us. (http://www.discgolfersr.us.) This message board is a ghost town.

what is your take on the focus of the leadership? It has always seemed strange to me that the P in PDGA is a misnomer and we are really, collectively, the ADGA... Maybe the CDGA (competitive disc golf association) would be more appropriate although there is a certain lure for the newbie to become a card carrying member of the *Professional* Disc Golf Association...

do you feel enough emphasis is given to Professional events and members and would we be better off having the ADGA be a subset of the PDGA so that there is a certain group of leaders who focus almost entirely on Professional competition? when 85% (?) of your dues paying members are not Pros, and when running amateur events is found favorable by a majority of TD's to what direction does that tilt the leadership?

i think the idea scooter keeps trumpeting is one crying out to be put into place -- maybe instead it should be 10% of all PDGA revenues goes to NT Pro payouts...

Pat or Pete, does the BoD -- in your experience -- spend a lot of time on this?

This message board is dead already. Comapare the traffic here to the traffic at www.discgolfersr.us. (http://www.discgolfersr.us.) This message board is a ghost town.




Then the PDGA is just a figment of our imagination compared to the number of players who play casually.

BTW you get a lot more info on here than on DGRus when it comes to events and things dealing with the PDGA.

"Pat or Pete, does the BoD -- in your experience -- spend a lot of time on this? "

no, not really, if youre talking about taking $X from every entry. the pdga has resisted doing budgets for each program in the past, so its really hard to see how they think about revenue allocations. remember, this is the organization that was/is afraid to allow its members to see a pie chart of its costs per member benefit.

"BTW you get a lot more info on here than on DGRus when it comes to events and things dealing with the PDGA. "

yes, this site does have a good hold on that info. isnt it better that we now have sites like DGRUS and DGcoursereview? dgcoursereview was made viable by the pdga sharing data with it. it built a nice interface and got started, then got hte data ferom the pdga. bravo for all concerned on that progressive policy.

imagine what sites we might have if we could use other data? theres no doubt that DGCR is superior to our course directory. why not make it possible - actually encourage - others to follow suit and create the enxt generation of dg sites?

(btw, that decision was pre-Rothstein, but i am sure he felt good about diminishing the pdga's web hegemony that he seeks to overturn. it would be heartening to hear some sort of affirmation from the current bod that the policy of data-sharing will continue.)

If anyone has an initiative they'd like to see the PDGA consider, it's much better to take it to the PDGA staffer and/or Committee that might handle or oversee the program. There's a Board member that oversees every committee. If the committee supports the idea, then the Board member overseer can be the advocate who takes the idea for Board review and approval if it even needs that level of approval.

much better than what?

Better than posting it here and hoping a staffer, committee member or Board member will read or consider the idea.

who did that?

Scooter regarding the $1 per player tax for Worlds as one example. But there are many more "you know the PDGA should" type posts all over the D-Board thru the year.

really? i thought that everyone who posts here also copies the office :) i know i have one idea in that is waiting for some additional input from staff before i know if i can get the data or not. the office has been pretty good recently with acknowledging they received an idea, and indicating what the next steps are.

Scooter regarding the $1 per player tax for Worlds as one example. But there are many more "you know the PDGA should" type posts all over the D-Board thru the year.




I like to think of it as a Grass-roots effort.

The sad thing is I barely even know who is on the board as few of them post on here and its not like they are out in the open.

$1 per entry towards worlds to make it the best disc golf event ever sounds like a reasonable investment for the players. SN does it and PDGA players flock there in droves to get a piece of the pie yet at worlds the Pie leaves you with the feeling you just ate fruitcake.

"PDGA Executive Director, Brian Graham, is pleased to welcome Dr. John G. Duesler, Jr. back to the position of Director of Marketing &amp; Communications. Duesler is revisiting this post after a brief hiatus in 2008. His duties will include contributing to new PDGA Magazine, online newsletter and the the PDGA Media Group. In addition, Dr. John will also continue his efforts at helping disc golf gain prominence on broadcast television by nurturing increased relations with corporate sponsors, convention &amp; visitors bureaus, as well as the PDGA membership itself. "

congrats John on getting back in.

Read the minutes from past board meetings. You can see whose on the board as well as keep up with current issues on the table. I bet Ron Convers and you are at some of the same events throughout the year...talk to him.

Excellent. I had the pleasure of meeting him a few years ago and was impressed with his knowledge, interest, and passion for disc golf. A welcome (re)addition to the PDGA.

dgcoursereview was made viable by the pdga sharing data with it. it built a nice interface and got started, then got hte data ferom the pdga. bravo for all concerned on that progressive policy.



Pat,

Actually, that isn't really how it worked. I think the PDGA is a little more willing to share data these days but my site was an individual effort at first. There wasn't any sort of collaboration agreement or data sharing that took place. I didn't talk with anyone from the PDGA until a few months into the site's existence and 1.5 years later I think we're still trying to hash something out but obviously the tech guys have their hands full here and I tend to be fairly busy as well so not much has come of it yet.

The course directory on DGCR was slowly built as I and other DGCR members started adding courses as we wanted to review them, mark them as played, etc. Now we're almost up to 3000 courses (more if you count extinct courses) with an amazing amount of information for many of them.

I've added so much to the site since starting it that "disc golf course review" doesn't adequately describe everything you can do on there. One of these days I might have to change the name of the place :)

i thought we were able to get you the course directorty data at one point? apologies if my memory is wrong. i coulda sworn we agreed to get it to someone. anyway, your site is awesome. i support more data exchange between the association and sites. good luck for the upcoming year.

Sounds like it may have been someone else. I wish I had that data to start.. it would have been really helpful!

Thanks for the compliments and have a great holiday!