Maybe not, but if we also cut down the entry fee so it didn't have to cover all that merch, it might be just as attractive -- if not to all the same people, then perhaps to others.
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
PDGA Board of Director Elections
- Thread starter roblee
- Start date
- Status
Maybe not, but if we also cut down the entry fee so it didn't have to cover all that merch, it might be just as attractive -- if not to all the same people, then perhaps to others.
Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful response. I can relate. When I was playing tournies people would ask why I wasn't playing advanced instead of grandmasters, and then 50+. It was because I wanted to play with folks I could relate to. The only am division i qualified for was advanced and that was a big no. I was good enough to place in the middle of pack in open, and in some cases compete with the local or regional open guys.
This seems like similar reasoning to the issue we are speaking about. People naturally want to play with other people they relate to. Using this reasoning it absolutely seems that there is a social element to trans individuals wanting to play in a division with people they identify with.
No you don't.
You vote for Members of Congress of the United States of America, because you are a United States Citizen.
They vote in Congress, and hopefully represent what you want to see, but you are not participating in the voting that actually determines the outputs of the US Congress.
This is a great point; but there still could be a cash payout, CTP's and overall great competition and organization to keep a proper entry fee level.
Maybe the League/Tournament/Competition Director could then get paid as well for all of their hard efforts and investments.
My personal taste would be lower entry, no players pack, no payouts to Ams (just a trophy). If the entry were $20, a 72-am field would generate $1400 in revenue, which in many cases could fund some nice amenities and still pay the TD for his efforts.
My wish for the PDGA is not that they mandate this -- just that they allow it. More flexibility for TDs, and events with a range of payout/no-payout systems to suit everyone.
I think it's part of the consideration. Along with competitive fairness, and no doubt other issues. I'm fond of saying that "the simple answer is....that there's no simple answer".
As much as I like to think of board members taking us in great and revolutionary new directions, or addressing some of my own pet peeves, mostly I want the board to do a good job, continuing the progress disc golf has made, and wisely dealing with whatever unforeseen issues may arise.
kerq6c
Bogey Member
This is a big sticking point for me. Some (probably most) of these directors are pouring their time into these events and get little to nothing of compensation for their time.
Tradition is another driver. My motivation & those of the other old-timers in my community was always the satisfaction of providing great playing opportunities for other players. That paradigm is shiftinging toward monetary compensation. That's cool but what the heck happened to headbands, no shirt, gym shorts, & tube socks?
I agree with the rest of your post, and this for the most part.. You don't need every bush league am getting in to the am world's but I like the idea of giving people a chance when they aren't fortunate enough to be able to play more than 5 or 6 sanctioned events a year. I get the ratings poison for the good players but it could be gold for players trying to make a mark and be a part of a high level event. When I was competitive it was difficult to find enough events to play, since the PDGA is a membership based business these leagues fit with the model.
One of my good friends who's been playing for 30yrs+ worked really hard to qualify for worlds when it was in Oregon(? Washington? A short 12hrs+ hrs away). It was tight and he just made it by a couple points, it was a dream to play on the big field, he had little chance of winning but the experience was on his bucket list. Actually I think he went with Steve who won that year
Last edited:
Sure we can agree that it there is an element, that it is part of the consideration.
It is clearly a multi-faceted complex issue, and sometimes its better to just speak in generalities rather than going down rabbit holes.
I'm curious to see what other issues are involved in this election also.
robdeforge
Double Eagle Member
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2014
- Messages
- 1,356
I don't feel this is a fair comparison, especially the bolded part. But at least you admit that physical differences between a transgender woman and a cis gender woman could exist - that is more than some are willing to do in my experience.
while trying to educate myself more about this issue, I came across this and thought it was interesting: Factors influencing acceptance of transgender athletes
given the number of amateur competitors in the PDGA, and disc golf in general, it makes sense that a fundamental difference like the one described above exists between viewing what is "fair" in this context
OBVIOUSLY physical differences exist. But, I am not trying to banish all tall, lanky people, young people, physically fit people, athletically gifted people, people with great concentration skills, people with better eyesight.....
Physical advantages are all over the place. Which leaves any objection, simple poor losing or fear and hate? Competition is never fair.
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,180
:clap:
Time for it to stop being mandated. Time for the PDGA to no longer force TD's to meet a payout model that might not work for the objectives of the tournament.
If TD's want to bribe players with player packs for the love of God go ahead but the PDGA shouldn't force it anymore. It's part of the US centric model I have never understood
I like a player pack to add value to a tournament that draws players because of the TD/Location or ideal. The second players started debating which tournament to go to so they can get a better return on their "investment" was the second they should have stopped being mandated.
Go to the tournament for the tournament, go to a yard sale to turn a quick buck.
Arguing individual variations also seems to me, to be an argument for abolishing gender or age protected divisions, and either having a single division, or only dividing players by rating.
There are 12-year-olds better than me. Does that mean I can play in their division? There are 25-year-old men worse than me. Does that mean they can play in my MA60 division?
But if you take a representative sample of 12-year-olds, and a representative sample of 25-year-olds, the kids will have a lower average and top skill levels than the adults. Sure, some of the 12s are physically gifted or have really worked hard to refine their game. Sure, some of 25s missed came athletically short genetically, or have put very little effort in. But both on average, and at the top of their respective groups, there's a difference. Individual variations don't matter when we're deciding to provide them with separate competitions.
Leaving trans- aside, this is one of the reasons for separate female divisions. Not the individual examples, but the average and the top levels.
Then where should trans- fit in? I'm not certain, at least far less certain than the dogmatic proponents on either side of the issue. In part because all of the above is simply about athleticism, and not all of the other considerations.
rkbraves
Newbie
It's appalling that this is even a subject.. Men can not become women.. that's a biological fact. They can however feel like they should have been born a women but that doesn't change their biological makeup. The PDGA should have never allowed them to compete in the FPO/FA divisions which have been protected for biological women and girls for years. Trans need to fight for their own divisions the same way women have or play in the MPO/MA divisions which is deemed mixed by the PDGA's own guidelines. But since this hasn't happened and the board wants to continue to pursue it's woke agenda, ( even with major womens sports outlets now banning trans from female competition), we must vote new people on the board to protest women sand our upcoming girls fair competition. Two of our men in dg are running and stand for this very position. Robbie Harris and Michael Munn. A vote for these men will put womens sports back on track for fair competition between biological women and girls.
robdeforge
Double Eagle Member
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2014
- Messages
- 1,356
this is how I look at the advantages that you named: winning the lottery. some people, like michael phelps or usain bolt, simply win the genetic lottery in ways that can't be overcome by training or anything else. which isn't to say these guys were lazy, but they had ideal bodies for their sports. I don't think it's unfair that they were born in their bodies - I just think they got "lucky" and made full use of that.
if physical differences do exist between transgender women and cis gender women, then transitioning from male to female could give somebody an advantage that is similar to that described above. and this could be in a way that cis gender women may or may not be able to replicate.
Several of them, including a candidate for the PDGA BoD and his buddies, tried to raid my Facebook athlete page. It did not go well for them.
Laughably incorrect, bordering on delusional.
(Yeah, I know, bigots accuse transgender people of being delusional all the time, as a way to dismiss us, but I'm using the therm appropriately in this case. The two situations are not symmetrical.)
Personal attacks are not exceptable in any capacity. You should out them here, report the incident to the PDGA and file legal charges if applicable. Any contact by a candidate to any social media, email, phone account is heinous.
It wasn't anything actionable, like death threats or calls for violence, so it's just low-key Facebook idiocy.
What happened was that I'd posted a call to action to my fans to be sure not to vote for those two, and I explained why. One of the candidates and his fans came and posted comments like "har har thanks for the publicity" (paraphrased, but it was not any more literate than that) and "I'm voting for (buddy) for sure!" and so on. Then they all liked and loved each others' comments.
Then I went through and clicked the links to each of their personal profiles so that I could harvest their usernames from the URL, plugged those names into the "ban user from page" function on Facebook, banned them all, and deleted all of their comments. These particular people won't be back, and there is no trace of their little raid on my page. It's like it never happened.
I don't engage trolls on my athlete page. I ban them. It's my page, not theirs.
(Edit: To be sure, the way they conducted themselves was definitely conduct unbecoming to a person who wants a position of responsibility in a large member-supported organization, but the level of discourse in our society has been circling the toilet bowl for a couple of years now. I'm not shocked. Just bored and tired, and wishing for better.)
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
