Your PDGA 'tax' dollars at work (now hijack free)

[Three Putt]

Wow, this has gone on a long time.

Basically I have no real problem with them drinking a few beers on the Org's dime. No big thing. I spent several years working in Advancement for a not-for-profit with an annual budget of around 25 million. We could piss away more money in five minutes than the PDGA BoD could drink in a year, so I'm really not shocked, appalled or anything in between. In the great grand scheme of wasteful spending or moral responsibility, this really amounts to nothing more than pissing in the ocean.

The problem I have is vision. Everyone who voted "no" knew this would be in the meeting minutes and the minutes would be posted on the Org's website. All of them should be aware that HawkGammon, UPM and the rest of the Org haters are circling like vultures and would find this little nugget. They should have known that it would leak out to various club sites and other disc golf message boards. Anyone with a little vision should have been able to realize that voting yes means they pick up their own bar tab and nothing else happens, and voting no gives us an excuse to drag the PDGA through the mud for a few days on the Internet. If it had never come up for a vote, everyone could drink in peace and no one would be the wiser. Once it was brought up, you had to take the PC route and vote yourself into the bar tab. That's politics, folks.

So to me, the no voters either showed a lack of vision or they don't care what we think. Neither one is good.

 

[zenbot]

Hey guys. Just got back from a meeting. Did you get this all figured out?

 

[Three Putt]

Hey guys. Just got back from a meeting. Did you get this all figured out?

Nah, the horse is still twitching.

 

[skinner21]

Oh, I don't really have a problem with it but I definitely don't feel the need to defend them on the internet about it.

I'm of a similar view, only I don't see a need to bash them all over the internet on different sites about it. We both don't care that much and can't see why the other side is all worked up, we're just leaning to slightly different sides.

Doesn't make them dumb *******s, at least not all of them. Just makes them little sheepies that are so plump and willing for the taking. :doh:

If you see a difference between calling some a sheep and a dumb as.s.hole, then I have nothing more for you. Keep calling people names on the internet though, you should get pretty far.

 

[Beable]

I'd rather blame the people who forced the non issue on them though, Three Putt. Voting yes means that this was an issue worth talking about, instead of "pissing in the ocean" like you said.

 

[Vegan Ray]

Wow, this has gone on a long time.

Basically I have no real problem with them drinking a few beers on the Org's dime. No big thing. I spent several years working in Advancement for a not-for-profit with an annual budget of around 25 million. We could piss away more money in five minutes than the PDGA BoD could drink in a year, so I'm really not shocked, appalled or anything in between. In the great grand scheme of wasteful spending or moral responsibility, this really amounts to nothing more than pissing in the ocean.

The problem I have is vision. Everyone who voted "no" knew this would be in the meeting minutes and the minutes would be posted on the Org's website. All of them should be aware that HawkGammon, UPM and the rest of the Org haters are circling like vultures and would find this little nugget. They should have known that it would leak out to various club sites and other disc golf message boards. Anyone with a little vision should have been able to realize that voting yes means they pick up their own bar tab and nothing else happens, and voting no gives us an excuse to drag the PDGA through the mud for a few days on the Internet. If it had never come up for a vote, everyone could drink in peace and no one would be the wiser. Once it was brought up, you had to take the PC route and vote yourself into the bar tab. That's politics, folks.

So to me, the no voters either showed a lack of vision or they don't care what we think. Neither one is good.

Very calm-headed synopsis of my post #124, TP. Well said.

 

[I3ooI3oo]

You're right, I misspoke, there are some moral absolutes, like murder, rape, etc.

Sorry theses are not moral absolutes.

Killing a person that is killing others, would be a possible contradiction to the murder statement. Joe Bob grabs all of his ammo and runs down to the local hospital and starts shooting everyone in sight. When does that moral absolute allow for taking his life. Every ten seconds Joe Bob shoots another person. How many people does he have to shoot for it to be morally right to end his life?

Back to the point at hand.

Those on the BoD only go to the summit to work on PDGA issues. They would not ordinarily have when to such a place without the need for said meeting. They should be given a daily per diem that covers their food and such. What they then spend it on is not open for discussion. The US goverment gives between $46-$75 per day per person. So buy a $5 burger and drink the other $70 away if you want.

 

[Lithicon]

Threeputt, that is the main issue. They weren't thinking about the ramifications on the organization. So either a momentary lapse of judgement or clearly a bigger picture of their lack of vision for the sport. Either way, their actions could be the result of little progress.

 

[littleshoe]

Wow. This is still going. I finished my presentation and everything. Lets see if I can finish my paper and its still goin.

 

[Frank Delicious]

Sorry theses are not moral absolutes.

Killing a person that is killing others, would be a possible contradiction to the murder statement. Joe Bob grabs all of his ammo and runs down to the local hospital and starts shooting everyone in sight. When does that moral absolute allow for taking his life. Every ten seconds Joe Bob shoots another person. How many people does he have to shoot for it to be morally right to end his life?
.

If a moral absolutist believes that murder is wrong, then never. If he believes murder is ok, then he can kill the person whenever.

 

[Vegan Ray]

Then the definition of "murder" becomes important…

 

[skinner21]

Sorry theses are not moral absolutes.

Killing a person that is killing others, would be a possible contradiction to the murder statement. Joe Bob grabs all of his ammo and runs down to the local hospital and starts shooting everyone in sight. When does that moral absolute allow for taking his life. Every ten seconds Joe Bob shoots another person. How many people does he have to shoot for it to be morally right to end his life?

Back to the point at hand.

Those on the BoD only go to the summit to work on PDGA issues. They would not ordinarily have when to such a place without the need for said meeting. They should be given a daily per diem that covers their food and such. What they then spend it on is not open for discussion. The US goverment gives between $46-$75 per day per person. So buy a $5 burger and drink the other $70 away if you want.

1) exaclty my point on the "morality" of this issue
2) great point on the per diem

 

[agent_peebody]

I don't really care if it is like 1-2 drinks. But if they are ordering 7 shots of Patron and a bottle of Gray Goose each...that's a different barrel of monkeys.

 

[zenbot]

I don't really care if it is like 1-2 drinks. But if they are ordering 7 shots of Patron and a bottle of Gray Goose each...that's a different barrel of monkeys.

Brace yourself.

 

[sidewinding]

This thread is making me thirsty. Guess I'll have to swing through the beer barn on the way home for a twelver of Shiner.

MMMM...Shiner

 

[skinner21]

I wish I could GIS "circle jerk" at work without getting in trouble so I could express my feelings on this thread. I have got to get out of here.

 

[Lithicon]

I'm of a similar view, only I don't see a need to bash them all over the internet on different sites about it. We both don't care that much and can't see why the other side is all worked up, we're just leaning to slightly different sides.



If you see a difference between calling some a sheep and a dumb as.s.hole, then I have nothing more for you. Keep calling people names on the internet though, you should get pretty far.

Yeah, the metaphorical sheep some how belittles my intelligence because I can see ignorance. I won't apologize for not conforming and following that metaphorical sheep that is so willing for the slaughter.

 

[Vegan Ray]

I wish I could GIS "circle jerk" at work without getting in trouble so I could express my feelings on this thread.

Curiosity, a troubling attraction, and a breathless feeling of warmth & fraternity?

 

[Frank Delicious]

1) exaclty my point on the "morality" of this issue
2) great point on the per diem

I really don't understand your morality point. Is it that the morality of the issue is relatively small compared to other "sins"?

 

[gcr_russell]

This last page has it all right finally. BofD members are given a meal per diem that is used at their discretion. They lacked foresight when voting, because perception is everything, and if we've learned at all through all the DG messageboards out there people will dissect and trample over any perceived or actual wrongdoing in our small obscure community.

This is a debate that could branch out a hundred directions within the PDGAs discretion in spending our money alone. I say this has come to a decent conclusion. Now on to part of morality and black and white and all that wonderfully opinionless banter.