Nope, we're good.
-
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
Nope, we're good.
This conversation was interesting but only 2 of 13 candidates chose to contribute. In fairness, maybe the others don't know the thread exists. From what info I could find on candidates my impression is that most were inexperienced with governing a nonprofit corporation with significant regulatory, promotional, and financial responsibility. Everybody loves dg & wants to grow the sport but their ideas didn't involve a path to succeed. One exception is Laura Nategaal. She presented a detailed & thoughtful plan for sustainable growth. She also contributed significantly to discussions regarding transgender issues. That topic was so pervasive that it masked the value of her governing potential.
Phil Mills sounds like he could contribute valuable fiscal oversight. I don't know if that need is best served as a Board member or as a contractor. Robert (Bob) Decker, CPA served the BOD as Treasurer for 15 years & 2 as President. I don't think there is a CPA on the BOD now. Honestly, Phil overwhelmed me with all the things he said. He even lampooned himself for his verbosity and he was consistent with his delivery
Voting ends at midnight and we should have results tomorrow. I expect the results will give us the opportunity for continued debate.
Phil Mills sounds like he could contribute valuable fiscal oversight. I don't know if that need is best served as a Board member or as a contractor. Robert (Bob) Decker, CPA served the BOD as Treasurer for 15 years & 2 as President. I don't think there is a CPA on the BOD now. Honestly, Phil overwhelmed me with all the things he said. He even lampooned himself for his verbosity and he was consistent with his delivery
Voting ends at midnight and we should have results tomorrow. I expect the results will give us the opportunity for continued debate.
This conversation was interesting but only 2 of 13 candidates chose to contribute. In fairness, maybe the others don't know the thread exists. From what info I could find on candidates my impression is that most were inexperienced with governing a nonprofit corporation with significant regulatory, promotional, and financial responsibility. Everybody loves dg & wants to grow the sport but their ideas didn't involve a path to succeed. One exception is Laura Nategaal. She presented a detailed & thoughtful plan for sustainable growth. She also contributed significantly to discussions regarding transgender issues. That topic was so pervasive that it masked the value of her governing potential.
Phil Mills sounds like he could contribute valuable fiscal oversight. I don't know if that need is best served as a Board member or as a contractor. Robert (Bob) Decker, CPA served the BOD as Treasurer for 15 years & 2 as President. I don't think there is a CPA on the BOD now. Honestly, Phil overwhelmed me with all the things he said. He even lampooned himself for his verbosity and he was consistent with his delivery
Voting ends at midnight and we should have results tomorrow. I expect the results will give us the opportunity for continued debate.
Oh yeah, I wrote alot lol. At the same time, I put time into my narrative and videos out of respect to the importance of the position. Also, I had no idea how short other people's statement should be so mine looks even longer. I didn't have the longest video though
. Obviously I have bias, but a board without a financial expert, especially for an organization with substantial growth, isn't ideal.At this point, I think the winners will be Munn +Laura/Conrad. We will see.
" I didn't have the longest video though ."
So only one World Record then!
I appreciate your thoroughness Phil. This campaign had more candidate involvement than ever before. Only downside is the single issue aspect. It's disappointing that actual governing is not the highest priority. Regardless of the results, I'd expect you to find a way to contribute your skills to the success of the PDGA. Cheers!
." So only one World Record then!
I appreciate your thoroughness Phil. This campaign had more candidate involvement than ever before. Only downside is the single issue aspect. It's disappointing that actual governing is not the highest priority. Regardless of the results, I'd expect you to find a way to contribute your skills to the success of the PDGA. Cheers!
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2008
- Messages
- 4,783
Members will vote based on things that are important to them.
You may agree or disagree with their opinions/priorities and values, but democracy is like that.
It's messy and frustrating and challenging, but it's what we have.
Free discussion and debate is the "fertilizer" that makes democracy strong.
They may be wrong and you may be right, but every member's vote counts as one.
That is the foundation of the democratic process.
You may agree or disagree with their opinions/priorities and values, but democracy is like that.
It's messy and frustrating and challenging, but it's what we have.
Free discussion and debate is the "fertilizer" that makes democracy strong.
They may be wrong and you may be right, but every member's vote counts as one.
That is the foundation of the democratic process.
PMantle
* Ace Member *
Why do you hate women so much?
Streets
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2012
- Messages
- 10,610
PMantle
* Ace Member *
Nice gif, but doesn't address the question.
Streets
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2012
- Messages
- 10,610
The thread's moved on chief and I don't feel like engaging your loaded, inflammatory question. Buzz off.
This does not even make sense. It is flawed logic and thinking.
If I support the rights and endorse equal treatment of cultures and races, other than mine....I hate my culture and race?
You do realize, as a humanist, I can support ALL people? Not just those I agree with or are like me. My support of the LBGTQ community is not an either/or situation. I can care about, love and support all humans, regardless of skin color, religious beliefs, gender identification, culture or philosophies. Seems like it is you that sees hate in this idea.
To be clear... The anti-inclusion people will not stop with the exclusion of women who have transitioned.
Look at what they're doing in track and field - this is about women conforming to a particular image that they desire to see, more so than it is protecting all women in sport. Over in Track & Field Caster Semenya is required test under the 5.0 nmol testosterone threshold to compete in her chosen events (she can compete in some others) because she has a difference in her sexual development. However by comparison - women with Poly-cystic Overian Syndrome are not required to test at all, despite the fact that women with PCOS a) start to experience differences in hormone levels often during puberty (which can be diagnosed for the first time later in puberty or after) and b) their testosterone levels can exceed the same 5.0 nmol limit that they place on people with DSD.
They don't care about women's competitive fields being level based on the developmental impacts of testosterone. They just want the women's field to purely reflect sex organs, the brain as an organ and the physical functioning nexus of your identity be damned. Competition be damned.
Lets again be clear: THEY. DO. NOT. CARE. ABOUT. LEVEL. PLAYING. FIELDS. They just want women's athletics to look as distinctly feminine as possible.
Look at what they're doing in track and field - this is about women conforming to a particular image that they desire to see, more so than it is protecting all women in sport. Over in Track & Field Caster Semenya is required test under the 5.0 nmol testosterone threshold to compete in her chosen events (she can compete in some others) because she has a difference in her sexual development. However by comparison - women with Poly-cystic Overian Syndrome are not required to test at all, despite the fact that women with PCOS a) start to experience differences in hormone levels often during puberty (which can be diagnosed for the first time later in puberty or after) and b) their testosterone levels can exceed the same 5.0 nmol limit that they place on people with DSD.
They don't care about women's competitive fields being level based on the developmental impacts of testosterone. They just want the women's field to purely reflect sex organs, the brain as an organ and the physical functioning nexus of your identity be damned. Competition be damned.
Lets again be clear: THEY. DO. NOT. CARE. ABOUT. LEVEL. PLAYING. FIELDS. They just want women's athletics to look as distinctly feminine as possible.
gingerandhoney
Birdie Member
Once, back in 2001, "either you're with us, or you are with the terrorists" was said out loud, that opened a highway to mass polarisation of society, only to be accelerated further by internet.
There's hardly any topic in the USA's social and political climate that isn't corroded in some kind of an "either you're with us, or you are against us" hyperbole.
gingerandhoney
Birdie Member
Powerful words, ChrisWoj
crd 81
Double Eagle Member
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2007
- Messages
- 1,010
PMantle
* Ace Member *
I agree with all of this. None of this addresses the issue at hand. The reason for protected divisions has nothing t do with LBGTQ. Ask yourself why they exist? The more you delve into that, the more you will realize you're hating on women in a really disgusting way.
PMantle
* Ace Member *
Calling it those things, while it may make you feel better, ignores the issue that you refuse to discuss. You obviously are taking the position that reasonable minds cannot differ on it. That's hilariously ironic.
There is no issue at hand. You are still using flawed logic and thinking. You are presenting no intelligent point and seem to be defending your fear and hate, by projection. It is not your issue, it has no impact on you. You seem to want permission or validation, that exclusion of those that scare you, is OK. It is not OK. Inclusion does not indicate hate.
It does not take "delving" or deep thought to understand protected divisioning is designed for fair play. If and when there is science, to indicate that trans athletes have some unfair advantage, the rules should be looked at. There is no such science. All that is left is your fear.
If you wish to continue discussing this, please post something...an opinion, facts, issue...
You are not going to get the validation and permission to project your fears on others. Take this and learn. There is a great opportunity here for personal growth and actualization, I encourage you to take it. We are all people. Even those unlike you and those you don't agree with. We all deserve respect and compassion. It really is that simple.
PMantle
* Ace Member *
There is no flawed logic. There is no fear. There is no hate. Your posts are truly bizarre. Your lack of support for women disc golfers is pretty sick actually.
This is just patently false. Why do you think FINA did what they did? Fear and hate? How can anyone be this dense and obtuse?
So....I have a differing view, so name calling is your default? This seems to be incongruent with your entire premise, of no hate or fear.
Shrug...your utter inability to state a point, issue or opinion, makes conversation very difficult. Your projection, of those promoting inclusion are promoting hate, is illogical and has zero merit. You are more than welcome to keep repeating this. Maybe someone else will provide you with some attention. :\
I hear, "Listen to the science"; "There is no science"; "The scientists used the wrong protocol"; as if the science will provide all the knowledge and reason to support MY position. Well, the science is a tool; one tool that helps societies determine what path to take. Millions of dollars have funded research of this fairness issue for decades. Individuals & governing bodies then accept or reject all or part of what the science says. Science is not a panacea or all-knowing deity. And scientific knowledge is not static.
The PDGA medical subcommittee will review the existing research on fairness. They will not conduct original or novel research. They will report to the BOD (including the newly elected). The BOD will use that info, their personal biases, their beliefs, their fears, their desire to be fair, & myriad other things to decide how they will cast their vote. They will probably do that without characterizing other Board members as weak minded, flawed, unintelligent, hateful, bigoted, & just plain "bad"; hopefully.
The PDGA medical subcommittee will review the existing research on fairness. They will not conduct original or novel research. They will report to the BOD (including the newly elected). The BOD will use that info, their personal biases, their beliefs, their fears, their desire to be fair, & myriad other things to decide how they will cast their vote. They will probably do that without characterizing other Board members as weak minded, flawed, unintelligent, hateful, bigoted, & just plain "bad"; hopefully.
- Status
Similar threads
