Since we're not allowed to post on their thread, I'll ask it here:

Is the new magazine going to have the same subscriber distribution process as DGW?

I'd think not, you can opt out...

No, I mean from presses to subscribers (opter-inners). Seems like DGW didn't get to people at anywhere near equal rates time-wise. I'm just curious if I'm going to be one of the last to my copy still. Even people in my town would get theirs a week or more before I'd get mine :confused:

Is your question whether you'll get yours at the same time as other folks? If so, the answer is all subscribers will get them within a pretty tight time window, yes.

There is an allowance for differing efficiencies with local post offices, but typically they work within a 3 day window. Delivery date is on or about January 30th for issue one. Please contact us should you have any troubles.

As far as posting and contact, you are always welcome to ask anything you want directly. My email is [email protected]

Yes, that was my question. Since it wasn't very clear(?), here's some more:

What happens to each copy after it is produced? Does it get postage put on it by you and shipped to each individual, or does it go to another location to be handled by another set of hands?

And while I've got your attention, here are some more:

Is it OK if we ask questions here on this board about the magazine our PDGA dues pay for? And why not let us post on the other thread about the mag, so as not to tie up the "Other PDGA" catagory?

Others may be thinking the same thing but may be shy to ask.

Yes, that was my question. Since it wasn't very clear(?), here's some more:

What happens to each copy after it is produced? Does it get postage put on it by you and shipped to each individual, or does it go to another location to be handled by another set of hands?

And while I've got your attention, here are some more:

Is it OK if we ask questions here on this board about the magazine our PDGA dues pay for? And why not let us post on the other thread about the mag, so as not to tie up the "Other PDGA" catagory?

Others may be thinking the same thing but may be shy to ask.



Generally copies to members will be signed, sealed, and delivered from one location, in one process. Copies someone receives retroactively (say for instance a member receives issue one after renewing in February) may be handled a bit differently.

As far as the message board, announcement threads are there to communicate information at need. I don't see why there couldn't be a Flying Disc thread in another section, too, much as there are regular threads for various manufacturers or personalities.

Please understand the majority of our time is now spent working on your super duper killer issue, though, so don't be offended if our visits to the board are intermittent.

You are absolutely free to talk about us all you want :D

Thanks. As a member I should be allowed to at least ask questions ;)


Please understand the majority of our time is now spent working on your kick [email protected] issue, though, so don't be offended if our visits to the board are intermittent



I'm not easily offended, especially about something like the timely arrival of a magazine. What I do find a bit disconcerting is your (weakly veiled) use of vulgarity here. Didn't you read the new policy about the mess board? Will this style of journalism be used in "OUR" new magazine? Are we to assume that when we get our magazines we will have to peruse it first to make sure that it is clean before our kids get ahold of it and start repeating what they read in there about kick [email protected] magazines? Is the Communications Director going to have to proofread every issue to make sure that there is nothing printed that could be damaging to the PDGA image?

Like I said, I'm not easily offended but it seems there are plenty of members who are, and you shouldn't be allowed that style if the rest of us are not.

Any word on by when we need to do our PDGA renewals so as not to miss issue #1 of the new magazine? I'm doing my renewal through our local club, and it seems the club isn't yet ready for it. Can I still get the first issue if my renewal isn't in on time (because of powers out of my control)?

Ummmm. Time to edit but not enough time to respond to questions from subscribers.......

Please understand the majority of our time is now spent working on your super duper killer issue, though, so don't be offended if our visits to the board are intermittent



Who would have guessed that "kick [email protected]" ([email protected]) means "super duper killer" in computer speak?

If you want the first issue, sign up now. BTW, it is not your dues that pay for it. You add 10.00 to your dues. It should be well worth it.

Is this new mag not subsidized in any way by the PDGA?

I was under the impression that this was going to be the official "periodical" of our association. Surely as a member of the association, I am allowed to ask questions, and most definately as a member I should question the practices of the entire association, even if it means someone needs to apologize for overstepping boundaries that have been clearly set by the association BOD.

Please understand the majority of our time is now spent working on your kick [email protected] issue, though, so don't be offended if our visits to the board are intermittent

Ummmm. Time to edit but not enough time to respond to questions from subscribers.......


Please understand the majority of our time is now spent working on your super duper killer issue, though, so don't be offended if our visits to the board are intermittent



Who would have guessed that "kick [email protected]" means "super duper killer" in computer speak?



C'mon from BOTH of you..He's sounding ambitious and excited about his first issue, and who can blame him? Let him make every effort to entice members to sign up for his magazine (I know I'll be signed up..) for early 2008?

Additionally, most of your questions have already been asked and responded to on other threads.

Are you trying to tell me that I have to read every thread on this board to find out the answers to my legitimate questions? Please show me where they were answered so I'll know where to look in the future.

I was wondering if the new delivery system was going to be similar to DGW's system, where different parts of the country received their issues later than others. That question was somewhat answered, but the door was left open for more Q's. Then, in his "excitement", the new mag guy experienced a lapse of judgement when he posted content that is clearly against the rules of the DISCussion Board. Am I to believe that the new magazine is not going to be held to the same standards that DGW was? If I'm not mistaken, Rick Rothstein was subjected to a lot of abuse on this mess board because of pictures, articles, and advertisements that were published in DGW. I would think the new mag owners know about that, maybe even were given certain content guidelines, and they would take special care to make sure prospective subscribers know they are not going to do the same things that got DGW in hot water.

I still would like to have an official answer to this question:

Is Flying Disc Magazine the official "periodical" of the PDGA, and does any part of PDGA yearly expenses go to the production of the new magazine?

Start here. (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=OtherPDGATopics&Number=74 4739&page=0&fpart=1)

Just because you're [censored] Rothstein is no longer doing the mag, don't take it out on the new guy. 4141 isn't the one that put out the RFP or the one that failed to submit a bid.

I'm not sure you are qualified to make judgements on my emotional state. I have never expressed that I want DGW back. I don't believe that I have expressed that I am (censored - as you put it) that Rick is no longer involved. You need to stop jumping to conclusions about others you don't know, pal. As a member, and a potential subscriber, I am allowed to ask what's on my mind. They even alluded to the fact that they welcome it. And when they reply with content that is against the rules, RED FLAGS go up the flag pole.

You want to silence me, take it to another avenue of approach :mad:

What does it matter when you get it. Most of the time you get it late it is most likely the Post Offices fault. I will most likely get mine late my mail goes by my little town on the freeway to the bigger city 100 miles away then put onto a truck to be sent back to my town. I takes 4 day to get mail for St Louis Mo to here in Southwest Virginia.

P.S. My membership is already renewed I cant wait for the first issue.

Sorry, it's only a prototype. :D

http://www.thinkgeek.com/images/products/additional/large/office_space_kit_mat.jpg

Additionally, most of your questions have already been asked and responded to on other threads.



Chris, Out of 11 questions I asked yesterday, only one was even remotely addressed in the link you provided. Try again.

OK, I'll help you with another one:



Who would have guessed that "kick [email protected]" means "super duper killer" in computer speak?



Everyone.

"And why not let us post on the other thread about the mag, so as not to tie up the "Other PDGA" catagory?"


Are you trying to tell me that I have to read every thread on this board to find out the answers to my legitimate questions?



You answered one of your own questions. :)

Congratulations to Rich and 4141 Disc Golf for winning the RFP. I applaude their enthusiasm and look forward to issue number one!!!


Mike

Man, I'm way behind times in the computer world. ;) That wasn't explained in the Commodore manual. I need to stay in more.....

Brian, I was trying to get info from the source, about a legitimate concern. Plus, the invitation was implied:
As far as the message board, announcement threads are there to communicate information at need. I don't see why there couldn't be a Flying Disc thread in another section, too, much as there are regular threads for various manufacturers or personalities.

Please understand the majority of our time is now spent working on your super duper killer issue, though, so don't be offended if our visits to the board are intermittent.

You are absolutely free to talk about us all you want





Just asking questions about policies and procedures. That's not wrong, is it? Why do you feel the ED should have to take the heat for someone else breaking the rules of the DISCussion Board?

How about trying to email him [email protected] Or go to his website. The MB is a real inefficient way to try and contact people....it's hard to read through all the threads and find everything. Direct emails or phone calls work better.

Chap

As opposed to using a public information venue that I help pay for? There should be nothing wrong with asking questions about our organization on a message board that is supported by member dues. If the other party refuses to answer publicly, maybe there is an underlying reason for the vagueness. I've tried to be civil about it, but answers are hard to come by. Perhaps I should resort to "gutter tactics" and purposely mispell swear words (that are currently against the rules) just because I'm excited about my new project.

As opposed to using a public information venue that I help pay for? There should be nothing wrong with asking questions about our organization on a message board that is supported by member dues. If the other party refuses to answer publicly, maybe there is an underlying reason for the vagueness. I've tried to be civil about it, but answers are hard to come by. Perhaps I should resort to "gutter tactics" and purposely mispell swear words (that are currently against the rules) just because I'm excited about my new project.



There's nothing wrong with you asking the questions here. If you expect an answer, though, I'd contact the guy directly. If he's in the throes of putting together a magazine, he's too insanely busy to read this MB very often. It's extremely inefficient, and mostly not very smart, to answer business questions on the MB. Most of the time, it's like answering the question, "Are you still beating your wife?" It's usually a lose-lose proposition, no ends up getting any real information (sometimes tough to discern between the real and misinformation out there), and it's quickly buried under 30 more posts anyway.

Chap

Yeah, John. I understand what you're trying to convey. But let's look deeper. Within 30 minutes of my initial post, FDM responded, trying to answer a member's question. After my next reply which included some more questions, FDM responded within 45 minutes. Then when I pointed out that they were in violation of the message board rules with their last post, FDM had enough time to come back and edit their post but not enough time to answer more questions or man-up and apologize for an infraction of the rules we are ALL supposed to play by. Possibly they are just so consumed with producing our next kick [email protected] (btw, this means super duper killer, not what it looks like) magazine and the excitement got the better of them, or maybe they just don't want to answer member's questions they don't like? If we (the PDGA) are going to help subsidize a magazine for our organization, they need to be responsible for what they say or do that pertains to the PDGA. Right? Minor infraction? Maybe in some member's eyes, especially those that know Rich. But what does that say about these new magazine guys that most of us have no clue about? I'm not ripping on the magazine, as much as I love to read, I'll probably enjoy it. But let's make sure our representatives put on the professional front when they are representing us, OK?

Issue 1 - questionable language in a post. Report it to a moderator. Done.

Issue 2 - questions gone unanswered. Give them some breathing room. Follow up with them in a week if you haven't received replies. Perhaps the person who wrote the questionable post decided editting it was high priority, working on the magazine a close second and answering questions third. Seems plausible.

Please don't take my reply personally, Message board moderation is good as are questions. However, this thread is going nowhere fast.


Mike

Mike, What brought moderators into this discussion? Did you push the "notify moderator" button and file a complaint? I haven't. I'm the type to go the source of the problem, not run to the TD (or mods in this case). If you see someone foot fault in a tournament, do you run tell the TD? I don't. I make the call right then, to the foot-faulter. A moderator chimed in on the discussion using his personal member account, and voiced his opinion as a member. Maybe this subject hits a little too close to home for some folks. Seems like some of you are afraid of what the shovel may dig up. Or is it you don't want Rich to get his feelings hurt, and give up on trying to produce OUR new magazine? Man, if this is all it takes to put a damper on their progress, we're in for a bumpy ride.

Let it go .......

You asked earlier what was being done about Rich's questionable post. Nothing will likely be done unless you report it to a moderator. That's the system in place - like it or not. Just like there's a system in place for the tournament infractions you referenced. Foot fault - I call it. Illegal drug use - it's not within my power to disqualify someone from an event. It's not a question of wanting to address the issue directly. It's not my call. I don't know Rich. We have never met, spoke over the phone or exchanged email/posts. However, I appreciate what he is doing and will give him the benefit of the doubt until it is no longer warranted.

Well, Mike, thanks for the PM. It may seem like back and forth bickering to you, but not to me. I would like for you to show me where I asked what was going to be done about the post with the questionable content. I don't remember asking for help. A poster posted something questionable during a discussion and I called him out on it. A simple apology with his edit would have spoken volumes about his character, and possibly would have swayed any members on the fence about the new mag to try it our for a while at least. I know I appreciate it when someone screws up then admits and apologizes much more than when they just try to let it die.
Now you want to bring up illegal drugs :confused: How did that get in here?
Smoke and mirrors seems to be the way for several members here ;)

I'm not really sure what you're trying to accomplish here. Him answering you quickly the first time meant he was reading the MB. It doesn't at all mean that he been here since then. Again, ask him directly, or don't expect to get answer.

Chap

Why does he need to apologize it wasnt directed at you. I dont think a apology is needed. Get over it and quit crying.

Start here. (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=OtherPDGATopics&Number=74 4739&page=0&fpart=1)

Just because you're [censored] Rothstein is no longer doing the mag, don't take it out on the new guy. 4141 isn't the one that put out the RFP or the one that failed to submit a bid.



ANYONE who is upset that Rothstein isnt doing the Magazine.....HASNT been around very long....OR they got "kick-backs" /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

He made ENOUGH money off of us........... :mad:

Cant wait for the new Mag.... :D

ANYONE who is upset that Rothstein isnt doing the Magazine.....HASNT been around very long....OR they got "kick-backs" /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

He made ENOUGH money off of us........... :mad:

Cant wait for the new Mag.... :D



Strange, I just saw Rick driving off in a Rolls laughing about how much money he raked in from the PDGA to produce the magazine - NOT!!!! :p

The post quoted is a prime example of the type of mistruths and attacks that are allowed on this board, yet if someone was to question the intelligence of the poster, they would be subject to moderator action. Raising issues of kickbacks, making accusations that the PDGA was not getting value for the magazine, and then making a leap that because change was made it just has to be better. All well before the results of the change have even been seen, well before any evidence that the change will be positive. All done with a tone of complete disrespect, and most likely without any idea as to what the production of such a magazine costs and what compensation the publisher realized in comparison to the number of hours he invested. Flippant, inflammatory and misguided at best.

I'm getting tired of uneducated posts bashing the efforts of the people who helped get us to where we are. "He made ENOUGH money off of us ....." give me a break.
:mad:

he didnt define ENOUGH. for all we know, he thinks rothstein made $7 and 50 cents over the years and he's mighty hoppin mad about it. lets not jump to any conclusions :cool:

Perhaps there is a sarcasm or tone intended that I have missed. If so, my apologies to SeeknPow. If not, apologies to Rick and any other 'giver' (volunteer or compensated) to the sport of disc golf who get to continually endure 'heartfelt thanks' from those who benefit without appreciating or being aware of the efforts that were required and the sacrifices that were made.

He made ENOUGH money off of us........... :mad:
<font color="red"> isn't that the point of having your own business, the alternative would be bankruptcy. </font>
Cant wait for the new Mag.... :D<font color="red">and i'm sure the new publisher will do it for free, then all will be right with the world</font>




thanks rick for all you've done for the sport <font color="red"> </font>

He made ENOUGH money off of us........... :mad:
<font color="red"> isn't that the point of having your own business, the alternative would be bankruptcy. </font>
Cant wait for the new Mag.... :D<font color="red">and i'm sure the new publisher will do it for free, then all will be right with the world</font>




thanks rick for all you've done for the sport <font color="red"> </font>



and continue to do, i.e. Ice Bowl and Ice Bowl Merchandise sold at dang near cost so we can raise charity funds and have a wonderful way to showcase disc golf to our communities

Thank You Rick!!

Has anyone ever made a sales presentation for a new course and not had at least one copy of the magazine with them?
WE need our own publication and we need enough members to support it so that it is a money maker for the publisher.
It has come a long way from the regional newsletters of the 70's. Now we are cohesive and "somewhat" united.

Well now Tom, are you recognizing that this is supposed to be the "official" magazine of OUR organization?

A high-quality magazine is important for helping the uninitiated public see that disc golf is a legitimate sport. Tom makes a good point - I always bring a copy with me when I meet with Parks folks or potenial sponsors.

Publishing the mag needs to be feasible financially for the publisher. The new one seems to be leveraging including other disc sports as a way of broadening appeal and perhaps increasing readership/exposure. That's OK, because old ultimate players don't die, they become disc golfers - but if the mag is paid for with PDGA dues it should primarily be a disc golf magazine. Let's see at least one issue before we pass judgement (does the BOD get to see galley proofs before it goes to print?).

It's difficult to overestimate the positive influence that Rick (and Lynne) has had on the sport of disc golf over the years. I won't begrudge Rick trying to make a living off of the sport - many of the people who have made large contributions to the sport have done so as part of their business or employment. That's how they have enough time to spend on the game. I'm hoping Rick will continue to find ways to be a booster for our sport.

John - can you give the new publishers a chance to get the first issue out before burying them? If the first issue comes out R-rated, I'll be right beside you asking for changes (and I really hope the ED and/or BoD get to review a draft before it goes to press...).

Alan,
Sure, I'll go along with that. I didn't start this thread in the hopes of squashing their dreams. I'm just curious what their process is for distributing the new mag. It was pretty frustrating hearing/reading about everyone else getting their copies weeks before mine would show up. I thought if we had a thread that we could pose questions for the new mag (we can't post on the "official announcement thread"), we could engage in meaningful discussions with people we only know from what we read here.

It seems like I've entered a virtual "no man's land" by calling the new mag guy out on a rules violation. We've gotten replies from a few who want it to be dropped and forgotten, because "We like the new guy and don't want to hurt his feelings." And others who say leave it up to the moderators, let them handle it. Now I'm trying to show that we have a very clear example of what many on this board have been saying for a long time. Whoever points out rules infractions on the course is labeled as an overly-competitive jerk. Whether it's a foot-fault or a falling putt, many offending players just want to act like it never happened, and get mad when they're called on it. It's a lot more fun to play with people who know they screw up occasionally and accept whatever penalties they incurr graciously, then move on to the next shot. The new mag guy had that opportunity to be a good sport, admit the mistake, and move on, but instead he chose to abandon the discussion (after returning to edit out his slip up), presumably to let the issue get covered up. That leaves me with a poor impression of Rich.

Apparently some don't want me (or anyone) to ask questions if the answers are going to mean someone needs to be responsible for a slip up. These people don't want to publically anwer my question about the "officialness" of the magazine, even though I suspect most of them know the answer is "Yes, this will be the official magazine of the PDGA". I don't care if the mag is full of kick _ _ _ this or suck my that, I'm not offended by rough language or pictures of pretty girls that are obviously "excited" or cold ;). I think there probably is a place for that kind of publication with this group, considering the demographics of our organization. I don't believe our "official" magazine should be done in that type of style, though. It should be about Disc Golf, the PDGA, and maybe a little room for other disc activities, but all done in a manner that will appeal to a broad spectrum of regular and potential players.

I'm not against Rich and the new mag, like I mentioned earlier, I'll probably get it because I realize the benefit of an official periodical (hopefully it'll show up and in good condition ;)). I'm just pointing out what I find to be a little odd, especially from someone who is charged with being a representative of the PDGA.

WOW

What date should we look for our first issue to be delvered?

Come on, Bill. Surely you know by now that this is the wrong place to ask questions! You'll have the old guard coming on here shortly telling you to keep it private, nobody else would be interested in any answers those questions will generate. :o

Come on, Bill. Surely you know by now that this is the wrong place to ask questions! You'll have the old guard coming on here shortly telling you to keep it private, nobody else would be interested in any answers those questions will generate. :o



You guys are both at least 5 years older than me, so I'm not sure what you mean by "old guard". But, if you want an answer to your question, it makes sense to ask the person directly, rather that post it on a message board which the person may not read with regularity. Yes, he may have posted here once or twice....doesn't mean he does it often. Just saying. Do you want an answer to your question or not?

Chap

Wow!!! Don't read the board that often.... :( now i know why. Just thought someone would know. Forget it!!!

i'm pretty sure its towards the end of january.

Bill,

I don't know the guy (Rich Givens), but his contact info according to his website is [email protected] Also, according to his website (look in the advertising info), January 30, 2008 is the release date for the first issue. I don't know if that means the magazine is in everyone's hands by then, or if that's when he's saying he'll get the copies in the mail, but I'd imagine it'd be within 10-14 days of that date, if all goes well for him. However, I'm sure he'll answer your question if you query him directly. Just trying to be helpful here.

Chap

I started this thread a while back to try to get a chance to interact with the new mag guys. It quickly went downhill and other threads were started, basically for the same reason. Yet they refuse to spend time communicating with the members. And it seems like they can't even keep up with their promise to get the news out to us (the members) in a timely fashion. Maybe they're just so giddy with excitement they can't focus? All these exciting locations to visit to report on must not leave much time for actually producing a magazine, OUR "official" magazine.

Maybe we can get the new mag dude to pull away from whatever travel project he is in the middle of to publish another issue of "OUR" magazine. Or better yet, maybe they will send the mag dude to Thailand to write about the course there, or maybe somewhere like Greece, or another Mediterrainian beach location, and we can just wait another 6 months till they decide to put in the effort to do what they're supposed to do.

They sure don't seem to be spending much effort on getting the mag out, why not just set up a thread where we (the members) can just ask them for their views, send them lots of our money, and watch them spend it however they choose?

Yes, starting a mag is difficult, and consistently publishing issues after the pilot is really difficult. And the first issue was good!

BUT . . . the PDGA needs to stand up for its members, most of whom are not receiving this particular benefit. Perhaps another call for an RFP would put some pressure on the new mag guys.

Yes, starting a mag is difficult, and consistently publishing issues after the pilot is really difficult. And the first issue was good!

BUT . . . the PDGA needs to stand up for its members, most of whom are not receiving this particular benefit. Perhaps another call for an RFP would put some pressure on the new mag guys.



was this a one year temporary contract? If not is should have been so we could have looked into other companies if it were necessary.

On 8/13/07, Brian Graham wrote this in a post:
"The frequency of releasing an RFP is a matter for the Board to decide. I personally think that at a minimum, an organization like ours should review and re-evaluate the contracts with our vendors every 2 to 3 years, to ensure that we are getting the best deal for our members."

Here's Brian's announcement from Sept. 2007:

http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.ph...amp;#Post744730 (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Board=PDGA%20Announcements&amp;Number=744 730&amp;Searchpage=1&amp;Main=744730&amp;Search=true&amp;#Post7447 30)

It just says that it starts January 2008.

Unfortunately, things have been done that may make it difficult to attract an established publisher's interest. Opt out results in not being able to guarantee to a publisher a certain subscription base (i.e. all PDGA members). Add to that the people who feel that value was not provided for what they paid for the magazine this year, and the subscription base may decrease further as more people chose the opt out option. If there aren�t enough people to pay for the production costs, then no one will be interested in providing a high quality printed piece. A newsletter or other lower cost options may be all that can be accommodated.

As predicted earlier, we may have killed the printed full color disc golf magazine based on actions taken over the past year or so. I hope not, but things are not looking good.

i'm looking at it as an errant tee shot. we now need a solid recovery to get back on track.

Unfortunately, things have been done that may make it difficult to attract an established publisher's interest. Opt out results in not being able to guarantee to a publisher a certain subscription base (i.e. all PDGA members). Add to that the people who feel that value was not provided for what they paid for the magazine this year, and the subscription base may decrease further as more people chose the opt out option. If there aren�t enough people to pay for the production costs, then no one will be interested in providing a high quality printed piece. A newsletter or other lower cost options may be all that can be accommodated.

As predicted earlier, we may have killed the printed full color disc golf magazine based on actions taken over the past year or so. I hope not, but things are not looking good.



This is one of the most important observations in this whole mess. I do believe when the opt out option was offered that there were voices who made this exact point.

Idea: Quarterly Magaize with a webiste that has regularly updated content (like every week).

Pat, Can you tell us here what kind of dollar amount the PDGA has already sent to the company who is supposed to publish "our" official magazine?

i will ask the office for that info.

i have an actual number now, but need approval of the BoD to tell the Members. while we wait for that, i'd say that a reasonable person might guess that our expenditures are about what you would expect for having received 33% of the product (2 of 6 issues). that reasonable person could start with the annual budget for the mag and reasonably assume that the amount we have actually spent is just about 2/6 of the budgeted amount. (we have not spent beyond what has been delivered.)

reasonable person



Uh, you're dealing with message board folks, not reasonable folks. :p

Thanks, Pat.

true, but the people who are actually spending the money and writing the checks are reasonable. so we could expect them to write checks in reasonable amounts. i'm just trying to reassure message boarders that we have not spent early or in excess relative to what has been delivered, without giving up an actual number before having holy water sprinkled on it to ward off the demons of knowledge.

Ok,

I for one just want to say that I do NOT blame the "magazine folks" for not posting in here. Why would you? Most people in this cyber room have nothing but time to kill and over analyze every microcosm of print.

Bottom line, the magazine is late, is it the end of the world? No. Should it be expected from a new publisher (it should be expected in my mind), no the first year should have been aligned with content to make it out of the box ready to roll, then if you have struggles you have them, which is the case that this is the 3rd magazine (note, I did not receive the 1st one).

Personally the discussion boards in my mind are a vein attempt to promote selfishness more than information. I like the banter in here, but it is not something that as a business person I would do. I don't. I don't use the MB to discuss ideas about my work with you folks, and typically I am not online to discuss options about my upcoming events with MB. I am in here to have fun, read what some people opine, and take it FWIW.

The only way I see it, is lets give them rope to either pull themselves out by getting us the product promised, or to hang themselves. They will make it work, or they fold, they have 2 options.

Unlike Sportsloop (whom I did go to Chicago to meet BTW, how many of you went that direction?) we have already gotten tangible products from this endeavor. SO we are LIGHT years ahead of the curve in my mind on that attempt.

And finally, OPT OUT was FOOLISH IMHO. It was the silliest thing that I have ever heard of, one if not the only thing that the PDGA membership perk was the magazine, round stats, ratings......so now we pay for round ratings and stats online........makes one wonder at times, makes one wonder......

I like this sport, but we need to ensure that we are keeping up with the times. Local clubs need more help from the PDGA to help get more $$$$ (magazine helps in validating the sport) in the events to entice more publicity, more people to attend (local tourism dollars really help civic leaders want to push our sport) and then also to reach into more of the casual golfer.

For every member of the KCFDC I personally think that there are at least 10 people that play regularly that are not members, that equates to close to 3000 in KC that are regular players that we are missing. Do that in each market in locations that have "strong organizations" (he says in tongue in cheek) and the problem is truly not isolated to a magazine, it just shines through on this topic.

Many other fish to fry, and as I said earlier in another thread, if they agreed to 4/yr, they'd be right on track, so.....they bit off more than anticipated, you never tried a shot that didn't work over and over......come on Tin Cup, you know you have!!
:p

am I the only one that did not receive the first issue?

I also have not received any issues after the second issue??? I though this was a 6X per year production.

am I the only one that did not receive the first issue?

I also have not received any issues after the second issue??? I though this was a 6X per year production.



No to question 1, no one has received any issues after 2 and I know you are busy with worlds, but in the PDGA Announcements thread, Addie and Brian have posted info on the mag. (as well as on other threads about the mag)

They still are claiming to be 6 issues.

3 in 5 months is not out of the question if delivered every 6 weeks.

PS. I have already gotten the same amount of issues as the California magazine, and I paid 20+ dollars for it for a year.

Let's see what happens, but as stated upthread, the OPT-OUT will KILL any chances for sustainability, if they don't get it into newsstands or other places.

opt out could kill it if it substantially underdelivers. if production stabilizes i'll bet opt-in numbers stay pretty high.

I hope Rick Rothstein is getting a good chuckle out of all of this.

After the way he was treated, I hope he is enjoying watching the PDGA wallowing in its own filth.

One more tangible member benefit down the drain.
What's next, another dues rate hike?!

:confused:

am I the only one that did not receive the first issue?

I also have not received any issues after the second issue??? I though this was a 6X per year production.



I also received issue 2, and no issue #1 or 3

i for one will not be getting this again next year

i am one of the few and lucky to get both the first two issues, however when I have received both, the cover on both was ripped badly and ripped in several other areas throughout the magazine. I was especially disappointed with the first issue being in this condition as I would of like to have kept it as a collectors item. The rest of the mail I received both times was fine including other magazines so it was not the carriers fault. The content in the magazine is decent, but it is not worth my time and money for a product that a) arrives at my door in horrid conditions b) has not been up to schedule and in the case of most of my friends, I am the only person who has the first two issues. I honestly would be surprised if I were to receive another issue, and honestly I would not be all that upset.

I just got my membership renewal package yesterday and boy am I excited!

Not a single magazine yet for me though actually.

Ok,

I for one just want to say that I do NOT blame the "magazine folks" for not posting in here. Why would you? Most people in this cyber room have nothing but time to kill and over analyze every microcosm of print.

Bottom line, the magazine is late, is it the end of the world? No. Should it be expected from a new publisher (it should be expected in my mind), no the first year should have been aligned with content to make it out of the box ready to roll, then if you have struggles you have them, which is the case that this is the 3rd magazine (note, I did not receive the 1st one).

Personally the discussion boards in my mind are a vein attempt to promote selfishness more than information. I like the banter in here, but it is not something that as a business person I would do. I don't. I don't use the MB to discuss ideas about my work with you folks, and typically I am not online to discuss options about my upcoming events with MB. I am in here to have fun, read what some people opine, and take it FWIW.

The only way I see it, is lets give them rope to either pull themselves out by getting us the product promised, or to hang themselves. They will make it work, or they fold, they have 2 options.

Unlike Sportsloop (whom I did go to Chicago to meet BTW, how many of you went that direction?) we have already gotten tangible products from this endeavor. SO we are LIGHT years ahead of the curve in my mind on that attempt.

And finally, OPT OUT was FOOLISH IMHO. It was the silliest thing that I have ever heard of, one if not the only thing that the PDGA membership perk was the magazine, round stats, ratings......so now we pay for round ratings and stats online........makes one wonder at times, makes one wonder......

I like this sport, but we need to ensure that we are keeping up with the times. Local clubs need more help from the PDGA to help get more $$$$ (magazine helps in validating the sport) in the events to entice more publicity, more people to attend (local tourism dollars really help civic leaders want to push our sport) and then also to reach into more of the casual golfer.

For every member of the KCFDC I personally think that there are at least 10 people that play regularly that are not members, that equates to close to 3000 in KC that are regular players that we are missing. Do that in each market in locations that have "strong organizations" (he says in tongue in cheek) and the problem is truly not isolated to a magazine, it just shines through on this topic.

Many other fish to fry, and as I said earlier in another thread, if they agreed to 4/yr, they'd be right on track, so.....they bit off more than anticipated, you never tried a shot that didn't work over and over......come on Tin Cup, you know you have!!
:p



I would like to present the opposite position from Jack. However, lets give him his due, he is correct in his perception of this MB and it's value in this process. Nonetheless, the message board is the one place where members can voice their views on the organization in a nationwide forum. Slanted, yes, microcosm, definitely, but still, it is what we have.

I disagree strongly with Jack's position that the the magazine is a key tangible asset to membership (my words not his). The key tangible asset IMO is membership, period. I understand that many find that ridiculous, and I admit that our European counterparts and especially an Asian counterpart would much better understand the notion of a non-individualistic approach to life (i.e. in those cultures it isn't all about what have you done for me lately).

The feeling of belong to a national organization that promotes and supports this sport - to put it in terms that some can laugh about - makes me feel all warm and fuzzy. I like that and no magazine is going to influence that feeling one way or the other. Opting out was foolish, but not for the reason Jack pointed out, unless you measure your satisfaction in this organization by the direct tangible items they hand you. I saw the option to opt out as the foolish option, but because it should never have been made, but then, I feel this change should never have been made per say. I would have been much more likely to work with Rick to change the magazine if I felt it needed something different. On the other hand, I'd say Rick was doing that anyway.

Back on track - Jack's notion that the process this magazine is going down is remotely acceptable, whether to us, or to a business organization is IMO wrong. I do not deny that many businesses go down a similar path and make the same mistakes, but that does not make it acceptable. Frankly, if for no other reason than they mismanaged both their own expectations, and members expectations, they are failing woefully.

Jack's notion that the lateness of the magazine is not the end of the world is correct. One only has to read upstream to see that point made. However, it is important because it is a comment on how this process was carried out. In an attempt to be responsible, we went down a path. Before we go down that path again, we should carefully consider if that path is the correct one.

Back to getting out a magazine - good intention are a dime a bucket. A solid understanding of the process, costs, and achievable goals count a whole lot more. FDM did not have the expertise to judge such an enterprise and to take it on. The problem being that they thrust themselves into a situation where there was no room to learn or grow. Day one they had to hit the ground running. They had to do this with no prior experience. That is a recipe for disaster. Look at the other magazines that have come out since DGWN became big. All of them started slow with smaller expectations and grew; that is, the ones that have had any success did that. There is only one way this transition might have worked and that would have been with the good graces of Rick. He should have been hired as a consultant to manage the transition to the new organization, for at least a one year period...

As an aside, over the past months the PDGA has hired Brian H. as a consultant for the transition to the new ED. This move has received some criticism, please review Pat Brenner's posts on the topic. I think the current situation accurately shows why managing such transitions carefully is critical and why setting up a stable transition for the organization by hiring Brian H. was probably a responsible thing to do. Oh my gosh, did I just say that? Yes I did, your Board acted responsibly and correctly in managing the introduction of Brian G. as ED! Why do I point this out, it's easy enough to carp and moan about the mistakes, one should have the guts to admit the successes also.

i was not critical of hiring BDH as a transition consultant. in fact, i supported it. regardless, how long does a transition take anyway? its probably over by now.

i was not critical of hiring BDH as a transition consultant. in fact, i supported it. regardless, how long does a transition take anyway? its probably over by now.



I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply you did. :o I simply wanted people to review your comments on the topic.

"This move has received some criticism, please review Pat Brenner's posts on the topic."

well then your writing skills need some refining.

"This move has received some criticism, please review Pat Brenner's posts on the topic."

well then your writing skills need some refining.



Possibly

I got the first magazine but have seen no other publications to date. BUMMER MAN!

Read Dostoevsky. Play disc golf.

pffft!

Read Dostoevsky. Play disc golf.



ill ready whatever the [censored] i want

I'm not battling the RED anymore. [censored] it!

Read Dostoevsky. Play disc golf.



ill ready whatever the [censored] i want



except the 3rd issue :opffft

this is true

The new issue has been published and is being distributed to those in Michigan at Worlds. Great! Now what are the chances I'll see my issue here at my house before the other parts of the US? I'm betting slim chance I'll see mine before at least half of the membership has their's in hand, and probably more like I'll be near the last to receive an issue :confused:. Why does it take so long to get Disc Golf related periodicals here?

Check out the new FDM site.
www.flyingdiscmagazine.com (http://www.flyingdiscmagazine.com)

Hey, Boobs, despite how uncomfortable your avatar must make most women PDGA members who try to use this site (you probably don't care; and I hope FDM doesn't follow that lead) I thought I'd ask you to pass on that I just tried to register and got a Drupal error message.

Since I wish the site the best - absent your kind of avatar and name - it'd be nice that they know this very quickly.

Not sure what exactly you are trying to say with your first part of the sentence. I just tested and everything works accordingly.
The site will keep getting better and better.
Thanks for the kind wishes.

Hey, Boobs, despite how uncomfortable your avatar must make most women PDGA members who try to use this site (you probably don't care; and I hope FDM doesn't follow that lead) I thought I'd ask you to pass on that I just tried to register and got a Drupal error message.

Since I wish the site the best - absent your kind of avatar and name - it'd be nice that they know this very quickly.



yet another unsuccessful attempt at thread drift FOILED AGAIN!

Hey, Boobs, despite how uncomfortable your avatar must make most women PDGA members who try to use this site (you probably don't care; and I hope FDM doesn't follow that lead) I thought I'd ask you to pass on that I just tried to register and got a Drupal error message.

Since I wish the site the best - absent your kind of avatar and name - it'd be nice that they know this very quickly.




Oh come on, the guy's name is Aleksey Bubis, I am pretty sure he did not give himself that nick name. I am sure it was given to him by friends to annoy him, after years of being called that it finally stuck.

I can understand as my nick name is Q-tip, not the most flattering. But it stuck.....

Whats up with the "Hussein" in your name, I am sure the Muslims on this site do not appreciate that.

Ultimately, if it was that offensive I would think the PDGA would outlaw such avatars. Sounds to me like your fight is with the PDGA standards. Seem to me that you assume people are too stupid to think for themselves and realize it just an avatar and nothing more, but you feel you have to be the savor to them all.

Hey, Boobs, despite how uncomfortable your avatar must make most women PDGA members who try to use this site...



Terry "Hussein" is probably most uncomfortable with the image of Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in the avatar.

Alexey, as a woman PDGA member, please let me assure you that your avatar doesn't make me uncomfortable in the least. But then again, I like Arnold...he is MY Governator.

THC: "Hey, Boobs, despite how uncomfortable your avatar must make most women PDGA members who try to use this site"

Discette: "Alexey, as a woman PDGA member, please let me assure you that your avatar doesn't make me uncomfortable in the least."

is THC out of touch?

I don't think THC is out of touch, just has way too much time on his hands.

Pick your battles, this is not worth fighting over.

i feel like the stormtrooper on Bestine .. these arent the droids you are looking for :)

I thought they were in Mos Eisely when that happened...

prolly so... wasnt it the capital city on tattoine?

After being behind at one point by four strokes, Chuck Hornsby has now caught Terry Calhoun and leads by three.




THC should quit trying to police this message board and just play golf while a World Championship is ongoing!

Tattoine:

A scene at THC's the Hutts palace with Jedi Master Luke Skyscandal....


Luke: You will take me to see THC the Hutt...

Evil Minion:......Yes, I will take you to see THC.....

Luke: Your master will be pleased and you will be well rewarded.....

Evil Minion....Yes, I will be well rewarded......

Mr. Hutt: What! I told you not to admit the Jedi scum !!!!

Just got it in the mail and it is everything I have been hoping for and losing sleep over for the last 3 or 4 months waiting on it :DThanks FDM love the new mag but it could use a cove mine came in the mail all beat up again :D

THC: "Hey, Boobs, despite how uncomfortable your avatar must make most women PDGA members who try to use this site"

Discette: "Alexey, as a woman PDGA member, please let me assure you that your avatar doesn't make me uncomfortable in the least."

is THC out of touch?


Depends. I would hope that anyone on here understands that finding one, or two, or three women who are not made uncomfortable by something doesn't mean that there might not be dozens who are.

Be interesting to see how we would react to a woman poster taking the name "Woody" and using some Photoshopping to exaggerate the contents of a tight pair of male bikini briefs for her avatar image. Being as explicit with that as Boobs is with his image might even present the moderators with a dilemma. :D

Oh, and not to worry about my focus: First place by three :cool:

it is kinda cool how guys that used to be pro can go back and win am world championships. its good to keep guys in the game who otherwise would go do something else if they had to stay pro.

Has anyone found this thread that Mark wrote about in his putting challenge article? It is supposed to start on the 20th of august.

I registered and searched, but found nothing yet.
But I am looking forward to trying his program.

Me, too. Here's the YouTube video of last winter's clinic, though - http://www.discgolfersr.us/video/video/show?id=1809917:Video:615892

Great shootin at worlds Terry!!

Thanks, Senior. Chuck Hornsby gave me a really terrific battle. Even better than my win, though, was that my wife (Sheila) also won her division :D

Has anyone found this thread that Mark wrote about in his putting challenge article? It is supposed to start on the 20th of august.


Just got a pm and they will have it up by the end of the week maybe sooner :DIt will be located under the disc golf tab and then look in the play better section.

can anyone tell me what the pic on page 46 is? i havent received my copy yet... we moved so the forwarding is prolly slowing it down.

TIA

a pic of Feldberg on 46 and a geoduck :)

can anyone tell me what the pic on page 46 is? i havent received my copy yet... we moved so the forwarding is prolly slowing it down.

TIA



http://www.cortesisland.com/tideline/articles/articles_1422/Photo_Geoduck_&amp;_Diver.jpg

yummy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoduck

Well FDM got a lot help in getting started this year. Since the PDGA will be doing their own periodical next year, will FDM be able to stay alive? Haven't seen it yet on bookstore shelves, but they did promise us.......

This is a [censored] travesty! FDM is a GREAT magazine! I've actually got all six issues this year and I [censored] love it!

It's actually a lame magazine, like his golf courses.

I'm going to opt for no magazine in my renewal.

It's actually a lame magazine, like his golf courses.

I'm going to opt for no magazine in my renewal.



You don't have that choice.

I'm going to opt for no magazine in my renewal.


No can do.

The Professional Disc Golf Association is pleased to announce that it will return to publishing its own in-house publication beginning in 2009 through the new PDGA Media Group. The project is still in the early planning stages but the publication is expected to be a glossy full color magazine containing membership information, news, opinions, event schedules, articles, photos, advertisements and other content consonant with the purposes of the association. All active PDGA members will receive an annual subscription to the publication as a benefit of membership.

The PDGA previously had its own in-house magazine prior to 1995, when "Disc Golfer" was published by the association. The new publication will return full editorial control over content to the PDGA as well as improve communications with members, and ensure that the sport of disc golf will continue to have a quality publication that can be used to promote the sport for years to come.

Members interested in providing content to the new publication in the form of photographs and/or articles are encouraged to contact the PDGA office. An announcement with more details will be forthcoming.

so with FDM being gone its prolly safe to assume that were never gonna see issues 5 and 6. i PAID by opting in for 6 issues...how is the PDGA going to reimburse me for my missing 2 issues? will i recieve 10 dollars off my membership next year? that seems like the only reasonable way to pay its members back for the failure of FDM.....I'm sure the banner ads can cover that loss in revenue...

they arent. think of it as a contribution by you to the good of the sport.

sounds like fdm needs to be taken to small claims

you mean think of it as a contribution to an organization that i only support because it save me money in the long run......i was never a fan of the pdga but gave them my 50 each year because it saved me money....now....obviously, its just a waste because i have no received what i was PROMISED by FDM and the pdga....such [censored] garbage......if im going to contribute to the sport it sure as hell isn't going to be by giving the pdga money...i'd rather spend money replacing a stolen basket, or on salt for the teepads in the winter....pdga=the suck....craptastic website, craptastic mag(or lack there of) and a craptastic way to waste 50 bucks.....

I'm going to wait till jan. 1st to renew(once again because it saves me money not because i WANT to). if i haven't received the next 2 issues of FDM by said date(which is what was promised) i'm going to call up the pdga and raise holy hell until i am fully reimbursed for the failure of FDM and the pdga to deliver on their promises....i suggest you all do as well

good luck with that...

my question becomes- who will be editing the pdga publication? it will be [censored] near a full time job. hopefully rick r. is consulting at the least.

in theory i am happy to see the ORG take it in house but it is the execution that will tell the tale.

you mean think of it as a contribution to an organization that i only support because it save me money in the long run......i was never a fan of the pdga but gave them my 50 each year because it saved me money....now....obviously, its just a waste because i have no received what i was PROMISED by FDM and the pdga....such [censored] garbage......if im going to contribute to the sport it sure as hell isn't going to be by giving the pdga money...i'd rather spend money replacing a stolen basket, or on salt for the teepads in the winter....pdga=the suck....craptastic website, craptastic mag(or lack there of) and a craptastic way to waste 50 bucks.....

I'm going to wait till jan. 1st to renew(once again because it saves me money not because i WANT to). if i haven't received the next 2 issues of FDM by said date(which is what was promised) i'm going to call up the pdga and raise holy hell until i am fully reimbursed for the failure of FDM and the pdga to deliver on their promises....i suggest you all do as well


if you dislike it as much as you say why would you bother to renew? i'm sure the pdga is just sitting around waiting on your holy hell phone call. if i don't get any more issues of fdm who cares, wasn't impressed with it anyway.

i wasn't impressed with fdm either, and to be honest i could care less about the actual magazine...its about being accountable for your actions, or lack there of. i renew because it saves me money....that is the only reason.....

"if you dislike it as much as you say why would you bother to renew? "

because he wants to play events, and most/all in his area are sanctioned?

i might have to renew simply to play the VIbram. otherwise, forget it. imo, the time has come for the next chapter... i am ready to join those who have already bailed, and those who are considering it.

Quit Crying
You saved 70 dollars on the tournaments you played. Why should you get the full ten dollars you still get 4 issues you should get back about $3.50 for the issues you didnt get.

he saved 70 dollars of fees forced upon him from a federal taxing authority. the only real value he got was the right to play at events - some in his home town.

the association's trick is to price the fees high enough so that it makes more sense to join. it maximizes memberships, event fees and nonmember fees! if you think that wasnt one of the main drivers, you didnt hear the discussions firsthand.

i think i could accept parting with my 10 dollars if homeboy from the magazine would come on here and explain the failure that is FDM and what happened

price the fees high enough so that it makes more sense to join. it maximizes memberships, event fees and nonmember fees!


Sounds like good association advice, to me. But I sense that you mean it negatively? An association/tour that doesn't "price fees high enough so that it makes sense to join" sounds like a non-starter to me. Good luck with that :D

Oh, and "federal taxing authority"? ROFL

i agree, if i were to get a detailed explanation of why FDM failed and an apology i would be fine with my 10 dollars being wasted....but we all know thats not going to happen. last time he was asked to do such a thing it was a fluff post.

Isn't it set up so that if you want to play a NT or Supertour event you *have to* renew? it is difficult at best to buy into the idea that posting privileges on this ad-laden message board or ratings should be considered perks worth nearly a hundred bucks a year... In light of these and other recent decisons on the part of the PDGA, no way I am renewing if the answer to the above question is "no." If the answer is "yes," i still may not renew.

can someone remind me of the reasons the PDGA gave for changing Pro membership fees to be higher than Amateur memberships? obviously it wasn't to discourage bagging...

Don't care for thread drifts but...
What does the PDGA accomplish with membership fees? (http://www.pdga.com/faq/membership/where-do-my-membership-fees-go)

All of that just for our hard-earned membership dollars? That is fantastic!

What recourse do we as members have if any or all of those perks/promises are not delivered by the PDGA? This year has been a most trying time for me as a member, and a 20 year member at that. My experiences in 2008 with PDGA HQ have not been very pleasant, and it seems there is nothing that can be done other than just trust HQ will get their act together in regards to my membership.

I realize there are a lot of things the PDGA does which I am in favor of and support -- I love disc golf and would like to see the truly professional subset of the PDGA prosper and flourish. What I am conflicted about is when the PDGA leadership makes decisions with which I disagree -- the only true recourse seems to be to not renew. Or is the PDGA leadership aware that my renewal should in no way be taken as evidence that I support and approve of their decisions &amp; expenditures?

What would really be encouraging would be if those who take responsibility for running the PDGA would communicate to the membership those areas in which they feel they have failed us and what their plan is to remedy those failures rather than merely trumpeting all they do for us and all the good things that come of our dollars.

Working for the PDGA should be considered an honor and a responsibility and when things go poorly leaders should step up and voice that they are disappointed too.

We can learn from our mistakes so I am wondering what the top ten historic PDGA mistakes are and how we have learned from them as an organization?

And if the PDGA really wants to discourage sandbagging they should greatly reduced the maximum allowed entry fees and prize payouts for the amateur divisions ;)

It seems to me we are largely an Amateur Disc Golfer Assosiation and the biggest accomplishment I would like to see is to elevate the standing and payouts for the true Pros in our sport (players rated 1000 ior higher) -- but it seems to me our focus is too scattered.

If you feel this is not the thread to discuss this feel free to start one anew, thanks.

Aviar X opines:
"I realize there are a lot of things the PDGA does which I am in favor of and support -- I love disc golf and would like to see the truly professional subset of the PDGA prosper and flourish. What I am conflicted about is when the PDGA leadership makes decisions with which I disagree -- the only true recourse seems to be to not renew."

[email protected]#$%^&amp;*()(&amp;^[email protected]#$%)(*&amp;^@#$%^&amp;*(*#$%^&amp;*

Rob, There a number of active choices beyond not renewing. You can voice your objections, vote against the Board members you are upset with, run for a Board position yourself or support someone else for a Board position.

The PDGA is a an organization which has (and continues to) provide long term direction and promotion for the sport. Your agreement with the current Board of Directors does not necessarily control your happiness with the organization. The PDGA has surprisingly little control of what happens on the local level.

Being upset with some current policy is like disagreeing with one particular rule in the rule book. It doesn't have to mean you disagree with the most of the rules or the idea that clear rules should control tournament play. There are some rules and some Board decisions I might not agree with but that does not mean I have no respect for either in a broader sense.

Support of the PDGA translates into support of the sport and support of the Frisbee family. There is no other major organizational force which exists.

Personalities will come and go. The basic mission of the PDGA and the good faith efforts of its elected Board will continue. Most Boards are not in the position to do much real damage to the game.

Rob, you have the talents. Run for the Board. You have my vote.

As for the promotion of the Professionals, the PDGA has always been an organization which promotes the sport and the Amateurs more than the Pros. Eventually some wealthy person or corporation will easily steal away the Pros with the lure of money and publicity. Until that time the PDGA represents all of us.

Wait. A 970 rated pro master thinks PDGA resources are not well spent on the members-only message board and ratings, but instead thinks the PDGA should throw more money at the pros?

This is a new idea? :D

I think the PDGA should throw more money at Am Grand Masters!!! :D :D :D

Just another thought I think is related to this thread,

Did anyone besides me notice that the PDGA went with a new magazine and Rick Rothstein got out of the [publishing] house more. And while the new magazine was flopping around like a fish in the bottom of the boat, the PDGA took Rick Rothstein "in-house". And now they are taking the magazine in-house too! Does this mean Rick won't be getting out of the house as much in 2009?

Wait. A 970 rated pro master thinks PDGA resources are not well spent on the members-only message board and ratings, but instead thinks the PDGA should throw more money at the pros?



Bruce, I clearly stated that i felt the PDGA should shift its support and focus on what I feel are the true Pros -- and I was pretty clear that I meant 1000 rated and above members. Did I have to explicitly say not the quasi pros like me who are rated 970 for you to get that? :confused:

also, the decisions made regarding member only posting privileges and ads are two examples of why I think not renewing is one of the only ways that seem to speak the language of the current leadership trends -- they only seem to focus on (short-term) metrics &amp; revenues...

do you oppose a cap that greatly lowers the amount of prize payouts am.s can get -- or is there a conflict of interest there for you? If we had a sub-branch of the PDGA called the ADGA, you would still be subsidizing the Pros but the leadership could get more focused on the sometimes conflicting interests of each domain in a way that would better benefit all.

- - - -

Mark, thanks for the kind words, I am too tired right now to give your post the attention it deserves...

It's actually a lame magazine, like his golf courses.

I'm going to opt for no magazine in my renewal.



You don't have that choice.



Well then, the application download needs to be revised as it currently offers that option.

It's actually a lame magazine, like his golf courses.

I'm going to opt for no magazine in my renewal.



You don't have that choice.



Well then, the application download needs to be revised as it currently offers that option.



Never mind. I see that it has been changed since my last visit.

i might have to renew simply to play the VIbram. otherwise, forget it. imo, the time has come for the next chapter... i am ready to join those who have already bailed, and those who are considering it.


My sentiments EXACTLY!

isnt the idea of adding another governing body just potentially making things worse, spreading the thin even thinner?

As more and more long-time PDGA members/volunteers begin receiving the treatment I have received this year from PDGA HQ, I believe we will see more of this type of attitude toward this organization. My trust in OUR PDGA HQ has taken a severe hit, and it doesn't seem to be gaining any positivity despite all of my efforts to get my issues resolved. After several years of paying dues and giving EXTRA $$$ (ACE Club member for the last 5 years) every opportunity I had, I seriously doubt I will ever be so generous with my efforts to help the PDGA.

I think a lot of TDs and volunteers have a rocky relationship with the PDGA. I don't like how much money they take out of our successful B-tiers. For $750 to $1000 per tournament, we don't seem to get much back. The PDGA takes more out of our tournaments than we do, every time.

And no one likes it when some important things like memberships just don't get processed in a timely way. It makes the TD look bad when he takes $40 or $50 from a player for a membership [and turns it in with the money two days later] and two months later the player still doesn't have a membership.

On the other hand, our players seem to think the PDGA does a good job with the ratings system, and ratings really sell our sanctioned tournaments. Our players are oblivious to the $3 to $4 each they are paying for sanctioning, let alone the $750 to $1000 it adds up to when you count the $10 fees too.

And, as far as I can tell, nearly all of the people who work in the office are genuinely nice people.

If your issue is membership processing, I think we should wait to see if they get that fixed in 2009. If it is the magazine, sometimes you just can't tell a weasel until you've lost some chickens.

So what can you do? If you care too much you'll always be frustrated, and if you don't care at all or if you quit nothing will ever change. You have to find a balance that works for you.

I just think we all have to be more helpful in running tornaments and get our heads in the game.

Just another thought I think is related to this thread,

Did anyone besides me notice that the PDGA went with a new magazine and Rick Rothstein got out of the [publishing] house more. And while the new magazine was flopping around like a fish in the bottom of the boat, the PDGA took Rick Rothstein "in-house". And now they are taking the magazine in-house too! Does this mean Rick won't be getting out of the house as much in 2009?




the "good ol boys" PDGA at work once again!

tbh it doesn't surprise me one bit. The PDGA is scared of new ideas, and people who want drastic changes. Maybe it is because sometime those new ideas don't work out well- however this doesn't mean they should give up. There are so many issues around the game that the PDGA could take steps to improve, yet they would rather maintain the status quo.

to me it seems like the PDGA is completely happy with a small % of growth annually, rather than take chances to make the sport go mainstream in the future.


PS- I miss underparmikey. we need him in this thread!

the org worked better when it really was an old boys network. they had more realistic expectations and did not try to be all things to all people.

the overwhelming evidence is that the sport and the PDGA are becoming more mainstream every day ...

BDH



sure, but the question is whether the PDGA is leading or riding the tide. a great start would be for all to agree there is room for improvement. failing is positive if acknowledged and learned from... what is ridiculous is when problems are swept undr the rug, and easy accomplishments are trumpeted as worthy of applause.

what are our biggest past failures and how have we learned from -- and put these experiences into future successes?

- The PDGA implements "new ideas" every year, "Super Class" is the latest in a long list. Some of them dont work out, yet they continue = they do anything but "give up."





the fact that THIS is the example you choose proves my point, lol.



- There were 2 (not 5 or 10 but TWO) bidders on the mag a year ago, the PDGA went with the "new idea", and it cost the org dearly. Incorporating a "good ol' boy" who proved reliable for a decade (read "EXPERIENCE") as just 1 of what should be several key players into the new inhouse publication is a more than sensible move, given what happened in 2008.



did you ever read any of the many threads about people who thought DGWN was terrible? Remember it was those feelings that led to the option to opt-out of the mag, except we never got a chance to opt out of DGWN, only flying disc. How much did that change hurt flying disc's chances? Missing out on thousands of instant subscribers that DGWN had always automatically gotten. Now the editor of DGWN will be back, and yet we won't be able to opt out this year. awesome.



- Funny, the overwhelming evidence is that the sport and the PDGA are becoming more mainstream every day ...



having internet ads from non-disc golf companies does not really constitute being mainstream.

what are our biggest past failures and how have we learned from -- and put these experiences into future successes?



Allowing people to opt out of the magazine was a monumental mistake. Apparently the current BOD learned from the old BOD's mistake and took steps to correct it allowing for future success.

Allowing people to opt out of the magazine was a monumental mistake.



I believe your statement is wrong. Many members do not want a magazine if it costs them extra, that much we have seen to be true. If those that chose the opt-out option were not allowed that choice, just think how bad the office would have been swamped with calls from angry members that had to pay for "Sports Loop II".

The magazine is too big to fail.

if the new thingie has the same content as the PDGA pages in either iteration of the former magazine, it will worth less than nothing.

The magazine is too big to fail.


ROFLMAO!!!!

Allowing people to opt out of the magazine was a monumental mistake



maybe having a magazine was a mistake... :confused:


Apparently the current BOD learned from the old BOD's mistake and took steps to correct it allowing for future success.




doesn't sound like sound science to categorize it as learning until that theory is put into practice and proven viable... what makes you so convinced? and aren't there more important things than the magazine to reflect about?

doesn't sound like sound science to categorize it as learning until that theory is put into practice and proven viable... what makes you so convinced? and aren't there more important things than the magazine to reflect about?



Rob - I agree are more important things to reflect about than the magazine, but you did ask the question and I gave my opinion.

I am not on the BOD and don't know exactly what happened. However, it doesn't take a genius to figure out FDM was headed for failure. I doubt many members would have opted FOR the mag in 2009 based on the poor performance of FDM in 2008. I gladly supported both DGWN and FDM, but after being discappointed in the content and poor editing with the first issues of FDM and the delay in receiving subsequent issues, I probably would have chosen to save $10.00 on my 2009 renewal. I knew I wouldn't be missing anything, and if I needed a copy, I could pick one up at an event or from a vendor. I can extrapolate that if a long time supporter of the PDGA was going to opt out, many others would too.

I think the BOD made a wise choice in cutting FDM loose before FDM lost a ton of money. I don't think anyone here would wish total financial ruin on any fellow disc golfer. We are a disc family, and Rich is our brother. I am sorry that his vision for FDM did not materialize. FDM did not fail because of the opt out. However, because of the poor performance by FDM, keeping the opt out option would pretty much doom any future magazine's chance for lasting success.

I personally think the magazine was a great showcase for this org. The full-color glossy magazine was something you could take to a park department or potential sponsor. You could show it to clueless family members or co-workers and they could see that disc golf was a real sport and quite organized. It is a shame we lost that. I will assert we won't get it back as long as folks can opt out.

Argue all you want that print is going away, but it will never die. The fact is the magazine was a tangible membership benefit as well as a full color promotion of our wonderful sport. You can argue that a magazine should be able to stand on their own through the sale of advertising and should not need the PDGA to subsidize it. The reality is that this sport doesn't have any Fortune 500 companies willing to throw down millions (or even hundreds) of dollars to advertise to our demographic. Disc Golf advertisers are just small businesses, clubs and individuals hoping to get fellow disc golfers to see and buy their products or attend their events. Many of these folks are barely making a profit and now they have lost one ability to market to their perfect target audience. I sincerely doubt any online site or PDGA "newsletter" can replace that.

Again, I think it is shame that PDGA members and disc golf businesses will no longer have a glossy magazine to promote our sport and to promote disc golf business in general. Perhaps the newsletter will be a glossy mag that will allow advertising and I am worried for nothing. <font color="red">EDIT - I just re-read the announcement and the new publication will be a full color glossy with advertisers. </font>

I don't want to dwell on the past and I don't want to base my decision to renew on past BOD performance. I will forgive them for making mistakes any one of us could have made had we chosen to selflessly serve this organization as they have. The BOD made a mistake choosing a new magazine over the tried and true DGWN. They made a mistake allowing members to opt out. They learned from it. Now they have moved on. I urge all of you to get over it and move on as well.

"The BOD made a mistake choosing a new magazine over the tried and true DGWN. "

discette, i liked most of your post, but dont forget that the DGWN was not an available option. opt-out did not create that situation.

from the pdga.com front page article on Dec 5th about the new mag... "The project is still in the early planning stages" I seriously hope its a bit past the early stages and that was written sometime earlier.

i'm not sure how mags run behind the scenes and dates of things but I would imagine things would have to be close to done for a January issue by now and not in the early stages of planning the magazine. Or maybe it will be quarterly and thats not a concern(haven't seen the frequency of release mentioned)... or they'll make FDM deliver the final 2 mags (i think they still owe 2 right?) and count those as the Jan/ Feb releases.

"The BOD made a mistake choosing a new magazine over the tried and true DGWN. "

discette, i liked most of your post, but dont forget that the DGWN was not an available option. opt-out did not create that situation.



I might be wrong about this, but I thought the sequence of events was:

1) BoD elect to make magazine optional
2) BoD put magazine contract up for tender
3) DGWN does not bid for contract

Granted that 1) does not necessarily imply 3), but I believe that RR considered 1) to be a mistake, and as such it may have had a massive influence on 3)...

RR had been waffling for quite some time about whether to continue. he was not giving out signals that he really wanted to keep going. in fact, some of the signals were rather strong in the other direction.

you guys might always think going opt-out was a mistake. the mistake is going back to a forced support of whats been to many of us a questionable publication for a number of years. the mistake is not doing bidding anymore. its the wrong direction for this org at this time.

but go ahead and spend the money. hopefully the association wont need it next year.

Fair enough, I don't pretend to have any insight into Rick's intentions. I don't believe I expressed an opinion one way or the other, I was just trying to clarify a timeline...

Discette makes an excellent case for the current course being the only viable one if we want to retain a mag. Your post implies you don't particularly want to, but you'll have to admit being in a minority on that front, with 60+% opt-in rate last year.

With other factors such as multiple members per household affecting that baseline figure, there's almost certainly a two thirds majority of the membership with an appetite for a magazine.

On that basis, I can't see how the BoD could have acted in any way other than the one they have done.

opting in to the mag is not a comment on the benefits and fairness of the opt-in policy. one can love the mag dearly but still support opt in. in fact, those folks are rather unselfish. they'll take their chances rather than force others to support their values. this is 20% of our dues.. its not like we're talking about 0.5% in an off-to-the-side program.

opting in to the mag is not a comment on the benefits and fairness of the opt-in policy. one can love the mag dearly but still support opt in. in fact, those folks are rather unselfish. they'll take their chances rather than force others to support their values. this is 20% of our dues.. its not like we're talking about 0.5% in an off-to-the-side program.




Yeah but why couldn't the PDGA do a .5% of the side program so that worlds can have better payout than a normal A-tier?

You know something like $1 per entry put towards worlds/marketing.

The PDGA probably spends around $9-$10 per pro member (~12%) toward Pro Worlds in added cash, staff salaries, travel expenses and marshal support.

The PDGA probably spends around $9-$10 per pro member (~12%) toward Pro Worlds in added cash, staff salaries, travel expenses and marshal support.



in the case of Worlds, wouldn't the % going towards added cash be much better spent marketing Worlds and paying someone to spend time trying to get sponsors?

so say its $1000 going towards added cash, don't you think that you could pay someone to work for a couple weeks @ $10/hr with the sole job of attracting sponsors, they couldn't top that amount?

we pay because no one we've worked with, paid or otherwise, has been able to pull that off, Luke.

i'd bet Chuck's number is low for a certain year, unless we finally got the money that was months and months past due

What money is past due? Besides what the PDGA says I owe them.

With regard to Worlds finances, the TDs like me don't necessarily know what the final tally is other than the balance sheet for our own event because all we know officially is what the PDGA directly adds to the event in cash. So those are just estimates on my part for the PDGA salaries, travel expenses and marshals. Don't overlook the costs for the whole advance process which pays for bidders to travel to present the bids, travel and staff time for several advance visits to check out courses and facilities and help the team with certain issues that arise. Sandals has seen those other items which can vary from year-to-year based on location and whether it's a combined Pro/Am or standalone Pro Worlds.

if the new thingie has the same content as the PDGA pages in either iteration of the former magazine, it will worth less than nothing.



It blows my mind people are that upset about an extra $10 for a magazine. There doesn't need to be an opt out, it does bring value to this silly sport! If you really feel this magazine has no value, take it to the dentist and drop it off on the table. Lots of people will take a look at it and may bring new interest to the sport. It's $10 people, give me a break....eat one less big mac a week and you will be covered! I understand the complaints about not getting the 6 promised issues, but moving forward let us just learn from this. The bigger we get, the more problems we will encounter. It is tough to please everyone, but keep in mind everyone has good intentions for disc golf ultimately!

The PDGA probably spends around $9-$10 per pro member (~12%) toward Pro Worlds in added cash, staff salaries, travel expenses and marshal support.




I would love to put $1 from each of my entries for a HUGE event to showcase what our sport "could be". Southern Nationals does it and people go out of thier way to qualify for a piece of the pie yet every year I hear Pros talk about how worlds has not monetary attraction whatsoever and they are only there because everyone else is.

I wish you could give me a good reason not to take $1 (didn't the PDGA have over 125,000 entries this year) from our entry to put towards what should be our big attraction?
Instead we give $2-5 per event to the PDGA and then they open online registration and instead of offering it as a membership perk or to help the TDs they do it to take 6% and take away from existing online reg companies.

I just don't get it. Is there anyway we can get this on a ballot or do I have to be a good ole boy?

You have to get a BOD member to bring it up for a vote.
BTW, what is the status of the magazine?

You have to get a BOD member to bring it up for a vote.
BTW, what is the status of the magazine?



Just my luck, all the ones I voted for lost.

Who's on there now?

Is this a membership vote we are talking about or one that would include the BoD and Mr. Decker?

BTW, what is the status of the magazine?



Tom there is an announcement on top of the home page here at PDGA.

Here it is:
By bgraham | Dec 05, 2008 |

The Professional Disc Golf Association is pleased to announce that it will return to publishing its own in-house publication beginning in 2009 through the new PDGA Media Group. The project is still in the early planning stages but the publication is expected to be a glossy full color magazine containing membership information, news, opinions, event schedules, articles, photos, advertisements and other content consonant with the purposes of the association. All active PDGA members will receive an annual subscription to the publication as a benefit of membership.

The PDGA previously had its own in-house magazine prior to 1995, when "Disc Golfer" was published by the association. The new publication will return full editorial control over content to the PDGA as well as improve communications with members, and ensure that the sport of disc golf will continue to have a quality publication that can be used to promote the sport for years to come.

Members interested in providing content to the new publication in the form of photographs and/or articles are encouraged to contact the PDGA office. An announcement with more details will be forthcoming.

moving that much money into the worlds would need BoD approval. good luck with that. 125,000 is a lot. you'd have to cut somewhere, and there are not a lot of programs we run that cost that much. would it be worth a head count to you?

of course, if the Tour part of the PDGA was split off, and it got to keep what it received from fees and use it as it pleased, it would likely have that amount to play with. but right now, funds generated by the Tour are used to pay for people and programs in other areas.

this is an explanation/observation, not a complaint.

moving that much money into the worlds would need BoD approval. good luck with that. 125,000 is a lot. you'd have to cut somewhere, and there are not a lot of programs we run that cost that much. would it be worth a head count to you?

of course, if the Tour part of the PDGA was split off, and it got to keep what it received from fees and use it as it pleased, it would likely have that amount to play with. but right now, funds generated by the Tour are used to pay for people and programs in other areas.

this is an explanation/observation, not a complaint.



How bout a quarter per entry? You could split that 125,000 in half and put it towards worlds and the rest for helping to improve local courses. I mean would this not be beneficiary to the sport? Right now we have a confederate sport ran by the local groups with little influence from the PDGA and I would just like to see the PDGA have a larger more useful role.

A Federalist vs States rights, eh?

A Federalist vs States rights, eh?



From a Texican no less!

Matt scooper Hall

$.25 per entry back to worlds payout...

We can give $.04 to sr grand masters,
$.04 to grand masters, $.04 to masters,
$.04 to women masters, $.04 to women open,..

For pro open, that leaves, let's see, too complicated.

Where is that extreme sarcasm button.

steve timm

Right now we have a confederate sport ran by the local groups with little influence from the PDGA and I would just like to see the PDGA have a larger more useful role.



a smaller role would be the more useful one.

Right now we have a confederate sport ran by the local groups with little influence from the PDGA and I would just like to see the PDGA have a larger more useful role.



a smaller role would be the more useful one.



I would like to see them become smaller in some ways but I think we should make our world championships into an event worthy of the name and I also thing we should support the improvement of courses that apply for some sort of grant.

I still have yet to hear a reason against boosting the worlds payout to almost 3X the purse size. Heck maybe that way you wouldn't have to take top 10 out of 150+ people to break even. I remember winning a lot of money.......I mean merch at AM worlds and I have a feeling that will be my largest cash unless something changes.


Maybe if we put in a dollar from each entry the PDGA could afford to give the Pros an Umbrella in thier player's pack.

Thanks, Discette. Word has flown around the country quickly.
I really hope it works out.

There seems to be a mind-set from several of the "higher-ups" in the disc golf world that many issues brought up here on this board are just incessant whining from 8 to 10 members who "dominate" the discussions, and thus should be discounted because this is a very small percentage of the pdga membership. From my perspective, I believe that pdga HQ should listen a little more closely and realize they have a LOT of real work to do, mainly in the area of member relations.

A very large portion of the pdga membership will just show up to play at their local venue and rarely ever say anything about policies, rules, money, or other issues surrounding OUR pdga. They just want to play. However, there are a few who will be more vocal. They have ideas and a vision of what they want this game to be, and they're willing to put in the effort to make it happen. In my opinion, these seem to be the ones who are doing a LOT of the behind the scenes work just to make events/clubs/courses happen for the regular players/members. These members have the passion and the drive to make things happen, and some of them have some very good ideas. To discredit these ideas (or the members themselves)just because they don't jive with your own is a huge mistake. And then for the "higher-ups" to get defensive and make posts that are less than respectful is definately the wrong path to take.

Other have just as much passion for the game as you.

And since you're here Brian, maybe you can shed some light on why an overseas TD gets a lesser penalty for "outstanding event fees" than a TD who commits the same infraction here in the US.

Well shouldn't that be listed differently on the DA page? I mean it's one thing to be late sending in "event fees" to the pdga, and something completely different when the TD won't pay cash prizes. At least it seems to me anyway.

I hear you JohnRock and Ive always had nothing but respect for what you do in N Texas. I dont consider you or AviarX to be among the "8-10 characters." AviarX gives (me) the impression he's a sharp cookie who'd be an asset to any PDGA Board.

But I have met some of the folk in question and it doesnt take long to figure out that their bitterness isnt just about PDGA but reflects their lives and attitudes in general. In an org the size of PDGA today that is par for the course. One of them had the parts about 2 years ago to post that he is seeking professional help. Whatever the reasons behind their life experiences and attitudes its unfortunate and I wish them better days ahead. But until they can temper their attack mode with the occasional glint that the PDGA actually also does some things well, I write them off because in this public forum they can have undue inf luence over members and visitors new to the d board and that influence can and does do undue harm to the association.



wow, that comes across as rather condescending. who made you the final judge of these 8-10 people? do you realize that those 8-10 people are balanced by another 8-10 who worship every move the pdga makes? you diminish the 8-10 by assuming there aren't more. why do you think the silent ones are all on your side?

who needed professional help? professional help has been received by PDGA staff on the association's dime over the years. needing professional help has been a feature of leadership for quite some time.

needing professional help has been a feature of leadership for quite some time.




I would like to recommend this to the current leadership, not in a mean way, just trying to avoid a problem I see developing.

My last phone call from the pdga HQ left me very angry with the current ED. The constant interruptions when I was trying to make a point had me so frustrated I was ready to give it all up in regards to the pdga. When a long-time member who volunteers a lot of money and time calls the office to vent about frustrations, they should be treated with a LOT more respect than what I received.

I would like to recommend to the BOD that they have a hard talk with the ED and make sure he understands who does the work to keep the bus moving so he has something to drive. Disrespecting members who have legitimate complaints (especially those who volunteer money and time) is very bad form. Listen to the complaints, admit mistakes, and try to learn from it.

Clueless

never their fault. always your.

in the words of a current BOD member, "_________ the PDGA". of course, he had the package to fill in the blank, right out on his website.

[responding to JohnRock:]

BG is grounded in diplomacy. Ive never seen him lose his cool. For this I admire him tremendously. If he was impatient with you Id say he's feeling incredible pressure dealing with all the work at hand, given the issues of 2008 which are all being addressed, given this is always a high stress/high performance time of the year, given what goes on under "other PDGA Topics," and that is a concern because he really is the man for the job. Ask Harold Duvall who's worked closely with BG for years what he thinks of him ... and please give him a little slack. Thanks.



This i think is an example of what may be causing frustration. 1st, Harold Duvall by the nature of who he is and his role in disc golf, is going to incline someone from the PDGA to display their very best behavior. So too, behavior in public may illicit a different behavior than one to one private discussion (hence the potential beauty of DISCussion when used wisely). So one thing to consider is that we are talking about John's particular experience in this case and not Harold's... To ignore that does a disservice to John and his willingness to put this on the table. It seems to me this type of scenario cries out for a simple apology for the unsatisfactory experience individual X (John, in nthis particular example) experienced and reassurance that the PDGA does value the input of all of its members and strives to give an open ear to member feedback. Going even further and summarizing what the member has said and stating that it will be given consideration (and then doing so) would be even better. Hopefully it is only the communication that this is occuring is what is lacking...

2nd, BG may be very patient, professional, and deserving of praise -- but that does not mean he is perfect or that he may not have handled certain situations poorly. When I met BG at 2007 Worlds I was impressed by his patience and willingness to be helpful despite having so much on his plate at the time. And that was after being predisposed to a critical view of him due to my having not even been [phone] interviewed for the Membership Manager position that had been open earlier that year and for which i had applied. (i have a Masters degree in Recreation and expected at least a chance to interview for the position)... The point being that even if official X is the consummate professional around you, me, and Harold he still may have a bad day or phone interaction occasionally and that may warrant an apology to the person on the other end of that interaction.

My particular concerns with regard to the PDGA have to do with making this website member only for posting privileges. To me that is a sign that the PDGA is too short-sighted when it comes to growing the membership and interest in competitive disc golf. When i voiced my opinion, it seemd to get discarded, Another issue for me is the price of membership. If the magazine only takes $10, where does the other $65 go? Transparency here would be helpful. And if growing the membership and the quantity of renewing members are top priorities, why not lower the cost of a minimum membership level? The mag is $10 so make a $25 membership level which entails a $5 per event entry fee surcharge as opposed to the $10 charge for non-members? Give them the mag, posting privileges (altghough we need a place for non-members to be able to post and inquire too that enocurages newbies to hang around -- maybe a free magazine subscription or something to the best newbie question each month). In short, having several membership levels and costs to incline new membership interest for beginners and persons of lower income to join would be a good idea (with increasing perks as one pays for a higher level of membership). this might also incline persons who are burning out or injured an option to stay with the PDGA at a lower level instead of abandoning ship altogether.

We also (imo) need to almost instantaneously send a membership package to new and renewing members. there is a reinforcing component to that which suggests the PDGA is responsive and engaged (and vice versa). So, an email to start and then a fast shipment is worth the trouble. And signing up online should be free or discounted over snail mail event entry or membership renewals too since that minimizes paperwork...

just a few things for now, unfortunately i don't have time to make this post shorter &amp; more coherent. thanks to you and everyone who has worked to further disc golf -- lets try to find common ground and keep the big proverbial disc in the air ;)

Now here's a person who needs to be in the front of the bus!

You're right Rob, and I hear you too Brian H. Brian G. no doubt has a lot to deal with trying to drive this organization's bus. My concern is that I'm being placed in a lesser spot on the priority list mainly due to my public posting of disappointment with the way things are going this year. I don't believe I've been nasty or mean, and certainly no personal attacks. I've gone through the proper channels (e-mails to the HQ, follow-up e-mails, and then phone calls) to try to get action on my problems, only to receive the replies of ,"I'm busy!" To be fair to Addie, it seems she has tried to help, but for some reason, we've still got problems getting me my stuff. And with my current issue with HQ, my concern is reinforced. Accepting responsibility for shortcomings is not fun, but in no way should the member have to feel sorry for bringing it up.

I'm no expert, but I believe I've earned the right to express my concerns. 20 years of sending in membership money, TD'ing numerous pdga events that also put money in the pdga's bank account, countless hours of physical work designing and installing courses (permanent and temporary), and there is no way to track the number of players I've steered towards membership in the pdga. All for free! The tireless volunteer. Yet after that last call, I'm left with the thought, "It kinda seems like I'm not doing ENOUGH."

Dear John,

I am very sorry that you feel that I did not give you the time, attention and respect that our members are due, when we spoke a few weeks ago. In defense of myself, I feel that I listened very closely to you and that I was much more fair and respectful towards you than you have been with me and the office staff recently.

I am also shocked that you are claiming that your treatment has anything to do with your criticism of the PDGA on this message board, when you know full well that I have in fact bent internal office policies several times in 2008 in order to keep you from being suspended.

I am always available to discuss and address any problems you or any other member may have with the association.

I think the moral of the story is the PDGA needs to keep the memebers happy so that they want to join to help disc golf and nopt just because they have to.

For all the money my dad and I have paid in the last 10 years we could have just used to put in new baskets or concrete boxes at a course but instead it goes to the PDGA and whatever projects you guys think is important.

Members have very little say in anything that goes on and it seems as though many who have been within the org at the higher level have a short-sighted view of what we can do with the sport and the different avenues we should try.

$1 per entry to Make worlds the BEST disc golf event EVER!

That is why everyone thinks SN is better. The sad thing is that in many cases they are right.

Well Brian, In defense of myself, it was clear to me that you had an agenda going into that phone call. It seemed to me that you (or your staff) don't like to be criticized when you think you're doing alright. My point is that you're not meeting my membership needs, and that conversation was not making any headway in my direction. None of my attempts were satisfactory, and we're still not square.

This latest issue that you're threatening suspension (plus other unspecified actions) on should never have gotten this far. Let me ask you this:
Do you concur that Matt Smart is the person who handles the payments to the pdga for all of the DisCrazy Shootouts (including sanctioning and player fees for the 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 versions of the Shootout)?

And also:
Are you or have you (or any person on your staff)recently had conversations with Matt Smart about this matter, and have there been attempts by you or any person on your staff to get him to run another C-tier event here before the end of the year to push the event total to 1000 for the year?

And now that I think about it some more, how come nobody in your office mentioned this problem when I sent in our sanctioning fee for this summer's Top of Texas Open? And then when I sent in more money after the event, nobody mentioned that you were on the verge of suspending me because of a 2007 event?

Please enlighten me why you have to approach me with threats of suspension and more when you know full well that the situation will be taken care of.

I feel I have clearly demonstrated over the last 20 years that I am more than willing to give above and beyond normal member expectations for this organization, and I do NOT deserve the attitude you are putting forth.

Dear John,

I am very sorry that you feel that I did not give you the time, attention and respect that our members are due, when we spoke a few weeks ago. In defense of myself, I feel that I listened very closely to you and that I was much more fair and respectful towards you than you have been with me and the office staff recently.

I am also shocked that you are claiming that your treatment has anything to do with your criticism of the PDGA on this message board, when you know full well that I have in fact bent internal office policies several times in 2008 in order to keep you from being suspended.

I am always available to discuss and address any problems you or any other member may have with the association.



first off, i'd like to hear the details about what Brian insinuates about John. Brian, you have come on here and basically said John has been given special treatment for unnamed indescretions. i am sure your moderators will agree that such charges against a member had better be backed up, or they may not be much more than a personal attack. so lets hear the details. on this discussion board, since thats where it started.

"...I was much more fair and respectful towards you than you have been with me and the office staff recently."

John, it is clear that You are the problem. in georgia, flies hang out on roses.

Happy Birthday Pat! Maybe some day we'll get a round in together...

Well Brian, In defense of myself, it was clear to me that you had an agenda going into that phone call. It seemed to me that you (or your staff) don't like to be criticized when you think you're doing alright. My point is that you're not meeting my membership needs, and that conversation was not making any headway in my direction. None of my attempts were satisfactory, and we're still not square.

This latest issue that you're threatening suspension (plus other unspecified actions) on should never have gotten this far. Let me ask you this:
Do you concur that Matt Smart is the person who handles the payments to the pdga for all of the DisCrazy Shootouts (including sanctioning and player fees for the 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 versions of the Shootout)?

And also:
Are you or have you (or any person on your staff)recently had conversations with Matt Smart about this matter, and have there been attempts by you or any person on your staff to get him to run another C-tier event here before the end of the year to push the event total to 1000 for the year?

And now that I think about it some more, how come nobody in your office mentioned this problem when I sent in our sanctioning fee for this summer's Top of Texas Open? And then when I sent in more money after the event, nobody mentioned that you were on the verge of suspending me because of a 2007 event?

Please enlighten me why you have to approach me with threats of suspension and more when you know full well that the situation will be taken care of.

I feel I have clearly demonstrated over the last 20 years that I am more than willing to give above and beyond normal member expectations for this organization, and I do NOT deserve the attitude you are putting forth.



Dear John,

I have already explained to you several times that you were the TD of record for the 2007 DisCrazy shootout and your name appears on the sanctioning agreement therefore you are the person responsible for submitting event results and fees to the office by the stipulated deadline. The event fees are from your 2007 event and are well over one year overdue.

If I were to have followed office policies to the letter, you would have been suspended in late 2007. Despite your very odd way of thanking us, I am still glad that you were not suspended as it only enforces the fact that we go out of our way to work with and accomodate our members and tournament directors.

I have no intentions of arguing this point any further on the discussion board. I am already sorry that I responded to your posts on this thread as it only brings out the trolls, but your unfair allegations and presentation of only half the facts forced my defensive response. Please feel free to call me at the office if you would like to discuss the matter any further, or drop me an e-mail with your number and the best time to reach you and I will gladly call you.

Only brings out the trolls? How botu it brings out a lot of memebers who want to know what the Org is really doing to further the sport of DG. Of all the money we take in it would seem feasable to put someone in charge of finding sponsors who can put a good amount of effort into the cause.

We can take $1 out of the $3-5 the PDGA already takes from every entry and put that towards our world championships in order to make the event not only fun but worth the trip! A worlds entry of $235 is way too high when you look at just how good the payout is. You finish better than 80% of the players yet you are payed out 20% more than put in???

How does that make sense? This weekend I played a B-tier where someone beating 80% of the field recieved twice as much as they put in and the players pack was just as good as what us Pros got at worlds this year!

I just don't get how B-tiers can have better payouts then our WORLD Championship especially when the entry is stupidly high like everything else we pay for. :confused: :confused:

i think it would go a long way to disspell the fear of trolls here if a more diplomatic tack were taken. i did a google search of the word other than diplomacy which came to mind and uncovered the following:

Magnaminity, a Latin word which means "great mindedness."

Magnaminity means the ability to possess our own strong convictions, yet allow other people to have convictions which differ and even contradict ours. Synonyms of magnaminity include: nobility, patience, humility, tolerance and class.

Having worked with Brian Hoeniger, Brian Graham, and the entire PDGA staff at three out of the last four Pro Worlds events, working long hours, in cramped quarters, and under stressful conditions, I have gotten to know them well. And after watching them ignore perennial criticism on an organization-funded server over the last several years from people whose sole existence is seemingly to complain daily about the PDGA, I can honestly say that these are some of the most diplomatic, patient, and tolerant people I have ever met in my entire life, and their ability to continue to hold their heads above the ridiculous scrutiny is nothing short of superhuman.

None of you would last a week in their shoes without completely losing your cool.

I know I wouldn't.

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."

-George Bernard Shaw

John,

I contacted Matt about running an event before the end of the year, not the PDGA office. I tried to contact you first, but was unable to reach you by phone. I was trying to contact TDs by phone to get quick responses, I did not try email.

I have not been informed of any issues with any payments of any events in Amarillo.

Please email me your contact information.

GnDuke at LSDGA dot com

Thank you for your honesty, Gary. You should be able to confirm what I am trying to prove. Can you tell everyone here who has been taking care of ALL of the pdga business associated with the DisCrazy Shootout tournaments, beginning in 2005? Who sets up the events, pays the pdga sanctioning fees, then pays the player fees (obviously excluding the $313.00 still outstanding)? Who have you dealt with about these events?

I'm the guy who volunteered to be the TD (on paper) since Matt Smart was not a certified official. This should have been a win-win situation for both the local players and the pdga, since we could potentially get more players at the event and the pdga could get more revenue than if we had not tried to sanction the event. For some reason unknown to me, Matt has not (according to the pdga) paid all of the player fees that were due after the event. In February of this year, I got notified by David Gentry that there was still some fees not paid from the 2007 event. I called Matt immediately and he claims he took care of the outstanding fees, in fact the pdga has a record of a payment on 2/26/08 (or some date close to there). This was in FEBRUARY of 2008! There have been NO payments associated with any DisCrazy event that have come from me. EVER! Now (well on Dec. 4), I get a e-mail from Karolyn at HQ telling me that I have 27 days to pay in full or else I'll be facing several named and unnamed disciplinary actions.

Boy, you talk about a odd way of thanking the volunteers who help run pdga events and help to put money in our bank account!

I have been in contact with Matt Smart over the last couple of weeks to try to get this settled, and he is still claiming, to me anyway, that he paid the fees in full. He said he has called the pdga office and spoke with Karolyn about what exactly my role in the event was, and he assured me that Karolyn knows he is going to get the financial matter settled, yet Graham is still holding these threats of suspension over my head.

It's not surprising that Graham is once again pointing the finger elsewhere, it seems to be the standard practice these days. I've told him he will get his money, even if I have to pay it myself. I'll take the money away from my kid's Christmas fun to settle this matter before the deadline, because I don't want the organization I have helped to build for the last 20 years to think I am not a responsible member.

Brian Graham is trying to make everyone believe he has bent over backwards to NOT suspend me for something that happened in MAY of 2007. I want to know why I was not notified in December of last year so I could have possibly avoided this animosity. Since these outstanding fees have caused Graham such distress this year, why has he not contacted me sooner so he would not have to bend long-standing pdga policies? This course of action reeks really bad.

I am already sorry that I responded to your posts on this thread as it only brings out the trolls . . . .



Sorry, Brian, but this clearly demonstrates a lack of professionalism and a certain condescending attitude toward the general membership who participates in this discussion board.

Also, the airing out of all the details of this Texas Shootout issue is inappropriate here. Take it offline when specific names and $ amounts are discussed.

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."



If you've ever lived on a farm, you know sometimes an animal will escape it's confines and then you have to wrestle it, rope it, or shoot it to make sure it does not damage the rest of the farm investment.

Pat B.

Please stop throwing your sandals at the ED.
He is younger &amp; even quicker than W!


John

You must first establish private communication
with unruly boar (male pig for the city folk)
with clear words and firm eye contact.

The urge to wrestle must be suppressed.

If conversation fails, skip to capital punishment.
Take extreme care skinning quieted swine,
it takes a delicate touch to remove pig's skin
without cutting into the bacon.

Where is that sarcasm Icon?
steve timm

too bad they wont narc out tardy Worlds TDs on the message board. but that might look bad. especially if we find out about the greens fees.

picking on a guy who was trying to help is ridiculous. it woulda been better to say "dude, thanks for trying. we appreciate it. but ya know what?, lets just not sanctions those events next time. we dont want to associate you and your good record with all that. so, thanks again, this one is not on you... lets move ahead with the events you directly run."

John, as the TD of record, I am glad you are willing to publicly step up and take responsibility. While you were not directly responsible for the payment (or non-payment) of the player fees for the event in question, you do realize you are ultimately responsible.

I am glad the PDGA management has some leeway when enforcing discipline policies. I think I know what would be posted on this forum if Terry Calhoun or Chuck Kennedy were the TD of record and not paid outstanding event fees after <font color="red">20 months!!!!</font> There would be endless posts about good ol boys and double standards, etc.

Apparently the PDGA is willing to work with TD's and members to find solutions before resorting to discipline.....even if the TD is an open critic of the PDGA. It is a sad state of affairs that some members want to micromanage every decision made by our paid staff and volunteer BOD here on the message board.


FYI -
I remember last year at this time (on a thread started by John) where John was wondering why FDM editor Rich Givens was allowed to edit a post with a naughty word and not have any action taken against him. Fast forward one year and now John is in the hot seat for something that seems a bit more important than using a naughty word on the mess board.

And all the critics are lining up against BG once again. Not for being lenient with rules, but because he won't bow down before you and kiss your dues paying feet!!!


Posted by Johnrock

Re: Rocky Start [Re: John Chapman]
#769572 - 12/04/07 11:16 AM

Yeah, John. I understand what you're trying to convey. But let's look deeper. Within 30 minutes of my initial post, FDM responded, trying to answer a member's question. After my next reply which included some more questions, FDM responded within 45 minutes. <font color="red">Then when I pointed out that they were in violation of the message board rules with their last post, FDM had enough time to come back and edit their post but not enough time to answer more questions or man-up and apologize for an infraction of the rules we are ALL supposed to play by. </font> Possibly they are just so consumed with producing our next kick [email protected] (btw, this means super duper killer, not what it looks like) magazine and the excitement got the better of them, or maybe they just don't want to answer member's questions they don't like? If we (the PDGA) are going to help subsidize a magazine for our organization, <font color="red"> they need to be responsible for what they say or do that pertains to the PDGA. Right? Minor infraction? Maybe in some member's eyes, </font> especially those that know Rich. But what does that say about these new magazine guys that most of us have no clue about? I'm not ripping on the magazine, as much as I love to read, I'll probably enjoy it. But let's make sure our representatives put on the professional front when they are representing us, OK?

what is John in the hot seat for? he didnt attack Brian. will the posts attacking John be edited? will the posters be probed?

discette, you seem to foorget that BG and all paid staff and consultants have what many of us view as dream jobs. their salaries and bonuses are paid by us. when those folks disparage a salary-paying member it is too much. when someone at HQ puts their foot in their mouth it is noticed. you might want to gloss it over, but for some of us it goes over the line.

watching them ignore perennial criticism on an organization-funded server over the last several years


I think ignoring criticism is a large part of the problem.

here is the transcript of the BoD's conversation with the magazine. its in the minutes, but easier to read here



FDM - Brian Graham introduced Rich Givens who requested to address the board directly with regards to FDM - Issue 4 is currently at the printer and should ship middle of next week.

Givens presents the circumstances that have created the delays in the magazine: -
There were unknowns such as the opt-out and the back issues.
We did not expect such a large opt-out.
Also, we didn�t expect that a late membership registration would receive only the remaining issues and not the back issues.

The combination of these two factors changed the dynamics of the situation that we had planned on. The net result is that the amount of copies that were purchased was reduced, which resulted in the necessity for us to put in additional funds. - As we work at the lower minimum numbers of what we can do, the economy of sales is not very sustainable. We were upside down on both issues 1 and 2. - I am hopeful that the board will consider a couple of possibilities as we move forward. -

1. I request that the board consider offering a full subscription regardless of when the user signs up for the PDGA. Thus back issues will be given to a new member. -
2. I request that we revisit the opt-out issue.

Decker: What rate of opt-out did you plan on?

Givens: The early projections that I received stated an opt-out of about 10%, but it is actually around 30%.

Bob: 30% is the opt � out that we expected. Actual PDGA subscriptions for each issue: 1st issue � 5200, 2nd - 7000, 3rd- 8400 (includes mail copies as well as extras)

Givens: It is not reasonable to print only 5000 so we printed more. We found ways of using the extra copies that we have to expose people to our magazine and the sport of disc golf, but the bottom line is that we are paying for magazines that we don�t have buyers for. - Actual print loads: 1st issues 15,000, 2nd 15,000, 3rd 10,000
- Dec 2007 year end 11 thousand+ members. -

Givens: Bottom line: if we have 10,000 copies of this issue for PDGA members we will be OK. -

Givens: I do not expect that what we receive from you will fully finance the magazine, but I do expect that it will be considerable. - The lower our numbers, the harder it is for us to get outside sponsors. - Opt-out becomes somewhat self fulfilling. As we move later in the year, I�m guessing that opt-outs increase.

Decker: Why has your communication been so weak with regard to these problems?

Givens: When I determined that this situation was not what I expected, I choose to deal with it myself. I�ve been communicating with Brian and I�ve been optimistic about the outcome or the direction we were going. I wanted to be careful in what I said and therefore said less then I should.

Board: We were under the assumption that issue 4 was at the printer and being printed then later we find that the funds are not available to take care of the printing.

Givens: We do not have a reserve to deal with what we have run into.

Board: Why did you plan on 15000 magazines for the 1st issue when even the best case scenario would require 12000, but more likely 8000 would be needed?

Givens: the additional copies did not significantly affect the price of the printing. We will not print less than 10000 copies.

Board: Is there a definite deadline on the next issue?

Givens: Yes Thursday. Board: What assurances can you give us that you will fulfill the next 2 issues?

Givens: We are fully committed, what assurances are you looking for? We have done about 50% of the production work for issue 5 and have already started on issue 6. We are late only because of cash flow.

Board: Do you have a balance sheet that you could provide us so we could be assured that you have the resources to complete the next two issues.

Givens: I will have to discuss that before I supply you with such information.

Board: Because we advanced you the funds for issue 4, we are now in a position of a banker which gives us the right to ask you such questions.

Stork: The question of content and direction of the magazine. What is your feeling about that going forward and any potential adjustments based on reader feedback or board direction. Is that something you are willing to do or would that be too restrictive?

Givens: I feel very good about the content of our magazine. We have received a tremendous response that we are going in a good direction. We certainly did not cross any bad lines or go over the top with our first issue and we have made modifications in previous magazines.

Decker: The magazine says that it is the �official magazine of the PDGA� and some of the content has gone beyond the level of good taste and I don�t believe that our younger market should even be exposed to it. I don�t believe your editorial staff is keeping the bigger picture in mind.

Answer: The text has changed so it no longer says that this is the �official magazine of the PDGA�.

Convers: I am very much pursuing a younger crowd. I�m actually hoping to get many more kids involved in this. I would like to have a magazine that I can give to a Sunday school class or a scout master. I cannot do that if there are drug references.

Decker: Ever since I�ve been on the board, we have been doing everything we can to distance ourselves from that issue.

Stork � what is the mood of the team at this point? Imagine that you don�t get both of the suggestions that you made. What is your feeling going forward?

Rich � I wouldn�t continue to do what I�m doing nor would my staff if I didn�t believe in what we are doing. We have a small internal staff. There are a few people that make all this happen. I am very close to all of them. I love and adore disc sports. It is something I�m passionate about.

Rick � issue 2 to 3, the binding changed from perfect bound to saddle stitch, did you change printers?

Answer � yes, we had quite a bit of feedback regarding damage. This was an attempt to see if we could eliminate the damage.

Brian � it sounds like you�ve found the money you need to get issue 4 out. What about issue 5? Will you have the money to print and ship issue 5 without an advance from the PDGA? Do you have a plan in place for raising the revenue to get 5 printed?

Answer � Yes we do.

Givens � we are trying to create something that will entertain the audience.

Convers � What is the feasibility of you managing memberships? If a member signs up in May could you then send them the next 6 issues?

Givens � I have no problem keeping track of subscription control. I prefer that.

Decker � So you would prefer to see the fiscal year approach to the subscription schedule. Answer � yes.

(Rich and Bill now leave the teleconference and the board continues the discussion.) Following Rich and Bill�s departure, the board discussed many options and then directed Brian Graham to follow up with Rich concerning the promised 10/30/08 delivery of the next issue.

Suzette,

I think you need to go back and re-read what I have posted about the mag guy. I started this thread to try to find out about the delivery of the new mag and if would follow the same delivery timelines as DGWN did in the past. It seemed I always got my DGWN weeks after other members and I was curious why. The mag guy quickly responded and sort of answered my question, then he made a mistake and included profanity in his response (and keep in mind that Peter Shive had just warned all members about his policies for the message board). I pointed out his mistake (I didn't run to any moderators or HQ) and he chose to edit the profanity then leave the discussion without accepting the responsibility of his mistake. I don't mind profanity but the Communications Director has said that it's a No-No here, so I asked the mag guy if that was the kind of content we were going to get with the new mag. That is not a complaint. That is calling the guy on a rules infraction and he chose to not acknowledge it, which showed me what kind of character we should expect.

I realize the position I am in with this situation, Graham has made it very clear he wants money, discipline, or both. I've said several times I will pay the outstanding fees of $313.00, even to Graham himself. I just don't agree with the way the issue has come about. Sending me a threatening e-mail with only 27 days to meet the deadline is not the way to handle the efforts of a long time member who has put in a lot of effort and money (did I mention my recent ACE CLUB donations?) for this organization. And nobody wants to acknowledge that this issue has been kept quiet until Dec. 4 of 2008 (with the exception of my conversation with Gentry in February, after which I had been told by Matt that it had been taken care of). If Graham has been bending policy for this issue for all these months, during which time I have contacted pdga HQ several times, why has he not mentioned it to me so I could look into the matter and get it settled? Surely I have proved over the many years of doing work for the pdga that I can be reasonable and trustworthy.

It seems to me that HQ is very frustrated with their progress this year, and since I have in Graham's words been disrespectful to him and his staff, I would make a good target for them to flex their muscle.

What exactly is the long-standing policy involving TDs who are late in sending in payments?

And are these other 27 TDs who are accused of the same infraction getting the same threats and deadline that I am receiving? Have they also been receiving the easy treatment because they are long time members and supporters of the pdga?

watching them ignore perennial criticism on an organization-funded server over the last several years


I think ignoring criticism is a large part of the problem.



I know for a fact that legitimate criticism is a viewed as a tool to encourage positive discussion, devise ways to improve the PDGA, and help to make us a better organization.

But when it is petty criticism, coming almost daily from those whose sole existence is seemingly to complain about the PDGA, it's no wonder that people boil over and get a little defensive.

hmmm... i'm not aware of anyone doing this "petty criticism, coming almost daily from those whose sole existence is seemingly to complain about the PDGA"

i guess what jeff is saying is that its ok to complain once or twice, but even if nothing gets better and you are disparaged in the meantime, just shut up about it already. there is a quote on complaining :)

there ought to be a quota on donations.

ya wanna stop the daily complaints? stop the daily screwups! its really rather simple.

and the error messages i've been getting while trying to load this webpage for the last 10 minutes are exactly what i'm talking about.

btw, the three challenges?

"each of the 3 main challenges in 2008 - timing of membership received, magazine, website"

where was that published? how is it communicated? if you'd like to solve those, maybe it would be wise to admit theres a problem and ask for input.

input from people who didnt help create the problems in the first place.

but i'm a dreamer :)

Assessing criticism is a fundamental requirement of leadership, as it's as inevitable as the dawn. I'm sure you're aware of the adage about pleasing some of the people some of the time etc...

Those who dislike the ratings will seize any perceived opportunity to criticise them.

Those who dislike "Am entitlement" will seize any perceived opportunity to criticise it.

Those who dislike Masters getting more cash than Open players will seize any perceived opportunity to criticise it.

Etc...

Good leadership involves assessing the criticism, which is usually at an extreme end of the spectrum, taking anything useful from it, and feeding it back into the system. Of course this won't satisfy the critics, because it's rarely feasible to do anything as extreme or comprehensive as the critic wants without completely breaking the system and upsetting far more people than you're pleasing.

Of course sometimes tough decisions have to be made, and you have to upset a few people for some greater good, and that also requires good leadership.

It's like being on a runaway cart, you can either tweak the reins and try to aim it where you want to go, or shoot the horse and walk.

If the PDGA listened and acted on every critic's views, there'd be a whole lot of dead horses, and we'd be walking back and forth so fast we'd practically be vibrating...

Free advice &gt;&gt; Costs more than it is worth

Discussion Board advice &gt;&gt;&gt; highly variable value

The perspective from your last post &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Priceless!!!!

Draft Neil Webber for PDGA Board of Directors
** probably too wise to run ** or wise enough to run away

This discussion board often is a 'beat the dead horse to death' sanctuary

how much did Neil get for his post? :)

btw, Neil makes an eloquent defense of message board critics. thanks Neil. i'm glad you recognize our value. please remember that the appearance of ignoring can be caused by things other than great and effective leadership. sometimes its just plain ignoring. in most cases i've seen its a bit of both. in this case the jury is still out.

how much did Neil get for his post? :)

btw, Neil makes an eloquent defense of message board critics. thanks Neil. i'm glad you recognize our value. please remember that the appearance of ignoring can be caused by things other than great and effective leadership. sometimes its just plain ignoring. in most cases i've seen its a bit of both. in this case the jury is still out.



How much what did I get in the where now? Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean...
If you mean money, I think you need to let go of your jealousy of those who have paid roles. To quote Yoda: "The shadow of greed that is"

I have no doubt that there are critics who run the risk of being ignored. Typically they are the ones who dilute any validity in the message that they are trying to convey by endless repetition, a refusal to accept any alternative other than shooting the horse, or any discussion of the horse's good points that mean it may actually be worth keeping.

Like white noise, eventually the brain will tune it out as irrelevant. Personally though, I don't consider that to be a flaw in the listener, it's a fault in the transmitter.

Neil, did you miss fossils post?

"Free advice &gt;&gt; Costs more than it is worth

Discussion Board advice &gt;&gt;&gt; highly variable value

The perspective from your last post &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Priceless!!!!"

good god, dude, i am the least greedy person you'll meet. geez, for a minute i thought you were thoughtful.

btw, repetition is how you get things done. and whats this about shooting the horse? no one is trying or suggesting that we kill the pdga. personally i am for a much stronger and much smaller pdga. not a dead one.

Neil, did you miss fossils post?

"Free advice &gt;&gt; Costs more than it is worth

Discussion Board advice &gt;&gt;&gt; highly variable value

The perspective from your last post &gt;&gt;&gt;&gt; Priceless!!!!"


Ah, I get it, you can have your smiley now :)


good god, dude, i am the least greedy person you'll meet. geez, for a minute i thought you were thoughtful.



I was joking, but you have had a theme the last week or so of banging on about how the paid staff have "dream jobs", hence the jealousy comment ;) Possibly I was a little obtuse there.


btw, repetition is how you get things done. and whats this about shooting the horse? no one is trying or suggesting that we kill the pdga. personally i am for a much stronger and much smaller pdga. not a dead one.



May have been stretching my analogy to breaking point there, granted. But there are those who would tear up the entire competition structure and start afresh (aka 'shoot the horse). Now I'm actually of the belief that the PDGA structure is fundamentally flawed, and the structure I put in place in the UK is testament to that, but I'm not daft enough to believe that the way forward for the PDGA is to adopt our format. You'd lose 2/3rds of your membership overnight I suspect.

I think the conclusion is: fight battles you can win. You (a generic you) are not going to get anywhere going on like a stuck record about something that has been addressed and dismissed a hundred times.

PDGA - Sweeping problems under the rug for over 30 years.


That is better than, PDGA- "Its in the AIR". :D

Assessing criticism is a fundamental requirement of leadership, as it's as inevitable as the dawn. I'm sure you're aware of the adage about pleasing some of the people some of the time etc...

Those who dislike the ratings will seize any perceived opportunity to criticise them.

Those who dislike "Am entitlement" will seize any perceived opportunity to criticise it.

Those who dislike Masters getting more cash than Open players will seize any perceived opportunity to criticise it.

Etc...

Good leadership involves assessing the criticism, which is usually at an extreme end of the spectrum, taking anything useful from it, and feeding it back into the system. Of course this won't satisfy the critics, because it's rarely feasible to do anything as extreme or comprehensive as the critic wants without completely breaking the system and upsetting far more people than you're pleasing.

Of course sometimes tough decisions have to be made, and you have to upset a few people for some greater good, and that also requires good leadership.



I have witnessed and sometimes been a part of the discussions you reference since about 1992, where these issues were actually part of BOD/Member meetings which used to be held at PDGA WC's.

Where exactly is the part in our leaderships history where these issues have been addressed? All I have seen in that time is a doubling of the number of divisions offered - hardly representative of either the problem, or of the discussions.

The unfortunate history of the PDGA administration is that the toughest decisions have always been avoided. I have been a member for over 20 years. I continue to support the PDGA because I know ultimately there is more good than bad. But it sure would be refreshing to see someone willing to act on these important issues instead of pretending they don't exist.

Aaaaand normal message board service is resumed

Aaaaand normal message board service is resumed




Well after the hit in run we experienced with Mr. Graham blessing our board just to state how perfect our ORG was I figured that sweeping things under the rug was policy.

Like Craig said these problems have been around for longer than I have been alive yet nothing has been done to solve them and they are just kicked farther down the road until they go from being "problems" to just the norm.

$1 per entry to make worlds the best event ever in which Pros actually get umbrellas!

far better to attack the poster than address the post, huh Neil? craig speaks the truth. you wont answer directly because of the answer you'd need to give.

Where exactly is the part in our leaderships history where these issues have been addressed? All I have seen in that time is a doubling of the number of divisions offered - hardly representative of either the problem, or of the discussions.


Just out of curiosity, I checked the Disc Golfer from Summer 1992 and half a dozen events had 6-7 divisions with scores. A quick check of half a dozen events with results posted in the last month indicates scores for 6-7 divisions. We could probably check the actual computer stats and I suspect we won't find much inflation in the average number of divisions actually contested at events. We may have more different ones potentially available but fewer than 10 at any particular event with 6-7 being typical.

Where exactly is the part in our leaderships history where these issues have been addressed? All I have seen in that time is a doubling of the number of divisions offered - hardly representative of either the problem, or of the discussions.


Just out of curiosity, I checked the Disc Golfer from Summer 1992 and half a dozen events had 6-7 divisions with scores. A quick check of half a dozen events with results posted in the last month indicates scores for 6-7 divisions. We could probably check the actual computer stats and I suspect we won't find much inflation in the average number of divisions actually contested at events. We may have more different ones potentially available but fewer than 10 at any particular event with 6-7 being typical.




You mean like this one Chuck?
More than 6-7 divisons (http://www.pdga.com/tournament-results?TournID=7776#Advanced%20Grandmasters)

chuck, can you run how many entrants per division there were? i see events with tons of divisions and events with 3 and less. most of the events with small divisions counts have had 3-5 players per division. not exactly raging competition.

we'd also need to track players by division by event to have a meaningful comparison.

Wow, 16 divisions for 78 players. EVERYBODY'S A WINNER! YAAAAAAAY!

Simply astonishing.

Wow, 16 divisions for 78 players. EVERYBODY'S A WINNER! YAAAAAAAY!

Simply astonishing.



Yet I cannot get one thing through to them. They are just catering to the newer AMs though and they aren't huge events. Notice the lack of Pros, I got $90 for 1st out of 7 at the last one I played.

We could probably check the actual computer stats and I suspect we won't find much inflation in the average number of divisions actually contested at events. We may have more different ones potentially available but fewer than 10 at any particular event with 6-7 being typical.




If they are seldom contested, then why have them at all? Oh yeah right - so those people who only play one or two events a year aren't discouraged. Makes perfect sense (also avoids the issue of competition overlap nicely - although I doubt it was intentional.)

We could probably check the actual computer stats and I suspect we won't find much inflation in the average number of divisions actually contested at events. We may have more different ones potentially available but fewer than 10 at any particular event with 6-7 being typical.




If they are seldom contested, then why have them at all? Oh yeah right - so those people who only play one or two events a year aren't discouraged. Makes perfect sense (also avoids the issue of competition overlap nicely - although I doubt it was intentional.)




Some of those in the small divisions show up to every one even if they have to play by themselves. :confused:

offering so many choices is part of the problem isnt it?

btw, W's approval ratings were &gt;60% for some time. were those folks right?

[QUOTE]
The unfortunate history of the PDGA administration is that the toughest decisions have always been avoided. ...

- Disagree. Do you think getting rid of FDM wasnt a tough(est) decision? I'd say anything involving a change of magazine and lawyers on both sides qualifies as a tough(est) decision ...

But it sure would be refreshing to see someone willing to act on these important issues instead of pretending they don't exist.
/quote]

That may be a tough decision for people north of the Border but most people here would see that after FDM not fulfilling its obligation/contract that it would be a very easy decision to get rid of them. Now there may be those who may have thought they needed another shot who may have made for discussion on the issue but the underlying question of to keep them or not is pretty simple.

Maybe the PDGA should have polled that too. ;)

The unfortunate history of the PDGA administration is that the toughest decisions have always been avoided. ...

- Disagree. Do you think getting rid of FDM wasnt a tough(est) decision? I'd say anything involving a change of magazine and lawyers on both sides qualifies as a tough(est) decision ...



Well personally Brian, as an issue for the player organization, I put dealing with the magazine a ways down the list of important issues when comparing it to the competitive system that is at the core of the PDGA's actual reason for existing. The magazine is an amenity, the competitive system is the primary element/focus in our mission statement. As such, I think it's fair to say it has NOT been the focus of leadership for virtually the entire time I have been a member.


But it sure would be refreshing to see someone willing to act on these important issues instead of pretending they don't exist.

- Just who is pretending they don't exist ???


Well gee Brian, you tell me. If we started talking about there being to many divisions at the BOD meeting at Worlds in Detroit in 1992, continued talking about it through those same annual meetings through 1995 - only to have it not even be acknowledged in the meeting minutes - who do you suppose was ignoring it? The membership? Easy for them to do when the BOD wouldn't even acknowledge the issue being discussed ad nauseum at their own meetings. It wasn't long after the BOD stopped having a meeting at Worlds - so collective member input was basically set aside as "inconvenient". (Granted I haven't been to Worlds in a while - maybe they started up again? I'd be pleasantly surprised if that was the case.)


Let's say the PDGA includes questions on event formulas in its next survey, which as if I recall correctly was seen as an upcoming priority at the fall summit. If 62% of members say they support the existing system which favors ages and genders and pro/am status over ratings, resulting in an "overlap" from a ratings perspective, as is the case in the divisional system of many sports, would you agree that the issue has been addressed and the people have spoken? Or would you continue to argue that this is a still an important issue that the PDGA pretends doesnt exist???



Well gee let's consider this. Let's ask all the folks who have been around less than 10 years (easily the majority of current PDGA members) if the entitlement scheme they were bred on is what they prefer - I wonder what answer you'd get? I would have to answer in the negative, if this is your idea of "addressing" the issue. I'd go further and say that the cost of such a survey would be a waste of member resources. Asking someone to express a preference involving something they've never experienced will not yield credible answers - and in no way shows either intitative OR leadership.


Personally I'd like to see the PDGA, as it has done with X-tiers, Ratings based events, Pros playing Am, Ams playing Pro, and now SuperClass, try out the G (for Gangloff) Tier, based on "the issues" and its success at the recent Seneca Soiree. And if 62% of members surveyed said G tier is the way to go then of course the PDGA would be wrong not to offer and promote it as a principal competition format. Getting TDs from coast to coast to go for it is of course another challenge ...
BDH



I'd love to see the very same thing - thanks for your support :) Because I believe that ACTUALLY doing/trying something different is inherently more valuable than just talking about it. And such a survey might actually prove credible because it would have a basis in actual experience.
I have been contacted by a couple people about the sliding scale format - and am anxious to hear how successful their efforts are. The only detractors I've heard from about the Soiree were people that weren't there.

How about it - sign up for the G TIER TODAY!! :D

Wow, 16 divisions for 78 players. EVERYBODY'S A WINNER! YAAAAAAAY!

Simply astonishing.



in general I am in agreement with Craig, and look forward to trying out a similar format to the soriee in the future. But I think the one area where small divisions should be allowed is amateur women, where the differences in skill are so great, and also except for the better adv. women they cannot be competitive in the intermediate division.

however if say 5 adv women show up, 5 intermediate, and a basically new female player, I do not think she should have her own division. However the TD should make sure she feels comfortable playing with more experienced players( we all know someone like this i think, XXX's wife who plays 4 times a year and maybe 1 tournament). and what someone like that SHOULD NOT have to do is play with the juniors just because she is in last( or has a small division that is 1 card + 1 leftover).


speaking of which there's something the PDGA has completely failed to do- increase participation of women in disc golf, and especially disc golf tournaments. Oh I am sure guru or BG will come on here and point to some % figure that shows attendance of women is up, but the game in general is growing. We still have a drastically gender-biased game, and they do not care.

nvm

far better to attack the poster than address the post, huh Neil? craig speaks the truth. you wont answer directly because of the answer you'd need to give.



You'll note I wasn't responding to Craig...

Unfortunately I don't have the time today to respond to anything here (or at least until much later), which is irritating