PDGA propaganda

[veganray]

WTF is with the PDGA's newly-published "BOD Voter's Guide"? While purporting to be an unbiased clinic on how a member should decide for whom to vote (an uncomfortable nanny-org thing in its own right), it cunningly attempts to influence members' voting toward the candidates that the org's "powers that be" prefer. Such gems as "Candidates who have long, successful experience in PDGA work have a clear advantage in our evaluation process" and "Candidates who you don’t know are impossible to assess on some of the key factors and also may gain advantage by presenting biographical information that is not reflective of their true abilities" are obviously attempts to sway voters toward incumbents (such as Messrs. Decker & Feldberg), "good ol' boy network" establishment candidates (such as Messrs. Pozzy & Decker), & "household name (lol)" hot-shot pro players (such as Messrs. Feldberg & McCoy) to the detriment of other candidates.

As I am no longer a PDGA member, it affects me little, but the damage to candidates such as Messrs. Solt, Schafer, & Hicks and Ms. Duffy is not arguable. As such, it is absolutely unconscionable that the org should publish such an obvious piece of propaganda. I strongly encourage you PDGA members to call bullshit on the PDGA's attempt at controlling your minds & vote for the candidates that it is obviously steering you against. I also ask that someone post this to the PDGA site for discussion, because this kind of behavior cannot be tolerated.

[Frank Delicious]

split this out from the crazy that was the rest of the thread.

[new013]

what's the line about power and corruption again?

[Smigles]

Wow Frank that was a drastic cut ^^ Probably for the better though. Thanks.

[JHern]

Of course its a good idea to have some published information to make a more informed judgment. I'm a member of several large scientific societies, and they always have something like that to help us decide in our elections. But the organization itself never actually endorses a particular candidate, I agree that would be wrong.

The best way is to have each candidate to provide a brief bio sketch, make a statement (limit the length to a certain number of characters), submit a photo, and then invite several supporting statements from other people (explicit signed endorsements) describing why they support that particular candidate...these people should be chosen by the candidate themselves. This should be published in Disc Golfer Magazine, for all the membership to read, well before the election occurs.

Anyways, it is nice to read the candidate statements, there are quite a few people who I'd like to vote for, with lots of energy and ideas being aired. I like that. You're right that the "voter's guide" bit is over-the-top (even providing a score sheet!), but I don't know that it will really influence anybody's vote in any particular direction. People will like the candidates they like for their own very personal reasons, and that will outweigh any other considerations.