#411  
Old 08-16-2013, 11:02 AM
coupe coupe is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 294
Quote:
Originally Posted by _MTL_ View Post
Yes, he finished third.

It's the most logical and fair choice.
That's assuming Mr. Sinclair would have been the third choice of the majority of those who voted for Mr. Shive, which may or may not have been the case.

Mr. Sinclair garnered 5 more votes than Mr. West (1131 vs. 1126, out of 3861 ballots cast). Regardless of the vote for Mr. Shive had been split among the other candidates, if six more of Mr. Shive's supporters had voted for Mr. West than for Mr. Sinclair, Mr. West would have won by one vote.

Unfortunately, there is no way of identifying the 1434 members who voted for Mr. Shive and finding out who they would have voted for instead. That's why the timing of Mr. Shive's abrupt resignation is unconscionable and amounts to flipping a bird at the very "little people" he claimed to represent.

Last edited by coupe; 08-16-2013 at 11:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #412  
Old 08-16-2013, 11:14 AM
coupe coupe is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 294
Note: I'm not saying Mr. Sinclair (who I think would be an excellent choice) is not qualified, or that he should not be appointed to fill the vacancy; only that the argument for appointing him based primarily or exclusively on his having finished third is not as cut-and-dried as it appears on the surface.
Reply With Quote
  #413  
Old 08-16-2013, 11:24 AM
mfcastillo17's Avatar
mfcastillo17 mfcastillo17 is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Years Playing: 8
Courses Played: 71
Posts: 317
Quote:
Originally Posted by Script View Post
I'm not sure what to say. I'm gonna go with "weak sauce".
Took the words right out of my mouth. Either way I didn't vote for Shive so I'm happy about it. I guess when the going gets tough.........
Reply With Quote
  #414  
Old 08-16-2013, 12:01 PM
Discette's Avatar
Discette Discette is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Years Playing: 17.6
Courses Played: 232
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by shive View Post
On August 3 I informed Brian Graham and Rebecca Duffy (Board president) that, although elected, I would not take office when the new terms start September 1. I recommended that Shawn Sinclair be appointed to take my place.

The main reason for my action is that Board members have a duty of loyalty that I would not be able to fulfill. After my oh-fer of June and July, documented by several of you who posted snippets of meeting minutes on this thread, I have given up hope of ever being able to accomplish anything significant for the little people from service on the Board. Instead of working optimistically for positive goals, I would likely spend the next term working pessimistically (and unsuccessfully) to obstruct other Board members from enacting programs that they clearly believe in. That is an impossibly negative prospect. It is also dishonest because it is actively disloyal. I need to get out of their way and let them do their thing.

WORST TIMING EVER!!!


Peter, I voted for you because I thought we shared a common view of what the PDGA should (and shouldn't) be doing. I voted for you because I wanted MY(your) voice to be heard at BOD meetings. Even if you felt like you were tilting at windmills, you were doing it on MY behalf and for the other 1433 people that voted for you!

I think you wrongly assumed your view was solely pessimistic and that you would have nothing positive to contribute. Even if you were going to be in the minority in voting, your dissension would be part of the record.

Now I feel my vote was completely wasted and our point of view will NOT be heard at BOD meetings. At least ask the BOD to appoint someone that held similar views to yourself.
Reply With Quote
  #415  
Old 08-16-2013, 12:02 PM
elnino's Avatar
elnino elnino is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: dc
Years Playing: 5.5
Courses Played: 15
Posts: 2,043
timing might be bad but i like how he told the board why and now he is going to try to do things the way he dreams it should be. i say well done. okay the timing is not perfect but one can not control everything all the time.
Reply With Quote
  #416  
Old 08-16-2013, 12:18 PM
ScottyLove ScottyLove is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Years Playing: 2.6
Courses Played: 77
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Discette View Post
WORST TIMING EVER!!!


Peter, I voted for you because I thought we shared a common view of what the PDGA should (and shouldn't) be doing. I voted for you because I wanted MY(your) voice to be heard at BOD meetings. Even if you felt like you were tilting at windmills, you were doing it on MY behalf and for the other 1433 people that voted for you!

I think you wrongly assumed your view was solely pessimistic and that you would have nothing positive to contribute. Even if you were going to be in the minority in voting, your dissension would be part of the record.

Now I feel my vote was completely wasted and our point of view will NOT be heard at BOD meetings. At least ask the BOD to appoint someone that held similar views to yourself.
^^^ This! Count me as one of the 1433 voices that were just silenced.
Reply With Quote
  #417  
Old 08-16-2013, 01:00 PM
shive shive is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Laramie, Wyoming
Posts: 109
The consensus here is shared by at least one Board member, who said, ďI neither understand Peter's reasoning nor respect it. I believe any credibility he has established and his effectiveness to make change (post Board) will be greatly diminished. Congratulations Peter on becoming the first PDGA Board director to quit twice. You've set the bar for the Hall of Shame in the service sector . . . .Ē

I made my decision shortly after the second Conflict of Interest debacle in July and could have resigned then. Why didnít I? Because I expected (and hoped) to lose the election, and could thus have avoided the resignation flap altogether. It was worth the gamble. The fallout would have been just as bad if I had resigned in mid-July because you canít reboot an election after people have started voting.

Either way we would have been faced with the ambiguity between appointing Shawn Sinclair or Dave West. I recommended Shawn because he finished third, and I believed that the Board only wanted to consider my position at this time. There are other unfilled positions, and the Board could also appoint Dave in the future. I hope they do.

I donít have any problem with appointments of people who do well in elections, as Shawn and Dave did. My problem is with appointments of nonelected positions. I opposed the reappointment of Bob Decker before the election for that reason. Do you realize that if I had not resigned the Board would have precisely recreated itself by reappointment (Decker) and election (McCoy and myself)? I feel that the Board needs new blood. To put it another way, if only one of us could serve, better Shawn than I. That was in fact a minor factor in my decision.
Reply With Quote
  #418  
Old 08-16-2013, 01:16 PM
Dave242's Avatar
Dave242 Dave242 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake Forest, IL
Years Playing: 19.9
Courses Played: 363
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 4,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by shive View Post
I made my decision shortly after the second Conflict of Interest debacle in July and could have resigned then. Why didn’t I? Because I expected (and hoped) to lose the election, and could thus have avoided the resignation flap altogether. It was worth the gamble. The fallout would have been just as bad if I had resigned in mid-July because you can’t reboot an election after people have started voting.
I want to buy this....but I don't because what you are essentially saying is that one event (debacle) made you change your mind. I am speculating that you are probably thinking/meaning that this debacle was "the straw that broke the camel's back"....since there have been previous debacles (per your post).

If this is the case, then you knew the lay of the land well before throwing your name in the ring and had to be strongly inclined already to have this attitude of how you couldn't rightfully serve on the BoD. So, you should have withdrawn your name earlier (or not even run).

If this was not the case (straw that broke....), then you should be rising above one debacle for the greater good of those who elected you. You signed up for that possibility when you decided to run.

My opinion only.
Reply With Quote
  #419  
Old 08-16-2013, 01:23 PM
smyith's Avatar
smyith smyith is offline
Suffers from Delusions of Grandeur
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Crystal Lake, IL
Years Playing: 12.6
Courses Played: 129
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by shive View Post
The consensus here is shared by at least one Board member, who said, ďI neither understand Peter's reasoning nor respect it. I believe any credibility he has established and his effectiveness to make change (post Board) will be greatly diminished. Congratulations Peter on becoming the first PDGA Board director to quit twice. You've set the bar for the Hall of Shame in the service sector . . . .Ē

I made my decision shortly after the second Conflict of Interest debacle in July and could have resigned then. Why didnít I? Because I expected (and hoped) to lose the election, and could thus have avoided the resignation flap altogether. It was worth the gamble. The fallout would have been just as bad if I had resigned in mid-July because you canít reboot an election after people have started voting.

Either way we would have been faced with the ambiguity between appointing Shawn Sinclair or Dave West. I recommended Shawn because he finished third, and I believed that the Board only wanted to consider my position at this time. There are other unfilled positions, and the Board could also appoint Dave in the future. I hope they do.

I donít have any problem with appointments of people who do well in elections, as Shawn and Dave did. My problem is with appointments of nonelected positions. I opposed the reappointment of Bob Decker before the election for that reason. Do you realize that if I had not resigned the Board would have precisely recreated itself by reappointment (Decker) and election (McCoy and myself)? I feel that the Board needs new blood. To put it another way, if only one of us could serve, better Shawn than I. That was in fact a minor factor in my decision.
you need to stop posting about this. you are just losing more and more respect. you've got great ideas and foresight, but you lack responsibility and stamina.

on the bolded section
an honorable man would have still resigned not gambled. even if you resigned mid election, some of those 1400 people had not voted yet im sure. they could have voted for someone else. the pDGA could've sent out an email that you were no longer electable. and possibly (idk how the system works) allowed for those who did vote for you already to recast a single vote for one of the other candidates.
And who cares if the BoD had re-made itself again. it was voted that way. people wanted your voice there, especially your standard position of dissent against the wrong ideas. people wanted McCoy there again cause he has forward thinking ideas.
Reply With Quote
 
  

  #420  
Old 08-16-2013, 01:30 PM
disc qualified disc qualified is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: more cowbell
Posts: 897
open, honest communication without an agenda is a wonderful thing when it comes from people who want to be leaders



unfortunately, it's about as rare as unicorn farts
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.