Not that it even matters now, but John never talked to me directly about my response nor did he have my permission to post or send anything. I never even knew this list was being compiled until I got an email about "what I said". I was never asked any of this by him (Edan posed the question) and my only comment about it was during the November meeting. I stated that it should go to John, but I got to thinking about the situation and then was undecided. However, Zoe called me (days after the meeting) and asked me about the situation and I explained how I was on the fence about the matter. I was also told (by her) that she was going to be calling everyone about the issue to see what they thought. I never gave an answer either way other than to say at the end that I don't care and want this to be over. The USDGC point series bid has DOMINATED conversation and ADGA meetings since this was brought up.
If the ADGA created the need for the State Coordinator, then why didn't we put a stop to the point series when that was a topic of discussion? There was some very spirited conversation about doing that and contacting the PDGA.
I've constantly heard that it is up to the SC to make these decisions as that is what they're elected for. An official must exercise his judgment and his skills, but his duty is to place these at the service of a higher authority; ultimately he is responsible only for the impartial execution of assigned tasks and must sacrifice his personal judgment if it runs counter to his official duties. I think that if the end result is ANYTHING but John going to the USDC most everyone involved in this hearing will think it is Edan trying to quell John. Even when Edan does make the decision and has an objective view on the matter. There is bad blood between John and Edan and it almost seems like people are campaigning for one side of the other instead of TRULY looking at this whole situation objectively and making a decision. Friendship with whomever and emotion have no jurisdiction in this argument. So if you can’t remove that from yourself and make a decision based on that, I think that what is said by each person doesn’t matter or contribute to this decision making process.
If I had never been quoted in saying something I didn’t and with “my permission”, I would have never posted anything on this subject here. Since false information is running about, I thought it necessary to say something (makes you wonder what else might be false). Just by stating falsities of the matter takes credibility away from the argument in my opinion. Also, I’m not on anyone’s side, my response is also to invoke critical and objective thought processes. This is not a matter of calling anyone out listed, it is purely about stating the facts as I know them. For this to be taken otherwise in a negative connatation shows that you missed the point entirely and didn’t ask me for clarification and furthers your ability to (still) not think objectively.