79 replies to this topic

[Dire Wolf]

RickKimbrell, on 07 August 2012 - 01:05 PM, said:

Oops, sorry, missed the emoticon.  I rescind the "tude" remark.  But, I still disagree with putting out in a tournament until your group is all present or someone tells you to go ahead and play out.  Just not good to do.  And, as I stated before, disagree with the DQ too.

Agree somewhat.  He didn't break any rules and they were told to play "ready golf", not "ready golf except for putting".

We all look back and, with the knowledge of what these guys were like, can advise him to be extremely cautious around them.   But up to that point all their efforts were to try and exclude him from the competition.  He had no way of knowing that they would make up a rule and penalize him for following instructions.  Sounds like he was blindsided.

This happened on the 3rd hole, so why didn't they say anything then?  Because, by my guess, they got together after the round and tried to find ANYTHING he'd done that could be construed as wrong.  They probably didn't know the rules very well, and this was the worst they could come up with.

The DQ is definitely BS.  I wonder if his marker was DQd for signing a scorecard he should've known was "incorrect"?

[rogolf]

esketores, on 06 August 2012 - 09:52 AM, said:

"The Committee" needs to be sanctioned.
Do write the USGA. As previously noted they do respond and resond in a timely manner.

Note that he lives and plays in Canada, and the USGA have no jurisdiction there - it's covered by the RCGA.

[Truman]

It always takes a season or more to find your place in a new club.

[Cwing]

3 sides to every story. Your side, their side and the truth. I too am guessing there is something missing here as we are only hearing the story from your perspective.

[Dire Wolf]

Why?  Is there some reason to believe this guy is lying?  You are essentially calling him a liar by saying his version is not the truth.

[rvgolfer]

Cwing isnt saying the OP is lying, only that we are hearing the story from only one perspective.  Its entirely possible that both sides believe they are telling the truth, while having a completely different perspective.

[Cwing]

rvgolfer, on 08 August 2012 - 07:53 PM, said:

Cwing isnt saying the OP is lying, only that we are hearing the story from only one perspective.  Its entirely possible that both sides believe they are telling the truth, while having a completely different perspective.

^This.

I don't know and to my knowledge have never met the OP.  However, i have been around long enough to know perspective can  cloud the truth.

The OP may have been screwed over or there may be more to the story, we are unlikely to know.

Edited by Cwing, 08 August 2012 - 08:02 PM.

[Dire Wolf]

rvgolfer, on 08 August 2012 - 07:53 PM, said:

Cwing isnt saying the OP is lying, only that we are hearing the story from only one perspective.  Its entirely possible that both sides believe they are telling the truth, while having a completely different perspective.

That's not how I read it.  If you say there are 3 sides, both parties and the truth, and you "guess" that you're missing some key info, you're saying you don't believe someone.  What reason for that is there, other than the false broad-brush application of the "wisdom" that the truth always lies in the middle (which is in fact a logical fallacy)?

If someone wants to say, as I did, that IF what we're reading is true then X, that's one thing.  That's conditional.  But to just assume there's missing, relevant information does...what exactly, other than cast aspersions on the poster?

This is not just about this thread or one post.  I see this all the time on various message boards and other forums.  It's part of a broader epidemic of "internet logic" that's seeping into real life.

[Cwing]

My point is that each party will have a perception of the events that occurred and the OP believes what he posted. I also believe the others involved would likely have a different perception of those same events. The last part would be all the facts with none of the perceptions of the individual's involved.

That makes 3.

Edited by Cwing, 08 August 2012 - 08:20 PM.

[Dire Wolf]

Cwing, on 08 August 2012 - 08:18 PM, said:

My point is that each party will have a perception of the events that occurred and the OP believes what he posted. I also believe the others involved would likely have a different perception of those same events. The last part would be all the facts with none of the perceptions of the individual's involved.

That makes 3.

I understood that, thank you.  I'm just saying that's not necessarily true, and is an assumption.

[poizster]

Dang this thread is making me weary of joining a club. I've been seriously considering it for the past 6 months. Found a club that offers a great intermediate membership, great golf course, facilites, etc. But similar to the OP I'm a 26 year old +2, is this behavior common to receive for a younger player that might threaten the club championship? How disheartening.

[rvgolfer]

My experience is that country clubs will have a variety of souls, just like the general population.  For the majority of your rounds, you will likely end up with a compatible group that have similar playing skills.

Will there be issues at times, yes, but you need to look at the overall experience, rather than isolated incidents.  I have seen several rather ugly incidents at my club, and likely there were more that I am not aware of, but by far, my experience was very enjoyable.  With proper handicapping, you should be able to play in almost any group, and there shouldnt be all that much jealousy or issues.  Just make sure the club you join has 8 or so scratch golfers somewhat close to your age.

It will help if you can get a firmly  established handicap and get to make friends with a few members with similar golf skills before you enter your first big tourney.  My experience is that the existing members actually want competition and better golfers rather than try to stifle it.

[mshills]

rvgolfer, on 08 August 2012 - 09:01 PM, said:

I have seen several rather ugly incidents at my club, and likely there were more that I am not aware of...

I suspect this is also illegal in Georgia.  

[Bluefan75]

For what it's worth, the OP posted this exact same thing on another board, and the course was revealed and he had the thread taken down.

Which leads many, including myself, the go with the "there's another side to this story were not getting" part.

[teejaywhy]

Cwing, on 08 August 2012 - 07:39 PM, said:

3 sides to every story. Your side, their side and the truth. I too am guessing there is something missing here as we are only hearing the story from your perspective.

Dire Wolf, on 08 August 2012 - 07:46 PM, said:

Why?  Is there some reason to believe this guy is lying?  You are essentially calling him a liar by saying his version is not the truth.

Is this really an unfamiliar axiom to you?

[Dire Wolf]

teejaywhy, on 10 August 2012 - 02:42 PM, said:

Cwing, on 08 August 2012 - 07:39 PM, said:

3 sides to every story. Your side, their side and the truth. I too am guessing there is something missing here as we are only hearing the story from your perspective.

Dire Wolf, on 08 August 2012 - 07:46 PM, said:

Why?  Is there some reason to believe this guy is lying?  You are essentially calling him a liar by saying his version is not the truth.

Is this really an unfamiliar axiom to you?

No, it's not unfamiliar, it's just not true.  Is this an unfamiliar logical fallacy to you?

http://www.nizkor.or...dle-ground.html

[KYMAR]

MtlJeff, on 06 August 2012 - 10:09 AM, said:

OP, do you want to stay at the club? Is it convenient for you, are the rates good? I mean a lot of people are telling you to take action, which could potentially only make this worse. Maybe they screwed you, you don't need to be a martyr if this club really is a good fit for you in other ways. Talking to the pro is a good idea, but if you want to stay, i'd tread carefully, be respectful and just ask questions. Not go in there making threads and waving your arms. I know a guy who burned his bridges at like 3 clubs because he was a bit of a hothead. We don't know the whole story but is everyone this bad? I have to think eventually this will sort itself out. At my current club a guy was telling me a story of how he was DQ'd in an event a couple of years ago because someone complained about something really inconsequential. It happens because some members like to complain about things. It doesn't mean we're a bad club.

Had to be Thrillhouse.

[teejaywhy]

Dire Wolf, on 10 August 2012 - 02:47 PM, said:

No, it's not unfamiliar, it's just not true.  Is this an unfamiliar logical fallacy to you?

http://www.nizkor.or...dle-ground.html

It only becomes fallacy when one automatically assumes middle ground.

"Three sides to every story" is supposed to be a humorous extension to the common notion there are "Two sides to every story."
http://dictionary.re...om/browse/humor

Judges have to hear both sides and rule on the outcome every day,  Does that mean our legal system is based on a fallacy?  No, because the Judge does not assume middle ground, he may rule 100% on one side or the other, or somewhere in between based on the evidence presented.

We have only one side of the story.

[poizster]

teejaywhy, on 10 August 2012 - 08:23 PM, said:

Dire Wolf, on 10 August 2012 - 02:47 PM, said:

No, it's not unfamiliar, it's just not true.  Is this an unfamiliar logical fallacy to you?

http://www.nizkor.or...dle-ground.html

It only becomes fallacy when one automatically assumes middle ground.

"Three sides to every story" is supposed to be a humorous extension to the common notion there are "Two sides to every story."
http://dictionary.re...om/browse/humor

Judges have to hear both sides and rule on the outcome every day,  Does that mean our legal system is based on a fallacy?  No, because the Judge does not assume middle ground, he may rule 100% on one side or the other, or somewhere in between based on the evidence presented.

We have only one side of the story.

Dire Wolf just got

[Dire Wolf]

poizster, on 11 August 2012 - 12:27 AM, said:

teejaywhy, on 10 August 2012 - 08:23 PM, said:

Dire Wolf, on 10 August 2012 - 02:47 PM, said:

No, it's not unfamiliar, it's just not true.  Is this an unfamiliar logical fallacy to you?

http://www.nizkor.or...dle-ground.html

It only becomes fallacy when one automatically assumes middle ground.

"Three sides to every story" is supposed to be a humorous extension to the common notion there are "Two sides to every story."
http://dictionary.re...om/browse/humor

Judges have to hear both sides and rule on the outcome every day,  Does that mean our legal system is based on a fallacy?  No, because the Judge does not assume middle ground, he may rule 100% on one side or the other, or somewhere in between based on the evidence presented.

We have only one side of the story.

Dire Wolf just got
(image removed)

Uh, no.  This is not a court of law.  This is a message board.  And on it we have people ASSUMING that the OP is omitting details that will somehow change our ability to analyze the situation.  Yet we can always analyze what we're told, with the disclaimer that it presumes we have an accurate account, which we MIGHT, as I've already said.

There is no need to cast aspersions on the OP's story, and no reason to nitpick his posts for hints of "attitude" or whatever in order to concoct some hidden agenda.  There is no final, binding verdict being handed down.  Plus, you're kind of proving my point by referencing a court of law, in that no judge is going to assume the truth is somewhere in the middle of the two sides he's hearing, and therefore constantly rule in favor of some kind of compromise based solely on that "axiom".

"3 sides" is an assumption, and is not true.  You can't have it both ways by claiming it's an axiom, but also a joke.  Also, humor is supposed to be funny.  Don't quit your day jobs.

(edited for typo)

Edited by Dire Wolf, 11 August 2012 - 11:55 AM.