On Nov 15th, Bruce wrote “5 golfers joined: David (17) Jockey John (26), Ralph (36), Brian(25) and Egbert (25)…… Winner was Ralph 35 pts, second Egbert 32 pts, Brian and Jockey John 28 pts, David 26 pts. Putting that in a form easier to read.
Egbert ( a member) entered his score on Birdie as 98. Brian (a member) entered his score on Birdie as 107. Either Bruce got it wrong on the post or the 2 members got it wrong posting it to Birdie.
From Jan 2015 til Aug 2017 — USGA handicaps were kept in my computer. The entire time anyone could question or ask for a copy of the theirs or anyone’s recent scores. All scores were on the blog and it was very easy to check for accuracy (not that anyone ever did).
From Sept 2017 til June 2018 — It was the same only it was done in by Graham on his computer.
On May 24, 2018 — This appeared on the SMAF blog. It is worth reading again. At the time I said that there was no way all the members are capable of maintaining their handicaps accurately and it was open to manipulation. I asked why the members weren’t consulted first before the change — the answer: We didn’t need to ask them. I asked why do it now? The answer — We can’t tell you that. I asked what are you covering up? They didn’t answer. The Birdie selling points were it is peer reviewable, not a burden on the Fairness Specialist, and good for outside competitions. Of course, this would help them play golf and have fun. Suspecting something was wrong I went back and compiled all the information off the blog from the time I handed it off to Graham.
On June 19th, 2018 — This appeared on the SMAF blog. I had noticed that Birdie wasn’t correctly calculating the Santiburi scores and that there were numerous errors with the member’s score postings. Rather than alerting the members to the errors and embarrassing the administrators I sent them an email advising them of the errors and that I was prepared to go the members with the information. I gave them a choice. Didn’t I have a responsibility to the fellow members to tell them their handicaps were wrong if the administrators weren’t prepared to correct their error? Rather than wait to see how I presented it to the members they published my private email and then they chose to attack me. They accused me of having a stunning disregard for ethics when they published a private communication!
From this point forward I continued to maintain the handicaps in the same manner I always had done. Once Birdie had corrected their error regarding Santiburi handicaps I then input all the information into Birdie. Some members objected that I was doing their handicaps correctly and requested Birdie to stop me. Birdie allowed me to continue as long as I used fake names.
What was their response? Once Bruce took over the blog postings most of the scores weren’t recorded on the blog. I have no access to the scores now.
Going back to the selling points on why switch to Birdie — it’s peer reviewable (not now it isn’t). It’s not a burden on the Fairness Specialist (I don’t consider it a burden.) Do you think that other golfers in Chiang Rai and Chiang Mai are not aware that SMAF handicaps are rubbish? How long do you think others will lose to SMAF members and not start asking questions?
I have said from the beginning of all this that the members deserve to have accurate handicaps. I have offered to do it or train another to do it. Yet 5Points has requested that members don’t allow me to keep their handicaps.
Over and over I did a peer review and reported all the mistakes. No one cared. Now anyone can enter anything and no one will notice. Why allow it? No one can tell me why you allow members to input rubbish when there is someone willing to do it for all of them correctly.
Is it about control? I have stated over and over again that I don’t want control. I want the members to have correct handicaps. I think that 5Points has fought me on this because he made the decision without consulting the members to switch to Birdie. It seemed like a good idea at the time. He is the boss and no one should dare to disagree with him. You certainly can’t tell him he is wrong about anything. Rather than admit he made a mistake he would rather accuse me of using unethical practices such as coercion and blackmail. He defended rubbish handicaps as acceptable because most of the members are hackers that can win on any given day. Isn’t that a contradiction? At first they wanted peer reviewable handicaps then they say “it becomes ridiculous to worry about whether a particular golfer’s handicap is 25.4, 24.8, or 23.4”. Does anyone truly believe that it is easier to play golf and have fun when your handicap is wrong?
I gave the members accurate, correct handicaps. The leadership rejected it and forced me to stop. At this point all I can do is offer to get it right for the members in the future should they want it. You just need to ask.