During my college days, a group of radical students regularly published an "alternative" newspaper called, appropriately enough, "The Gadfly".
Because it was interesting, fairly well-written, and was willing to take on the powers that be, it was regularly read. However, I now look back and have to say that it didn't make any impact whatsoever on what was happening at the college, town, or world in general. Most here might see it as yellow journalism.
In my most cynical moments, I fear that is what we might have become.
However, I really don't believe that. There are a LOT of seminal issues at the fore right now that will determine the future of the game. Issues related to the cost of the game, the direction of architecture, the impact of equipment, the disparities between classic architecture and modern trends, the pure aerial game, environmental issues, etc.
If there is not a public forum for those issues to be addressed and information shared between concerned individuals, then the game is none the better.
It seems to me that most of the people who post here, while we may disagree on particulars, favor a game that is simpler, less costly, more fun, more in tune with nature, more basic, more strategic, more taking advantage of natural resources and attributes than modifying them, and more challenging in a way that respects the past, recognizes the present, but seeks to educate for a better future.
As Neal Meagher suggests, now is hardly the time to become discouraged or disenchanted. I think we are much more read than is generally acknowledged and if there is a more urbane, knowledgable, and articulate group discussing any subject on the Internet, I haven't seen it.
What's more, the simple fact is, WE ARE GOING TO PISS PEOPLE OFF! If we disagree fundamentally with a person, or club, or company, or ruling body, they are not going to like what we have to say one bit. Not that we should go out of our way to be impolite or purposefully insulting, but I certainly reserve the right to say that the work I've seen of architect X is boring, non-interesting, and a pile of dung. I'll be happy to discuss why I think so, and will listen carefully and open-mindedly to opposing arguments.
That's called honest discourse, gentleman, and we shouldn't be ashamed for engaging in it.
Look at this another way. In my view, a golf course architect is producing a functional work of art. At each architect's disposal are hundreds of acres of God's green earth, expensive property in capitalist terms, and probably the most public and visible canvas of any professional endeavor I can think of.
Where the Hell did we ever get the idea that the men who shape this land for our recreational pleasure are somehow beyond criticism and reproach???
In other cases, an architect is charged with preserving or improving an already wonderful work of art. If they screw it up, should we just sit back and say..."oh well, guess he had an off day! What's gone is gone".
Of course not! Does anyone really believe that there is not even a subliminal benefit to the fact that people know that there is a very public forum where work will be discussed passionately??
Once again, if I were to suggest anything, we should keep our comments to the work itself, and not to personalities and personal attacks. That might give us some more general acceptance, but I'd also hate to see the passion I sense in many posts diminished in any way.
I am continually impressed with the level of knowledge and passion of those who post here. I think, as Neal suggests, that we are simply saying the things that need to be said, and that we will ultimately be a force for positive good in the game.