You call this discussing ARCHITECTURE ?

[paul cowley]

Turboe my man ....spoken like a true semi-god [just 9 more posts to go!]

Hey ....maybe we could set up a 'Gods Corner' kind of thing, with a hotline where questions could be asked of the Gods...."Mr Diety, what type of Cabernet would you prefer to drink along with your Ragout after a long day trudging the gray skied fields searching for the perfect combination of length and quirk in your new routing?"

[PThomas]

Hey ....maybe we could set up a 'Gods Corner' kind of thing, with a hotline where questions could be asked of the Gods...."Mr Diety, what type of Cabernet would you prefer to drink along with your Ragout after a long day trudging the gray skied fields searching for the perfect combination of length and quirk in your new routing?"

and I wouldn't even charge that much for a response Paul!

and no wine questions, I don't drink the shit...I have a more sophisticated palate regarding things like the best pizas in CHicago...

[Joe Hancock]

Brian,

Not everyone was lost on your jab at Pat ie the wind thread. Too obvious, matter of fact.

If I thought I had enough intelligence to have it insulted, the assumption that your wind thread was clever enough to trick me might have done it.....

Joe

[Michael Moore]

But the reality is that other than threads about grass or rules, every thread on GCA is fundamentally a "where have I played list".  

"We don't see the world as it is. We see the world as we are." - Anais Nin

[PThomas]

But the reality is that other than threads about grass or rules, every thread on GCA is fundamentally a "where have I played list".  

I strongly disagree

[Emmy]

Here’s my 2-cents worth….I enjoy the GCA site as it stands, even with its odd twists-and-turns, now and then. While the primary path should focus on related elements of golf course architecture, it seems to me there’s nothing wrong with an occasional, side-road thread.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Shivas & DMoriarty,

You'll notice that those who create mindless off topic threads rarely start substantive, interesting architectural threads, and that those objecting to my criticism of OT threads rarely post interesting, thought provoking architectural threads.

Clearly, they have interests that don't center on golf course architecture.

JAL & Voytek,

I don't see either of you creating many interesting threads.

Rather than criticize my criticism of nonsensical OT threads and the dilution of the quality of the site, why don't you step up to the plate and contribute more in the way of initiating creative, interesting architectural threads on you own ?

I've received well over a dozen IM's thanking me for taking exception to some of the drivel posted on this site.

You can either revel in, and encourage the lowest common denominator or you can help to improve the quality of individual threads and this website in general, the choice is yours.

Stop whining and get off your ass and create a number of interesting topics for discussion.

Action speaks louder than words, do something ... make positive contributions to this site.

Ran Morrissett has stated that the purpose of the discussion group section is:
[size=4x]
A free access board for the discussion of golf course architecture related matters.[/size]

The least you could do would be to honor his wishes.

[Garland Bayley]

I have to wonder how Huckaby does it. He says he can't believe people don't have time to go to page five to find things they are interested in. I can't believe he has time to go to page 5 and post all he does and still serve his employer adequately.

As for Tom Paul, I have always assumed that he was retired.

As for me, I am the typical plodding reader/writer that ends up and engineer. I seldom have time to get to page 2 if I want to make any meaningful posts on page 1. The amount of time it comsumes sometimes forces me to hurry and not get the correct info into my posts that as an engineer I value.

When you join this group, you are joining a Golf Course Architecture discussion group. At first, I thought the idea of adding other forums was good. Then I realized that membership is limited. If you open up other forums, what will keep regular golf nuts from joining to take part in the other forums and diluting the gca interested membership to nothing?

[RJ_Daley]

Pat, you are shouting.  

This forum has lasted some 7+ years.  It is hard to imagine that in one way or another, just about every angle of GCA has been discussed at some point.  

I think some original contributors and participants long ago realized that, and moved on.  Some of us who stayed, can not live by GCA alone.  We need a little humor and conviviality in our lives.  The newbies have often started a topic they think is the newest-best angle since wonderbread, and most of us oldsters play along with comments and ideas we have expressed before, because we like the idea of new people being enthused about the subject and still enjoy the conversation.  

But, you seem to be going about the task of nominating yourself to be the "perfect of the congregation for the doctrine of GCA".  I guess that makes Ran the pope.  

If someone tells a joke, or goes off topic, are you going to institute expulsion?  Are you going to give certain people passes or indulgences?

We all remember certain characters that dropped into this forum for periods of time that contributed nothing but flames.  They were ostricized and universally shouted down, or better, ignored. But we also know many (I'd like to think of myself too) that have tried hard to make relavant comments on GCA, but just don't wish to relate to our other forum friends strictly in the context of GCA.  
 
And, what is worse?  Is it so bad, starting an OT thread clearly labeled as such, for amusement or for participation of those that might find some diversion an enjoyment?  Or is it worse to wade into a GCA topic, disagree with someone's ideas, and get into a nasty series of flames and calling each other's sanity, judgement, taste, or character into question with incessant replies desiring always the last word.

And, that is a question about all of us, not you or any other individual in particular.

The very fact that this thread has gone on 3 pages, and similar seasonal threads calling for the purity of discussion have popped up countless times, ought to prove that the community is not of one mind on this matter.  I for one am thankful, contributors are not humorless or without options to 24/7 strict professions of GCA doctrine.  I reckon that when/if it does go to 24/7 all GCA all the time, I'll be moving on, because frankly I don't think I've had anything original to say in a long time, if ever.

[paul cowley]

I just slapped myself in the face after reading RJ's previous post.......

[John_Cullum]

Pat

Did you read any of the Finland beats USA thread?

[John Keenan]

Mr. Daly,

An excellent post. Well stated

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

RJ,

What you and others fail to realize is that noone objects to an occassional off topic post, but when 1/3 of the front page is loaded with them, that tells another story.

And, if you can't see where excessive OT threads are going to lead ........  go ahead and enjoy a site where golf course architecture is discussed as the exception, not the rule.

[Voytek Wilczak]

...snip...Voytek,

I don't see ...snip... you creating many interesting threads.

That's okay. I want to learn before I start GCA threads.

Otherwise I'd feel that I wasted the bandwidth and GCA members' time.

Ran admitted me to this group and until he revokes my membership, no self-appointed yahoo will question my contributions to this group.

[RJ_Daley]

Pat, we've both been around here long enought to realize that many of these rambling posts, OT joking around and such is in part seasonal.  We are in the depths of winter for many of the US, AND FINLAND FOR JARI!  

At the moment, I can't even relate to what it feels like to try and fade something into a NADER, or draw a low one up onto the kick plate of a redan.  Your recent post "four walls do a prison make" applies not only to steep sided bunkers, but to a tight snow bound cabin too.  Speaking only for myself, right now, all I have is curling once a week, and watching hockey!

It seems to me, that even in many of the fine traditional and historic writings of GCA, the great writers diverted now and then to ideas that weren't strictly GCA related.  

Yes, I agree that GCA.com can't descend into mindless banter about all things not GCA.  But, having participated here for as long as this forum has been around, I'm just not all that worried about it, because I've seen it function pretty much the same over all those years, remaining the best GCA forum on the net.

[Tom Huckaby]

Garland:

Since you asked, as shivas pointed out, I work for Yahoo.  Perusing internet sites for research is a small part of my job.  Working with databases and other internet and computer-related issues is the larger part.  In any case, I click fast and type fast and read fast - that's how I can check in from time to time throughout most weekdays and still do my job, and pretty well I must say.  But thanks for the concern.

Seriously though, I do understand Patrick's concern -we have discussed this many times before.  I'd agree that when there are more O/T threads than architecture threads, something is wrong.  And of course we all ought to honor the intent of this DG, as posted by Patrick today in bold.  But who's to say where the limit of "related to" architecture ends?

In any case, well... this has been beaten around for several years now, and the DG is what it is and seems to survive.  My only take this time around was incredulity about this"churn" issue... and such remains.  Yes shivas, page one is more meaningful, and that is how a search engine makes money.  Yahoo does indeed make money in many other ways.  In any case, unless something's really changed, Ran isn't in this to make money.  Thus to me, well... it just seems an odd complaint that things get moved to page 2 and 3 too quickly.... But yes, that's because I guess I can live with the extra milisecond it takes to scroll down and make one more click.

 

[Patrick_Mucci]

RJ Daley,

Evidently, the moderator agreed with my objection to mindless OT threads, as they've all be removed from the site.

Voytek,

Your lack of contributions to this site are a matter of record.

I didn't question your motives, I merely pointed out your failure to create interesting architectural threads, and encouraged you to create some, rather than blindly support mindless OT threads which detract from the content and quality of the site..

[Daryl "Turboe" Boe]

RJ Daley,

Evidently, the moderator agreed with my objection to mindless OT threads, as they've all be removed from the site.

Well then maybe thats the answer then, a person should just continue to post whatever you want just as you have been doing for many years, without having to worry about a "Citizens Arrest".   If the Sherrif shoots down all of your threads as unworthy then we can just pack our bags and go elsewhere.  

In the mean time until I get deleted I am going to do what I have been doing on here for years.  Enjoying myself if you dont like my post dont read it.  Just like I probably dont read lots of other threads.  The day I have to refer to some list of approved topics before I start a thread is the day I probably just find it more enjoyable to go elsewhere.

p.s.  For any of you topic police keeping tabs on me, I would never have posted a reply to this thread and take up one of your precious first page slots when it popped back from the netherworld of the second page.  But since Patrick already took care of that for us a couple minutes ago, I felt that I wouldnt be breaking any rules on here.  However I do reccomend one demerit be added to Mr. Mucci's record for bringing a blatantly OT thread back from the second page.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Turboe,

Why don't you reread what Ran Morrisssett posted on the "Discussion Group" section.

He set the rules or guidelines for discussion.

Ran clearly stated:

"A free access board for the discussion of golf course architecture related matters. [size=4x](note: non-architecture threads/posts are deleted)[/size]

You, and others have to ask yourselves, do you want to participate on this site according to Ran's rules, or do you want to disregard and contradict his stated guidelines ?

I'm not policing anything, I'm just reminding those who've forgotten, or have chosen to ignore Ran's stated purpose for creating the discussion forum.

If you and others want to create mindless OT threads, go ahead, but remember, Ran only permits a limited number of participants on this site, and there are a lot of individuals who are serious about golf course architecture, who enjoy contributing and discussing golf course architecture, that would like to gain access to this forum and take your place.

If you and others want to disregard Ran's wishes, have at it.

[Daryl "Turboe" Boe]

Turboe,

Why don't you reread what Ran Morrisssett posted on the "Discussion Group" section.

He set the rules or guidelines for discussion.

Ran clearly stated:

"A free access board for the discussion of golf course architecture related matters. [size=4x](note: non-architecture threads/posts are deleted)[/size]

You, and others have to ask yourselves, do you want to participate on this site according to Ran's rules, or do you want to disregard and contradict his stated guidelines ?

I'm not policing anything, I'm just reminding those who've forgotten, or have chosen to ignore Ran's stated purpose for creating the discussion forum.

If you and others want to create mindless OT threads, go ahead, but remember, Ran only permits a limited number of participants on this site, and there are a lot of individuals who are serious about golf course architecture, who enjoy contributing and discussing golf course architecture, that would like to gain access to this forum and take your place.

If you and others want to disregard Ran's wishes, have at it.

I have read it many times.  

I am simply saying I have been on here as long as you have, and it would appear to me that this place has been relatively well received and successful.  And there is a reason for that.  It is (or at least has been) enjoyable to hang out here.  So why fix it if it isnt broken.  I think everyone on here is here because of their love of GCA (or they would likely be on a cooking DG or Scrapbooking DG).  And everyone here is aware of the underlying theme of this place.  And if Ran deems something "out of line" or too far "Off Topic" it goes away, always has, always will.

To suddenly decide that you (or I) or anyone eles other than Ran should be the Citizen Police and tell people what they can and cant post on here seems a little draconian.  I would hate to see this place change from what made it successful.  

When I first came in here granted there was a lot less traffic, but it was a very user friendly place.   A place that welcomed in all comers and varying thoughts.   I can just imagine how a new person who comes in here now would feel reading the tone of these "If your posts dont measure up to my personal standards of what a good thread is, then we dont need to hear from you!"  It certainly doesnt make a newbie want to stick his/her head out to make their first post.  

We always have been, and I hope continue to be a collection of people who enjoy GCA.  But first and foremost "People".  People who tend to have varying thoughts, tastes, likes and dislikes.   I see the purging of any individual personality as this place becoming sterile, and cold.   If I wanted a place to read pure, undiluted GCA theory only, I would just read one of the books on my shelf or buy some more.   I like my GCA with a little bit of fun as well.

So again I say these threads have been going on since day one, and the site doesnt seem to be the worse for wear.  I dont think anyone is purposely trying to "Disregard Ran's wishes" or subvert Ran's authority, quite the opposite I welcome it.  He has done a great job of moderating this site since day one.  But I dont think the heavy handed attitudes of others (not Ran from what I have seen) are good for the overall tone, and camaraderie.

I think if you look back at my history I have added a few useful threads over the years.  Maybe my "Finally got to play Augusta" thread late last year didnt meet your architectural requirements, but several people on here seemed to find it entertaining, and that was the intent.  And I also feel fairly confident you will find I have been an good citizen of GCA.com for all my years on here.  Very rarely if ever have I flamed fellow citizens, or hi-jacked threads, etc.  So if Ran thinks I would be better replaced with someone else so be it, I trust his judgement, its his site, and I will certainly miss it.  But I dont think you need to Lord that over my (or anyone elses) head as a threat.  If Ran bequeaths this site to you someday then that is different, but for now I guess I am just going to continue doing what I have done on here for many years, and I hope everyone else does as well.

I agree with you if I started to see a lot of threads like "Did you see last weeks LOST episode" they have no place here(and I would guess they quickly would dissapear) unless they discovered an abandoned course on the island.  But I personally enjoyed the thread several years ago about Merions showers even though it had nothing to do with GCA.  It never ceases to amaze me the depth and breadth of knowledge that we have on here.  No more did we start discussing Merions showers, then someone who had intimate knowledge of the exact model of shower head and GPM statistics jumped in and added information.  That was amazing.  And I feel that much richer for reading that (and many other) thread that is not strictly pure GCA.

Patrick, I understand your concern that this place doesnt deteriorate into something different.  I dont want it to change either I love it here.  That is why to me it seems putting new restrictions on thread topic would do just that which I dont want to happen.  I know a few years ago when we weathered the storm of intense flaming, and general deterioration of civility Ran handled it and we are all the better for it.  But to change the overall tone of this site, is cutting off your nose to spite your face.  

Changing this site, to avoid the site from changing is a self fulfilling prophecy.