[Brian Phillips]

TEPaul,

100% agree...

[cary lichtenstein]

I have a question that I would like a straight answer to:

Are IM read by the moderators here?

Before this thread is deleted, would the moderators answer this please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dan Kelly]

I have a question that I would like a straight answer to:

Are IM read by the moderators here?

Before this thread is deleted, would the moderators answer this please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I second the motion. I presume the answer is Yes, but I'd like to hear it confirmed.

[Craig Van Egmond]

I would presume that the moderators have better things to do with their time than read peoples IM. At least I would hope so.

However, if you have expectations that anything you do in the electronic world is private, then you are sadly mistaken. Not only do moderators potentially have access to your IMs, but so do the systems administrators, the application support staff and possibly hackers.  Same with e-mails, ICQ, msn, etc...  you should never say anything in IM or E-mail that you don't want the whole world to know.  

I make my living at computer security and investigating computer misuse so my illusions of privacy are long since gone.   Believe me, people are watching and its easy.

[TEPaul]

Craig:

Thanks for that info. Frankly I wasn't aware of all that even though it certainly doesn't surprise me. Despite that, maybe I'm just too old but I thought people on here had enough commonsense to realize the IM on here is not supposed to double as this DG.

[Geoffrey Childs]

It seems to me that Tom Paul had a right to change his mind about forwarding private emails with names of individuals who choose to remain unknown to Tom MacWood and everyone else who reads GCA.

Those names should NEVER have been put into a public forum and Tommy was right to remove them at Toms request.

This is common sense and just as silly as that 31 page thread.

[Craig Van Egmond]

Tom,
        Well it does say "Would you like to send this member a PRIVATE message" .

However not everyone has the same morals or ethical code. Sadly.

[ed_getka]

TommyN, you need to delete this thread. You really do, and you should do it right now. It serves no purpose at all on this golf architecture discussion group.

Tom Paul,
     This thread probably wouldn't have occurred if you you showed a little more restraint with your name-calling. Just because you don't agree with someone's thesis doesn't mean you should attack them personally. That doesn't make whatever Tom M did justifiable, but I doubt he would have done such a thing if a more civil tone was maintained in the Merion thread. JMO.

[Bill_McBride]

TommyN, you need to delete this thread. You really do, and you should do it right now. It serves no purpose at all on this golf architecture discussion group.

Tom Paul,
     This thread probably wouldn't have occurred if you you showed a little more restraint with your name-calling. Just because you don't agree with someone's thesis doesn't mean you should attack them personally. That doesn't make whatever Tom M did justifiable, but I doubt he would have done such a thing if a more civil tone was maintained in the Merion thread. JMO.

Good point, Ed, and probably the most germane thing said in this sad thread.

IMHO, there should be a limit of maybe 10 pages to a thread.  After that amount of pages, everything seems to disintegrate into mind-numbing, redundant, sometimes venemous discourse between those who type fastest in this crowd.

In the words of the immortal Rodney King, can't we all just get along?     Apparently not.

[John_Cullum]

IMHO, there should be a limit of maybe 10 pages to a thread.  After that amount of pages, everything seems to disintegrate into mind-numbing, redundant, sometimes venemous discourse between those who type fastest in this crowd.

I ususally find that to be the case by the third page. Many times I wont read a thread until the 3rd page, because I figure then its starting to get into a good pissing contest.

[Jay Flemma]

Between the silence on the issue from some people, and from the analysis of Craig's post, are we to assume then that the moderators have the ability to read messages supposedly marked "private?"

I think I speak for many when I say we all would feel better if the board would take a position on this important issue.  Reading a man's email is akin to looking in his wallet.

[Tom Huckaby]

Gents - of course the moderators can read IMs - they've always had this ability.  I thought this was common knowledge....

Now what I don't know is if they choose to use this "power."  I always figured they had better things to do.

Jeez this place is turning into a soap opera lately....

 

[John Kavanaugh]

I have found that you get the best and most truthful information about architecture by reading peoples IM's.  The fun behind the scenes puts the discussion group to shame.

[Tom Huckaby]

I have found that you get the best and most truthful information about architecture by reading peoples IM's.  The fun behind the scenes puts the discussion group to shame.

Oh I'm sure you have, John.  But breaking into people's profiles remains rather shameful, no matter how easy some naive folks like me made it for you.

 

[CHrisB]

IMHO, there should be a limit of maybe 10 pages to a thread.  After that amount of pages, everything seems to disintegrate into mind-numbing, redundant, sometimes venemous discourse between those who type fastest in this crowd.

Bill,
I've noticed that as well.

But by far the most important posts of that long Merion thread occurred on page 31 when Tom Paul posted Alan Wilson's 1926 report on the creation of the Merion golf courses entitled "Merion's East and West Courses", which seemed to settle several disputed issues.

Personally, I felt rewarded for wading through all the muck to get to Wilson's letter, and I just wish it could have been revealed 20-25 pages sooner!

I see no reason for limiting speech if it is architecture-related.

[Mike_Cirba]

Bill,
I've noticed that as well.

But by far the most important posts of that long Merion thread occurred on page 31 when Tom Paul posted Alan Wilson's 1926 report on the creation of the Merion golf courses entitled "Merion's East and West Courses", which seemed to settle several disputed issues.

Personally, I felt rewarded for wading through all the muck to get to Wilson's letter, and I just wish it could have been revealed 20-25 pages sooner!

I see no reason for limiting speech if it is architecture-related.

Chris,

You're absolutely right.   I skip by tons of threads simply because they don't particularly interest me.   I invite others to do the same if they feel a thread is either too cumbersome or unimportant to the reasons why they are here.

And you're right.   The Alan Wilson letters are stunning, and worth the speculation in getting there.

I also wish they could have come to light sooner, but guess what?

If anyone thinks that thread served no purpose, I would ask you to consider that the reason the Alan Wilson letters surfaced in the first place is because someone went searching for them BECAUSE of that thread and just located them in the past day.

Let's not judge harshly here folks.   I hope Tom MacWood sees fit to participate here in the future, because he's an important voice.  

[Ian Andrew]

Jay,

"are we to assume then that the moderators have the ability to read messages supposedly marked "private?"

Its an internal message system, not a personal email - if it's that private use an email. If you think they're read - your also assuming the site is continuously moderated - it's not.

Of course they can read it, and so can anyone read anything on any server if they have a password or are an administor the site.

If you think someone has the time to read all the posts or all the IM messages - or even cares - your kidding yourself..

[John Kavanaugh]

I have found that you get the best and most truthful information about architecture by reading peoples IM's.  The fun behind the scenes puts the discussion group to shame.

Oh I'm sure you have, John.  But breaking into people's profiles remains rather shameful, no matter how easy some naive folks like me made it for you.

 

And like Tara Conner I feel bad about what I did but have a better understanding of life and architecture because of it.  I would do it all over again if given the chance and expect the moderators to do the same.  The true abuse of GCA is done in the IM world...I'd like to see the feature taken off and force people to do their dirty work on their own email or phone lines.  I was careful to not make what I learned by reading IM's public...I think.

[Tom Huckaby]

I have found that you get the best and most truthful information about architecture by reading peoples IM's.  The fun behind the scenes puts the discussion group to shame.

Oh I'm sure you have, John.  But breaking into people's profiles remains rather shameful, no matter how easy some naive folks like me made it for you.

 

And like Tara Conner I feel bad about what I did but have a better understanding of life and architecture because of it.  I would do it all over again if given the chance and expect the moderators to do the same.  The true abuse of GCA is done in the IM world...I'd like to see the feature taken off and force people to do their dirty work on their own email or phone lines.  I was careful to not make what I learned by reading IM's public...I think.

I'm curious what you find to be "the true abuse of GCA".  By that acronym do you mean the concept of golf course architecture, or this site?  I assume the latter... but I've learned with you never to trust my assumptions....

[Jay Flemma]

Jay,

"are we to assume then that the moderators have the ability to read messages supposedly marked "private?"

Its an internal message system, not a personal email - if it's that private use an email. If you think they're read - your also assuming the site is continuously moderated - it's not.

Of course they can read it, and so can anyone read anything on any server if they have a password or are an administor the site.

If you think someone has the time to read all the posts or all the IM messages - or even cares - your kidding yourself..

Easy, Ian...no one said any such thing...but issue is whether or not people do...its whether or not they can...and it important for us to know if a footprint is left...and more important for us to be cognizent of that as well.

I keep saying two things over and over because I know adherence to them solves alot of problems...

1) dont say anything on the board you would not say to the person if they were sitting across from them at dinner; and

2) when you are sitting there in the basement in the dark in your underwear surrounded by empty pringles cans, 40 oz bottles of shasta and your all-Rush mix tape blaring THINK BEFORE YOU HIT SEND.  

"E-maill will kill ya." - Bob Kelly

[Tommy_Naccarato]

TommyN, you need to delete this thread. You really do, and you should do it right now. It serves no purpose at all on this golf architecture discussion group.

Tom Paul,
     This thread probably wouldn't have occurred if you you showed a little more restraint with your name-calling. Just because you don't agree with someone's thesis doesn't mean you should attack them personally. That doesn't make whatever Tom M did justifiable, but I doubt he would have done such a thing if a more civil tone was maintained in the Merion thread. JMO.

Ed, EXACTLY

Cary, I'm breaking my own rule by ever addressing you ever again, but you ask the question and it's a legitmate question.

The answer is NO. I feel it would be an evasion of privacy to do so. I think privacy is an important thing.

In closing, I feel that both parties are at fault here, Tom Paul for even conversing with Tom MacWood and giving him the information he posted (these two people mix like oil and water) and Tom MacWood for posting something like that knowing how Tom Paul would react. But how can one blame him, especially after being called names, getting threatened to get his ass kicked and God knows whatever other childish behavior that has been elicited.

In closing, Phil, Tom wasn't kicked off, he deleted himself from the discussion group. I don't blame him after the way he has been treated, abused, mocked and called names. Frankly, I think the behavior itself is bizarre. I removed Tom's post because Tom Paul called and asked me to because it could be a detriment to his standing with-in his personal life--it was something I would do for any of you if it had some sort of ramifications that were beyond your control.

This discussion group is supposed to be a fun outlet about frank discussion of golf architecture. Unfortunately it's one important contributor short, and I can only look at that as being a bad thing.

Merry Happy Holidays everyone.

[PThomas]

I have found that you get the best and most truthful information about architecture by reading peoples IM's.  The fun behind the scenes puts the discussion group to shame.

Oh I'm sure you have, John.  But breaking into people's profiles remains rather shameful, no matter how easy some naive folks like me made it for you.

 

And like Tara Conner I feel bad about what I did but have a better understanding of life and architecture because of it.  I would do it all over again if given the chance and expect the moderators to do the same.  The true abuse of GCA is done in the IM world...I'd like to see the feature taken off and force people to do their dirty work on their own email or phone lines.  I was careful to not make what I learned by reading IM's public...I think.

IMs are nobody's business but the people they are sent to and from

[DMoriarty]

Wayne Morrison,   I agree with the sentiments of your post.   It is something we should all keep in mind; or at least it is something I should keep it in mind.  Maybe for New Years I will resolve to to begin using smiley faces . . . nah, I wouldn't want to get carried away.    
_________________________________

In the further interest in full disclosure, and to try to keep the other thread at least somewhat on topic, I am transfering TEPaul's latest comments to me over to here.

David Moriarty:

Regarding your odd and needless post above, no, I did not discuss private emails with Tom MacWood and I did not send him any. So your analysis which is unnecessary on this DG and completely uncalled for too just falls apart right there. It serves no purpose on this DG for you to speculate on or even mention any of this. You should remove that post, it has nothing whatsoever to do with Merion or who designed it, and furthermore none of it is any business of yours anyway.

I found this odd, because I recalled gleaning the information I posted above from one of TEPaul's posts of last night.  In fact it was where I got the information I posted above, and also one of the posts that got me thinking about the hypocracy of this all.   But here TEPaul says he did not discuss private emails with Tom MacWood.  Did I dream it? Is my post above just strange, blind speculation?  Does imy post fall apart based on an unsound assumption? Have I really and truly lost my mind  . . . again??


Fortunately for my sanity, by chance I had copied TEPaul's post to Mike Cirba on the other thread, as I was considering replying to it.  And, by Christmas miracle or modern technology, it was still on my clipboard today.  Here it is, with my bolds:

"However, after reading about the possibility of Tom MacWood leaving this site, I frankly feel very down that I may have contributed to that."

Mike:

Don't even think about it. You didn't contribute to that at all. Do you really think anything you said on this thread should've made him leave this site? Why would that be, because you didn't agree with his constant claim that we are all speculating about Wilson and commitee designing Merion? Who did agree with that preposterous claim of his except perhaps David Moriarty? If he left the site for that reason, that's definitely his problem, not yours.

You had nothing to do with it, I did. I told him on the IM I'd send him some emails of some people who emailed me about this thread who don't contribute to this site for their own reasons. I decided not to send them to him and I probably never should've even mentioned them to him. Then instead of asking me on the IM why I didn't send them to him he put the question on this thread with names. That's just not supposed to happen on this website, in my opinion, never, not ever. The IM is there for a good reason and it's not supposed to double as this DG. I immediately asked him on the IM to remove that post and he refused, so I had the post removed. Apparently that's why he decided to leave the site. If that's the way he feels about something like that then that's his problem, in my opinion. If I were you I wouldn't bet much that he won't be back.

___________________________

Tommy,

I see no reason to delete this thread.  No confidences have been breached here.  Those of us who read Tom MacWood's post have not repeated the names in this forum.  

We need to get these issues out in the open and get by them, even if it is ugly.  And mostly we need to correct the wrongs and get Tom MacWood back.

[George Pazin]

This is one sad thread.

[David Stamm]

This is one sad thread.

George, unfortunately, ain't that the truth.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()