[TEPaul]

Ran (or Ben):

Maybe I should post this subject on here and maybe I should just email or call you about it but what the heck.

I was talking to Wayno Morrison today about the importance of encouraging as many superintendents as possible to post on here. In my opinion, their input on maintenance and agronomy is most certainly a reality check for all of us, and ultra important because of it.

But some of them really do have a problem posting on here---eg they can sometimes get in some trouble with their jobs if they say something somebody may not like where they work. I've known a fair number of them that used to be on here and told me they had to go because of this inherent problem and danger.

Therefore, I propose that any and all supers who want to register and post on here be given as much anonymity as they see fit to be able to post on here.

Mark Fine said we should encourage magazine panelists back on here and I agree. But, in my opinion, I'd rather see one good super on here than fifty magazine rating panelists.

[TEPaul]

God Almighty----thanks guys, and thankfully we have emailing and the IM feature on here.

Ran, guess what, not only do you need to allow for superintendents to register and post with as much anonymity as they see fit to post but you just might have to construct a really good GOLFCLUBATLAS.com "Witness Protection Program".

I'll be fielding any phony names and identities that any supers may want to submit to me. I'm sorry but the name Bobby Weed is already taken.

[Anthony_Nysse]

I'm sure Carl Spackler has been taken.....

Tony Nysse
Sr. Asst. Supt.
Long Cove Club
HHI, SC

[TEPaul]

Could be but I think Heinrich Himmler has recently become available again.

[RJ_Daley]

I don't mind if some supers or archie associates or other industry folk feeling the need to post with annonymity are allowed to do so, as long as they register with their real names and then post under a psuedonym.  

Although, I'm not sure that even with many more supers posting here, that we will get a clear picture of the truth and light on all things, design or turf maintenance wise.  I'm pretty sure that for every position taken by superintendents on one side of a question, you can find opposing points of view.  But, to have more of them weigh in on various matters can't hurt in the overall understanding the forum as a whole will acquire.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Ran (or Ben):

 

Mark Fine said we should encourage magazine panelists back on here and I agree. But, in my opinion, I'd rather see one good super on here than fifty magazine rating panelists.

Maybe you'll get your wish.

[Jonathan McCord]

It's very interesting that this subject is being brought up, as this happened to me just from being a staff member at a golf course discussed on this great site.

I made a remark about the course and architect that the head professional didn't agree with.  The head professional caught wind of this post because that specific architect, who dabbles on this site, felt inclined to bring it up during a conversation with my ex-boss.  Faster then I could explain myself, I was not welcome there anymore.

However, it is rather interesting that architects and others CARE about what (we) say about their courses and designs.  Let GCA be heard!

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

Carl is my hero. I second TE on this one. I find the views and knowledge that our friends contribute to be so very valuable to this site.

[JESII]

Would this person then need referrences to prove they need anonymity...

[Mike_Young]

TE,
Sorry to disagree but it has to be the same for all.  Plenty of us post on here where it can come back to haunt us in some cases.....I am a member at a club where I disagree with most of what the supt does...supts should not be the exception but I do understand their situation.....
Mike

[Michael Christensen]

agree with you Mike.....but it seems there is a caste system here...HBH at the top and looks like some will join him.

I've always respected you for your unfiltered views and opinions....others should follow your lead, not veer off into anonymous ID land

[TEPaul]

"TE,
Sorry to disagree but it has to be the same for all.  Plenty of us post on here where it can come back to haunt us in some cases....."

"I am a member at a club where I disagree with most of what the supt does...supts should not be the exception but I do understand their situation....."


MikeY:

Why does it have to be the same for all of us when you know damn good and well it isn't the same for all of us?

Sure, I know well that what we post on here can come back to haunt us. I've been on here from the beginning, like for eight years posting, and it's come back and haunted me bigtime but that was back then---I'm past that now.

What do you have to worry about for posting on here what's really on your mind? What do I have to worry about anymore? Nothing really because all the damage that can be done already has been and you and I are still here.

But that's not the same and shouldn't be for supers who'd like to post honestly on here and find it hard to do because their job might be in jeoprady. I might make myself unpopular for saying the things I say on here and it may even nix some opportunities for me but that's not in the same zip code as putting a job on the line.  

The point is some of these supers really may want to say some things on here they feel they aren't able to if they put their names on the line. I want to correct that and get past it, and anoynymity may be a way to do it.

[paul cowley]

Sorry Tom....I think everyone here needs to take ownership for what they say and under their own name.... not being able to might even motivate people to assess their situation and move on, or find a way to express themselves without fear of retribution.

I don't think that there are that many design or trade secrets that are being repressed or stifled because of fear for ones job.

Fear is healthy.  

[Andy Troeger]

Tom,
I think I understand what you're getting at, but my preference would lie on the side of Paul and Mike Y. If you start making exceptions for one group (in this case supers), then where do you draw the line?  I'd say the same thing if you were talking about raters or anyone else. I just feel people should be held accountable for what they post here as this site is obviously well read.

[Mike Benham]

I'm sure Carl Spackler has been taken.....

Tony Nysse
Sr. Asst. Supt.
Long Cove Club
HHI, SC

As is Hamilton B Hearst ...

[wsmorrison]

I respect the positions of Mike, Paul and the others that believe we should all be known and accountable.  Architects work for the membership of a club, albeit temporarily or intermittently as do superintendents, though with more permanency.  I admire the architects on this site for their willingness to share ideas and even be controversial.  For whatever reason, architects have a bit more freedom to contribute, perhaps it is inherent in their position.  Empirically, it seems that the superintendents we've spoken to over the years have lots to offer but with exceptions are usually less willing to completely address an issue because of potential backlash and job security issues.  For those interested in maintenance meld, possible solutions to issues at their clubs or whatever, I say let's let them post anonymously.  We can all benefit from more industry expertise if that's what it takes.  In the long run, we'll be better off for having more superintendents come to the table, even with nom de plumes.  

I would make it easily known that they are superintendents posting anonymously by giving them easily recognized aliases such as numbering them....Super001, etc.  Super007 wouldn't be a bad name.

[Tom_Doak]

Wayne:

I disagree.  If you open the door to anonymity you take the chance that a couple of rogue superintendents will start bad-mouthing people under the cloak of secrecy, and that would be devastating for this discussion group.  I've had a few superintendents call me out on various issues over the years, and I've responded to them, but I think all the architects here would quickly be gone if you let others criticize us anonymously.

I don't understand what agronomic issues a superintendent can't discuss openly here.  I understand they can't get into the politics of their own club (or probably the architecture, either) for fear of offending members, but that's not what you are saying they would contribute ... and even if they were anonymous they should stay off those topics or they'd likely be found out.

What of importance has a superintendent told any of you that he couldn't post under his own name?  The only thing I can imagine is if a good superintendent went off the deep end and started lambasting his own industry for overspending and kowtowing to members who don't understand turfgrass ... but even that isn't going to have any impact unless we know the superintendent by name and respect his views.

There has never been an anonymous poster here who contributed anything important to the group (sorry Hammy).  If there really are that few superintendents out there who are willing to speak the truth without fear, it's no wonder the business has gone the way it has.

(Maybe that will get a few more of them to post.   )

[paul cowley]

Wayne .....I guess I could go along with Supers posting under  assigned or registered alias'.
But you might as well start at least two other categories;

GD's....for golf designers working in a firm who might not want to post for similar reasons as Supers.

GI's.....for others in the golf industry that might be employed under similar circumstance.

Well then again, maybe I'll not go along .....to have healthy input, posters need to be accountable for what they say.....faces versus masks.
The slope starts getting pretty slippery once you start to make accomodation.

And BTW....who would be the Gatekeeper?

 

[Brent Hutto]

Anonymous posting lowers the standard of discussion. That's just an unfortunate fact of on-line life that I've observed for a couple of decades now. Therefore, unless it is critically necessary to allow it in order for the group to function I'm against it.

In the case of this discussion group the only thing anonymous posting could avoid is some individuals in sensitive employment situations having to leave certain things unsaid to avoid offending those with the power to make their lives miserable. For my part I think the downside to anonymity is far greater than the possibility that a few guys have to soft-peddle their opinions here.

Some times on the Internet we lose sight of the fact that good conversation generally involves a certain degree of selectiveness in what one says or how one says it. It is not the end of the world to occasionally refrain from blasting forth The Truth as we see it even when it is ugly, contentious or offensive. Lord knows what B.S. I would pronounce online if my name weren't affixed to each post, it's bad enough as is.

[wsmorrison]

Tom Doak,

I don't think a superintendent has to go off the deep end to lambaste the agriculture chemical industry for sponsoring trends that sell product despite other approaches that are cheaper, better for playability and healthier turf.  The cost to the sport of golf due to what has become accepted practices in terms of turf "care" has become a real problem.  How many superintendents want to discuss this in an open forum?  Ones that I know that believe this simply won't.  I think it is an important counter perspective that should be part of the overall consideration.  That isn't to say it is the answer for every club, but it is another view that breaks the one party system we have today.

I think there are strong points to each side, and maybe I am now convinced that anonymity is not such a great idea.  But losing a wider perspective and professional input isn't so great either.  In your experience, do you think superintendents are unlikely to post because of the downside of doing so?  From their perspective, what do they have to gain?  Tom Paul and I were wondering how we could respond to the many superintendents that said they'd like to participate but chose not to for obvious reasons.

Paul,

It sure as heck wouldn't be me.  Ran could field a few phonecalls and make the determination if enough thought it a good idea.  I guess the early consensus is that it isn't such a good idea.

Brent,

I think the mindset that the superintendents would be ugly, offensive or contentious if allowed to post anonymously is a bit of a stretch.  These are professionals yet in positions of less strength than architects.  Is it any wonder why so few golf professionals post here?  In balance, what is there to gain for them to do so?  I know for a fact some of the professionals on here do limit their discussions because of their positions.  If we are interested in comprehensive viewpoints, the more the merrier.  Tom and I were trying to figure out a way to achieve that end.

[Brent Hutto]

I think the mindset that the superintendents would be ugly, offensive or contentious if allowed to post anonymously is a bit of a stretch.

Wayne,

I wasn't implying that at all. I'm saying that having my name attached to what I post is a valuable reminder not to let myself lapse into the kind of "anything goes" Internet norms that are encouraged by anonymity.

I would not assume that golf professionals, course superintendents and architects are any more or less prone to that kind of ugliness than I observe in my own behavior.

[wsmorrison]

Sorry, Brent.  My mistake.  I misread your post.  

[Peter Pallotta]

I think a little humility would go a long way.

No one is asking for, or expecting, this board to become a courtesy class - everyone is free to question, cajole, posture, and pontificate about anything under the sun, and to their heart's content.  

But if I were a super (or an architect), I'd hope that my words, as a practicing professional, were given their due respect and value, especially from a group of impassioned amateurs who, presumably, care more about those words than most.

Whether we agree with the approach to agronomy that their professional duties sometimes demand of them is another question.

Peter  

[Mike_Young]

Wayne:

I disagree.  If you open the door to anonymity you take the chance that a couple of rogue superintendents will start bad-mouthing people under the cloak of secrecy, and that would be devastating for this discussion group.  I've had a few superintendents call me out on various issues over the years, and I've responded to them, but I think all the architects here would quickly be gone if you let others criticize us anonymously.

I don't understand what agronomic issues a superintendent can't discuss openly here.  I understand they can't get into the politics of their own club (or probably the architecture, either) for fear of offending members, but that's not what you are saying they would contribute ... and even if they were anonymous they should stay off those topics or they'd likely be found out.

What of importance has a superintendent told any of you that he couldn't post under his own name?  The only thing I can imagine is if a good superintendent went off the deep end and started lambasting his own industry for overspending and kowtowing to members who don't understand turfgrass ... but even that isn't going to have any impact unless we know the superintendent by name and respect his views.

There has never been an anonymous poster here who contributed anything important to the group (sorry Hammy).  If there really are that few superintendents out there who are willing to speak the truth without fear, it's no wonder the business has gone the way it has.

(Maybe that will get a few more of them to post.   )

AMEN.....
The truth will never hurt you....for long....so supts should post just like archies....just replace the word supt in all of the discussion with the word archie and the same would apply.   IMO

[wsmorrison]

Mike,

Might the difference between contractual relationships (architects) and employee relationships (superintendents) inherently preclude the same application?  I don't wish to be difficult here.  I simply recognize that some superintendents do not participate because of potential consequences.  I would like to see more professionals, supers and architects alike participate and have given thought as to how that might be accomplished.  I certainly will go with the flow on this.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()