The downside of basher bashing

[George Pazin]

WARNING: INTROSPECTION ALERT!

Has anyone else noticed how we haven't had a good old-fashioned, knockdown, drag out Rees/Fazio bashing battle-type thread for quite awhile now? (I don't count that overly long rules thread about the cheater line. That one, you just shake your head and say, that's just Dave.... )

Does anyone else kind of miss them, in a guilty pleasure kind of way?

We almost had one last week, with the Fazio and Oakmont thread, but none of us involved really took the ball and ran with it.

Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

[Jim_Kennedy]

George,
Assessing architecture is one thing, bashing someone in print is another. Bashers are kin to the bartender in the 3 testicles joke.

[Peter Pallotta]

George
this isn't the product of any introspection, just some speculation.

Many here would say, I think, that they value the site (at least in part) because of what they can learn and/or share.

Well, if that's actually TRUE, and people ARE learning from one another, maybe you're simply seeing the product/result of that, as the more extreme expressions of opinions (and the opinions themselves) slowly get tempered and modified.

If so, the question is whether this leads to the development of more reasonable, intelligent, and accurate opinions (as the conventional wisdom gets defined and re-defined) or instead to a kind of bland and squishy consensus opinion that offends no one because it no longer has the edges to cut with, and gets at no real truth because it seeks peace at all costs.

I don't know the answer to that.

Peter

[Garland Bayley]

Actually George, Tom Paul has us all confused. He says he loves a bar room brawl, while at the same time espousing the whole world theory that is accepting of all courses and styles. How can we brawl when we are to be so accepting?

[George Pazin]

To clarify a little before heading home, I was always different in my view of the threads in question - I always thought there was a lot more meat than others seemed to think, and that the cries of bashing were, to draw on gca=speak, highly overrated.

One man's criticism is another's bashing.

When we label all as the latter, we lose the former.

Just something to think about. See you tomorrow.

 

[John Kavanaugh]

Most everyone on this site wants something so they are now afraid to give anything.  If you are not currently in the golf business you believe you are just one impression away.  This goes for writers, arcitecture consultants, yardage book makers, recognized pundits, raters and members of clubs once out of reach.  Everyone now posts like they have something to lose and it has been at the loss of serious interesting conversation.

[Andy Troeger]

I think that more posters now realize just how many people read what they write and that causes them to reconsider just what they are willing to post for anyone to read on the internet.

[Tom_Doak]

Andy:

I think that's true, and I also think it's too bad.  It's a byproduct of the media age.  One rant caught on tape and your career can be over.

There ought to be someplace where you can express a strong opinion about something without being reported by the Thought Police.  It's been a while since I trusted everyone here enough to say what I really think on every occasion.  Certain architects may believe that's a good thing , but others will recognize what they are missing as a result.

[Andy Troeger]

Tom,
I agree, it would be nice to actually get everyone's real opinions on things instead of feeling that they are watered down. I blame it more on lawyers than the media, maybe the combination of both, either way both are good targets  

Oops...hope no lawyers read that!  

[Kalen Braley]

Hey,

Just send your opinions my way via PM and I'll present them as mine.  As I don't work in the industry, not too worried about shutting down any career paths there.

And I'm cheap too, only $.25 per post..  

[Don_Mahaffey]

There's a lot of folks watching what goes on here and those of us in the business, at least at the level I'm at, have learned that you do need to be careful what you say.

If your doing a project and you talk about it you might get private comments (I have) like...you guys sure do like to hype your course...I've got a few of those from some surprising places. If your overly critical, you can come off as a loose cannon or...even unprofessional if your critical of the wrong folks or profession.

I tend to brush those PC thoughts aside but I have deleted some posts after people I respect have contacted me and said I might have gone a bit too far. I actually regret those deletions now as I rarely post anything confrontation anymore without reviewing it numerous times and letting the message sit on the screen for a while. I think it's OK to get after it sometimes and I'm disappointed that we can't "get it on" anymore without someone's panties getting in a wad.

[Garland Bayley]

kalen,

Everyone would immediately recognize it wasn't your writing, because you are always wrong!  

[Kalen Braley]

kalen,

Everyone would immediately recognize it wasn't your writing, because you are always wrong!  

Thanks for your vote of confidence there Garland...      

[Mike Sweeney]

Most everyone on this site wants something so they are now afraid to give anything.  If you are not currently in the golf business you believe you are just one impression away.  This goes for writers, arcitecture consultants, yardage book makers, recognized pundits, raters and members of clubs once out of reach.  Everyone now posts like they have something to lose and it has been at the loss of serious interesting conversation.

John,

Your critique and pictures of Ken Kavanaugh's courses on your Spring trip were very inspiring.  

[Tim_Weiman]

George,

I share your sentiment that something can be lost if everyone is so politically correct about golf course projects and architects.

Several years ago I wrote a critique of the work done by Greg Norman at Doonbeg. One person responded by saying I was being unfair to Norman.

Actually, I didn't have any interest in Norman himself, I just felt some of the work at Doonbeg - specifically one of the par 3s - was really bad. So, I said so.

The good news: the hole was eventually changed, though I am not saying it was my criticism that caused the changed.

Bottom line: as long as people focus on the architecture rather than the person (architect), criticism should flow whenever someone feels it is appropriate. Just be sure to provide enough details of whatever criticism is being offered so people who haven't seen the course can learn and understand it.

 

[Joe Hancock]

Don Mahaffey,

You are out of touch. Who wears panties any more?

I hope my true character shows in my posts. I am not very confrontational, I am goofy, I try to be courteous and polite...why would I intentionally be different as an internet character than I am in real life?

Joe

[Phil_the_Author]

John, when you state, "Everyone now posts like they have something to lose and it has been at the loss of serious interesting conversation..." you are quite wrong.

Speak for yourself on this one.

By the way, since you state "everyone" that must also include you, so what is it you have to lose? Care to share what is "holding you back?"  
 

[Tommy Williamsen]

I'm not sure that I have "anything to lose."  But I have been ordained for thirty five years. I am always aware that I represent more than myself.  So I don't get a chance to rant in public very often.  So here goes, you guys are a bunch of....  I guess I couldn't do it.  Sorry.

[mike_beene]

Tommy,in one of Mr Penick's books he talks about Preacher Mann,who after missing a short putt would turn to a playing partner and ask"would you please express my sentiments for me"

[Tony Ristola]

The modern spirit is a hesitant one. Spontaneity has given way to cautious legalisms, and the age of heroes has been superseded... We have no more giants; only obedient ants.
Warren Buffett