News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Norbert P

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #50 on: February 08, 2008, 01:07:53 AM »
. . .
« Last Edit: February 08, 2008, 01:14:16 AM by Slag Bandoon »
"Golf is only meant to be a small part of one’s life, centering around health, relaxation and having fun with friends/family." R"C"M

ANTHONYPIOPPI

Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #51 on: February 08, 2008, 11:17:10 AM »
Let me get this straight, all previous threads can be erased by the person who originated it? Can all individual responses be obliterated by the person who posted them?

Anthony


Jon Wiggett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #52 on: February 08, 2008, 12:09:13 PM »
Let me get this straight, all previous threads can be erased by the person who originated it? Can all individual responses be obliterated by the person who posted them?

Anthony



Anthony,

I think you can still edit (sorry modify :)) them, so at the very least you could delete what was written.

HamiltonBHearst

Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #53 on: February 08, 2008, 12:17:21 PM »


Keep the OT posts coming, it serves as a means to weed out those I would prefer not to host at my home clubs. ;)

It seems people reveal a lot more about their character in OT stuff than any discussion of a Sand Hills green complex.

ANTHONYPIOPPI

Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #54 on: February 08, 2008, 01:11:10 PM »
Jon:

So can somebody go back hundreds of threads and deleter or alter what was written months ago?

Anthony


John Kavanaugh

Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #55 on: February 08, 2008, 02:24:12 PM »


Here's what Ran Morrissett thinks:
[size=4x]

GolfClubAtlas Discussion Group 
 
GolfClubAtlas.com 
 
Golf Course Architecture

A free access board for the discussion of golf course architecture related matters. (note: non-architecture threads/posts are deleted).

Moderators: Ben_Dewar, Ran Morrissett 
[/size]


Exactly, but the selfish bastards who think they have something important, yet boring, to say do not care.

Btw.  I am posting from the Bandon Dunes business center and you're not.

ANTHONYPIOPPI

Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #56 on: February 08, 2008, 02:27:37 PM »
So, let's just say an architect posted a criticism of other architects some time ago but now finds himself doing the exact same thing for which he criticized them, he can go back and change his old posts and, in essence, alter history? Wow, Bush-Cheney, Stalin and Orwell would love this site.

Anthony


Norbert P

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #57 on: February 08, 2008, 02:28:56 PM »

Btw.  I am posting from the Bandon Dunes business center and you're not.
[/quote]

John, Why aren't you outside playing golf?
"Golf is only meant to be a small part of one’s life, centering around health, relaxation and having fun with friends/family." R"C"M

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #58 on: February 08, 2008, 02:30:48 PM »
Any rain there today John?  If not you should have taken the bet!!!!   ;D

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #59 on: February 08, 2008, 02:32:16 PM »
So, let's just say an architect posted a criticism of other architects some time ago but now finds himself doing the exact same thing for which he criticized them, he can go back and change his old posts and, in essence, alter history? Wow, Bush-Cheney, Stalin and Orwell would love this site.

Anthony



Anthony,

I'm pretty sure I read in another thread that this has been revoked, but I can't confirm that.

But you could start your own thread, get some others to post, and see if you can delete thier comments!!   ;D

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #60 on: February 08, 2008, 03:04:47 PM »
"Wow, Bush-Cheney, Stalin and Orwell would love this site."  Anthony
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow!  This comment damn near makes me answer my own question in the affirmative.  But no,  I think Mr. Hearst is onto something. 

John Mayhugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #61 on: February 08, 2008, 03:39:55 PM »
Keep the OT posts coming, it serves as a means to weed out those I would prefer not to host at my home clubs. ;)

The issue for me is how much people's political opinions matter when it comes to enjoying golf or GCA  discussion with them.  I played in my first GCA event at last year's Dixie Cup and genuinely liked everyone that I met.  I would be glad to host any of them to play with me.  But I have to believe that if I had read up on everyone's political views before meeting them, I might not look at each one in the same way.

Once you're friends it's a lot easier to overlook differences.  I just wouldn't want different non-GCA viewpoints to prevent me from enjoying the opportunity to meet and enjoy other people.

Kyle Harris states it far better than I ever could:
The very nature of this site and its content will forge relationships through the power of the shared experience. OT posts which serve to divide the group into factions go against the very nature of enjoying a passion and sharing that enjoyment - which is ultimately the meta purpose of Golf Club Atlas.

SL_Solow

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #62 on: February 08, 2008, 03:51:34 PM »
I guess I just can't help myself.

Lou;  You have a long memory, something about the caddy discussion rankled you as it appears to be a recurring theme.  If it was outside of the scope of the site, then I erred and I would not have objected if the moderator had taken action.

Moreover, don't sell yourself short.  I learn things everyday, my comment did not suggest that I am uninterested in political discussions.  As I said, I am involved in them all the time, just not here.  I did indicate that I found these discussions to be unenlightening and I stand by that.

As for your comments re tax policy, if you or anyone else wants to start a thread on the impact of changes in tax policy on the construction or management of golf courses, I think that would be sufficiently related to GCA to pass muster.  I would probably be interested as tax law is not my specialty and I might learn something. Whether tax policy should be determined by its impact on golf course construction is another question but I digress.  However, suggesting that unfocused diatribes against  the poltical opposition and the "class" they represent somehow become relevant in this forum because tax policy is involved and taxation effects GCA strikes me as more than a little disingenuous.  The question really is, where is the focus of the discussion?  A lot of seemingly extraneous material can add flavor to a discussion so long as the focus is on point.  Your argument actually reminds me of a legal tactic used by makers of soft  core porn back in the late 60's and early 70's, before I went to law school.  As part of the Supreme Court decisions, a film could avoid classification as "obscene" (a different censorship issue, one involving the government no less) if it had redeeming social values and if its predominant appeal was not to the "prurient interest".  Film makers like Russ Meyer would insert "serious" discussions about race relations, poverty, war and the like before cutting to the inevitable nudity etc as a way to meet the social values test.  Similarly, suggesting that there is an impact on the golf business from any political discussion doesn't make the topic a GCA topic.  In the vernacular, you are putting "lipstick on a pig".  

Finally, I'll take one last try at the censorship point.  It is similar to the one posted by Pat Mucci.  This site is a private forum.  Only those who agree to its "rules" are permitted to be members and to post.  I concede enforcement may be somewhat inconsistent but I suspect that is because the moderators do not want to overly inhibit the discussions.  But we all agreed to limit the discussions.  If we want to talk about other things we are free to do so elsewhere.  The analogy to government interference doesn't wash.

Ulrich Mayring

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #63 on: February 08, 2008, 06:39:48 PM »
Of the remaining candidates Obama is the only one playing golf, plus he's endorsed (somewhat) by Tiger Woods and he spoke out against the noose cover.

Ulrich
Golf Course Exposé (300+ courses reviewed), Golf CV (how I keep track of 'em)

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #64 on: February 08, 2008, 06:45:18 PM »
As I've stated somewhere above, I don't think deleting a thread by the moderator was censorship, as I first misused the term.  It can rise to a case of being arbitrary and capricious, because we already all know and admit, some O.T. threads have been allowed to go on for many pages without the heavy hand of deletion by moderation coming down.  

Inconsistant enforcement of rules or contractual terms is one premise I have won arbitration cases over, though it isn't an absolute 'excuse' to get some grievant off the hook or paid according to terms of interpretation and meaning of a benefit.  

But, I will postulate or submit for consideration that GCA.com would become an obscure, backwater slough on the Internet, with an ever dwindling number of posts and members, if it were "really" golf course architecture, design and even construction, 100% of the time.  I'd have to take the position that some of the witty and humorous or just odd observations about this and that are what give this forum flavor, character, and appeal.  

Now, if you take a 100% fundamentalist sort of approach, one might consider the following, foder for deletion:
Quote
Exactly, but the selfish bastards who think they have something important, yet boring, to say do not care.

Is that the pot calling the kettle black, or what?  Where is the GCArchitecture content in that?   And, is this one person thinking he can call something boring and have it dealt with according to his wishes, that may be something interesting to another and something another wants to hear out.  Once you start calling folks 'selfish bastards' because they have a take that you deam not worthy, I think you start getting into a hornets nest of unnecessary confrontation, discord and breaking of morale amongst the group, and enter a labyrinth of hipocrisies for the pronoucements you make...

But, I could be wrong...  ::) :-\
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #65 on: February 08, 2008, 09:43:51 PM »
A common definition of CENSORSHIP is "the suppression or deletion of material, which may be considered objectionable, harmful or sensitive, as determined by a censor" (Wikipedia).  I never questioned Ran's or his nominees' right to delete anything.   I simply asked if doing so, censoring, was a good thing for this site.

Thus far, it appears that for the majority, economics and politics, inextricably intertwined as they are, should be off limits.  The primary reason given is that these subjects are divisive and lead to bad feelings to the extent that some of us may not wish to play golf with others who hold contrary beliefs.  One gentleman went so far as to provide names of posters who delve widely in OT subjects, but are positive and a joy to be with.  Curiously, two on his short list have a long history of being highly opinionated and not afraid to create controversy.  But I digress.  If this site wishes to go PC, I can handle it.

Dick,

Don't let Barney pull your chain.  He is just toying with us on the site.  BTW, he has company in the snowy Midwest.  I know another who just tosses things out there to rile things up, though he does it a bit more adroitly.

SL,

I have similar problems with discipline.

A good memory for subject matters which interest me is one of my blessings.  Nothing about the mandatory caddy discussion rattled me, nor do I think it was improper for this forum.  Simply, I disagree with your authoritarian stance on this matter, and some of the same objections you raised to support the deletion of the Obama thread seemed to apply to that one as well.

If it came across that I was selling myself short, that was not my intent.  I harbor no illusions of changing your mind or otherwise posting anything that you don't already know.  As you noted so well, the answer to why I even bother is that "I guess I just can't help myself".

As to being "disingenuous", that too was not my intent.  The pure course architecture thread on this site is a most rare occurrence.  Even those that Patrick Mucci starts often run into various tangents that stray well away from the source.  I am not complaining mind you.  I didn't start the Obama thread nor veered its course toward tax policy (I don't think), but I feel fairly justified in claiming it has a connection to golf.  Who knows, perhaps if it hadn't been deleted , we may have been able to develop the themes (not to your edification perhaps, but maybe to others) and tied things together a bit more neatly.

Regarding the lipstick on the pig, I try to avoid these things whenever possible, so there is seldom a need to dress them up before going out in public.  In your way of thinking there may not be a tie-in between the populist, golf-playing Obama, his policy of higher taxes, and the well-being of golf.  A few of us disagree.

I don't think that the notion of government interference was brought up here.  It is not a matter of a right to free speech.  As I stated at the outset, Ran's right to censor is not being challenged.  The question posed was simply: is this a good thing?  The concensus answer, to my chagrin, appears to be yes.  Fortunately, life will go on.  Cheers!
« Last Edit: February 08, 2008, 09:48:20 PM by Lou_Duran »

John Kavanaugh

Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #66 on: February 08, 2008, 11:12:02 PM »
RJ,

I have never started an off topic thread so sorry that I am now on my way down to drink at the Bunker Bar and you're not.  note:  It was a perfect day with zero rain exactly as I predicted.  I am so often right and rarely boring.  It must kill you guys.

Mike Sweeney

Re: Is censorship on gca.com a good thing?
« Reply #67 on: February 09, 2008, 06:45:51 AM »
RJ,

I have never started an off topic thread so sorry that I am now on my way down to drink at the Bunker Bar and you're not.  note:  It was a perfect day with zero rain exactly as I predicted.  I am so often right and rarely boring.  It must kill you guys.
Barney,

And still you seem to avoid going overseas like real golfers do! I know I know, a poor little contractor with the second biggest payroll in Southern Illinois can't possibly afford a visit with Fat Baldy Drummer right now with the dollar where it is. This Bandon and Riviera butt kissing is staring to make me think you are a closet LA guy! :o

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back