[Charlie Goerges]

Tonight I was looking online for a philosophy forum to possibly join (in order to help keep me from polluting GCA with my sophomoric philosophizing) and I realized just how good things are here at GCA.

A few other discussion groups are perhaps more civil than GCA, but I have not seen any that combine the level of civility, intelligence, depth, humor, and camaraderie that is shown here.

For providing this discussion group, I thank Ran Morrissett and Ben Cowan-Dewar. And for making it such a worthwhile place to visit, I thank the members of GCA.

Happy Holidays to all,

Charlie

[JSPayne]

Charlie, I whole-heartedly agree. And the exact reasons you've mentioned have been my half-arse excuse for posting certain OT topics on this board that have angered a few regular posters. I just have never been able to find a more enjoyable, intelligent and interactive group with which to share ideas and discussion not pertaining to GCA.

I understand the desire to keep this board as OT free as possible, and I'm sure it's not one of Ran's greatest desires, but if an additional board could be created (maybe titled something like "Around the Green"?) where those of us wanting to share and discuss random but pertinent OT topics when we need a little break from GCA could go, I think it would solve everyone's dilemma. I feel such a board could only add to the site, not detract, as  anyone participating in OT discussions wouldn't have to go far to get back to the main GCA board. Sometimes it seems that an incredibly active OT discussion even stimulates more ON-topic posts regarding GCA, but to have that discussion in a seperate forum where those opposed to OT topics don't have to see it if they don't want to would be ideal.

Just a thought. And for whoever doesn't like the thought, I challange you to point me toward a board for which to find such an outlet on general OT discussions with a comparable membership of witty, colorful, intelligent and well-spoken minds as can be found on this site.

Charlie, if you find such a site.......please let me know. I'd love to join you. 

[Bill Shamleffer]

I think one of the very important aspects about GCA that makes this discussion group so much better than all else I have seen on the web is the requirement to post under our real names.  I believe people are more likely to think about what they post when that statement is under their own name and not under some anonymous byline.

Another important aspect is requiring contributors to these discussions to be accepted to the group.  That extra bit of effort eliminates postings by those who just want to make a few outlandish comments without being involved in the community of this discussion group.

These two requirements do create a community among this discussion group.  A community with some similarities to that found at a good golf club.  A community that has its characters, has some heated moments and exchanges, but a place where the members look forward to visiting and spending time.

[Tom Huckaby]

I concur with all of this, and would ask those who frequently complain that this group has gone downhill, sucks compared to what it once was, etc. to go read some others before you judge.  You just don't know... this one is by so far and away the best it's silly to even contemplate.  And that was true at the beginning and remains true now.
TH

[Kirk Gill]

Another important aspect is requiring contributors to these discussions to be accepted to the group.  That extra bit of effort eliminates postings by those who just want to make a few outlandish comments without being involved in the community of this discussion group.

Bill, this is so true. My wife is a moderator of a very large discussion group that deals with a very emotional topic. She calls those people who just jump on a site to create dissention "Trolls." They appear, drop their verbal bombs, and take off or are immediately banned. They often re-appear using different user names (although the site is getting better at making sure that this doesn't happen).

Even the most passionate, vitriolic threads on this forum don't ever approach the level of harshness, baseness, or boorishness that these kinds of hit-and-run posters provide.

My thanks, as always, to Ran and to Ben and to all of the members of this group who continually impress with their knowledge, their class, and their acceptance of those who are interested in both learning and (on occasion) pontificating.........

[tlavin]

But for the occasional perseveration about obscure, but related, threads and the rogue off-topic conversations that occasionally get too personal, I agree that this place is tops for me in terms of discussion groups.

[Mark Pearce]

Whilst I was expressing a similar thought just this lunchtime, I'm always a little concerned when a message board enters the phases of it's lifespan when  people a) start to talk about how they talk about the subject of the board and b) start to congratulate themselves on the way they talk about the subject of the board.  These are, IMHO, not a healthy sign.

[Mike Sweeney]

But for the occasional perseveration about obscure, but related, threads and the rogue off-topic conversations that occasionally get too personal, I agree that this place is tops for me in terms of discussion groups.

Speaking of such, what is up with this Blagojevich guy?  Who voted for this guy in Chicago last election?

[Tom Huckaby]

Whilst I was expressing a similar thought just this lunchtime, I'm always a little concerned when a message board enters the phases of it's lifespan when  people a) start to talk about how they talk about the subject of the board and b) start to congratulate themselves on the way they talk about the subject of the board.  These are, IMHO, not a healthy sign.

That is very true.
But that has been going on for YEARS in here also.  I too had fear the first time it occurred... but this site always seems to overcome it.

TH

[Andy Hughes]

Speaking of such, what is up with this Blagojevich guy?   Who voted for this guy in Chicago last election?

You know, I seem to recall that Shivas guy telling us a few months ago something to the effect of 'you guys have no effin' clue how corrupt Chicago politics are and how deep and wide the swamp is.' 

[JC Jones]

I wouldnt mind an OT board.  When you find yourself surrounded by people who share a passion of yours, often times they share other passions and wouldnt mind a discussion on those as well.

If not, Im certainly happy as a clam w/ what we've got and Ran has done a great job.

[PThomas]

Speaking of such, what is up with this Blagojevich guy?   Who voted for this guy in Chicago last election?

You know, I seem to recall that Shivas guy telling us a few months ago something to the effect of 'you guys have no effin' clue how corrupt Chicago politics are and how deep and wide the swamp is.' 

the US attorney who announced the arrest, Pat Fitzgerald. said it perfectly when he said Lincoln is rolling over in his grave and that this case is a new low...which is saying a lot with the fine history of corrupt Illinois politicians

what a freaking bum......

[RJ_Daley]

I've been of the opinion since year one that GCA.com would be better served with an extra button on the left list of features, called something like "19th hole O.T. or O.B." 

I also believe that registration and posting under one's real name is something of a quality control. 

We have had a few episodes of "trolls".  No need to name them now, they have all eventually moved on. 

I would love to see the day when we had an O.T. sidebar button, and a serious architectural question or debate would break out, and all the O.T. participants would get angry and tell the GCA discussion guys to take it over the the proper GCA discussion page.   

As rough and tumble as O.T. discussion has gotten at times, with a few drop out people for lack of much to say, or delisted people along the way for inexcusable transgressions of insult, I remain convinced that O.T. discussion strengthens the overall group, because it puts a personality and real face on people that participate, and one can always choose to seek further association or avoid some of the 1500 participants of GCA.com, as one sees fit and feels comfortable.  O.T. helps grease the wheels of real life meetings for golf or social, and adds texture to the group, IMHO.

[Tom Huckaby]

RJD:  I've always pretty much agreed with you on this, although my main reason for wishing for the OT side was so that we could prove once and for all how BORING and slow the other side would be.

 

But of course in the end, not only is the love you take equal to the love you make, but this remains a site owned by one man.  Whatever the hell wants is how this is gonna go.

TH

[Anthony Gray]

  At my first CGA event I noticed one glaring omission other than the golf. And that was for the three and a half hours I was at the club noone mentioned golf course architecture. It was a bunch of golfers fellowshipping. So I believe that OT threads are vital to this site if as a "rookie" I am allowed a voice on this thread. This site offers congresation with others that have higher golf IQs than the people you normally golf with. Please do not make me display photos of the people I normally golf with. The wealth of experiences on this site is intoxicating at times. I am blessed to be included.


  Anthony

 

[Mark Pearce]

Where can I get some of that congresation?  It sounds good.

[Anthony Gray]

Where can I get some of that congresation?  It sounds good.

  It goes great with Merlow.

  Anyhony

[Sean_A]

Anyhony

As in any honey will do?

Ciao

[Anthony Gray]

But of course in the end, not only is the love you take equal to the love you make, but this remains a site owned by one man.  Whatever the hell wants is how this is gonna go.

  And Tom Paul is one of the finest.

     Anthony

[Mark Bourgeois]

He even used the Queen's English, Mark!

What I would like to see is for BenRan to port an idea over from GMail: Mail Goggles.  Is everyone familiar with this feature?  It requires you to do sums (successfully) before sending an email.  Very good filter for late-night emails best left unsent!

The (GCA) Post Goggle would be a little less restrictive; before launching a thread, a question pops up:

"What can be learned about architecture from exploring this?"

This is what Ran says we each should ask ourselves before launching a thread.

Mark

PS Anthony, I should have thought "off-site" GCA.com meetings were the place for bonding, with the discussion board the place for architecture discussion.

If Ran's quote above leaves any doubt on his views, here is BenRan's unimpeachably-clear description of the mission of this discussion board:

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

[Tim Bert]

Hoping to contribute to the greatness of the conversation and deep intellectual levels here...

http://members.shaw.ca/stephen.sutherland/golf.html

[Mark Pearce]

If Ran's quote above leaves any doubt on his views, here is BenRan's unimpeachably-clear description of the mission of this discussion board:

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

Unimpeachably clear?  The lawyer in me notes that Ran doesn't say "A free access board for the discussion of golf course architecture" but rather "golf course architecture related matters", clearly a far broader (and less distinct) subject matter.  It's clear, for instance, that drivers made from Unobtainium relate to GCA in that they affect the way golfers using said drivers interact with the architecture.  Surely, therefore, BombSquadGolf type discussions of which carbon nano-tube loaded shaft to fit to my Unobtainium driver are suitable material (God forbid that this should ever happen).  It seems to me that the mission of this board, as defined, is rather broader than some would suggest.

[Anthony Gray]

  What do professional golf course architects talk about when they get together? I heard some even like baseball trivia.

  Anthony

[Mark Bourgeois]

If Ran's quote above leaves any doubt on his views, here is BenRan's unimpeachably-clear description of the mission of this discussion board:

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

Unimpeachably clear?  The lawyer in me notes that Ran doesn't say "A free access board for the discussion of golf course architecture" but rather "golf course architecture related matters", clearly a far broader (and less distinct) subject matter.  It's clear, for instance, that drivers made from Unobtainium relate to GCA in that they affect the way golfers using said drivers interact with the architecture.  Surely, therefore, BombSquadGolf type discussions of which carbon nano-tube loaded shaft to fit to my Unobtainium driver are suitable material (God forbid that this should ever happen).  It seems to me that the mission of this board, as defined, is rather broader than some would suggest.

Sure, the key is intent: does the poster try to tie the subject to architecture?  A discussion on wedges or wedge regulations can be taken in an architecture direction (impact on course design and maintenance), a pure technology direction (BombSquadGolf), or a navel-gazing, narcissistic direction (Oprah).

[Charlie Goerges]

Well, this thread has certainly taken off. I'm glad it promoted some discussion, especially since I just meant to compliment the posters here, thank the operators, and say how fortunate we are to have such a thoughtful group.

Regarding where the discussion has gone, I'll say that I agree with those who don't mind some OT threads. Going further, I agree with Tom H's viewpoint (or what I believe his viewpoint to be) that a separate board for OT threads is not necessary or desireable.

In my opinion, many of the threads labelled OT or called OT are in fact on-topic. Among the themes that architects and writers on GCA have found appropriate to the subject are: "being at one with nature", "overcoming adversity", "man vs nature", "man vs self", and countless others I'm forgetting or have not read. So it does not surprise me nor bother me when topics like this come up on this board. They go to the purpose of golf architecture and to the varied outlooks of those who experience the game.

So if you dislike OT discussion, remember that even if the discussion does not seem to relate to architecture, the information in that topic may help you understand your fellow posters even better when discussing something considered on-topic.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()