[TEPaul]

"Who is "they"?  Who had the option?   When did it expire?  What was the option price?"


Shivas:

He means MCC (at least I THINK he means MCC (Lloyd) ) and he means "option" in the form of a choice and not an actual legal option for which a premium may've been paid.

[TEPaul]

"Now can I have the date and the info about how that committee was formed and what it morphed from?   "


Shiv:

You quoted the wrong post there when you asked the question above. Now, go back and read my post #349 VERY CAREFULLY if you have any questions like the one you asked that I just quoted above. Post #349 explains everything I'm aware of that was written and recorded by them about those kinds of committees. We have all their records so far as I can tell and there just ain't any more.

Jeeesus, I can't be writing these explanations over and over and over again just because somebody else neglected to read them in the first place. This gets sort of tiring you know?   

[DMoriarty]

He read the right post, Tom, it is just impossible to decipher what you base your amorphous claim upon.

From the records of the club itself there is a brief mention in the late fall of 1910 of Wilson going onto what appears to be a special committee, or perhaps a morphing of the former "Special Committee on New Golf Grounds" that we have known as the "Search Committee" that clearly was an "ad hoc" commitee that was passing out of existence as their work was done  . . . .

What the hell does that mean? 

[DMoriarty]

Shivas

This logic applies only if the swap occurred after they had decided on 117 acres for the sale.    I doubt this was the case. 

What about the $85K purchase price?

The price was set when the acreage was set.  I think the exchange may have occurred before even this.

[TEPaul]

David Moriarty:

I've got your post #362 printed out with time and date of GOLFCLUBATLAS.com on it. You're talking about the law on here now in your ongoing attempt to be given access to private information?? You're talking the law on here now regarding things such a legal defamation after YOU put an unsolicited opinion essay about a private club on a public forum and got both personally and literarily criticized for it by people who have access to information on that private club you don't have and perhaps can't get???

As much as I've been disgusted by the way you have treated this subject on here and the opinions of others about it, I really never thought you were so stupid as to write a post on here like #362.

I'm sending it to the administrators of this website and may make plenty of others concerned and potentially concerned about something like this aware of this post as well.

It may be incalculable what you and that post of yours just did to this website ever getting information from clubs or anyone connected to them who are in a position to have that kind of information to share their OPINIONS of it with others on here.

[DMoriarty]

David Moriarty:

I've got your post #362 printed out with time and date and GOLFCLUBATLAS.com on it. You're talking about the law on here now in your ongoing attempt to be given access to private information?? You're talking the law on here now after YOU put an unsolicited opinion essay about a private club on a public forum and getting criticized for it by people who have access to information you don't???

As much as I've been disgusted by the way you have treated this subject on here and others opinions about it I really never thought you were so stupid as to write a post on here like #362.

I'm sending it to the administrators of this website and may make plenty of others concerned and potentially concerned about something like this aware of this post.

It may be incalculable what you and that post of yours just did to this website ever getting information from clubs or anyone connected to them who are in a position to have that kind of information to share their OPINIONS of it with others on here.

I'm talking about the same thing I always have been.  How civil society functions.  In our society, when you attack someone or when you attack their reputation, ideas, and work, then that person is entitled to defend themselves.   That principle exists not only in the law, but across the fabric of our society.  That is all I am asking for; a chance to defend myself.   I told you long ago that you needed to back up your claims with fact, and I am telling you nothing more today.

I haven't done anything to the website.  It is you and Wayne who have made a mockery of civil discussion and debate by trying to ruin my reputation and bolster your own while refusing to back up your ridiculous claims.

[TEPaul]

Shivas:

Ordinarily, I would be happy to consider your questions on your post #374 but I think you need to look at David Moriarty's post #362 first and my Post #375 response to it.

It looks to me like this thing is over now for people who have access to private information on Merion and are willing to share their OPINIONS on it on this website.

It looks to me like this will effect people like us from clubs all over the world like that one sharing anything we know on this website and maybe even participating on here.

I suspected the guy was a bit over the top and more than a little self-possessed but I never thought he was actually so stupid as to write a post like #362 for the entire Internet world to potentially see.

But he did and a copy of it (as well as his post #376) is now sitting on my desk.

Sorry about your question on ad hoc committees and such at Merion; it won't have an answer from me!

[Dan Herrmann]

David,
I'm just a lurker on this thead, but this isn't a legal arguement, it's an academic arguement.

The world of academia is (a lot?) less "civil" than our courtrooms.  But I think it's all for the good.  Stong, passionate persuit for facts can help discover what really did or did not happen. 

Attacking a thesis is not attacking the person.

[DMoriarty]

Shivas,

This is of course correct.  I was answering TEPaul's repeated question:  Why I am the only one demanding that he provide me his source material?   I have answered before quite similarly, but he can't quite get it through his head.  I am fishing to come up with something that makes these guys understand that you cannot go around trashing other people's work based on information that only you have and not expect them to ask for it.   

TEPaul seems to think that because the information he is relying on comes from Merion that he can say whatever he wants and be free from questions or critiques, and that he need not support a lick of what he says.   This is of course not true anywhere in our society, no matter what club is or isnt involved.  The only exception I can think of is the past administration's  justifications for invading Iraq, but that is the exception that not only proves the rule but also the need for the rule.   You don't get to the truth unless you provide a basis for your claims and allow them to be thoroughly vetted.   

Allowing people a chance to defend themselves, their ideas, and their reputations is crucial for a host of reasons, not the least of which is that it cautions the unscrupulous from preying on others,  and provides the best chance of actually getting to the truth.   And while all of us (including Merion) have privacy rights and privileges, we cannot shield supposedly private information and at the same time allow that  information to form the basis of a public attack on others.   Civil law is just one example.  If you trash someone's professional reputation and ability, the burden on you is to prove that what you are saying is true.   An example from criminal law is a bit more straight forward.   While it is against the law for me to punch you in the face, I am entitled to defend myself if you physically attack me.   Look to the rules of debate, discussion, negotiation, conversation, academic publication, journalism, peer review, and it is the same.  You just cannot say a bunch of shit without providing support and giving others a chance to respond. 

Yet, here TEPaul and Wayne have said a bunch of shit (most of it directly about me and my Essay) and they inexplicably expect me to accept what they say without vetting their sources or even challenging their ideas.   

That is outrageous.

________________________

Dan,  You are absolutely wrong here.   

-So far all they have done is attack the person, they have hardly even touched the thesis.  They have not and cannot attack the thesis because they are unwilling to provide the basis for their attack.   
-So far all we have are a bunch of BASELESS claims about what they think selections from source material says.  That is meaningless in a real conversation about what happened. 

I would love an academic discussion.  That is what I am hoping for.   

But what they are doing is the anathema of an academic discussion.  They are attacking my thesis and my reputation but have refused to support any of their arguments with the source material.  Nothing academic about it. 

[Kirk Gill]

David, just a question here.

To what degree have you sought out the information from Merion from sources other than TEPaul or Wayne Morrison? Are there other avenues for your research than this public forum?

And if you don't have access to the first-hand documentation, on one hand I can see that it would be frustrating to know that others have access to it and you don't, while on the other hand it gives the proofs you offer for your theories less weight than if you'd seen and studied this material.

Of course, I've not been as deeply involved in this thread as you all, so perhaps this is an issue that has already been dealt with, and if so, my apologies.

[DMoriarty]

Kirk your last post was much more than "just a question" and is a probably pretty good indication of just how absurd this has become, and the futility of me even bothering.  While I always expect you to disagree with me and you never disappoint in this regard, your posts are usually thoughtful and reasonable, but the conclusion here leaves me a bit dumbfounded.  I will nonetheless answer your questions.

My understanding is that Wayne and TEPaul control the information from the MCC archives and I have been told many times and in no uncertain terms that I will never see it.   As for my attempts to access the material directly through the clubs, I won't discuss that in a public forum except as to say that I have not seen the documents as of yet.

There are other avenues of research and I have and will continue to pursue them as I reasonably can.     Most of the practical avenues were exhausted before my Essay, and the results of that research and research since have been quite productive, and have produced quite a bit of"first hand documentation."   Just about everything in my essay was based on my research and contained information and theories that had never before been brought to light and as far as I know, based on everything I have ever read about Merion, my essay still provides the most complete and accurate representation of how Merion East came to be created.    About the only thing I couldn't access in my research were the the minutes and documents stored at MCC;  I found them but was not allowed access.   One of the main reasons I came forward with my essay when I did was so others would build upon my research and we could figure out more about what happened.

You misunderstand my frustration entirely.   I am not frustrated because others have access and I don't.    I am not entitled to access to everything that interests me, and don't bother being frustrated about what may or may not be out of my reach.   The reason I am frustrated is that Wayne and TEPaul have used their access to try and undermine my ideas, my credibility, and my reputation, while simultaneously refusing to back up any of their attacks with actual facts.

For a year now, I have been told that I am an idiot and a terrible researcher and writer, and that virtually everything in my essay ("over 90%" is false.)   Yet they have refused to support their claims with facts.   Instead we are told that I need to accept what they say as true, and that to challenge them or demand proof is an affront to Merion. 

It is an absolute and outrageous joke, and I would expect someone like you would be able to see through it.   

Instead you conclude that you should give my theories less weight???  Why?
-  Because my theories are based on fact, and I produced those facts, and they have been thoroughly vetted and have not been disproven?
-  Because after a year of insults, attacks, and character assignations they still havent produced a single fact that undercuts any of my major theories? 
-  Because they have promised repeatedly for a year to come up with a clear and cohesive document, backed up by fact, that tells a different story than my own, yet they have been unable to do so?
-  Because, as this thread has proven, they do not even understand their own theories and get more wrong almost daily than I got wrong in my entire essay?
-  Because even the information they purposely leak to try and undermine my theories backfires and ends up supporting my theories instead?
-  Because in order to make their theories work they have to ignore "first hand documents," including the specific statements of those who were there, like Francis, Wilson, and Whigham? 
-  Because the more we find out about these MCC documents, the more we realize that these guys have way overhyped them, and when it comes to undermining my theories, there just isn't any there there? 

I am really curious?  What is it about their misuse of the source material that causes you to doubt my theories?   Because the way I see it, the more they stretch to attack and twist and misrepresent my theories  WITHOUT OFFERING A BASIS FOR THEIR ATTACKS, the more clear it ought to become to you and everyone else that the vast majority of my essay had it about correct.

Don't get me wrong, there are quite a few things that I need to change, but most of these things are things that I or others figured out, and have nothing to do with their presentation of their source material.  (Some of it does have to do with the source material, but usually about matters which they apparently do not understand.) 

SO FAR THERE ISN'T MUCH MORE THAN ONE THING THAT I NEED TO CHANGE BASED ON THEIR COUNTER-ARGUMENTS:   In his June 1910 letter, CBM did not include a specific description of a proposed routing.   One year of this garbage, and that is about it.

Would I find other things to change had I the documents?  Surely I would.   But so far, from what I can tell, the vast majority of this information supports my overall conclusions.  This ought to give you a pretty good idea of why they swear I'll never see it.

Kirk,  my tone is probably too sharp here, and I apologize for that, but it annoys me when their propaganda -- and that is all it is since there are no real facts being offered-- sways those who are usually a bit less gullible.   

IF YOU OR ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO DOUBT OR DISMISS ANYTHING IN MY ESSAY, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.  BUT PLEASE DO ME THE COURTESY OF DOING SO BASED ON VERIFIABLE FACT, AND NOT JUST BASED ON WHAT TEPAUL CLAIMS HE KNOWS.  

We should all know enough about TEPaul by this point to know that whether we trust him or not, we really ought to VERIFY.

[JESII]

Tom,

If you read DM's post #362 as some sort of legal threat, you have misinterpreted...and taken this whole thing way too seriously.

The tone from day one has been, in total, ridiculous and embarrassing.

That you guys can't find a way to deal with this subject reasonably is sad because it is such an interesting one with so many moving parts and nuances...it should be a study of cooperation and discovery.

I told David (a year or so ago) I thought he was taking the wrong tack if his goal was to simply get to the bottom of what happened, and I've told you guys I thought you were insane for the way you've gone about voicing your side of the conversation.

This is one of the true golf course architecture threads that hasn't been beaten to death (best redan in the Southern half of Montgomery County, PA...) and you guys have pretty well killed it anyway because of the venom.

Tom et al, why even bother with the threat of not participating on this topic any more? This is an ongoing conversation that you have the unique ability to lead to completion. If you don't trust David's motivations, and think he is only out to discredit Hugh Wilson, prove him wrong. And if the paperwork doesn't prove him wrong, find another way, within the realm of what is known to do so. There is not a soul on the planet that would assign any more design credit, than what has been given, to CBM based on his extremely limited time involved. He helped, but he did not design Merion's deservedly world famous East Course. A comglomerate of members, lead by Hugh Wilson designed and built Merion with some much appreciated guidance from some of the leaders in the business at the time.

[TEPaul]

"Tom et al, why even bother with the threat of not participating on this topic any more? This is an ongoing conversation that you have the unique ability to lead to completion."


Sully:

Look, I have no problem at all continuing on in this thread and doing it civilly. I haven't engaged in any venom with Moriarty lately and I don't plan to. The problem here with him on this thread and others like it about Merion is he is just constantly demanding that I turn over to him private source material that I have from Merion. Count it up; he has hounded me for that on about ten to twenty posts on this thread already.

I am just not going to give it to him and I feel I have no "civil discourse" or "civil law" or any other kind of requirement or responsibility to do that just because he put an essay on here that we don't happen to agree with at all. But he keeps insisting that I do have some requirement to turn that source material over to him on just about every other post. Post #362 is the most blatant example to date----he even suggested defamatory remarks about him on Wayne and my part (destroying his reputation and "work" ) because we have criticized the accuracy of his essay and his position on the details of the development Merion on here.

What we have from Merion is definitely not subject to some law of "public disclosure" as might be information from a public company or a government. This is a private club's private material some of which has never before seen the "public domain." If Merion G.C. or MCC trusted us enough to give it to us with the stipulation that we could speak on here about our opinion of what it says or means without putting the source material itself in the "public domain" (GOLFCLUBATLAS.com) then that is our business with Merion G.C. and MCC and not Moriarty's or anyone else's on this website.

If you don't see it that way then I would like to hear about that from you and why. But if you and others on here are OK with me expressing my own opinion of what it says and means then I will continue participating on threads like this one. If not, then I just won't.

Again, the last thing I'm worried about is Moriarty suing me to disclose this material or suing me for defamation. My God, if he tried something like that I would welcome the opportunity to show up the little shit in a court of law and if he and his reputation and his "work" suffered because of that who the Hell cares; certainly not me. Do you really think I give one good God-damn about his "reputation" or should? That's his problem, not mine. He put that essay on a public forum and out there in the public domain and if he actually thinks the "law" or even some "great societal American agreement on discourse" somehow protects him from the slings and arrows of what anyone thinks about it or him for writing it, he really is egocentrically insane, in my opinion.

I have no problem continuing on with threads like this but his constant hounding of me to turn over private source material to him because he wrote a bullshit essay and put it on here has just got to stop. I recommend you and others suggest to him to stop that stuff of constantly hounding me to turn over whatever I have to him on every other of his posts to me on these threads.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jim Sullivan,

I agree with the initial part of your thread.

Before David even posted his opinion piece/white paper it was attacked.

When it was finally published it certainly wasn't greeted with any degree of appreciation for the work that went into it, nor was it greeted with intellectual curiosity.   It was condemned from the outset.

Did it have flaws or gaps ?  Certainly.
But, no one tried to constructively correct the flaws or fill in the gaps.

The response from the outset has been hostile rather than receptive.
I would have hoped that a collaborative effort would have enabled the interested parties to first find, and then fit the missing pieces of the puzzle together, irrespective of the ultimate conclusion.

Instead, what followed devolved into personal attacks.

From the begining it seemed that the war camps defended their conclusions, rather than having an open mind or embarking on a search for underlying information that could be shared by each camp.  While some have stated the obvious, that this isn't a court case, the production of evidence to both parties is a beneficial process, one that would have helped in this case.

Discussions, passionate and heated debates can produce interesting and informative revelations if the parties are so inclined.
Very little interesting and informative revelations evolve from the "he said, she said" nonsense.

I like each and every one of the parties who has taken an active part in this discussion/debate

I haven't read all of the posts thoroughly and thoughtfully, nor have I analyzed them properly, however, I've found a good amount of the posts from ALL parties to be very informative from various perspectives.

While some of the conclusions formed by those presenting their case seem flawed, the presentation of their material has added to the overall data base on the subject.

The issue of "information" and "private clubs" reminds me of the movie "Absence of Malice".

I understand TEPaul's ane Wayne's position, but, I also understand David's position.

A club, or a party privileged to information obtained from a club, can't dispense that information.... "selectively".

On the other hand, a "private club" has no obligation to diseminate any information.

Therein lies part of the dilema.    The thirst for knowledge, data, information involves a third party who's not a participant in the discussion/debate.

Let's examine the extremes for a second.

Extreme # 1
CBM and HJW had little to do with the routing and design of the golf course

Extreme # 2
HW had little to do with the routing and design of the golf course.

If either is true, is Merion less of a golf course ?
If one is true, is Merion less of a golf course ?

The only negative I see is the correcting of a historical record if one or the other is true.
I see no adverse consequence befalling the golf course.

While I respect the "private club - privacy issue"  why wouldn't a club, having stored documents for close to a century, want to digitize those documents and reveal their content ?  Why would they continue to save them in some attic or basement if they're NOT going to be made public.  If you're not going to reveal them, you might as well destroy them and use the storage space for something worthwhile.

One of my interests in this discussion lies with learning more about Raynor's counterpart, Francis.
Certainly he would seem to have had to have been an integral part of the design process, from start to finish.

Did he visit NGLA, did he travel abroad, was he involved in subsequent designs, etc., etc..

Perhaps over the weekend I'll take the time to read this thread in one continuous effort, make notes, and ask questions.

Someone, especially someone OBJECTIVE, should referee or moderate this discussion in order to make it more productive ....... sooner.

[JESII]

Tom,

He's not suggesting the law provides him any access to your information...he is suggesting that when you dispute an opinion he states you support it with specific facts to support your claim, otherwise it's "he said / he said". You've got the leverage of information...

[TEPaul]

"About the only thing I couldn't access in my research were the the minutes and documents stored at MCC;  I found them but was not allowed access."


Just a minute here David Moriarty!

I am more than willing to give you the benefit of the doubt right now that you may THINK you're referring to minutes and documents stored at MCC of some nature OTHER than the following:

1. Macdonald's actual letter to Lloyd
2. Wilson's report to the Board meeting of 4/19/1911
3. The rest of that 4/19/1911 board meeting, including Thompson's resolution
4. A series of correspondences in 1910 between these Merion board men including Cuylers who you never even heard of.
5. Lloyd's deed taking land into his own name and holding it for 7-8 months and the reason why.


IF you are trying to suggest that you found those items above at MCC and were denied access to them I feel I have every single good right and reason to call you a liar right here and now on this discussion group in a world wide public forum.

There is no conceivable way you found those MCC documents mentioned about because Merion G.C. was not aware of them and frankly either was MCC until Wayne Morrison and two friends of his from Merion GC AND MCC found them less than a year ago.

I'll tell you right now, you just better cut out trying to pass off on here these kinds of egregious mistaken remarks and if you are actually aware that they are that and you put them on here like you did above anyway, there is no possible conclusion to come to other than you are just LYING to this website!

Go ahead and think you can or should be able to sue me or browbeat me into disclosing things to you for some bizarre idea you have about "civil discourse" and "civil law" and some societal American agreement to protect or promote both for saying what I just did above, but come on, if one is as familiar with all this material as I am, where it came from, when and from whom, I am most assuredly not going to allow you to try to convince anyone on here that you either knew it was there or you found it. Failing you actually coming here and crawling up into a dark, dusty attic at MCC where that material has been for God only knows how long, that is virtually IMPOSSIBLE! 

[DMoriarty]

TEPaul,

You are wrong about this Tom.  You and Wayne and now Mike have placed Merion's information squarely in the public domain by constantly talking about it, reciting it, and alluding to it on this public website, and by selectively using it as the supposed basis for your public attacks on me, my research, and my essay.  This is the public domain. 

You are under this insane notion that because you guys used the (supposed) contents of a private club's records to attack me, that this somehow makes you immune from simple standards of civility and fair play, but you are very wrong there.   All you've done is exposed yourself (and through you, Merion) to the very questions and demands that to which you now object.   

For reasons that are inexplicable to me, Merion and MCC have allowed you guys to pretend like THEIR documents support your attacks on me, my research and my essay, and whether they truly are concerned about the privacy of these documents (a claim which is betrayed by the way you have played fast and loose with the information) then you have put them in an horrible spot.    I've no other means to defend myself, my research, my essay, or my reputation but to vet these documents.   You guys sacrificed their privacy interests when you duplicitously and deceptively double dealt with their documents.   

In short, Merion's information has no special status in the realm of public discourse.  You've used the information to attack me, and now for a host of reasons you need to let me vet the information which you have claimed is the basis for your attacks.  I've explained this to you guys at the very beginning, and told you then what a terrible position you were putting the clubs in, but all I got in return was your arrogance and scorn.   

Your problem with you guys is that you think the rules of civility are beneath you, but you are wrong about this.  If you want to have a civil conversation then you will start by answering my questions so I may adequately vet your claims.   If you won't, then you have no role to play in this conversation and you never have.  An open and frank discussion requires us all to back up our claims with facts, and allow others to fully vet our claims and challenge us based on the entirety of the source material.   This applies to you, me, and everyone else, including a certain member who is feeding you lines and information,  while letting you do his talking for him.   

My hounding you will not stop until you have backed up your claims.   I am not here to have you dictate your version of Merion's history to me or anyone else.   

_____________________

As for the MCC documents.  I knew generally that the old records were there, but not the specific contents, except for maybe the minutes.  Meanwhile, you guys were writing how you had searched everywhere and suspected the documents had gotten lost in a fire.   Or was it a flood?  It's always one or the other.
_______________________

Patrick,  I agree that a private club should be able to do what their documents as they see fit.   But once they allow those documents to be used to attack and disparage another, for a whole host reasons (not the least of which is common decency) they need to allow that person to defend himself, even if that means divulging information that they might not have otherwise divulged. 

I repeatedly warned Tom and Wayne about this way back when Wayne first embarked on this path, yet here we are, a year's worth of insults, attacks, and character assassination and plenty of claims that just will not hold up to critical muster if and when the source material is revealed.

I've said from the beginning that I have no grudge against either of the Merion's and respect both clubs, and remain willing to respect Merion's privacy and their wishes concerning their private documents.   I tried to treat the subject with sensitivity in my Essay and did not stoop to personal attacks or insults directed at those with whom I have disagreed in the past.  Additionally, though my Essay relied entirely on material from the public domain, I nonetheless tried to be respectful of any potential privacy concerns Merion might have had, and even consulted with Wayne before disclosing certain documents I thought might be particularly sensitive.   I'd like to figure out a way where I can vet the attacks leveled against me by Wayne and TEPaul, and in a manner that causes the least concern for Merion and MCC.

That being said, I am entitled to vet my claims.   If TEPaul and Wayne were really concerned with the privacy of this information, they wouldn't have been using it publicly against me for the past year. 

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
He's not suggesting the law provides him any access to your information...he is suggesting that when you dispute an opinion he states you support it with specific facts to support your claim, otherwise it's "he said / he said". You've got the leverage of information..."


Jim:

It does not work that way. Not in my opinion, and I doubt it ever will.

Is there any single reason you can think of WHY David Moriarty should not have gone directly to Merion G.C. and MCC HIMSELF before even attempting to write an essay, and certainly one like THAT challengeing the club's architect and architectural history??

From Christ's sake, these two clowns MacWood and Moriarty DID NOT EVEN KNOW that MCC, Merion, the club, the club historians had THANKED Macdonald and Whigam profusely when they helped them out over four days spread out over ten months!!! They thanked them for that back in 1910 and 1911 and the Merion history reflects that completely. IT's ALL RIGHT THERE in the club records AND MEETING MINUTES from back then. Did those clowns try to find it where it all began? You surely know the answer to that---eg NOT even close.

So these two people who have never even been to Merion (Oh, sorry, Moriarty went there once to play golf ) find something in some old article somewhere that Merion has always had and then THINK THEY discovered some PUZZLE about the architectural history of Merion!?!?

BULLSHIT they did! We've all known about that forever. THERE IS NO more to it. THERE IS NO PUZZLE! THERE NEVER WAS! THOSE TWO CLOWNS just dreamed it up! SO they decide to make a total fucking mountain out of a molehill that has been known about FOREVER by MERION!?

Figure out for yourselves what has gone on here!

And THEN when ONE decides to write some article about all this he sends it to people who don't know much of anything about Merion and REFUSES to show it to anyone WHO DOES???

Just ask yourself what the hell THAT was all about??

Cooperation?? Civil discourse? Sharing of material??? HORSESHIT!!! Moriarty didn't want us to see a damn thing he was coming up with before he put it on here. WHAT is THAT about if you guys are asking for civil discourse and cooperation from us with HIM!?

Figure it out Boys; you aren't really as big saps and suckers as you are letting on here on these recent posts, are you? Or ARE you?

Don't you realize that any historian worth a damn with a club or course goes right at the original source material FROM the club WITH THE CLUB and with the club's cooperation and consent? If they don't do that, then what in the hell is going on anyway other than some preconceived suspicion about the club or its friends are trying to hide something about its history?!?  Don't you guys even understand that? Have you ever done anything like this as we have for years not just with Merion but many other clubs?

If a David Moriarty really wants to know all about Merion's history then he has JUST GOT to do what we have----GO THERE, get to KNOW them and their history FROM what the club has FROM that history.

He decides to write some revisionist crap which the rest of you don't recognize or understand because you don't know the course's real history either without even going there?! He decides to just throw some shit on the wall, and when he gets criticized for it and for doing it that way by us he THEN DEMANDS that WE TURN OVER TO HIM everything he never had the commonsense and the common courtesy to spend the time and the effort and I guess the money like we have to go to the club for IN THE FIRST place?


I don't think so young Sullivan Jr.  That's just not the way we look at all this and I'm pretty sure if you were us you wouldn't either.

This stuff has got to stop like tomorrow. If I see another post from that clown browbeating me to turn over everything I have he should've had BEFORE writing that preposterous essay (I guarantee you anyone who actually thinks THAT essay is interesting doesn't know shit about Merion's architectural history) I'll just get off these threads and then all of you can have no access to even actual source material OPINION and you can all just speculate your brains out about what really happened back then; that's about all you've ever done anyway.

THIS jerk keeps telling everyone on here there is no reason at all to trust anything I say about source material that I've analyzed very carefully because I don't agree with what he says about the architectural history of the course and THAT material when HE has NEVER even seen it himself?

FIGURE IT OUT BOYS! Figure it out!! 

[DMoriarty]

Is there any single reason you can think of WHY David Moriarty should not have gone directly to Merion G.C. and MCC HIMSELF before even attempting to write an essay, and certainly one like THAT challengeing the club's architect and architectural history??

I have a few reasons:

1.  Because you and Wayne made it perfectly clear to me that Merion wanted nothing to do with my research.  You even went so far as to tell me that you had had specific conversations with certain individuals at Merion (Chairs of certain committees) and had discussed my research with them, and that they were very upset and wanted nothing to do with it or me.    Now that turned out to be a complete lie on your part, but I wasn't taking my chances.

2.  I informed both you and Wayne before I even returned to the website that I was back to discuss Merion and related topics, and I even gave you a laundry list of the types of topics I would discuss.    Patrick and others told you I was working on an essay that would rewrite much of Merion's history, and both you and Wayne encouraged (demanded is more like it) that I post it and post it immediately so it could be vetted.   Most of the website chimed in as well.   NO ONE ONCE SUGGESTED THAT I GO TO MERION BEFORE POSTING IT.   NOT WAYNE. NOT YOU. NOT ANYONE.   Nor did Wayne mention this while I was explaining to him how the property transactions worked, or various other details not covered in my paper, or when I was providing him with documents and directing him to others.   It was only in retrospect,  after you guys decided to that you had the MCC documents and did not need me anymore that suddenly my actions became so offensive.    How convenient.

3.  My essay relied entirely on public domain material and concerned topics that had been discussed on this website for years.  The only difference with my essay is that I actually did the research and put it all into one coherent piece.

4.  I discussed providing Merion with a copy before posting it, but was encouraged not to do so because, I was told, Merion would most likely try to stop me from posting it, especially given that they would undoubtedly involve Wayne in the process.   There was no legitimate reason for me not to posting it.

Tom, even if I had gone to Merion, nothing would have changed.  By that point I knew what you guys knew, and a whole lot more.   And I had tried to work with you in the past, and that proved impossible, and I was resolved to not getting bogged down again.  So long as you and Wayne are running the show regarding Merion's history, one would have to be a fool to think that cooperation would get anyone any closer to the truth.

From Christ's sake, these two clowns MacWood and Moriarty DID NOT EVEN KNOW that MCC, Merion, the club, the club historians had THANKED Macdonald and Whigam profusely when they helped them out over four days spread out over ten months!!! They thanked them for that back in 1910 and 1911 and the Merion history reflects that completely. IT's ALL RIGHT THERE in the club records AND MEETING MINUTES from back then. Did those clowns try to find it where it all began? You surely know the answer to that---eg NOT even close.

Have you read my essay?    Of course I knew these things.  That is why I started to question you and Wayne when you constantly minimized their involvement.

BULLSHIT they did! We've all know about that forever. THERE IS NO more to it. THERE IS NO PUZZLE! THERE NEVER WAS! THOSE TWO CLOWNS just dreamed it up! SO they decide to make a total fucking mountain out of a molehill that has been known about FOREVER by MERION!?

I am tiring of you saying this.  Do you really want to go through in detail what you knew and what you didnt?   I have no interest in embarrassing you further, but if you keep claiming that you knew it all already, I will.

[Kirk Gill]

David, I don't know who  controls what at Merion, and my question was not, I hope, the result of gullibility on my part. And I don't know that I came to any conclusions in that post, I'm just wondering.

I guess I could go into more detail of where I'm coming from in that question. It is obvious over the many pages of many threads that you and Tom Paul don't get along, and haven't since before your essay was posted. I'm sure that he's the bad guy in this to you, and to him the opposite may be true. Regardless, the bad blood has a tendency to obfuscate the points you are both making. My question about probing other sources is a straightforward one. Are there other sources within Merion with whom you might deal to obtain the information you're looking for? If, as you assert, that TEPaul and Wayne "control the information from the MCC archives" then you'll either find a way to get past all of the personal rigmarole and find the answers you're looking for, or you won't. Nothing is owed to any of us. You as a researcher have to try and find a way to get to any privately held information you desire. My "less weight" comment is based simply on this - if there is first-hand information out there that directly addresses the questions you're researching, and you don't have access to it, then it can't help but hurt your research. NOT your credibility, but your work product. I did not say that your theories should be given less weight because of this, but that the proof for your theories may have less weight because you simply don't have all of the information.

Yes, you've  been attacked, and I appreciate the fact that you understand that while I've disagreed with some of the assertions (or in some cases the logic that leads to your assertions) in your essay I've attempted, at least, for it to never be personal.

[TEPaul]

I see no reason to actually copy posts #388 and #390 but this post is my response to them and the result of them. To me they are just the last straw. I'm sorry so many didn't seem to see the obvious and try to stop it; I really thought they would. I've got to admit, I'm disappointed, as my good friend Wayne Morrison from Merion is too.

email on the way;

"Ran;

Seeing as I'm probably less tech-savy than even you admit to be, I guess I can't deregister myself from GOLFCLUBATLAS.com. I think you've probably suspected that things would come to head someday with this David Moriarty and us and Merion and clearly it has. I don't want to be on this site if he's registered. If you take him off let me know and I'll consider coming back. I've had a lot of fun on your website from the very beginning and you know it was a big part of my life. Maybe I'll see you at the Homestead in a couple of weeks and maybe I won't. Please deregister my name immediately.

Thanks, Pal,

Tom"

[DMoriarty]

Kirk,  I tried to answer your questions, and hope I did.  

I disagree with your conclusion that their games have at all diminished my essay.  If there was anything in that source material that diminished my essay we'd have seen it a long time ago the first day they had it just like the CBM letter.  

Now maybe there are things in there that diminish my essay but they haven't figured them out (this wouldn't surprise me in the least bit) and my essay would surely be better with the source material, but my theories are as good or better than the day the essay was posted.   A year has passed and despite every effort on their part, they have barely scratched the paint.  

My concern is that somehow anyone can buy their jargon that there is something there when WE HAVE SEEN NO PROOF THAT ANYTHING IS THERE.  Just like their theory on the Francis swap. They swore up and down they could prove it didn't happen the way I said it did.  Now they are out of bullets and if anything they have made my theory more probable, not less.  

[DMoriarty]

*

[TEPaul]

"Tom, It seems rather extreme to de-register rather than answer my questions, especially because that won't stop them."


Your questions or your "puzzles" or your self-possessed concerns about your "work" and your reputation  doesn't matter to me anymore, not that they ever have with the way you went about all this. Merion will always be there and Hugh I. Wilson and his committee (along with Flynn later) will always be considered its primary architects. Macdonald and Whigam helped them and gave them good advice on some things then, probably more to do with agronomy than architecture for a total of four days in the beginning. Merion and we always knew that even if clowns like MacWood and you didn't. Macdonald and Whigam were in no wise the routers or designers or the driving force behind Merion East! Even if you probably never will, I know that and so does Merion, and that's what will always be important. I don't want to be on here if you are on this website, because, in my opinion, you make everything to do with the very soul of golf architectural research shriek!   

[DMoriarty]

"Tom, It seems rather extreme to de-register rather than answer my questions, especially because that won't stop them."


Your questions or your "puzzles" or your self-possessed concerns about your "work" and your reputation  doesn't matter to me anymore, not that they ever have with the way you went about all this. Merion will always be there and Hugh I. Wilson and his committee (along with Flynn later) will always be considered its primary architects. Macdonald and Whigam helped them and gave them good advice on some things then, probably more to do with agronomy than architecture for a total of four days in the beginning. Merion and we always knew that even if clowns like MacWood and you didn't. Macdonald and Whigam were in no wise the routers or designers or the driving force behind Merion East! Even if you probably never will, I know that and so does Merion, and that's what will always be important. I don't want to be on here if you are on this website, because, in my opinion, you make everything to do with the very soul of golf architectural research shriek!   

So go then.  No use making a scene. 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()