[paul cowley]

I'm checking out of this thread.......have fun guys!

[Joe Hancock]

I'm checking out of this thread.......have fun guys!

I didn't even see you check in.....

[JC Jones]

I'm checking out of this thread.......have fun guys!

I didn't even see you check in.....

I was thinking the same thing 

[DMoriarty]

Jeff,   You and I have different recollection of the past tone of some of your comments about TomM's research.  Even here, you misrepresent and overstate his position in your previous point of agreement.  But no matter.  I have no interest in getting into that.

As I wrote above if your intention in the thread was positive then great.  I said what I had to say on that issue in my first post.

My frustration here isn't with you, but rather with Sean and Brian who saw fit to lecture me for bickering with TEPaul when I did nothing of the sort.  I've had enough of being lumped in with him.    Brian and Sean were out of line and remain out of line.  Apparently, neither is mature enough to acknowledge this.  

I'm done with this.

[Joe Hancock]

......

 

[Mac Plumart]

Okay...here is the deal...I played too much golf over the holiday and my newly repaired leg is KILLING me, so I had to load up on some serious painkillers today.  Therefore, I am perhaps a little too loose with the keyboard today.  Nevertheless, I continue to type...

As to Jeff's history regarding comments on Tom M. or others, I don't know and can't really comment.  However, in reading his original post on this thread...I took it to be a sincere appreciation of the knowledge and/or research materials that Tom M. has.  I agreed wholeheartedly and still do.  His comments on some of my threads have been superb.  Did he challenge me at times?  Yes...but in a good way.  Did he frustrate me?  Yes...and not always in a good way.  But that doesn't take away from his knowledge and research...which is quite impressive.

I really think Jeff meant this thread to be complimentary to Tom Macwood.  I am taking it as that.  I would love to hear Tom's comments on his research background and the process he has gone through over the years to learn all of this stuff.  Why?  Because I want to copy it and eventually have the depth of knowledge that he has.  It is very impressive.  Like I said, in all sincerity previously, Thanks Tom. 

[Sean_A]

Jeff,   You and I have different recollection of the past tone of some of your comments about TomM's research.  Even here, you misrepresent and overstate his position in your previous point of agreement.  But no matter.  I have no interest in getting into that.

As for your "humor," I agree that you think you are funny.  But often I see more snide than funny.  See your repeated snide comments about me finding your stalker comment over the line.

As I wrote above if your intention in the thread was positive then great.  I said what I had to say on that issue in a single sentence.  My frustration here isn't with you, but rather with Sean and Brian who saw fit to lecture me for bickering with TEPaul when I did nothing of the sort.  I've had enough of being lumped in with him.

Brian and Sean were out of line and remain out of line.  Apparently, either is mature enough to acknowledge this.  

I'm done with this.

David

This is fat coming from you with the nonsense you have been involved with.  At times, its all you have done is bicker with Tom P.  Jeff has made it quite clear yet again what his intentions were and are.  You totally misread the situation.  

I just wanted to read a reply from Tommy Mac and all I got was crap from you and TomP - yet again.  Its a broken record which against all my best judgement I hope will be fixed, but this only results in heavy sighs on my part.  For this I am truly sorry.  

You know, it just might be easier to trust people once in a while.  Give them the benefit of the doubt.  Christmas is almost upon us.  

Ciao  

[PThomas]

since this thread has gotten so far off track i hope it gets deleted

[Jud_T]

He's definitely pulling a Tiger! 

[DMoriarty]

I just wanted to read a reply from Tommy Mac and all I got was crap from you and TomP - yet again.  Its a broken record which against all my best judgement I hope will be fixed, but this only results in heavy sighs on my part.  For this I am truly sorry.

Give me a break.  Below is the ENTIRETY of what provoked you to blast me and continue to blast me for bickering with TEPaul, yet not a bit of it has anything to do with TEPaul

Mac, Your comments are right on and above board.  But otherwise I smell a skunk.   Comparing Tom Macwood to a stalker?    Too much.  

Tom MacWood, I appreciate your research and analysis as well, but I've neither need nor desire to see a time card or a comprehensive bibliography.   Keep up the excellent work.

And this to Jeff:  Maybe you just aren't as funny as you think you are.

I thought (and think) Jeff Brauer's comparison of TomM to a stalker was "too much" and said so.  Am I no longer entitled to express my opinion?   Is mine really such an outrageous opinion so as to garner the load of crap you and Brian have shoveled my way?

You know, it just might be easier to trust people once in a while.  Give them the benefit of the doubt.  Christmas is almost upon us.  

Glass houses, Sean.  

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ran can certainly delete this thread IMHO. I am really sorry for it.

David,

No one like to be lectured...hint, hint. And like others, I see no need for constant bickering here, and apologize for my part in any of it.  But, I may have started it but am trying NOT to continue it.  You can quote everyone on earth and give your interpretation of how you are offended, but again, there was no intent by me to offend you, or drag you into any argument.  Sad to say, you just tend to do that your self..... 

That said, I think you are sort of filling in some blanks the wrong way, but I do seee why.  I do agree that some of my posts in the past have taken a condescending tone towards Tom, no doubt.  I am trying to let those disagreements go, and hope he (and you) does the same.  Certainly, he has more to forgive of me than in reverse.  Like a few others, I would prefer to hear from him than you or TePaul.  If he doesn't want to answer, I completely understand, especially at this point.

Lets talk architecture! (on a new thread)

[Kalen Braley]

Jeff,

FWIW, I thought your question seemed harmless as well and was looking forward to Tom M chiming in with his thoughts.

Tis a pity!!

[Brian Phillips]

David,

Jeff was using humour about the stalking....it's a joke....you know ha ha..

Why do you get so uptight about everything?  You judged Jeff before allowing Tom M to even make his own reply to what everybody else saw as a legitimate question.  You said you could smell a skunk...

You are the only one that thought the question was loaded, which apparently it wasn't. Jeff has confirmed this.

Maybe we can get this thread deleted and Jeff can ask the question again....without anyone reacting...

This thing between you and Tom Paul has to stop, it really does.  It is not doing you any good or Tom Paul any good or this website.  Can you guys not meet up for a beer somewhere and bury the hatchet....it is worse than the middle east in here.   

[TEPaul]

Jeffrey:

Don't even think about it----this thread does not need to be deleted at all. I think its back on track today and it would be good to see what Tom MacWood has to say about your questions. You've got it back on track and you can kept it on track if both you and everyone else on here, including me, would just stop responding to one person's posts this morning that has been taking it off track. Keep it going---we would all love to hear what Tom MacWood has to say about it and I would also love to know what he plans to do with ultimately repositing all the material he seems to have at his disposal. Personally, I would love to see him reposit it with the new USGA Architectural Archive as others are doing with their own material, most notably including Joe Bausch of Philadelphia who has arguably amassed a trove of old newspaper and magazine material to rival anyone's, probably including Tom MacWood's.

[Ian Andrew]

Jeff,

It was a good question.

Ask Ran or Ben to delete the original and post the question again - but I would suggest that you IM or email Tom to see if he will answer first. I expect (don't know for sure) that he turned down George's Get to Know You request, so he might not be interested in discussing himself.


Tom was a huge help in finding information about The Stanley Thompson courses built in the US. He has also been a regular source of information for me and someone who's research I appreciate very much.


To the "Bickersons:

I've met you guys and like you a lot. You are both interesting, thoughtful and reasonable people.....normally.
Please return to form.  

[Jim_Kennedy]

Sean,
I would direct you to the first reply on this thread.


To no one in particular:  It pays to remember one thing, that TM's most vocal detractors   ALL have something to protect.

If you don't think that's true, I offer the search engine as proof. Have a tour, you'll be enlightened.

[Jeff_Brauer]

TePaul,

Thanks for the thoughts. I do hope it goes somewhere constructive and that TMac thinks seriously of what to do with his material. I like the USGA repositiory idea and advice, but the way these things go, maybe he will donate it to OSU or something. It is his call.

I also agree that there are others on this site with lots of material and I probably should have expanded the title and scope to recognize and allow us to show our appreciation and support for all they have done, and encourage dissemination of such material..  Joe, Bradley Anderson and Phil Young are amongst those who we also a great debt for collecting material on specific subjects.  I know I have left out a few others who have or are studying various gca's, locales, eras' etc.

I have enjoyed nearly every book on gca and gca history and have most in my collection (usually the cheaper reproductions)  I wish I had time to do that kind of work and appreciate all the free labor that TMac and others put into is so I can shamelessly enjoy it!

Actually, in thinking about it, I wonder if TMac, in studying such a broad spectrum of gca history compared to a single subject author like Phil, may have inadvertantly created a monster for himself?  Its an honest question as to whether snippets on the history of what appears to be hundreds or thousands of courses could easily be put into some kind of unified format, or whether he could just provide info to any course that is a subject of his research.  Even then, perhaps some wouldn't want to rock the boat of their own history, as he has found out on a few occaisions!

And, it is not for me or us to tell Tom MacWood that he must do anything with his materials.  As Ian suggests, I did email Tom privately to apologize and see if he might answer, but so far, no response. I completely understand.

So again, I apologize for not thinking entire premise of my thread idea through.  This could have been so much better.  Maybe someone else could formulate a recap thread of all those who have studied what so its not so polarizing.  

[Brian Phillips]

Sean,
I would direct you to the first reply on this thread.


To no one in particular:  It pays to remember one thing, that TM's most vocal detractors  ALL have something to protect.

If you don't think that's true, I offer the search engine as proof. Have a tour, you'll be enlightened.

Jim,

Most of of us on here do not care anymore.  We are sick of it...I am fed of looking backwards...that is what you do when you look into search engines for what was said and not said....

We have to move on....forwards..

[DMoriarty]

David,

Jeff was using humour about the stalking....it's a joke....you know ha ha..

Why do you get so uptight about everything?  You judged Jeff before allowing Tom M to even make his own reply to what everybody else saw as a legitimate question.  You said you could smell a skunk...

You are the only one that thought the question was loaded, which apparently it wasn't. Jeff has confirmed this.

Jeff and TomM have a history.  Jeff even admits that he has been taken a condescending tone with TomM in the past!    I doubt you are aware of Jeff's past posts to and about TomM but I am aware of them, and given that context the comment was over the line and not by a little.  I understand that it was meant to be a joke, but IMO it was a stupid joke and way over the line.   But as I said in my first post to you, if Jeff didn't mean anything by it then great.  

My question is why do I have to face this load of shit because I thought Jeff comparing Tom MacWood stunk and was over the line?   And I'd appreciate an answer.  

Maybe we can get this thread deleted and Jeff can ask the question again....without anyone reacting...

Fine with me if the thread is deleted, but if I am Tom MacWood I'd choose someone who had been much less condescending (admittedly so) as my interviewer.   If anyone should interview Tom MacWood it should be Ran.    His contribution for surpasses that of just another "get to know" poster.

This thing between you and Tom Paul has to stop, it really does.  It is not doing you any good or Tom Paul any good or this website.  Can you guys not meet up for a beer somewhere and bury the hatchet....it is worse than the middle east in here.  

Enough already.  MY COMMENT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH TEPAUL.  DESPITE HIS COMMENTS, I HAVEN'T HAD A THING TO DO WITH HIM SINCE WE LAST DISCUSSED THIS.   READ THE POSTS FOR GOD'S SAKE.   IF YOU WANT THE BICKERING TO STOP THEN YOU AND SEAN AND ANYONE ELSE OUGHT TO READ THE POSTS BEFORE YOU FLY OFF THE HANDLE.   Then maybe your scorn will at least be directed where it belongs.   Wouldn't that be a nice change.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Brian,
I agree with you. Therefore we should all stand up against unnecessary attacks on a person's credibility going forward, which was the purpose of my post.



edit: by the way, I thought Jeff tried hard to do this early on, but the die was cast.

[TEPaul]

"Jeff,

It was a good question.

Ask Ran or Ben to delete the original and post the question again - but I would suggest that you IM or email Tom to see if he will answer first. I expect (don't know for sure) that he turned down George's Get to Know You request, so he might not be interested in discussing himself."


Mr. Jeffrey, Sir:

I would strongly second Ian the August Andrew on that!  


Brian:

I agree with you----eg move forward and not backwards into the GCA archives of divisive threads. I'm surprised at Jim Kennedy for posting what he just did if he wants to avoid future divisiveness on here. He says ALL the detractors of TM on here have something to protect. If he is including me or Wayne Morrison and Merion the only thing we have ever tried to protect is the actual and accurate architectural history of Merion, nothing more. And vis-a-vis TM and other subjects he's been involved in on here with me I feel exactly the same about the actual and accurate architectural histories of the likes of PV and Myopia. He can say whatever he likes about his feelings on those subjects but of course so can I and I will----but I will keep it just to golf course architecture, nothing more, in the future.

[Jeff_Brauer]

David,

I have already apolgized for this damn thread three times. I won't do it again.

Despite our occaisional differences, and my unjustified condescension of Tom MacWood in a few of my thousands of posts here, we have discussed architecture off line. I think we still could, despite what has gone on, because in the end, we share more than we disagee on.  In this case, I could be wrong.  Maybe I offended TMac way beyond the pale on this one.  I hope not.

[Brian Phillips]

David,

Your post dramatically changed the tone of the thread. It started off as a perfectly normal question and you changed the tone of it by accusing Jeff of up to no good.

That is why I had a go.  Nothing else.

Same to Tom Paul.  His post also changed the tone of the thread.

You both hijacked a legitimate thread that would have been fascinating.

[DMoriarty]

Jeff,  No need to apologize to me, not even for the repeated sense of humor jabs.  I apologize to you for reading more into your comment than you meant.   All this now has nothing to do with our original exchange, I don't think.   We've muddled through worse.   All that is going on now is Brian and Sean back peddling to try and justify coming after me for bickering with TEPaul, when in reality I had nothing to do with him.  
__________________________________

Brian,

How about you just come to grips with the fact that you flew off the handle at me without basis, and you try to read my posts before you do so next time?  Between the "stalker" comment and TEPaul's attempt to lead Jeff in a snide direction, the tone was gone.  And I wasn't here to take shots at MacWood, but rather to demand that he be treated with the respect he deserves.  

I am glad that posters have had enough of the bickering and boorish behavior and are willing to take a stand against it. (In fact that was my intent, whether right or wrong.  And it was Jeff's intent in dismissing TEPaul from the thread.  But continuing to lump me in with TEPaul is just messing things up further.   I wasn't here to trash Tom MacWood or rehash the same old b.s.   I didn't take TEPaul's bait nor will I.   Jeff understands the basis for my comment, whether I was correct in my understanding or not.

[Brian Phillips]

I give up...

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()