The Power of the site and its participants

[Mac Plumart]

Okay, y’all.  I watched these threads related to golf course architectural history develop and I have some thoughts on them.

First off, please read my synopsis of the threads.  I tried to hit only the highlights to make it a quick read.  And then at the end I give some summary thoughts.  Let me know any thoughts or comments you all might have.

Northshore CC—Tillie or Raynor Thread

George Bahto post #1---he states North Shore CC looks like it has Raynor greens, but it appears to be credited to Tillinghast concerning the routing…so his question is this…is NSCC a Tillinghast or Raynor?

Bahto post #5—produces a quote from White showing that Tillinghast/White began work in 1915.

Tom MacWood post #8---he believes the holes attributed to Raynor are actually Emmett’s and he further states that he has found no mention of Tilinghast or Raynor and he states he believes that the bulk of the credit should go to White.

Shaffer post #9---produces a quote from MGA stating that Tillinghast is the guy.

Shaffer post #13---he states that Tillinghast had White do work for him at multiple courses and he hired White to do the construction at Northshore and be the pro there.

Tom MacWood post #15---he states that he has seen considerable evidence that Northshore is Emmett & White.

Tom MacWood post #19---he states that Tillinghast never took credit for Northshore and he has never seen any newspaper articles (or the like) giving Tillinghast credit.

Shaffer post #22---he states that Dr. Quinn never mentioned Emmett regarding Northshore at all.

Tom Paul post #23---he states that looking at the club minutes might shed some light onto the subject.  He also states that he thinks White might have been acting as a constructor/greenskeeper at Northshore.  He also states that if, indeed, the club claimed Tillinghast for no reason that would not be the first time something like that has happened.

Tom Macwood posts #24 and #25---he produces numerous newspaper articles which detail why he feels that Emmett and White were the designers of the course.

Shaffer post #26---he alludes to the fact that the club’s minutes contradict the newspaper clippings of Macwood.

Tom Paul post #28---he states that someone really should look at the minutes.

From this point on speculation accusations fly and some unproductive posts are put on the site…

Moriarty post #70---he asks has anyone reviewed the minutes of the club.

For me the thread gets tough to read as a pissing match (or several) break out.  However, perhaps these are mild for this site…but under the mess of the fight some good information can be gleaned by the reader with perseverance.



The Mystery of Northshore---Raynor’s First Course?

Shafer post #1—he states that he visited the NY Historical Society and he took notes on the club records.  It appears that Raynor was the designer and he worked with White as his superintendent.

Tom Macwood post #2—he states that Steve Shafer has found documented evidence of Seth Raynor’s first course.

Tom Paul post #12---Please everyone go back and re-read it!!!!!!!!

After this a lot of nonsense breaks out again…but that is okay…it seems to be something we have to endure from time to time.  Other things are discussed, but nothing as groundbreaking as the revelation of Raynor’s first design.



Okay…here is my point.  The talent, knowledge, and resources on this site are capable of accomplishing almost anything in regards to historical golf course architecture research.  In this instance, George Bahto thought the greens look like Raynor’s but the course wasn’t attributed to him.  Discussion ensued, articles were produced, game plans were discussed, and the evidence was finally discovered.

I really think if you guys work together like a team, more can be done for the good of architectural history.  You guys will have to actually listen to one another and work together to accomplish some of this stuff.  I know you can do it, if you want to. 

If you choose to do something like this team effort, let me know.  I would be happy to help out in any way that I can.

Anyway, 2 cents from Atlanta!

Great work guys!!!

[Tony_Muldoon]

Mac you are like a breath of fresh air.  Keep it up.

[TEPaul]

Mac:

Tony Muldoon is right---you really are like a breath of fresh air on this site. And if you keep it up with threads like this and posts like yours above that may become less than just a figurative remark and more of a literal one.

You said above:

"I really think if you guys work together like a team, more can be done for the good of architectural history.  You guys will have to actually listen to one another and work together to accomplish some of this stuff.  I know you can do it, if you want to."  




I've actually worked together on one thing or another, some big and some small with many, many people on this website over the years, and frankly I have never found anyone unwilling to work with me or me and some of my friends in this interest we all have other than two, and I think you can imagine who they are. I've offered to work with them over the years and not just once but many times and they know that good and well and I'm sure they'd even admit it. That just happens to be something that does not seem to be their style or their interest with certain people on here and on certain subjects. They turned me down each and every time on a number of subjects I proposed working together on. This goes back a long, long way on here and it involved various clubs and courses but the primary one was Merion. They didn't have the slightest interest, it seems, in working with me or those here who have been involved intimately in that subject for many years----even before GOLFCLUBALTAS.com existed.

But I'm a hopeful kind of guy and maybe there is hope in the future for all of us to work together, even including those two, who haven't wanted to do that with some on here. Maybe you, Mac Plumart, are that very hope for this site that will make that happen somehow----again, as Tony Muldoon said---you're like a breath of fresh air on here----keep it up.  

[Mac Plumart]

Thanks guys!!

FYI...I will be off line for a few days, but I hope to see some amazing things of great importance on the site upon my return!!!

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mac,
There have been many interesting subjects and good amounts of information on this site over the years, some from cooperation and some from exasperation. It will probably favor exasperation as it's almost impossible for anyone to forget, as you have probably already noticed from reply #2, the second half of which was the very antithesis of what you wrote.

[Garland Bayley]

...
After this a lot of nonsense breaks out again…but that is okay…it seems to be something we have to endure from time to time.  Other things are discussed, but nothing as groundbreaking as the revelation of Raynor’s first design.
...

Why is it exactly that we have to endure nonsense?
Why is nonsense OK?

[TEPaul]

Mac:

Again, I like your thread here because it is hopeful but there have been only 4-5 more posts on it since you started it and I encourage you to read them again, and if you do I have every confidence you will pretty much see that only one or both of last few indicate what's going on here or wrong here.  

I think the truth is this website has about a handful of people on it, and some who've been around for a while, who are pretty much on here just to argue, no matter what the subject is. I guess they just think they are good at argumentation and they probably just do it constantly to prove to someone that they can be persuasive somehow.

You wondered above if Jim Kennedy and I are kidding on here; we're not. I know who MacWood and Moriarty are and where they're coming from but I have no idea who Jim Kennedy is or where he's coming from on here. A lot of people have asked me that lately and I have to tell them I have no idea at all. But it sure looks to me like he wants to be something like a forum moderator when he grows up.  

But anyway, I could take a lot more of your breath of fresh air and hopefulness stuff, as Tony Muldoon said, and a lot less of the constant petty argumentation of that other handful.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mac,

What's wrong with you ?  You're showing your naive side again.

It's much more fun to do research to prove the other party wrong than it is to collaborate with other parties.

The advesarial nature of the threads is the fuel that drives the research engines.

Some of the research and the results produced have been phenomenal.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Edit.  I've thought twice, it didn't need saying, everyone can see it for themselves.

Good luck Mac.

A Merry Christmas to everyone on this site.

[Tom MacWood]

Mac
I don't believe Steve Shaffer said the club minutes contradicted the newspaper articles. He said Dr. Q's account was different than the newspaper articles. He assumed Dr. Q had access to minutes, which now seems unlikely. By the info Steve produced from the minutes do not contradict the newspaper articles. You also failed to mention Phil's contributions to the thread. three mention of TEP's input and 0 for Phil seems a bit odd.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Why is it exactly that we have to endure nonsense?
Why is nonsense OK?

Garland,
Of course the simple answer is that 'we' don't. It's just as easy to switch the channel as it is to be bothered by the dust-ups.

The more complex answer is that we are human, and interaction isn't always neat. There is probably more chance for 'nonsense' here than at the "Remote Control Flyer's Club", but this place is no more or no less dysfunctional than any other group of people who are loosely organized around their 'hobby'.

[TEPaul]

Patrick:

Way to go Paly----you're post #7 is right on the money. It obviously falls into that infrequent 2% of the time when you're actually correct about something! This website is all about competition with research information and research information is the sole currency on here! You're right, some don't want to help most others on here, they only want to prove them wrong!

However, Mac Plumart has entered the scene now and he is in danger of actually doing something positive about this so it does not surprise me you call him naive!   

[Jim_Kennedy]

Mac:

You wondered above if Jim Kennedy and I are kidding on here; we're not. I know who MacWood and Moriarty are and where they're coming from but I have no idea who Jim Kennedy is or where he's coming from on here. A lot of people have asked me that lately and I have to tell them I have no idea at all. But it sure looks to me like he wants to be something like a forum moderator when he grows up. 

TEP,
You've made three replies so far on this thread, all of them negative, and I really enjoy this one, where you once again insult by the use of insinuation. You have to stop listening to the voices in your head Tom, they aren't your real friends. 

[Joe Hancock]

If one of you guys who are adept at gleaning statistics can help, I'd like to know what TEPaul's posts: posts edited ratio is, and if anyone else even comes close in that department.

Fascinating.

Joe

[Tom MacWood]

Mac
I understand the point you were trying to make and I think its good one. I'm not sure everyone would concur with your reading of the thread, but the thread is still available for everyone to read on their own.

For me the most important information that thread (or 2 threads) uncovered:

1. Raynor was hired to redesign North Shore (making it perhaps his first design/redesign).
2. The original course Glenwood was designed by Devereux Emmet (& George Hubbell)
3. Five the original Glenwood holes were incorporated into the redesign
4. CB Macdonald was a consultant on the NS project
5. Tilly did not list NS as one of his designs/redesigns, and his list of courses in 1925 was apparently a very thorough one

Some of the unanswered questions:

1. Were the five holes retained from the original course the prototypical CBM holes that Emmet was also known to use?
2. Was Robert White simply the grow in guy or was he involved as an active collaborator?
3. What was CBM's involvement?
4. Did White continue to tweak the course over the years?
5. Where did the Tilly attribution come from?

I would not be surprised if we later learn Tilly was involved at some point, most likely after 1925. There are usually good reasons why a name gets associated with these designs.

[TEPaul]

Joe Hancock:

I'm not sure what you mean exactly by post editing ratio or why you ask but if anyone on here would know that best it would probably be me, don't you think? 

[TEPaul]

Jim Kennedy:

Regarding your post #12, the reason I make posts like those to you, and will continue to, is simply and solely because I view you as remarkably constant and consistent in responding to me on just about anything in a negative way with your attitude and style of petty insinuations and accusations. It's not a bit more complex than that and has nothing to do with any voices or whatever in my head.  

As you may've noticed, every Blue Moon or so, you actually say something interesting and benefical and as you can see I respond to you positively.

[Garland Bayley]

Why is it exactly that we have to endure nonsense?
Why is nonsense OK?

Garland,
Of course the simple answer is that 'we' don't. It's just as easy to switch the channel as it is to be bothered by the dust-ups.

The more complex answer is that we are human, and interaction isn't always neat. There is probably more chance for 'nonsense' here than at the "Remote Control Flyer's Club", but this place is no more or no less dysfunctional than any other group of people who are loosely organized around their 'hobby'.

Of course the problem is most of us just change the channel. Which means we lose what Mac is hoping we would gain.

I understand that some ISPs or websites have had moderated threads in the past. I don't have any experience with them, but perhaps the moderator was able to keep things a little sane, or perhaps all he was able to do was keep things like TEP's f-bombs off the site.

[TEPaul]

I think we should all return (at least on this thread) to Mac Plumart's spirit of hopefulness and future cooperation on here (what Tony Muldoon said was like a breath of fresh air---keep it up) and dispense with all these insinuations of past problems and past adverserialness.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jim Kennedy:

Regarding your post #12, the reason I make posts like those to you, and will continue to, is simply and solely because I view you as remarkably constant and consistent in responding to me on just about anything in a negative way with your attitude and style of petty insinuations and accusations. It's not a bit more complex than that and has nothing to do with any voices or whatever in my head.  

As you may've noticed, every Blue Moon or so, you actually say something interesting and benefical and as you can see I respond to you positively.

You miss the obvious irony in that post.


Garland,
For a while there was some filter on here, but it wouldn’t even let Shinnecock get by its faulty reading program. I don’t remember if this is correct, but I think it used to come out as “Shinnethingy.

[TEPaul]

"You miss the obvious irony in that post."


You're right, I sure do. This is interesting in that it seems we are agreeing more and more on here. I hope that isn't depressing to you in any way!  



"For a while there was some filter on here, but it wouldn’t even let Shinnecock get by its faulty reading program. I don’t remember if this is correct, but I think it used to come out as “Shinnethingy."


It doesn't surprise me you don't remember if that is correct; it's probably a matter of the fact that you've never known. Would you like me to explain to you who helped Shinnecock understand the mistake they'd made in their architectural attribution and why?

[Jim_Kennedy]

TEP,
I think you're headed over the edge. Did you even read what prompted that reply to Garland? Probably not, as you couldn't waste time when you saw the opportunity to take another cheap swipe at someone who doesn't agree with you, in this case, me.   

You're getting smaller. 

[TEPaul]

"TEP,
I think you're headed over the edge. Did you even read what prompted that reply to Garland? Probably not, as you couldn't waste time when you saw the opportunity to take another cheap swipe at someone who doesn't agree with you, in this case, me.   

You're getting smaller.  "





No problem Jim Kennedy; as you know I have no idea who the hell you are or where you're coming from and I really don't care what you think; haven't for a while now due to the posts you've put on here for quite some time both to me and in response to things I've said on here about architecture which weren't to you and had nothing to do with you. I have no hesitation in telling you I think you are a piece of shit and a truly inconsequential and petty little piece of shit at that.

[TEPaul]

By the way, I just got a great email today from Rich Goodale who resigned this website. It was truly inspirational and directing! I've always felt the guy was pretty much the freethinker type and frankly an intellectual we should and would and could all learn from, in all kinds of ways. True to his form, and amongst some other good stuff about a number of things, he put an interesting little tid-bit on the email from Yeats which I found perplexing at first but ultimately so thought-provoking and apropos;



 
"The best lack all conviction,
The worst are full of passionate intensity"



Did Yeats really say that?! I'll wager only the Gecko knows for sure.

[Tim Bert]

If one of you guys who are adept at gleaning statistics can help, I'd like to know what TEPaul's posts: posts edited ratio is, and if anyone else even comes close in that department.

Fascinating.

Joe

Using the fully credible sample size of 9 posts available on this thread, I have extrapolated and determined that TEPaul has edited approximately 25,103 posts in his time.