[Melvyn Morrow]

First off. Let me say that our club system is for the most part completely different from the picture you paint of your private American Clubs. Your club system (correct me please if I am wrong) is based upon money and old money families who like to protect their privacy from all comers. So it’s not really a question of approaching the Club Secretary, The Pro or Green Keeper, as they (I presume) are just employees in the eyes of the Committee (who are made up from The Members). Seems to remind one of a well-known club in St Andrews, who play TOC, alas it’s a public course though, nevertheless, it goes some way to keeping their feet on the ground but their heads still aspire for the rare air up in the clouds. Ops I digress, thinking that one day I might join this elite group (wild horses, a peerage even being able to beat Tiger would not make me want to be a Member, sorry guys I may be a traditionalist but I am not an elitist – I leave that to others who tell me they know better).

Sorry back to the topic in hand, although elitist does seem to have a serious bearing on this discussion, when noting the American Club scene (as I said correct me if I am wrong). This is where at times I find it difficult to understand, it seems that if you want to play at these private clubs you can but by paying a big Green Fee (imposed to keep the rabble away from the course, as I presume these Green Fees hardly contribute to the annual maintenance cost as so few in number). Clearly a policy to welcome other financially well-endowed visitors but not the general population at large. Most if not all American Golfers are aware of these clubs fortification, yet they still yearn to play these courses.

My take on this matter for anyone interested would be to first pay the fee and enjoy the once in a life time experience. Alternative show interest to a friend that you would welcome the opportunity to play, in the hope that he might be able to arrange a game for you at Guest rates. However reading what Tony W went through to play the course is IMHO rather excessive to the point of being unfriendly and taking advantage of the good nature of others for one’s own ends.

Tony, if this is what Jeff is referring to then I must support him on this subject. This type of behaviour is not worthy of a golfer and puts you firmly in the player category. For the sake of your own pleasure you have forced others to do you  bidding, which they seem to have do. Tthey not you have acted as Gentlemen throughout.  You seem to have no shame, happily convey the epic story of how you played a private course. I do not like the expression AW but Tony you appear to deserve the title.

There is nothing wrong in asking a friend but to solicit a game in the manner you prescribe is not acceptable IMO. I can now understand why others on this site are uneasy with players who conduct themselves in this fashion. Once bitten by this sting I too would steer clear of anyone I suspected of conducting themselves in this manner.

Why are these people members of very expensive private clubs. The clue may be in the word private, expensive and high green fees. I agree that perhaps on these courses the Grass is always green, but then all you have to do is play fair and pay the Green Fee to encounter the experience.

To all those who host GCA.com members, you are indeed owed a big thank you for your kindness and generosity of mind and spirit, yet those who unfairly solicit access could so easily kill that kind generosity and ruin the pleasure for others. 

If I have misunderstood you post Tony then I apologise to you. If true, then I do not think that it is something to be proud of, just my opinion.

Melvyn

[Jeff Fortson]

The whole AW thing has me a bit puzzled.  I can see not doing it coming from this site/DG, as that may very well not be appropo.  BUT, when the PGA was in Mpls. last year, I wanted to play Interlachen.  I contacted the Pro there and he said "sure, you can play for $375 each."  That's a bit too much for me, and my friends.  So, I started to see if I had any contacts that knew someone that knew someone who was a member?  Was that so wrong?  Fortunately, a businessman in my town had a brother who is a member there.  He was kind enough to give me the number of his brother, put in a heads up call for me, and let me know that his brother was a busy Dr., but he'd call me back.  I made several calls, talked about some mutual connections, and asked if he minded hosting us.  He said he would be delighted to, as he loved sharing the course with others.  

I was thrilled as it was my first Ross and with him it only cost $150.  Now, was that so wrong?  If he'd said no, I would have understood.  If you are a member at a prestigious private, would it not be enjoyable to host people from time to time?  I know, the difference is you are asking as opposed to being asked, and I can see if you are in Jeff's postition as an employee at a club and get constantly bombarded, but still, is it hard to just say NO.  Maybe I'm missing something, but I'll forever be greatful to the Interlachen member, and I think he really enjoyed the day as well.  What more can you ask for.  TW, AW (I guess).  

Tony,

How you choose to gain access to a club outside of gca is not what I am talking about.  If you have contacts that can help you get out somewhere, great.  I simply have a problem with people using this website as a rolodex of people they feel entitled to cold call for access to their club.  If people are open to cold calls they will let it be known and then feel free to take advantage of their hospitality all you want.

It's not the idea of people getting to play great courses that bugs me, it's the idea that this website is here as a tool for making unsolicited requests to gain access that detracts from the health of the DG, IMO.  What one does to gain access outside of this DG I could care less about.

Jeff F.

[Jeff Fortson]

Jeff, word of advice:

This is a clear and cogent argument that is persuasive and compelling:

Fair question but the answer is pretty simple.  One is a professional courtesy given between members of an industry, the other is a website dedicated to the "discourse" of course architecture.  

I am no longer a golf professional.  Matter of fact, I now have my amateur status back.  I doubt one would become a golf professional just to gain access to other golf clubs.  Sure, it is a perk, but it is probably not the motive behind one's reasoning to dedicate their professional life to an industry.  GCA.com is supposed to be a website of avid golfers interested in course architecture.  This website wasn't created to be a pick-up bar for people to go around asking for unsolicited access to another member's club.  It is also a perk that most members here will gain access to clubs through INVITES.  I have NO problem with that.  

People need to focus on what I am saying.  I am not denouncing the acceptance of an invite to another member's club.  Matter of fact, I support and encourage people to take those opportunities.  I simply don't think this should be viewed as some Holy Grail of internet access to cold call people about playing their course to tie another knot in their Top 100 belt.

This statement completely undermines the above argument:

If you can't see the difference between professional courtesy in an industry from peers to making unsolicited advances to people you may or may not know on an internet site, then I really don't think I could explain it in any way that will make sense to you.  

If you actually care about this site (which I'm not sure you do) and you are concerned with the quality of the "discourse," then I suggest you stop your posts before you hit the "if you don't agree with me you are an idiot" portion.

Thanks

Point taken but I didn't write that part to be read like that.  I was simply trying to say that if you need further explanation as to the difference then I don't know if you will ever get it.  Once again, I am using the word "you" in general terms.

Jeff F.

[George Pazin]

Melvyn, I think you are reading too much into Tony's pursuit. He didn't do anything nefarious as I read it, he simply asked a few friends for help. Friends help friends, without thinking the worst of them, and I think that's where things tend to get confusing on here.

I can't imagine that any American (due to our system) hasn't occasionally come across a course they wanted to play and didn't know anyone and didn't think of trying the same thing. That's not access whoring to me, that's simply being passionate and curious. Of course there is a good way and bad way to go about it, but I think many of those who are complaining already have access, so they don't see what it's like for those on the outside.

But I will say, no one's buggin' me for help to get on my local muni...

-----

Jeff, I will simply say that, aside from the repeated insulting broad sweeping generalizations, the thing I disagree most with you on is why you feel it's up to you to point out things everyone can see for himself. We're all big boys here, let each make his own decisions with regard to others' motivations and behaviors.

[Phil McDade]

Donnie, I miss many of the old guys too. How do you feel about this quote?

I can tell you, that I spend a lot more time at a site created by an ex-member here that fits my needs and wants out of discussing course architecture and golf in general.

Bill,

I can see where Jeff is coming from. Unfortunately I have to agree that this site has changed for the worse over the years. I still enjoy it and visit daily but it isn't the same. I find myself lurking in the background more and more. It is really disheartening when you spend time to write something of substance only to see it disappear under a sea of OT and Tiger posts.

Yes, look at all of these on-topic architecture threads from the good ole' days in 2003:

Review of Feinstein's new book, "Open"

Tiger's quote on non-conforming drivers

Northeast Amateur

"Addicted Member"

Celebrities on the course

Public Service Announcement: How the West Was Won (about a new Led Zeppelin CD)

why I love/hate Johnny Miller

Paddy Hanmer (Muirfield club secretary)

Golf flying under the radar this year.  Why?

LARGEST Locker Room in Golf

U.S. Ladies Open qualifier, Big Wiesy in the hizzy

Good for John Riegger (about Sorenstam playing at Colonial)

Handicaps and other musings

Buggies

"Due Process" article in Golf Magazine June 2003 (about pairings for golf tournaments)

[Jeff Fortson]

Donnie, I miss many of the old guys too. How do you feel about this quote?

I can tell you, that I spend a lot more time at a site created by an ex-member here that fits my needs and wants out of discussing course architecture and golf in general.

Bill,

I can see where Jeff is coming from. Unfortunately I have to agree that this site has changed for the worse over the years. I still enjoy it and visit daily but it isn't the same. I find myself lurking in the background more and more. It is really disheartening when you spend time to write something of substance only to see it disappear under a sea of OT and Tiger posts.

Yes, look at all of these on-topic architecture threads from the good ole' days in 2003:

Review of Feinstein's new book, "Open"

Tiger's quote on non-conforming drivers

Northeast Amateur

"Addicted Member"

Celebrities on the course

Public Service Announcement: How the West Was Won (about a new Led Zeppelin CD)

why I love/hate Johnny Miller

Paddy Hanmer (Muirfield club secretary)

Golf flying under the radar this year.  Why?

LARGEST Locker Room in Golf

U.S. Ladies Open qualifier, Big Wiesy in the hizzy

Good for John Riegger (about Sorenstam playing at Colonial)

Handicaps and other musings

Buggies

"Due Process" article in Golf Magazine June 2003 (about pairings for golf tournaments)

No one is claiming that OT topics didn't exist, but there were fewer.  I'm not even trying to kill the idea of having OT topics.  I post or have posted on them too.  It's just more rampant than before.  As is the access issue.

Jeff F.

[Ed Oden]

Jeff, please do not take this as an attack on you or your position with respect to access seekers.   But I have an honest question.  How do you feel about professional courtesy extended to pros, assistants, supers, GMs, etc. to play at clubs other than their place of employment?  Aren't those typically unsolicited requests for access, only from someone within the "industry"?  While I am not condoning blatant access whoring, I have a hard time getting worked up over what goes on here when it seems like the equivalent behavior occurs within the industry.  Again, I'm not trying to goad you.  Rather just trying reconcile what I perceive as a bit of a contradiction.

Fair question but the answer is pretty simple.  One is a professional courtesy given between members of an industry, the other is a website dedicated to the "discourse" of course architecture.  

I am no longer a golf professional.  Matter of fact, I now have my amateur status back.  I doubt one would become a golf professional just to gain access to other golf clubs.  Sure, it is a perk, but it is probably not the motive behind one's reasoning to dedicate their professional life to an industry.  GCA.com is supposed to be a website of avid golfers interested in course architecture.  This website wasn't created to be a pick-up bar for people to go around asking for unsolicited access to another member's club.  It is also a perk that most members here will gain access to clubs through INVITES.  I have NO problem with that.  

People need to focus on what I am saying.  I am not denouncing the acceptance of an invite to another member's club.  Matter of fact, I support and encourage people to take those opportunities.  I simply don't think this should be viewed as some Holy Grail of internet access to cold call people about playing their course to tie another knot in their Top 100 belt.

If you can't see the difference between professional courtesy in an industry from peers to making unsolicited advances to people you may or may not know on an internet site, then I really don't think I could explain it in any way that will make sense to you.  Hope that answers the question.


Jeff F.

Jeff, I understand the difference...but I will admit that I am struggling a bit with the outrage.  At the end of the day, a pro who calls up another pro and says "Hey, I am going to be in town next Thursday and would love to play ZZZ Club" is doing pretty much the same thing as a guy from this website who sends a PM to someone else on this website and says "Hey, I am going to be in town next Thursday and would love to play ZZZ Club".  The motivations of both are essentially the same:  to get access to a private place.  The only difference I see is that the former is accepted withing the industry while the latter is not.  So I have a hard time being offended by one and not the other (and I am not saying I am offended by either).  Now, I agree with you that the pro almost certainly did not become a pro solely for the purpose of gaining access to nice private clubs.  Similarly, I don't know anyone who has joined this site solely for the purpose of gaining access.  But in any walk of life you will inevitably have people that occasionally abuse the system.  So I am williing to bet that there are a few individual pros out there that abuse the professional courtesy system just as there are no doubt a few guys here who use this site for access.  However, in my view, both are relative outliers in the scheme of things.  

[Melvyn Morrow]

George

Then its seems I owe Tony an apology, so

Tony, before saying sorry, I will say that you certainly seemed to have done a lot of networking to find a Member, but clearly I am wrong, so please accept my unconditional apology for linking you with what is termed AW – clearly you are not and indeed a golfer.

If one is wrong there is no shame in admitting it, at least I had the balls to name the individual so that I could apologise to him.

Melvyn

[Jeff Fortson]

 

Jeff, I understand the difference...but I will admit that I am struggling a bit with the outrage.  At the end of the day, a pro who calls up another pro and says "Hey, I am going to be in town next Thursday and would love to play ZZZ Club" is doing pretty much the same thing as a guy from this website who sends a PM to someone else on this website and says "Hey, I am going to be in town next Thursday and would love to play ZZZ Club".  The motivations of both are essentially the same:  to get access to a private place.  The only difference I see is that the former is accepted withing the industry while the latter is not.  So I have a hard time being offended by one and not the other (and I am not saying I am offended by either).  

You're certainly entitled to your opinion but I completely disagree.  A courtesy extended to a professional peer, that is given because one dedicates their professional life to better the sport/business of golf, is much different than simply logging on to a website and lobbing requests to people unsolicited.  That's just my opinion.  

Jeff F.

[Garland Bayley]

...
But I will say, no one's buggin' me for help to get on my local muni...
...

George,

If I ever get the Pittsburgh, you can be sure I will be bugging you to host me at your course!

[Phil McDade]

Donnie, I miss many of the old guys too. How do you feel about this quote?

I can tell you, that I spend a lot more time at a site created by an ex-member here that fits my needs and wants out of discussing course architecture and golf in general.

Bill,

I can see where Jeff is coming from. Unfortunately I have to agree that this site has changed for the worse over the years. I still enjoy it and visit daily but it isn't the same. I find myself lurking in the background more and more. It is really disheartening when you spend time to write something of substance only to see it disappear under a sea of OT and Tiger posts.

Yes, look at all of these on-topic architecture threads from the good ole' days in 2003:

Review of Feinstein's new book, "Open"

Tiger's quote on non-conforming drivers

Northeast Amateur

"Addicted Member"

Celebrities on the course

Public Service Announcement: How the West Was Won (about a new Led Zeppelin CD)

why I love/hate Johnny Miller

Paddy Hanmer (Muirfield club secretary)

Golf flying under the radar this year.  Why?

LARGEST Locker Room in Golf

U.S. Ladies Open qualifier, Big Wiesy in the hizzy

Good for John Riegger (about Sorenstam playing at Colonial)

Handicaps and other musings

Buggies

"Due Process" article in Golf Magazine June 2003 (about pairings for golf tournaments)

No one is claiming that OT topics didn't exist, but there were fewer.  I'm not even trying to kill the idea of having OT topics.  I post or have posted on them too.  It's just more rampant than before.  As is the access issue.

Jeff F.

Yes, all kinds of OT topics cluttering up the first page of the DB devoted to golf architecture right now; let's see:

Are there any other holes that can be called Template holes...

2010 PGA at Whistling Straits discussion thread (with many posts discussing the architecture there)

Desmond Tolhurst's account (another Merion thread, about its architectural roots)

Shouldn't Road Hole templates all be par 4's?

Flora in bunkers

"Have you heard anything about this new course in Nebraska...." (dealing with architectural attributes of a course in a remote location)

Very interesting article on course setups for a major

Henry Stambaugh Municipal Golf Course - Youngstown, Ohio 1920's era (photo thread)

Black Wolf Run (Original Championship Course) vs. Whistling Straits?

So just how good is the Straits from an architectural perspective

Moundbuilders - Newark, OH

Rock Creek photo tour - all 18 holes

USGA Women's Amateur at Charlotte CC (about the architecture and restoration of the course)

Augusta National: The Most Cleverly Bunkered Course in Dr Mac's Portfolio?

The Dormie Club - Routing

Pa Open at Applebrook (about a Gil Hanse--designed course)

Architects - Challenge my directional control, my distance control not so much

First 9 is a Ross, Second 9 is a Bendelow then all a Tillie? - Wanango CC (PA) (photo thread)

The Sagebrush Experience (some very good photos of golf holes)

Golf Trip to the USA...The Favourites Holes Lists

[Jeff Fortson]

Donnie, I miss many of the old guys too. How do you feel about this quote?

I can tell you, that I spend a lot more time at a site created by an ex-member here that fits my needs and wants out of discussing course architecture and golf in general.

Bill,

I can see where Jeff is coming from. Unfortunately I have to agree that this site has changed for the worse over the years. I still enjoy it and visit daily but it isn't the same. I find myself lurking in the background more and more. It is really disheartening when you spend time to write something of substance only to see it disappear under a sea of OT and Tiger posts.

Yes, look at all of these on-topic architecture threads from the good ole' days in 2003:

Review of Feinstein's new book, "Open"

Tiger's quote on non-conforming drivers

Northeast Amateur

"Addicted Member"

Celebrities on the course

Public Service Announcement: How the West Was Won (about a new Led Zeppelin CD)

why I love/hate Johnny Miller

Paddy Hanmer (Muirfield club secretary)

Golf flying under the radar this year.  Why?

LARGEST Locker Room in Golf

U.S. Ladies Open qualifier, Big Wiesy in the hizzy

Good for John Riegger (about Sorenstam playing at Colonial)

Handicaps and other musings

Buggies

"Due Process" article in Golf Magazine June 2003 (about pairings for golf tournaments)

No one is claiming that OT topics didn't exist, but there were fewer.  I'm not even trying to kill the idea of having OT topics.  I post or have posted on them too.  It's just more rampant than before.  As is the access issue.

Jeff F.

Yes, all kinds of OT topics cluttering up the first page of the DB devoted to golf architecture right now; let's see:

Are there any other holes that can be called Template holes...

2010 PGA at Whistling Straits discussion thread (with many posts discussing the architecture there)

Desmond Tolhurst's account (another Merion thread, about its architectural roots)

Shouldn't Road Hole templates all be par 4's?

Flora in bunkers

"Have you heard anything about this new course in Nebraska...." (dealing with architectural attributes of a course in a remote location)

Very interesting article on course setups for a major

Henry Stambaugh Municipal Golf Course - Youngstown, Ohio 1920's era (photo thread)

Black Wolf Run (Original Championship Course) vs. Whistling Straits?

So just how good is the Straits from an architectural perspective

Moundbuilders - Newark, OH

Rock Creek photo tour - all 18 holes

USGA Women's Amateur at Charlotte CC (about the architecture and restoration of the course)

Augusta National: The Most Cleverly Bunkered Course in Dr Mac's Portfolio?

The Dormie Club - Routing

Pa Open at Applebrook (about a Gil Hanse--designed course)

Architects - Challenge my directional control, my distance control not so much

First 9 is a Ross, Second 9 is a Bendelow then all a Tillie? - Wanango CC (PA) (photo thread)

The Sagebrush Experience (some very good photos of golf holes)

Golf Trip to the USA...The Favourites Holes Lists

Cherry picking one moment, of one day, out of an entire host of possibilities, is easy to do.   When I posted this thread there were three OT-Tiger Woods threads and two or three thread about what courses each of us have played.  I've been lurking for months and it has been quite frequent to find the front page of the board filled with topics unrelated to course architcture.  Like I have said, I don't mind the OT topics and engage in them myself.  I just don't think they should dominate the forum.  Right now, today, they aren't and I applaud that.

Jeff

[Patrick_Mucci]

Donnie, I miss many of the old guys too. How do you feel about this quote?

I can tell you, that I spend a lot more time at a site created by an ex-member here that fits my needs and wants out of discussing course architecture and golf in general.

Bill,

I can see where Jeff is coming from. Unfortunately I have to agree that this site has changed for the worse over the years.
I still enjoy it and visit daily but it isn't the same. I find myself lurking in the background more and more.

It is really disheartening when you spend time to write something of substance only to see it disappear under a sea of OT and Tiger posts.
AGREED

[Dan Herrmann]

You know, the issue Patrick agrees with could be solved pretty easily - just have Ran's boys create another DG category here.  Another site I visit, dbstalk.com has one section set up just for OT topics, and they move theads over to it if necessary.

[Phil McDade]

Donnie, I miss many of the old guys too. How do you feel about this quote?

I can tell you, that I spend a lot more time at a site created by an ex-member here that fits my needs and wants out of discussing course architecture and golf in general.

Bill,

I can see where Jeff is coming from. Unfortunately I have to agree that this site has changed for the worse over the years.
I still enjoy it and visit daily but it isn't the same. I find myself lurking in the background more and more.

It is really disheartening when you spend time to write something of substance only to see it disappear under a sea of OT and Tiger posts.
AGREED

Of course, Patrick spent several pages arguing with Shivas about cheater lines, ostensibly on the notion that cheater lines thwart green contouring, the largest stretch of comparing an OT topic to golf architecture in the history of GCA.

[DMoriarty]

You know, the issue Patrick agrees with could be solved pretty easily - just have Ran's boys create another DG category here.  Another site I visit, dbstalk.com has one section set up just for OT topics, and they move theads over to it if necessary.

It could also be solved if those wanting to gossip endlessly about Tiger would start their own damn website.  

Maybe call it AccessTiger.com, and take away two big problems at once.  

[Sean_A]

I am stiill confused by the access issue.  First, is it really rampant behaviour on this site?  Second, if so, why are we being lectured on it when presumably those in the know are aware of the guilty parties and can thus direct their comments toward those folks in a private manner?

So far as cold calling for access, I don't see how folks can get terribly uptight either way.  We all have our standards and many issues are really more a matter of conforming to those standards.  On an issue like this I can't see how one standard is right and another wrong - they are merely different so in the end we are forced to agree to disagree - not a bad result really. 

Ciao       

[Patrick_Mucci]

Donnie, I miss many of the old guys too. How do you feel about this quote?

I can tell you, that I spend a lot more time at a site created by an ex-member here that fits my needs and wants out of discussing course architecture and golf in general.

Bill,

I can see where Jeff is coming from. Unfortunately I have to agree that this site has changed for the worse over the years.
I still enjoy it and visit daily but it isn't the same. I find myself lurking in the background more and more.

It is really disheartening when you spend time to write something of substance only to see it disappear under a sea of OT and Tiger posts.
AGREED

Of course, Patrick spent several pages arguing with Shivas about cheater lines,
ostensibly on the notion that cheater lines thwart green contouring,
the largest stretch of comparing an OT topic to golf architecture in the history of GCA.


Phil, your confused.
And, you have me confused with someone else.
Shivas and I are in perfect harmony on the cheater line.
Please correct your post to reflect the name/s of those arguing with Shivas..

Thanks

[Phil McDade]

Patrick:

I stand corrected; more precisely, I should've said you spent pages arguing alongside (instead of "with") Shivas, about the use of cheater lines, which if I remember correctly, you disdain (as do I, by the way...).

[Patrick_Mucci]

I am stiill confused by the access issue.  First, is it really rampant behaviour on this site? 

Yes, just ask TEPaul, myself and others.

Second, if so, why are we being lectured on it when presumably those in the know are aware of the guilty parties and can thus direct their comments toward those folks in a private manner?

Because TEPaul, myself and others don't want to waste our time.
And, what makes you think our comments will change their behavior ?

So far as cold calling for access, I don't see how folks can get terribly uptight either way.

Then your brain isn't functioning.
Didn't you read what Jeff F had to say about being beseiged with requests for access.
How would you like to be constantly bombarded with access requests ? 

We all have our standards and many issues are really more a matter of conforming to those standards. 
On an issue like this I can't see how one standard is right and another wrong - they are merely different so in the end we are forced to agree to disagree - not a bad result really. 

Sean, if you don't understand the dilema it's because you're choosing not to understand the dilema.
How could you not understand it after reading Jeff's posts is mind boggling.

[Anthony Gray]

can someone explain what "jumped the shark" means?

There was an episode of Happy Days where Fonzie, waterskiing, jumped over a shark. It was roundly viewed as the point where the series was on a downward spiral and was destined to never be as good ever again.

Some people focus on the "doing something zany and ridiculous to get attention" side of the scenario when they say "that was the point where such and such jumped the shark", others just mean "that's the point where it all went to shit".

  Why is everybody argueing when its all Fonzie's fault?

  Anthony

[Sean_A]

I am stiill confused by the access issue.  First, is it really rampant behaviour on this site? 

Yes, just ask TEPaul, myself and others.

Second, if so, why are we being lectured on it when presumably those in the know are aware of the guilty parties and can thus direct their comments toward those folks in a private manner?

Because TEPaul, myself and others don't want to waste our time.
And, what makes you think our comments will change their behavior ?

So far as cold calling for access, I don't see how folks can get terribly uptight either way.

Then your brain isn't functioning.
Didn't you read what Jeff F had to say about being beseiged with requests for access.
How would you like to be constantly bombarded with access requests ? 

We all have our standards and many issues are really more a matter of conforming to those standards. 
On an issue like this I can't see how one standard is right and another wrong - they are merely different so in the end we are forced to agree to disagree - not a bad result really. 

Sean, if you don't understand the dilema it's because you're choosing not to understand the dilema.
How could you not understand it after reading Jeff's posts is mind boggling.

Pat

I am confused that someone feels it isn't a waste of time to lecture the Tree House about access issues but it is a waste of time to confront the "guilty" parties.  I am also confused as to how rampant this behaviour is.  I could be wrong, but I get the feeling we are talking about a handful or two of people when I don't know how many hundreds have rolled through the Tree House.  It may be a problem for a very small group on here, but where I come from, when you have a problem with someone you talk to that someone. Afterall, what does  Joe Blow's behaviour have to do with me and hundreds of other people here?  Being lectured to because of someone eles's behaviour is about as off topic as it gets besides being rather annoying.  It is especially irksome when you (yet again and to form) add pointlless, misguided insults, compounding the problem because they are directed at the wrong person unless you for some (mistaken I might add) reason believe I have asked any access favours (or any other sort for that matter) of you. 

Ciao

[Jud_T]

Sean,
I have to side with Pat here.  It's simply a matter of etiquette.  And perhaps some who've never belonged to a private club never learned it properly, hence the lecture.  If you haven't been improperly seeking access then no offense should be taken on your part.

[Sean_A]

Sean,
I have to side with Pat here.  It's simply a matter of etiquette.  And perhaps some who've never belonged to a private club never learned it properly, hence the lecture.  If you haven't been improperly seeking access then no offense should be taken on your part.

Jud

It isn't Pat's opinion I object to; I happen to share it.  My issue is being lectured to and then being insulted (which is a typical behaviour Pat falls back on) when I have nothing to do with his or Jeff's qualms.  If I haven't stepped on toes, I shouldn't be lectured to as though I have.  Broadcasting this sort of problem is imo just as inapporpriate as cold calling for access.  But that is just my opinion and if others disagree, I am not terriby bothered - its just opinions.

Ciao

[Melvyn Morrow]

Jud

Etiquette, its simply a matter of etiquette, that’s great just great. When I raised my concern about senior players course behaviour i.e. throwing of clubs etc I was accused of Tiger bashing.

The real problem with this site is not the site but its members or perhaps I should say the inconsistency of quite a few. Why because many will not address the issues. Etiquette is important be it on the course or off and would certainly not go amiss on this site too. The problem is always easier if we blame others as we may have missed the  infringements or just accept that our heroes are above reproach. I was taught that no one was above the law.

If standards have slipped on the course with no action being taken to nip poor behaviour on the spot, then why do we expect anything else from fellow members.

Etiquette, is as much part of golf as walking but we have seen how that has been diminished over the years, so why are we reacting as we are today, it just natural progress. In time in will deteriorate further unless checked and people take responsibility for their actions.

But Guys we have to be consistent, to do so we have to be committed, but it’s a DG where commitment is not considered let alone required. In short we are the product of our own problems and the only way to resolve problems is to have an open debate on the topics concerned, which brings up round full circle.

Etiquette is used so lightly but it is as I said fundamental to good golf and I suspect to this site as well.

Jeff decided by posting this topic to attack me but without the bottle to name me, making it very clear who he was referring to “ I'm sick of the elitist mentalities, the groveling access whores, and relatives of famous golfers telling us how the game should be played..“ He not just attacked me, but the site and others again without naming names because he was feeling pissed. Is this the standard you want for this site, well its certainly does not seem to be Ran’s or Bens, seeing by Ran’s post early today.

We all have a contribution to this DG, no one has more right than the next and if only some would allow the topics to flow we may all learn something new perhaps even interesting.

Melvyn 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()