[Bill_McBride]

I have been very fortunate to be able to play some great golf courses in America because of my affiliation with GolfClubAtlas.com, but it hasn't come through cold calling or badgering members of private clubs, it's come through participation in the wonderful GCA outings and meeting people at those events.

Invitations seem to naturally flow if you mind your manners and have a good time.  Even if there weren't invitations, the events themselves are typically played over some fine golf courses.  I'm talking here about the King's Putter, Dixie Cup and Buda Cup.  Some new events like the Midwest Mashie and less formal events such as the Kingsley Club outing and Creek Club (Sweeney fundraiser) and others have popped up, more or less open to GCA.com participants.

Anyone who hasn't taken advantage of these opportunities is shortchanging him or herself.  Once you have played golf or broken bread with someone, it's tough to get into a barroom brawl with them on the website.



I

[Brent Hutto]

I wonder what proportion of the contacts that have Jeff and Pat's panties in a wad have come from actual participants in the forum. It's one thing if they're getting cold called by the Sean Arbles and Bill McBrides and Kelly Blake Morans. But I rather suspect more often it's someone who may not even be a member of the forum who just Googles up a discussion of whatever "trophy" course and then grabs the name of someone they think has connections.

To the extent it is the latter category they are totally wasting their time complaining here. Those people are immune to any criticism or pressure they might think they're bringing to bear. And there ain't a darned thing Pat or for that matter Ran can do about that kind of attention other than quit participating in public discussions or take the forum off the 'net all together.

So do we have any idea how big a "problem" this is in terms of access request coming from, let's say, people who have actually posted in forum discussions at some point in time versus others?

[JC Jones]

Brent,

Can you get me on Columbia Country Club?

[Brent Hutto]

Sure. I could probably even get Jeff Fortson on...as long as he doesn't want to play on a weekend.  

Just kidding!

P.S. The group will have definitely jumped the shark on the day I have to worry about fielding too many requests for access to my club.

[Patrick_Mucci]

You have presented next to no evidence - those are the facts.

Sean, you remain obtuse and in denial.

TEPaul, myself and others have discussed this issue off site on numerous occassions.

I related how TEPaul got an inordinate number of calls.
Then TEPaul confirmed that he's received 40-50 calls.
That's a FACT.

Jeff Fortson stated that he received an inordinate number of calls for access.
That's a fact.

Then I stated that I received an inordinate number of calls from total strangers, probably 50.
That's a fact.
I've also received numerous calls from non-strangers, and in almost every case have accomodated them.
That's a fact.

Yet, you continue to regurgitate your party line, that no evidence has been presented.
Have someone read the posts to you as you're clearly not comprehending them.  

Now you say up to 50 people have cold called you.  If this is the case, that is probably somewhere in the region of once every other month since you have been on the board. 

I didn't say 50 people have cold called me since I've been on this board, that's your erroneous conclusion.
I was just recounting from the last few years.
The total since my introduction is much higher.
Then add in Jeff's numbers, TEPaul' numbers and other's numbers and maybe, just maybe you'll begin to understand the situation.

But, it doesn't matter if it's once a week, or once a month, it's inappropriate.

Post your public notice under your name or at the bottom of your posts. 
My contention has been because relatively few people have hassled relateeively few people on this board that it isn't a board problem. 

"Relatively few" have hassled ?
The numbers are very substantial and your attempt to minimize the numbers is disengenuous on your part.
Your problem is that you have NO experience in this area, but, you continue to dismiss the statements and experiences of Jeff, TEPaul, myself and others.

It is a board/GCA.com problem since the board/GCA.com is the sole source of the offenders.
You just don't get it.

You nor anybody else hasn't produced anywhere near enough info to convince we have an epidemic problem on the board.  Again, I could be wrong, but without the facts...

Now you're going to use a word of extremes, "epidemic", which is nothing more than another disengenuous attempt to justify your opinion/contention.

You just don't get it.


I do very much get that your problem is a series of incidents not directed at the board, that is why I suggest you handle these incidents privately - they are not a board issue.  If you feel you must post a public notice use the space below your name or at the bottom of your post.  That lets people know in no uncertain terms how you feel without hvaing to rehash this same subject every year.   

I don't rehash the subject every year, that's just another erroneous statement on your part.
Jeff Fortson initiated the thread and I merely confirmed that it's a problem, as did TEPaul.

No, I am not a member of one of the elite clubs, but I do get cold calls for games. 
The diffeence is I don't mind, but I fully understand that others would and that is why I wouldn't cold call someone. 

When an acquaintance calls, I don't mind.
When a stranger calls, it's an imposition.

When did I ever give you the impression that I support folf cold calling you or anybody elese except for myself? 

In just about every reply you've posted.

There is no need to fal back on accusations that are clearly not accurate merely because it is my opinion that cold calling is a problem for a few people on the board rather than a wide spread issue which can't be dealt with in a private manner. 

Remind me again, how are you going to prevent lurkers from calling ?

This leads me to my final point, when did I ever give you the impression that you need to publicy take folks to task for cold calling? 
I have repeatedly stated these issues should be dealt with privately because they ARE NOT BOARD ISSUES. 


Of course they're board issues.
The BOARD is the SOLE SOURCE of the callers.
What part of that don't you get ?

You are known for pulling switches with your argumentative behaviour, but at least try and be clever about it. 

I try to be clever, but when the person you're dealing with is incredibly obtuse, you have to be brutally candid.
I'm content to come to grips with the fact that you just don't get it.

Thank you for the invite, but I would rather an apology for your pointless insults and a gesture that you will in the future refrain from needlessly insulting folks on this board.  It is all too common an occurrence which serves no positive purpose. 

You had a better chance of getting and invite than an apology, and now you've got neither. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

I wonder what proportion of the contacts that have Jeff and Pat's panties in a wad have come from actual participants in the forum. It's one thing if they're getting cold called by the Sean Arbles and Bill McBrides and Kelly Blake Morans. But I rather suspect more often it's someone who may not even be a member of the forum who just Googles up a discussion of whatever "trophy" course and then grabs the name of someone they think has connections.

Brent, I think lurkers may be the problem.
I've been happy to host participants from the site that I've had some interaction with, but, when a total stranger calls and invites themselves and tells me on what date and what time they can play, with no regard for my schedule, that's inappropriate, irrespective of what Sean Arble thinks.

To the extent it is the latter category they are totally wasting their time complaining here.
Those people are immune to any criticism or pressure they might think they're bringing to bear.
And there ain't a darned thing Pat or for that matter Ran can do about that kind of attention other than quit participating in public discussions or take the forum off the 'net all together.

To a degree, I agree with you.
Some people just don't get it.
Look at Sean Arble for example.

There's a line in the movie, "Midnight Express" where one party tells another that "The bad machines don't know that they're bad"
He was referencing people.
Sometimes people don't know that they're crossing the line in terms of unacceptable behavior.
Sometimes a reminder that certain things are a "no-no" goes a long way.
When AW is considered Taboo, perhaps it will diminish.


So do we have any idea how big a "problem" this is in terms of access request coming from, let's say, people who have actually posted in forum discussions at some point in time versus others?

I don't keep track and I doubt the others do.
About an hour ago someone I know from this board IM'd me and asked for help getting on a certain course.
I indicated that I had zero influence at that course, but, if they wanted to play another course in the area, I'd be happy to set it up.

Now I realize that this exceeds Sean Arble's once a month quota, but, I'm more than happy to help this person gain access to a nice golf course.

Hope that helps

[Brent Hutto]

Not from you, Pat, but from other long-time members of the forum I had heard tales of "lurkers" seeing a name here and cold-calling. Which is why I speculated it may a large portion of the problem (although I'm sure not all of it). That's a tough one to effectively head off no matter how we conduct ourselves, although nothing wrong with publicly pointing out that it's unacceptable behavior.

[Bill_McBride]

I wonder what proportion of the contacts that have Jeff and Pat's panties in a wad have come from actual participants in the forum. It's one thing if they're getting cold called by the Sean Arbles and Bill McBrides and Kelly Blake Morans. But I rather suspect more often it's someone who may not even be a member of the forum who just Googles up a discussion of whatever "trophy" course and then grabs the name of someone they think has connections.

Brent, it couldn't be me.  Kindly refer to my post #279 above.   

[Dan Kelly]

I have to tell you guys that I am honestly sick of reading about this topic. Why don't we just get it over with and name names?  Let's just have a one-time public outing of everybody who has done it and be done with it?  Let's see who is sorry and contrite and see who simply doesn't get it and fights it? 

At a bare minimum, it'll put an end to threads like these...

That doesn't qualify as a bare minimum.

[George Pazin]

At a bare minimum, it'll put an end to threads like these...

Would it? Few of these things are black and white, mostly they involve shades of gray. One man's access issues is another's clever networker.

I can't tell you how many times I've posted a thread about a golf course and someone sent me a message saying, why didn't you call me if you were in the area? I've also had numerous people tell me, you should have told me you were in that area, I know several members at such and such that would have helped you out. I didn't because that's not me.

I did contact someone one time, on behalf of another friend who had terminal cancer and has since passed. It led to quite a few interesting posts on here, to say the least. What does that make me?

Is there a problem? Sure. Is it any bigger than the access issue for golf in general? I don't know. I feel bad for people like Pat, Tom and Jeff, but I think the problem is with people and golf in general, not necessarily this site.

[Brent Hutto]

I wonder what proportion of the contacts that have Jeff and Pat's panties in a wad have come from actual participants in the forum. It's one thing if they're getting cold called by the Sean Arbles and Bill McBrides and Kelly Blake Morans. But I rather suspect more often it's someone who may not even be a member of the forum who just Googles up a discussion of whatever "trophy" course and then grabs the name of someone they think has connections.

Brent, it couldn't be me.  Kindly refer to my post #279 above.   

Bill,

Agreed. It totally couldn't be you.

[Sean_A]

You have presented next to no evidence - those are the facts.

Sean, you remain obtuse and in denial.

TEPaul, myself and others have discussed this issue off site on numerous occassions.

I related how TEPaul got an inordinate number of calls.
Then TEPaul confirmed that he's received 40-50 calls.
That's a FACT.

Jeff Fortson stated that he received an inordinate number of calls for access.
That's a fact.

Then I stated that I received an inordinate number of calls from total strangers, probably 50.
That's a fact.
I've also received numerous calls from non-strangers, and in almost every case have accomodated them.
That's a fact.

Yet, you continue to regurgitate your party line, that no evidence has been presented.
Have someone read the posts to you as you're clearly not comprehending them.  

Now you say up to 50 people have cold called you.  If this is the case, that is probably somewhere in the region of once every other month since you have been on the board.  

I didn't say 50 people have cold called me since I've been on this board, that's your erroneous conclusion.
I was just recounting from the last few years.
The total since my introduction is much higher.
Then add in Jeff's numbers, TEPaul' numbers and other's numbers and maybe, just maybe you'll begin to understand the situation.

But, it doesn't matter if it's once a week, or once a month, it's inappropriate.

Post your public notice under your name or at the bottom of your posts.  
My contention has been because relatively few people have hassled relateeively few people on this board that it isn't a board problem.  

"Relatively few" have hassled ?
The numbers are very substantial and your attempt to minimize the numbers is disengenuous on your part.
Your problem is that you have NO experience in this area, but, you continue to dismiss the statements and experiences of Jeff, TEPaul, myself and others.

It is a board/GCA.com problem since the board/GCA.com is the sole source of the offenders.
You just don't get it.

You nor anybody else hasn't produced anywhere near enough info to convince we have an epidemic problem on the board.  Again, I could be wrong, but without the facts...

Now you're going to use a word of extremes, "epidemic", which is nothing more than another disengenuous attempt to justify your opinion/contention.

You just don't get it.


I do very much get that your problem is a series of incidents not directed at the board, that is why I suggest you handle these incidents privately - they are not a board issue.  If you feel you must post a public notice use the space below your name or at the bottom of your post.  That lets people know in no uncertain terms how you feel without hvaing to rehash this same subject every year.  

I don't rehash the subject every year, that's just another erroneous statement on your part.
Jeff Fortson initiated the thread and I merely confirmed that it's a problem, as did TEPaul.

No, I am not a member of one of the elite clubs, but I do get cold calls for games.  
The diffeence is I don't mind, but I fully understand that others would and that is why I wouldn't cold call someone.  

When an acquaintance calls, I don't mind.
When a stranger calls, it's an imposition.

When did I ever give you the impression that I support folf cold calling you or anybody elese except for myself?  

In just about every reply you've posted.

There is no need to fal back on accusations that are clearly not accurate merely because it is my opinion that cold calling is a problem for a few people on the board rather than a wide spread issue which can't be dealt with in a private manner.  

Remind me again, how are you going to prevent lurkers from calling ?

This leads me to my final point, when did I ever give you the impression that you need to publicy take folks to task for cold calling?  
I have repeatedly stated these issues should be dealt with privately because they ARE NOT BOARD ISSUES.  


Of course they're board issues.
The BOARD is the SOLE SOURCE of the callers.
What part of that don't you get ?

You are known for pulling switches with your argumentative behaviour, but at least try and be clever about it.  

I try to be clever, but when the person you're dealing with is incredibly obtuse, you have to be brutally candid.
I'm content to come to grips with the fact that you just don't get it.

Thank you for the invite, but I would rather an apology for your pointless insults and a gesture that you will in the future refrain from needlessly insulting folks on this board.  It is all too common an occurrence which serves no positive purpose.  

You had a better chance of getting and invite than an apology, and now you've got neither.  

Now I feel bad.  A missed day of golf with Pat Mucci.  Maybe in my next life if "I just get it".  

Ciao

[Melvyn Morrow]

It cannot be me, I have never asked and anyway my back has stopped me play golf.  So guys, on this it can not be my fault, I am not Guilty of asking anyone for  ‘the courtesy of the course’.

Also as I have never been to the States I am not guilty there either, so you will have to blame another this time.

Melvyn

PS Pat Sean, you two are better than this so come on stop this madness

[PCCraig]

Why in the world hasn't this train-wreck of a thread been deleted? It could be the worst, most useless, thread I've ever read on this site and it only seems to be getting worse.

As a side note and something more "on topic" I really don't think I've ever actually participated in active AW-ing with anyone on this site, but if for some reason I've ever come across as doing so with a member on here I appologize. As I said before on this thread I find no harm in people e-mailing/messaging other members that they know that live in a certain area that they will be looking for a game. IMO I think that's the best part of this website and the reason I always tell people to let me know if they are ever in the Chicago area.

I can and can't imagine the whole access issue is that big of a deal. On one hand you have people that clearly care about playing top 100 courses and will do everything in their power to do so. But then again I can't imagine that there are that many of them bold enough to just e-mail members of this site out of the blue to set up access. From some of the posts above you would think that the GCA members getting these requests are suffering serious trauma. I would suggest to them to just hit the delete button when one of those messages come in.

Whatever...it's just an online niche discussion board at the end of the day!

[JR Potts]

Was going to stay out of this as I'm not sure it adds anything to the discussion but I've received probably 20 messages to play.  Several I have accepted as I've read past posts of theirs and found them to be interesting people - others I've denied as I couldn't make it fit into my schedule and others I've just plain ignored.  I have to say, I haven't had a request in a year so maybe that aspect of the site is gone.

More often than not though, I would like to play with most on here and would doubly like to take them out to play at my home course.  Unfortunately, my rounds are limited now so it is difficult.

All the above being said, I think they should be some rapport with a "host" before someone hits someone up for access.  I have to say, I don't think I would ever ask under any circumstances but that's just me.  Also, I do have the luxury of having my pro call and 99% of the time - I can play whereever. (which I know others may disagree but I find it to be a perfectly acceptible way of playing different courses - as I enjoy hosting others at my club).

I guess the long and short of it - this site hasn't jumped the shark....and certainly hasn't in the last 3 years due to merely access whoring.  I have made a lot of good e-friends on here (twitter friends as well) and still enjoy it when I can.  The delete button can always be used when getting access emails despite its 2 second annoyance.

So - let's keep calm and carry on.

[Bill_McBride]

I wonder what proportion of the contacts that have Jeff and Pat's panties in a wad have come from actual participants in the forum. It's one thing if they're getting cold called by the Sean Arbles and Bill McBrides and Kelly Blake Morans. But I rather suspect more often it's someone who may not even be a member of the forum who just Googles up a discussion of whatever "trophy" course and then grabs the name of someone they think has connections.

Brent, it couldn't be me.  Kindly refer to my post #279 above.   

Bill,

Agreed. It totally couldn't be you.

Unless I'm coming to Columbia!   

[Brent Hutto]

If I hear the McBride's are going to be here in town I'll be the one calling you up to arrange a game. What is the proper term of art of reverse-access-whoring?

[Bill_McBride]

If I hear the McBride's are going to be here in town I'll be the one calling you up to arrange a game. What is the proper term of art of reverse-access-whoring?

Courtesy?   

[Kyle Henderson]

For my part, I hope the shark is un-jumped and I will gladly sift through the smut for the chance of learning and enjoying from the ample "meat" of quality posts that endure.

This site has much to offer:

I've made dozens of friends through this discussion group (DG) and enjoyed their company on dozens of public courses, along with a handful of stellar private layouts. 90+% of the DG participants I've played with I would eagerly join again, regardless of venue.

I've also learned a great deal from contributors of the industry (e.g. superintendents, shapers and practicing GCAs) that post here. It is an absolute treat and pleasure -- even the dry stuff can be fascinating at times. We should all consider ourselves fortunate to enjoy this priviledge.

Sure, the copious amount of extraneos and superficial posts detract from the greater glory what many would consider the ideal for the discussion group. Constant effort should be invested to maintain or improve the quality of this DG. In this regard, I thank Mr. Fortson for bringing attention to what he sees as poisonous trends that threaten the balance.

Generally, the biggest threat I see involves negative comments made about fellow posters. Would it not be best to post almost exclusively about GCA-related items -- a few friendly quips and jokes notwithstanding?

I see no reason to make negative comments about other posters on the DG board. If you disagree with someone else's opinion, offer yours in counterpoint. If you dislike the manner in which they post or any other aspect of their persona, send them a private message.

Stay classy, DG.

[Mac Plumart]

Alas, here it is...

Completely explained!!!

http://tv.yahoo.com/blog/happy-days-writer-breaks-silence-show-did-not-jump-the-shark--1513

[Anthony Gray]

  I went to a hockey game and a GCA thread broke out.

  aNTHONY

[Jeff_Brauer]

Anthony,

You are being far too disrespectful......to hockey.  Unlike this place, its a game of skill and grace.  If you are ever in DFW, betwen October and April, let me know and I will show you what a great sport it is to watch.  If the #$!(*## Stars manage to make the playoffs this year, extend that from October to May or even June.

[JC Jones]

Anthony,

You are being far too disrespectful......to hockey.  Unlike this place, its a game of skill and grace.  If you are ever in DFW, betwen October and April, let me know and I will show you what a great sport it is to watch.  If the #$!(*## Stars manage to make the playoffs this year, extend that from October to May or even June.

Very graceful....like toothless ice dancing.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()