News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
TePaul,

Well, if they came from a private source, they would not show up on Drexel's data base, so the intrigue continues.

I doubt any of us will be holding our breath waiting for you to decide to show what you got.  I am interested, but not interested in getting whacked!
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Phil_the_Author

Jeff Taylor,

As you've only received one answer to your set of questions I thought that another perspective might be of help especially as I have written several club histories, am in the process of writing several others and do private research for a number of clubs on a regular basis. So, for what it is worth:

1. Why would a member of Merion (or any club for that matter) care what is said about its history on this website?

      First of all, even though you are asking for an opinion, and mine is certainly only that, what must be looked at are the facts that reflect on the answer. The fact is that there are many, many people who regularly read golfclubatlas who are not and never will be members. How often have you seen a newbie tell about himself and begin by saying "I was a lurker for many years..."? Why do people "lurk" on this site without being a member?" Because there really are many more out there that ARE interested in architectural, and yes, their own clubs histories. It has been my experience that at every club I've done work at that golfclubatlas has been mentioned by far more than one person. So, why would a person who is a member of a particular club "care what is said about its history on this website?" They do because they really enjoy their club and their fellow members. They take great pride when their club is discussed and take great interest when the discussions they read on here challenge or dispute the history of their club that they have come to know and believe. Likewise, may take great offense when they believe that the discussions are or become filled with misinformation and wrong opinions by individuals who show what they believe to be a callous disrespect toward their club. Remember, for many members their club is an extension of their home and so take anything said about it in that vein.

2. Why would a member of any club care about GCA.com SOP's for course history investigations in general?

      I am not sure that anyone would and I disagree with Tom Paul that golfclubatlas should have a "SOP" at all. A true researcher or golf historian should do their work within an ethical structure that respects the feelings and beliefs of those they are researching or others who have information discovered about them. For example, when major information is discovered about a club either directly or inadvertently that club should be shown the information as soon as possible and before it is mentioned anywhere or to anyone else.
      I defined it in two ways. “Directly” in the sense that one is working for or with a particular club and makes discoveries during this research. If the information discovered was part of the club’s personal documents then it must and should be considered private and remain that way until the researcher is given permission to dispense it to other individuals or publish it for all. The researcher/historian should approach their relationship with the club as akin to being a doctor/patient one.
      The second way I defined it was if it was an “Inadvertent” one. Let me give you an example. Imagine if during a research project for a certain major club one discovers while going through their board minutes that Alister Mackenzie had been hired to examine the course and make recommendations for changes to it? And suppose that up to that point not a single person, not even those working away for years now on the exhaustive Alister Mackenzie timeline had known of or even heard of this? What would you do? As a friend of Neil Crafter would you email him the good news, or would you approach the club and ask permission from them to allow Neil to know about this? What if the club gives permission and stipulates that he must agree to not publish it until they give permission? Would you do so surreptitiously anyway? These are not little questions and situations such as this have occurred. Here is where a STANDARD of ETHICS practiced by good researchers come into play for each and how showing respect for the others work can enable trust in the other. Now if the information is discovered through a public source, a library or public archive or old newspaper account. Still, as one is working directly for and with the club, they should be informed first and the matter discussed with them privately. As the researcher is on good terms with the club he is working for, this show of respect is appreciated. It has been my experience that discoveries of this type are never asked to be kept private. It is the respect shown to the club that actually helps with this.
      Now what if a discovery is made when one is simply doing research on their own and not even indirectly for a club? Still, pause must be given and some restraint should be shown. An approach to the club before publishing the information is not only polite and ethical it is the right thing to do. There isn’t a person or institution that wants to learn new information about themselves, complimentary or not, by reading about it in a public forum. Their reaction might give the discoverer reason for either publishing it or holding it back, but in either case it is his discovery and his decision. By approaching the club first he can only end up making a better choice in this.
    
3. Why would any club want to participate in this endeavor after reading these threads? Is that the motive for deleting insults? Is there and expectation that they won't find them and then feel more willing to participate?

      That is the most important question that you’ve asked. The contentious nature of a number of the history threads has made it far more difficult for competent and respected researchers to approach clubs where they have not had a relationship before. I have had questions asked about it of me and seen the same for others. Clubs, especially those considered major and/or important ones, take great personal pride in how they are viewed. They do so as an institution and as individual members. One thing that both have in common are long memories. Being well-aware of what has already been written on here about them, they don’t and won’t forget or forgive perceived insults to their honor regardless of whether the offending posts are removed or not.
      What SHOULD be removed are any and all insults wherein a PERSON or INDIVIDUAL by NAME has been attacked or insulted or even worse, possibly slandered, especially when they are NOT a member of the Discussion Group. That is wrong in every conceivable way and opens up both the poster and Ran to some very potentially unfortunate repercussions.

4. Does a discussion group of 1500 really mean that much to private clubs?

      Oddly enough the answer is yes. It is like the magazine rankings. Every club wants to be ranked or considered good enough to be and when not works toward the day when they might be. The day a club falls out of the rankings is a very bad one for that club and the proverbial “heads will roll” over it isn’t too far off the mark. Likewise golfclubatlas has become a very integral part of club culture. Many non-members are fascinated by it and read it for both knowledge and help in areas such as maintenance issues when they are being discussed. They get a big kick out of seeing their club discussed and when the discussion is not complimentary want some answers. I’ve received many emails from non-members about things said about certain Tillinghast clubs that they considered derogatory and from others who greatly enjoyed what they read. So, in my opinion, golfclubatlas really does have a much wider meaning to clubs and individuals than most on here credit it with.

These are just my opinons but I hope they will be of help...
« Last Edit: October 29, 2010, 10:22:15 AM by Philip Young »

TEPaul

"TePaul,
Well, if they came from a private source, they would not show up on Drexel's data base, so the intrigue continues."



Jeffrey, Sir:

Is that right? You must understand, I am not exactly one of these modern men and I am not familiar with that kind of terminology. What is a Data Base anyway? Would it be like some kind of technological military base where Data goes through boot camp or something?


Mike Cirba

Tom,

Did the Biddle Basement bring better benefits than Al Capone's vault, or are you really just baiting us and biding time with baseless banter about Biddle's Basement and Beyond?   :-\ :-* ;D

TEPaul

Do not make jokes about the Philadelphia Biddles, Mr. Cirba; not even alliterative jokes. They were one of the most prominent Philadelphia families in the city's long history (including substantial members of MCC and other early significant Philadelphia golf clubs) and I have "verifiably provable" documentation and quotes from President Andrew Jackson and King Edward VII of England to support it.

I have also found almost two hundred years of Biddle family papers at the University of Delaware. This of course will go on my resume as someday I would appreciate it if Tom MacWood would deign to consider me a "Searcher" too and hopefully a "Searcher" with an "open mind."
« Last Edit: October 29, 2010, 11:58:28 AM by TEPaul »

Mike Cirba

So...

Are you seriously saying that your solo searching is sufficiently sated and you are satisfied that serious analysis is secondary to proper subsequent, subtle vetting of said materials?

Or put another way, is our long national nightmare nearly over? 

TEPaul

"Is our long national nightmare nearly over?"

Do you mean in the matter of the architectural attibrution of Merion?

If so, yes, hopefully.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2010, 04:02:18 PM by TEPaul »

Jeff Taylor

  • Karma: +0/-0
Thank you David, Tom, and Philip for your thoughtful answers.

Mike Cirba


"Is our long national nightmare nearly over?"

Do you mean in the matter of the architectural attibrution of Merion?

If so, yes, hopefully.


Tom

Is there any other??

I mean, the economic collapse and subsequent recession is only about 2 years old, right?  ;)  ;D

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
It's hard to believe this is a conversation between adults.

I have three young boys, and if I overheard a similar conversation I'd tell them to either show what they've got or stop teasing.

From an outsider looking in who knows very little about the history of this dispute, that's what this looks like. Childish teasing.

I agree, Dan, and am embarrassed to be involved in it.   Imagine what those 300 recently booted posters must thinking when they see a thread like this.  How many of them ever engaged in anything this pathetic or this embarrassing for the website?

Tom Paul, here is your last paragraph of your initial post on this issue:

"Pretty amazing but when someone is proven flat-ass wrong he should just man-up and admit it. One just never knows what may happen next in these things we do. Stranger things have happened, I guess, but not much stranger."

What (or who) made you change your mind on how you would deal with this?
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

TEPaul

David:

As you might imagine it's not easy realizing you may've uncovered a conspiracy of this magnitude going back a century and involving scores or hundreds of people and perhaps the entire golf community including the press of a major American city. Today I was considering selling the farm and moving back to Long Island where I originally came from.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2010, 10:44:57 PM by TEPaul »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Please Tom.  Cut the bullshit. 
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

TEPaul

David:

Excuse me? I thought you said within the last 24 hours you weren't going to be insulting in the future. Have you no feelings? Have you no shame?? This isn't easy for me as I've known literally hundreds of people at that club going back about thirty years, including everyone who ran it. I thought they were my friends. How could they have allowed a potential myth and a potential conspiracy of this magnitude on the architectural attribution of one of the world's most significant golf courses to be perpetuated like this and for exactly a century now?


DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
David:

Excuse me? I thought you said within the last 24 hours you weren't going to be insulting in the future. Have you no feelings? Have you no shame?? This isn't easy for me as I've known literally hundreds of people at that club going back about thirty years, including everyone who ran it. I thought they were my friends. How could they have allowed a myth and a conspiracy of this magnitude on the architectural attribution of one of the world's most significant golf courses to be perpetuated like this and for exactly a century now?

No insults Tom.  I am just asking you, again, to please cut the bullshit.   Surely this isn't what Ran wants, is it?  You are making a mockery of his website, and right after Ran implored us to clean up our act.   Yet you've creating this embarrassing mess.  You need to clean it up, one way or another.  "Man-up," as you put it.  

And there is no need for this sarcasm about a conspiracy.   No one has ever claimed there has been a long running conspiracy at Merion.  Not sure what point you think you are making but it has nothing to do with any position I have ever taken.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2010, 11:36:50 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

TEPaul

Sarcasm? What are you talking about? This could be potentially horrible and you mention sarcasm? Why?

No one's mentioned there's been a long running conspiracy at Merion? Of course they have. It's been mentioned on this website for years. You mentioned it I think and Tom MacWood has mentioned it scores of times, and not just about Merion, about Philadelphia golf itself. Having said that, I hope I'm not just assuming you are of the very same opinion as Tom MacWood is about Merion, and if I am I apologize; it does get tough to tell the difference sometimes.

By the way, what was your position when he called Merion's historian the 'Poster Boy of unethical archivists?' Do you think I can find your opinion on that in the back pages or have you voluntarily deleted it? Do you think he deleted that remark?

I thought both you and Tom MacWood were making the point that Wilson was too much the novice to have been capable of designing Merion East with his five man committee and that in fact he just constructed it to someone else's plan. Are you now trying to say I've been wrong about that for the last two and a half years? I've read your essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion" many times and it sure seems that was what you were saying in it. Do you think I read it incorrectly somehow? If so please tell me what you really meant.

And I've read the numerous posts of Tom MacWood that keep asking how or why the powerful men of MCC could've gotten an insurance salesman inexperienced in architecture to design a course for them when they had some real talent available to them. Did he mean something I haven't heretofore understood by those questions?

Thanks

« Last Edit: October 30, 2010, 12:03:18 AM by TEPaul »

Phil_the_Author

Tom,

Regardless of what David might have said in the past, isn't what THIS thread is supposed to be about what YOU said you had? I am of the opinion that you need to answer the questions posed to you on this. David responded to your "condition" and you didn't accept his answer. That is fine and understandable on both sides.

What I took from that, though, was that you were willing to discuss what you said you received in the mail regardless of any involvement from Merion IF David did as you asked of him. That he doesn't see a need to do so shouldn't now prevent you from showing what you have because all of the rest on here have a vested interest in the discussion and information as well after it has been so often mentioned. It is time to put this thread to bed once and for all.

You know that I have supported you & Wayne on many Merion issues and ciontroversies in the past. That having been said, as a friend I believe that this one is definitely up to you to end.

TEPaul

"What I took from that, though, was that you were willing to discuss what you said you received in the mail regardless of any involvement from Merion IF David did as you asked of him. That he doesn't see a need to do so shouldn't now prevent you from showing what you have......"


Is that right Phil? I asked him to fulfill a condition and if he did I said I'd consider discussing his questions (#1, #2 and #2) in his first post. He did not agree to fulfill that condition. If you think he did then please show me where he did and then I'll consider discussing his questions #1, #2, and #2 with him and anyone else who thinks they have some vested interest ;) in this subject.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2010, 12:15:41 AM by TEPaul »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Tom.  

You should quit misrepresenting my positions and focus on your own.   Why won't you come clean?  Why won't you "man-up" like you said you would?

Are you really refusing to discuss this because I will not cede you total editorial control over all my past posts?   Really? Does this actually sound reasonable to you?   Do you really think it reasonable for you to dictate to me what I need to delete, and that not even Ran should get a say?  

Does Ran know you playing games like this?  Does he know that you are conditioning your reasonable participation on my granting you the unchecked ability to delete my past posts?
__________________________________________

Ran.  

You were wondering what is going wrong with your website.   Are you getting any of this?  Is this what you have in mind for your website.  
« Last Edit: October 30, 2010, 01:51:54 AM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Phil_the_Author

Tom,

You misunderstood what I said. You responded to my post with "Is that right Phil? I asked him to fulfill a condition and if he did I said I'd consider discussing his questions (#1, #2 and #2) in his first post. He did not agree to fulfill that condition. If you think he did then please show me where he did and then I'll consider discussing his questions #1, #2, and #2 with him and anyone else who thinks they have some vested interest  in this subject."

What I said was, "What I took from that, though, was that you were willing to discuss what you said you received in the mail regardless of any involvement from Merion IF David did as you asked of him. That he doesn't see a need to do so shouldn't now prevent you from showing what you have......"

No, David hasn't agreed to your request and I never intimated that he had. My sole reason for mentioning it was because you have already stated that the information is publicly accessible and not private. It is something that most definitely needs to be shared with Merion and SHOULD be shared with them first but since you took the route of speaking of it numerous times you have effectively lost that privilege of refusal in my opinion.

At the very least you should provide the resource information so that others who are investing their time to research the question may do so. An example that is EXACTLY comparable to this situation... North Shore.

The information as to who designed it was contained in a little known portion of the New York Historical Society archives. The only person on this site that knew of it SHARED that information with the others discussing it and so Steve Shaffer took it upon himself to travel from Philadelphia to visit them and made the discovery. When Mark Hissey wanted to confirm it and attempted to do so he was told by the chief archivist there that the records didn't exist and went back home wondering who had found what and where. The same person who had given the original information gave it again to Mark including TITLE, FILE and BOX numbers. mark brought this back to the same archivist who now, with a great deal of embarrassment located them and even gave Mark the ability to get copies of the document for the club and new owner.

Maybe you have acceptable personal reasons for not sharing the information with david Moriarity... fine. What you don't have is acceptable reasons for not sharing the LOCATION of the information with everyone else as it is a public access archive which has it. Would you please allow the rest of us to have at least that portion so that any and all who desire to make the effort can visit the archive and research the question as you have done? Some have already stated that they have gone to Drexel and been told the files don't exist. Why not be as selfless as the person on the North Shore thread was in providing the ability to find what is there so that THEY aren't wasting precious time and resources? That is what a responsible researcher would do regardless of his problem with another individual(s).

You have called for Ran to create an SOP for researchers discussing historical information on the DG. I am quite certain that the principle of sharing public access innformation would be high on the list of items that he would see a need for openness and candor on.


TEPaul

"Tom. 

You should quit misrepresenting my positions and focus on your own.   Why won't you come clean?  Why won't you "man-up" like you said you would?

Are you really refusing to discuss this because I will not cede you total editorial control over all my past posts?   Really? Does this actually sound reasonable to you?   Do you really think it reasonable for you to dictate to me what I need to delete, and that not even Ran should get a say?   

Does Ran know you playing games like this?  Does he know that you are conditioning your reasonable participation on my granting you the unchecked ability to delete my past posts?"
__________________________________________





David:

Have I been misrepresenting your positions on this thread? If so I’m sorry but I am certainly not aware how I’ve done that. How do you think I’ve done that?

On the second paragraph, no, I’m not refusing to discuss this because you will not cede total editorial control over all your posts. I didn’t ask for that or say that. I only asked you, as a condition to discussing your questions to me, to accept that condition that we both voluntarily agree to delete insulting posts re: Merion that the other feels are insulting, and then do that. I also never said that Ran should not get a say. As you know he started a thread recently about the tone on here and boorish behavior and he did mention the Merion threads. I have spoken to him at length about this after that thread and I feel he said he would be delighted if we could do this. I think both of us felt this might serve to begin a new and better tone of civility and cooperation in the future if those insulting posts were removed from this website. But judging from your responses on this thread to that idea it does not appear you agree with it.

I did not start this thread; you did. Apparently you think I have something you want. And I feel you can do something I very much want to see happen on this website----eg that we both agree to get rid of the insulting posts and boorish behavior on them that we have both contributed. I had also hoped that Tom MacWood would participate but he seems to never want to respond at all to this type of request. I asked you if you would try to convince him in a show of good faith. If you feel that Cirba has been part of some boorish behavior on here and insulting posts, I am quite sure I can convince him to participate with us in voluntarily removing them.

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
1. You have misrepresented my positions on the thread.  Take your sarcasm about a Merion consipiracy.   Leaving you and Wayne out of it, I've never said Merion or anyone at Merion ever surreptitiously misrepresented what happened at Merion.  For another example, you have misrepresented my dealings with Merion and their archives.   There are more examples, but there is no reason to be discussing my positions on Merion at all as they have been discussed ad nauseum.  Your attempts to inject thus stuff into this particular conversation seem rather diversionary to me.  

2.  If you aren't demanding editorial control over my past posts and refusing Ran say in the process then your "condition" has been met and you should answer my questions.    Because I have repeatedly said I would delete the posts you wanted me to delete, provided Ran is given final say on which should be deleted.    

3.  You again try to speak for Ran on this issue, claiming that "he would be delighted" with your plan to cleanse the history of the website to suit your needs.   I disagree.   Surely Ran knows you cannot alter history by manipulating the source material.   But if you are correct, then make your list and Ran can decide what to ask me to delete.


« Last Edit: October 30, 2010, 10:17:04 AM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

TEPaul

"You misunderstood what I said."


Phil:

Yes, it seems that most all of us are almost always somehow misunderstanding what the other is saying when it comes to discussions with David Moriarty and Tom MacWood, or you and MacWood and Moriarty or even you and me. It certainly seemed you could reach no understanding with MacWood about whether or not he called you a liar about something to do with Shawnee. ;)

I think the North Shore situation is an excellent analogy on how material about clubs should be treated. I cannot now remember how that all played out with Steve Shaeffer other than I do remember he asked me if I wanted to go to New York with him about that material. And I do recall I mentioned to me by phone, I believe, that he should go to the club with it first; I think he called me about that when he was at the New York Historical Society looking at it. I also put in a call for him to Bill Quiran who had written about North Shore and its architectural attribution previously.

In that vein, whatever I have on Horatio Gates Lloyd that bears on the history of Merion, I should probably discuss it first with the club or those at the club I have dealt with for years on things to do with their architectural history. You did remind me on an earlier thread that I should not have mentioned it first on here before doing that and I told you I feel you are right about that. In the interest of what you said about that I should probably delete that but apparently it has been requoted on here and it appears we are having some problems on here getting others to agree to delete things which probably should not be on this website.

TEPaul

"1. You have misrepresented my positions on the thread.  Take your sarcasm about a Merion consipiracy.   Leaving you and Wayne out of it, I've never said Merion or anyone at Merion ever surreptitiously misrepresented what happened at Merion."


David:

If that's true then I apologize to you and I hereby detract what I said about you that way. I guess I got you confused with Tom MacWood and what he has said on here in that vein numerous times and for a number of years now. However, you did say leaving me and Wayne out of it. You should know that Wayne is considered by Merion GC to be their primary architectural historian, and he is a member. If you are suggesting that he's been involved in some kind of misrepresentation or conspiracy, and it appears you are suggesting that considering all the times you have stated on numerous posts that he and I are hiding source material or even altering original documents, then by extension I think you are suggesting that Merion is involved in some kind of architectural attribution misrepresentation or conspiracy.

Of course the reality of it is that that contention by you could not be farther from the truth. It has been explained to both you and Tom MacWood by Merion GC what the process is to research their archives and as yet neither of you have taken them up on their process.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2010, 10:38:26 AM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

"2.  If you aren't demanding editorial control over my past posts and refusing Ran say in the process then your "condition" has been met and you should answer my questions.    Because I have repeatedly said I would delete the posts you wanted me to delete, provided Ran is given final say on which should be deleted."


David:

That's excellent. I realize it seems very hard for you and I to discuss anything but I think if you review Posts #60, 61, 73, 88 and 90 you will find we discussed that. In those posts I did say that you and I should then be in touch with Ran and get his agreement on that. It was my understanding with him that you and I could certainly do this together voluntarily without his oversight but if you are asking for his ongoing oversight on it then we can certainly ask him about that as well. Ran and I even discussed the possiblilty of having a conference call on this issue of Merion perhaps including you and MacWood and Cirba and me with him. Would you agree to that?

My hope is to fix the tone and lack of civility of the past and I just feel the best way to do that is to first remove all the examples on this website of incivility particularly on the subject of Merion on here.

Frankly, it would seem a whole lot more appropriate to me if the five of us just did all this off this website and its DG but in the past you certainly know you have constantly asked me not to contact you in any way other than on this DG. I hope you won't deny that.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2010, 11:03:24 AM by TEPaul »

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Nice try Tom, but you and Wayne are not Merion, and my comments about the two of you reflect only on the two of you and not on Merion or Merion's Archives.  I would not condemn Merion and its great history based on the words and actions of a single member and his buddy, especially when so far as I know neither is authorized to speak on behalf of Merion in these matters.    And here again you pretend to know  about matters you know nothing about . . .
"It has been explained to both you and Tom MacWood by Merion GC what the process is to research their archives and as yet neither of you have taken them up on their process."
You have no idea about any of this and you really ought to let Merion speak for Merion on these matters.   Thanks.

As for the rest, set up anything you want, but it is only Ran's opinion I am interested in.  

Now answer my questions, as you said you would.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2010, 11:06:30 AM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)