You asked for an example, Tom. Go back and look at the previous discussion you mentioned for your example.
But more to the point, Tom, surely you must realize that by asserting your "right to disagree" in these discussions about your own courses, you chill frank and honest commentary about those courses, don't you?
_________________________________________________________________________________________
JC,
Thanks for actually trying to make this a productive discussion. I'd like to answer your questions, but I don't think we are quite talking about the same thing. I really don't care about anyone's likes or dislikes, except to the extent that such opinions provide an avenue into a discussion of golf course architecture. There just doesn't seem to be much depth of discussion regarding gca because with certain courses and certain people, everyone freaks out at the slightest hint of criticism. There is no discussion, just people saying they really, really, really looove this hole, but they really, really, really, really love, love, love that one.
That is what has grown frustrating for me, and it is not just about Dismal. So much of the discussion is just about visceral likes and dislikes without any attempt to try and dig deeper. The same thing is going on with ANGC. All the ANGC lovers have circled the wagons and any attempt to try and discuss it is being met with a how-dare-you criticize this great institution?! How-dare-you ruin my viewing pleasure?! Well, we should dare. Frank discussion of golf course architecture ought to involve delving deeper than just visceral likes and dislikes. We can love a place, yet still critically analyze the architecture. That is what separates those who love golf course architecture from those who just love golf or even golf courses.
As for the DR Red, I agree that it seems pretty much off limits. The closest I can think of to potential criticisms are a few allusions to difficult walks, discussion of a bad bounce, and when I and a few others asked a few questions about the unusual dead end routing and the required commutes, and the reaction to the last was swift and harsh from all the involved parties. For me, when one of our great architects departs from a centuries old custom of finishing near the first tee, it is worth exploring. But it obviously is not possible in this environment.
My whitewashing pun wasn't about my opinion of the course, but about what seems to be a pretty strong effort at rehabilitating the reputation of the Nicklaus course. No doubt it is well-meaning, but I think the message is out that wholesale criticisms of DR white are not welcome. Even Tom Doak seems to be half trying to bite his lip about the course. (See his non-comment comments about Tiger's comments.) I agree that criticisms were once commonplace around here but I think you have to go back a ways to close to a different ownership regime to find a candid and honest criticism of the course. The new party line seems to be that it is a quirky and much misunderstood gem that requires play after play after play to appreciate. When this paradigm was challenged in the pillow fight thread, again reaction was swift and harsh.
As for me, I haven't played it, but by the descriptions from people I trust (mostly either old or offline) I doubt it would be my cup of tea. Of course, your results may vary.
ADDED: I see now you have deleted your posts and questions. Take my response for whatever you think it worth.
_________________________________________________
Chris Johnston,
This isn't a Dismal thread. I didn't hijack anything. I answered Mac's question. That is how frank discussion is supposed to work.
This is not the first time you threatened me with your innuendo about unnamed "deep cutting" insults and gossip. Your repeated allusion to such things really speaks volumes about the kind of person you are.
As for your outhouse quip, yet another classy move on your part. You can name your building after me provided we can agree to appropriate compensation.
________________________________________________
One other general point regarding frank and honest discussion, and whether it is being suppressed . . . Look at what happened to the Dismal pillow fight thread! Tom Doak thought the thread might discourage people from from going out (I agree) and so he contacted Eric and the thread was killed. Hardly open and frank commentary. More like a mutual marketing decision.