On a recent Monday after JPN mentioned us in the Wall Street Journal weekend edition our server almost crashed; such was the crush of people. No matter where I go (including South Ulst!) people know GolfClubAtlas.com. While we can all take great pride in that, we need to recognize that the onus is on us to be at our best at all times. A busy traffic week like the US Open is as good a time as any for us to re-focus and press ahead best foot forward.
Please post under your name or something close (JSmith is fine if you don’t want Jack Smith out in public), don’t change it because you are feeling cute, be courteous,
ignore Pat, stick to topics on golf course architecture, no profanity, etc. Your views on politics, gun control, etc. that you may consider fascinating aren’t why people tune in to this site. 98% of the participants readily demonstrate common sense and comply. The other 2% struggle and boorish behavior ensues.
Currently,~1,535 have the ability to post. We will trim that back, maybe to 1,500, deleting accounts where people don’t comply with the above. Another ~ thirty pages of off topic threads will be removed this week.
Such actions are only taken with due consideration and are not at all fun. Ben and I view them as ‘a necessary waste of time' and it must happen occasionally lest we become worse. The guiding principle continues to be: What is in the best interest of GolfClubAtlas.com and what measures can be taken to improve the platform upon which discussions about golf course architecture can flourish?
People everywhere acknowledge the great value of the Discussion Group
once they sift through the off point remarks. This round of action is meant to help people find that meaningful content more readily. One thing that has developed is something I call ‘poster fatigue.’ The age of the site and the length of time that people have been posting means that there are individuals with 5,000, 10,000, 15,000 plus posts. That’s a lot! There are some who comment out of habit, not because they are adding something of value. Restraint would be appreciated as otherwise pages and pages of drivel build up over time. The beauty of this site is that it is devoted strictly to the study of golf course architecture and our posts should reflect that primacy. We aren’t trying to please sponsors or advertisers via superfluous statistics.
In 2011, Ben and I received 348 ‘report to moderator’ complaints about poor behavior. In 2012, that number dropped to 261. Some were frivolous and others the fallout from passionate debate, which we endorse. So it appears that we are heading in the direction of gentlemanly behavior. Ben and I can’t be accused of having read The Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group Manual (was it published by Knopf? I don’t recall
). However, we will keep trying our very best to provide the finest open access site in the world.
We pledge that to you.Best,
Ben & Ran