As the creator of this thread, this debate is not one I'll wade into, as it is not my place to judge my own content. I will leave that to all of you. But I do want to say two things:
First, I wouldn't do these tours here if people didn't want to see them. The page views and the responses seem to indicate pretty clearly that, at least for now, people want this content. Unless and until that changes, I will continue to provide it. And I hope that those who like it will continue to enjoy it.
Second, I don't think it's my place (or any other outsider's place) to judge what is in the best interests of the clubs I (or others) photograph and display here. Were any club ever to have any issue whatsoever with photos or a tour that I put up, I would immediately respect their wishes and either take the thread down or modify it accordingly. And when possible, I always try to either get permission or gauge the club's interest in having these photos displayed. That said, the responses from the clubs that I have photographed for display here has been overwhelmingly positive. Many have asked for the photographs for their own uses -- a request I am always more than happy to grant.
So, in the end, I respect but disagree with the opinion that these photographs somehow "cheapen" the experience of playing a club. If anyone thinks that my photographs can, in any way, shape or form, replicate the experience of playing National Golf Links, or Fishers Island, or Myopia Hunt Club, then you have a higher opinion of my photography than I do. But as I said in my opening post, if I can introduce someone to a course or an aspect of a course that they've never seen or heard of before, or provide photographs that add to the architectural discussion of a course, or invoke positive memories in those who have been to one of these venues, or even just provide a little distraction to get someone through an otherwise boring day, then I am happy to have been able to do so.