[MCirba]

Ran started the year with an impassioned plea to those of us privileged to participate here, asking us essentially to keep the discussion to golf course architecture related topics.   Implied as well was to be a kinder, gentler, more focused Discussion Group who engage in respectful debate and the type of civil discourse that might occur if we were all sitting around a table in a club grill room, face to face.

He also provided us with some tools such as the "Ignore" feature, which I haven't used but I'm thinking others may have found it of value.   

All in all, how do folks think we did in honoring Ran's request?

Perhaps we should use the Doak Scale, with a 10 being a "have to read it every day and most every thread is of value", and 0 being quite the opposite.

End of year is always a good time to take stock, and I'm hoping this thread will cause some additional reflection and self-examination from all of us about our respective efforts at being good GCA citizens.   

Perhaps the question we all need to ask ourselves, truthfully, is "Would I want to read my posts?"

Thanks for some very good discussions in 2015 and I look forward to many more to come.

[Jud_T]

Mike,


I'd give us a 6. The good news is that there's been less OT crap, but this may have as much to do with the lull in the news cycle between Tiger and Trump as it does with self-monitoring.  There have been some nice historical discoveries and discussions thanks to folks like yourself, Sven et. al.  The problem is that with the exception of a handful of interesting new projects and restorations, there's really not that much to talk about that hasn't been covered before.  How many times do we need to read about the same GCA darling courses, travel ideas that have been rehashed many times over and ratings threads debating why various courses moved up or down a couple of spots?  In a sense we've won the war- minimalism and fun firm courses are now the status quo of new high end golf development and restoration/renovation projects focus more on classic strategy and presentation.  Problem is that there simply aren't as many new battles to fight. 

[George Pazin]

Nice post, Jud, I'd give it at least at 8, maybe even higher upon further reflection.


Site's fine, posters are fine, world isn't. Doubt it will be any different in December 2016...

[Kalen Braley]

Mike after taking 3 year hiatus I've also noticed the difference in less OT topics.

That being said, I've also taken a good look in the mirror and realized my role in participating in those threads in the past, so I've tried to make a very concerted effort to do better in that category since coming back.

When I was gone, I found that I really missed all the wonderful course reviews the most.  A close 2nd was not hearing about all the new projects in the planning stage and following along as they come to fruition.  Mike K has really been killing it as I had no idea about the Sand Valley project until a couple of months ago.

[John Kavanaugh]

The first guy to respond uses a fake name. I give us a 2 with much blame towards myself and those like me who participate on far too many threads. I don't think it would be all that difficult to write a program that limits each individual to 365 posts per year.  Nobody has that much interesting to say.

[Sven Nilsen]

"Our site is not a message board; no one should feel compelled to tell us about their state of play; no one should comment on every thread. In fact it is nearly unimaginable that you should post every day.  There should be a constraint to post so that there is more certainty that what is said advances the discussion and understanding of golf course architecture. We can have what our esteemed British friends might call an argy-bargy but it must be substantive and dignified.  GolfClubAtlas provides a platform to speak to the world; it is a privilege, not a right and comes with obligation. The theologian and poet Fenelon summed it up well, 'The more you say, the less people remember. The fewer the words, the greater the profit.'"

[Rich Goodale]

I'm pretty much with John, although I give the site a 4, in that a Doak 2 essentially means a dog track next to a sewage plant, and this site is much better than that.  I look into the site several times a day, but it's a very blue moon when I read something which interests me and/or tells me something I didn't already know or have read about many times before on this site, or elsewhere.  Some of the writing is sometimes good, but most of it is ASIS (Average Self-Absorbed Internet Standard)

[John Kavanaugh]

"Our site is not a message board; no one should feel compelled to tell us about their state of play; no one should comment on every thread. In fact it is nearly unimaginable that you should post every day.  There should be a constraint to post so that there is more certainty that what is said advances the discussion and understanding of golf course architecture. We can have what our esteemed British friends might call an argy-bargy but it must be substantive and dignified.  GolfClubAtlas provides a platform to speak to the world; it is a privilege, not a right and comes with obligation. The theologian and poet Fenelon summed it up well, 'The more you say, the less people remember. The fewer the words, the greater the profit.'"

Sven,


Nice contribution, that is your 188th post using "or" in the last 365 days. How would you rank the site?

[Sven Nilsen]

"Our site is not a message board; no one should feel compelled to tell us about their state of play; no one should comment on every thread. In fact it is nearly unimaginable that you should post every day.  There should be a constraint to post so that there is more certainty that what is said advances the discussion and understanding of golf course architecture. We can have what our esteemed British friends might call an argy-bargy but it must be substantive and dignified.  GolfClubAtlas provides a platform to speak to the world; it is a privilege, not a right and comes with obligation. The theologian and poet Fenelon summed it up well, 'The more you say, the less people remember. The fewer the words, the greater the profit.'"

Sven,


Nice contribution, that is your 188th post using "or" in the last 365 days. How would you rank the site?

Above average.  But now I've posted more than once today, so it has slipped a little.

[Phil McDade]

Mike:


Glad you posted this, as I was reflecting on this same subject recently.


I share some of the thoughts expressed here -- I tend to visit the site a bit less that I used to, as I find myself bored with topics that have been hashed over time and again. I have posted (or tried to) a lot less this year, in part because I just don't get out as much..

Some of the site's highlights for me this year included:

-- Folks like Jon Cavalier (well, especially Jon Cavalier) and their continued devotion to extensive course photo threads, which (despite what the naysayers say) are the heart of this website, and require a lot of time to put together.

-- The return of posters like yourself, Kavanaugh, and Shivas -- discussion boards are pretty pointless without a decent variety of viewpoints, and we still have a bunch here (although I still lament the loss of some of the ones that first drew my interest in this site). Relatively new posters have contributed much to the site, particularly historical information.

-- Ran's (really thorough and well-written) reviews of courses like George Wright and Roaring Gap that fall well below the radar of even most of us here.

-- The continued involvement in discussions by real architects, who have actually done the stuff we debate all day. I'm not sure of a comparable level of involvement by such knowledgeable people on other discussion boards. We should all appreciate their contributions and willingness to put up with the rest of us.

Lowlights:

-- The actual discussion board -- in terms of optics and user-friendliness -- continues to be the single worst thing about the site, and it  is hands-down one of the worst I view regularly. Revising it -- from the standpoint of users, not software coders or other types -- ought to be the site's top priority next year.

-- Ran should get out more. I count four course reviews this year, or once a season. OK, half in jest, because I'm reluctant to tell anyone to spend more time on what is truly a labor of love. But his reviews are so good, and so in-depth, that I "pine" for more.

-- Posters continually discussing holes and/or courses without pictures. Of course, pictures don't capture the nuance of a particular hole or course, but they are better than nothing. I always default to Ran's reviews -- excellent as they are, they are much the better due to his wonderful photography.

I'll still parrot what Shivas said several years ago -- despite its flaws, this is still hands-down the best golf architecture website on the web, by a fair margin. A solid Doak 7.

[Marty Bonnar]

If I'm honest (as much with myself as anyone else), I'm currently voting about a 3.
I think that's a function of disillusionment+boredom+familiarity. There's very few threads I check in on. Still too much of a US angle, subject rehashing, very variable site management.
Oh yes, and the interface is utter shee-ite.
Other than that, it's okay.
Cheers,
F.

[Peter Pallotta]

Mike - a good reminder, thanks.

At a 'personal' level - this site continues to be populated by good and sane and decent folks, the vast majority genuinely interested in gca and in constructive and/or interesting and/or engaging and/or light-hearted discussion.

At a micro-level - I post far too much drivel and don't edit myself properly, as I have gotten into the habit of using posts to say "hello" to various folks or to encourage someone's efforts but also (worse) to think out loud and toss around ideas willy nilly.

At a macro-level - I think the site continues (and needs to continue) to evolve. Like the art-craft itself, gca.com has come into its own -- not an adolescent now but a mature adult (albeit one with a few psychological and emotional links kinks to work out).   The self-expression for the sake of self expression and self promotion for the sake of self promotion (of all kinds, and in all its forms, some subtle and some overt) could usefully be curtailed -- less threads, less posts (from the likes of me), less cleverness and more considered opinions.

In short, a perfect candidate for either a sympathetic restoration or a low-budget renovation.

Best
Peter     

[Blake Conant]

I hope for more restoration/renovation discussion.  Many projects worthy of discussion the past few years rarely get talked about much if at all.

[John Kavanaugh]

I hope for more restoration/renovation discussion.  Many projects worthy of discussion the past few years rarely get talked about much if at all.

It's almost impossible to talk about a course without being accused of having a motive. You are either a member braggadocio or a hater protagonist. If you're an architect you better have the work complete and be paid or you might have the job stolen from under your feet. And even then you may lose any future work after another architect explains what he would have done differently. We are in a dead zone of generalities.

[archie_struthers]

 


Posed  a question today about Turnberry and my dismay that politics will limit its position in the British Open rota. 
Of course it denigrated into the reasons  why the R&A is acting and moved far away from golf architecture with my help . Apologies to all.


 But it's the playing of the game that's so important, and visibility matters. If we couldn't watch the great players in the Masters and how they attack the course on tv , who amongst us could really appreciate the strategy, and the architecture that begets same . We can't all visit all these great venues , for many reasons, but those who know them share. Sharing disparate views of architecture challenges us , and sure it morphs into politics and business and money once in a while but in the end it's all about the golf for 98% of us.



i really enjoy the site , it's at least a 7 on the Doak scale . Where else would I get guys talking about forced carries , angles of attack and how flighting  the ball is still relevant etc , etc . The talk today about irrigation systems today  is priceless for anyone who is new to the business. Thanks to all who participated in that fabulous thread.

 Ran  well done . It's a unique , interesting site. If we occasionally go astray and veer off point it's ok , so do our tee shots !

[Mike Hendren]

See there, EVERYTHING needs a rating.  Now we can end the Pimp-Daddy thread!
 
I'm more curious as to what rating would be assigned Max's Lounge since the cognoscenti consider this joint to be the equivalent of the kids table in the kitchen at Thanksgiving and I can't garner a peak inside.
 
Bogey

[Bruce Katona]

I try to read what's newly posted and going on; the redo at Torry Pines North was lots of fun (iloved the place when I played there).
 
 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()