"Maybe he will even write an article for Golfwrx and post a link to it here!"

[Ronald Montesano]

From my concurrent thread about the 147 Custodians.


I'll take the high road, and interpret the exclamation point that concludes the aspiration, as supportive and optimistic.


I make no money for anything that I write for GolfWRX. I write for the sheer pleasure of writing about golf. Some bits are winners, while others are also winners. Everything I write is a winner!


The links to GolfWRX pieces that I post are to architectural articles, or charitable pleas. I don't post links to my weekly tour recaps, nor my product reviews.


My skin is thick, and my heart is full. For anyone who thinks that the impact of 100 hits from this discussion group, on any article, is at all valuable ... allow me to cure you of that deception.


The next time you see a link from me, and feel compelled to click on it, don't.

[PCCraig]

Ron,


By now if folks from GCA are a fan of your articles, they will know where to find them (you).

[John Kavanaugh]

Huge props to Mayhugh. I didn't know he had it in him.

[Mike Sweeney]

Ran is the smartest guy in golf.


Let's all appreciate his site and his post about the "Worcestershire Golf Club in Malvern, England with David Thomas":
https://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,67900.0.html


and appreciate the fact that we have the ability to exchange golf course nonsense with friends from around the world as a result of this site. Dang it, Jaka - watch the video and appreciate the fact that good people do become members of the Sand Hills Golf Club:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4kEpQzgKE0&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR2tlYfbjYTVsIVaMqR84135NDyP0kaXCsRAeD8hULEWaGIGo3wpZvxLmq0


Genuine thanks to Mrs Donna Huckaby. RIP

[Ronald Montesano]

Ron,


By now if folks from GCA are a fan of your articles, they will know where to find them (you).

1. New folks come to GCA all the time, correct?

2. Folks don't telepathically know when something new is posted, correct?

[John Mayhugh]

Ron,

If you:
a) make no money from what you write for others like Golfwrx and
b) you think that your content is relevant to the discussion of golf course architecture

Why wouldn't you simply post an article itself instead of a link? Or why wouldn't you post the article here and then a link at the other site?

Ordinarily I would have just ignored your 147 Custodians post, but it seems especially distasteful for you to criticize the person that hosts this site on one thread while simultaneously using the discussion group for self promotion. The effectiveness of the self promotion is irrelevant.

[Ronald Montesano]

Why wouldn't you simply post an article itself instead of a link? Or why wouldn't you post the article here and then a link at the other site?

I don't understand what you are after here. I don't know you, I've never met you, and you haven't had the good taste to direct message me. I cannot repost an article from GolfWRX (or any other site) that is their intellectual property.

Ordinarily I would have just ignored your 147 Custodians post, but it seems especially distasteful for you to criticize the person that hosts this site on one thread while simultaneously using the discussion group for self promotion. The effectiveness of the self promotion is irrelevant.

You should have ignored it, as you have completely misunderstood the purpose of the thread. It is not a criticism of the person that hosts the site. Ran, you dress poorly is a criticism~Ran, your feet stink and you don't love Jesus is also a criticism.

I'd direct you to any thread that has a link to one of my articles, as posted by me. Notice that I do not self-promote in any fashion: I don't auction myself out for photography or writing commissions; I don't ask for advertisers to contract with any site for which I write; I don't push those threads back to the top of the DB, when they've sunk to page 2 or beyond. The effectiveness of the self-promotion is absolutely relevant. If you've this opportunity to worry about an ineffective self-promoter, there must be much free time available.

I'm inclined to think that, much like Vizzini in The Princess Bride, you keep using words and I do not think that they mean what you think they mean. I'd encourage you to DM anyone on this site, and see if they share your opinion of my intent.

To recap: the thread on 147 Custodians is to examine its importance, accuracy, relevance. It has its own column in the header of the site. The method? Respectful debate, as has been in evidence thus far.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I don't understand what you are after here. I don't know you, I've never met you, and you haven't had the good taste to direct message me. I cannot repost an article from GolfWRX (or any other site) that is their intellectual property.

You should have ignored it, as you have completely misunderstood the purpose of the thread. It is not a criticism of the person that hosts the site. Ran, you dress poorly is a criticism~Ran, your feet stink and you don't love Jesus is also a criticism.

I'd direct you to any thread that has a link to one of my articles, as posted by me. Notice that I do not self-promote in any fashion: I don't auction myself out for photography or writing commissions; I don't ask for advertisers to contract with any site for which I write; I don't push those threads back to the top of the DB, when they've sunk to page 2 or beyond. The effectiveness of the self-promotion is absolutely relevant. If you've this opportunity to worry about an ineffective self-promoter, there must be much free time available.

I'm inclined to think that, much like Vizzini in The Princess Bride, you keep using words and I do not think that they mean what you think they mean. I'd encourage you to DM anyone on this site, and see if they share your opinion of my intent.

To recap: the thread on 147 Custodians is to examine its importance, accuracy, relevance. It has its own column in the header of the site. The method? Respectful debate, as has been in evidence thus far.

👍🏼

This site doesn't have "like" buttons so I've made my own. 

[John Mayhugh]

Ron,
I don't understand the intellectual property argument. If you write something and provide it to Golfwrx, you're saying you couldn't you have posted it on GCA instead? Forgive me if there are some particulars with free labor that I don't understand.

I categorized your posting of links to your own writing as self-promotion - the act of posting links at all, not the text that's in the thread. I've not worried about the effectiveness of your self-promotion. You are the one to point out that not very many people are following the links as some sort of justification for posting them. That's where I derived my opinion on its effectiveness.

While I may at times misunderstand the intent behind someone else's writing, I do understand the meaning behind the words that I use. Sadly, I have not seen The Princess Bride, so your presumed insult is lost on me. I did err in saying you were critical of Ran in the 147 Custodians thread without mentioning your "shuttered" comment as the source for this. You seemed to be suggesting that Ran would shut you down for the act, but you later provided an explanation. Others can judge me from what's posted there. 

You're welcome to start another RonMon thread and ask people's opinions if you like. I'm certainly not messaging people to ask. On this thread, at least a couple haven't exactly leapt to your defense. The one that did, well.....

Anyway, my mom did tell me that rudeness shouldn't be countered with rudeness. If Ran is ok with your posting of links to your writing posted on another site, then I should just shut up and ignore it as I have been doing for years. You won't see me commenting on this again.

[Tim Martin]

Ron,
I don't understand the intellectual property argument. If you write something and provide it to Golfwrx, you're saying you couldn't you have posted it on GCA instead? Forgive me if there are some particulars with free labor that I don't understand.

I categorized your posting of links to your own writing as self-promotion - the act of posting links at all, not the text that's in the thread. I've not worried about the effectiveness of your self-promotion. You are the one to point out that not very many people are following the links as some sort of justification for posting them. That's where I derived my opinion on its effectiveness.

While I may at times misunderstand the intent behind someone else's writing, I do understand the meaning behind the words that I use. Sadly, I have not seen The Princess Bride, so your presumed insult is lost on me. I did err in saying you were critical of Ran in the 147 Custodians thread without mentioning your "shuttered" comment as the source for this. You seemed to be suggesting that Ran would shut you down for the act, but you later provided an explanation. Others can judge me from what's posted there. 

You're welcome to start another RonMon thread and ask people's opinions if you like. I'm certainly not messaging people to ask. On this thread, at least a couple haven't exactly leapt to your defense. The one that did, well.....

Anyway, my mom did tell me that rudeness shouldn't be countered with rudeness. If Ran is ok with your posting of links to your writing posted on another site, then I should just shut up and ignore it as I have been doing for years. You won't see me commenting on this again.

The guy that did support him has a link to his twitter page and a list of professional accomplishments in his tag line.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

The guy that did support him has a link to his twitter page and a list of professional accomplishments in his tag line.

Yeah, it's the Internet, and part of the reason for a signature is so that y'all know a little bit about where I am. It's information. I wish some of the other folks here would put stuff in their signature so I knew where they were coming from with their posts, too. (And if you don't want to see anyone's signatures, you can change that setting in your profile, and you'll never see it again.)

The web was built on interlinked content. You can't have a "web" without the interconnections. Just as someone may find GCA by a link on GolfWRX, it works both ways. And Ron can't cross post his content here because GolfWRX owns it.

And, it's not like Ron is spamming the forum with links to GolfWRX all the time, as I see it. He occasionally (rarely?) posts a link, and only when it's GCA-related. Others post links to things they did or didn't write, do they not?

John's posts are out of line, IMO. Mildly so, but still.

[Tim Martin]

The guy that did support him has a link to his twitter page and a list of professional accomplishments in his tag line.

Yeah, it's the Internet, and part of the reason for a signature is so that y'all know a little bit about where I am. It's information. I wish some of the other folks here would put stuff in their signature so I knew where they were coming from with their posts, too.

The web was built on interlinked content. You can't have a "web" without the interconnections. Just as someone may find GCA by a link on GolfWRX, it works both ways. And Ron can't cross post his content here because GolfWRX owns it.

And, it's not like Ron is spamming the forum with links to GolfWRX all the time, as I see it. He occasionally (rarely?) posts a link, and only when it's GCA-related. Others post links to things they did or didn't write, do they not?

John's posts are out of line, IMO. Mildly so, but still.

It’s a shame that you see GCA as a potential marketplace. Saying that “yeah it’s the internet” is a straight up cop out. I would have a little more respect for you if you would just own it.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

It’s a shame that you see GCA as a potential marketplace. Saying that “yeah it’s the internet” is a straight up cop out. I would have a little more respect for you if you would just own it.

This is not at all what I said. And the "it's the Internet" was re: Ron's rare link to an article. Turn off signatures if you want. I specifically don't link to anything but the "@iacas" in my signature, even though I could link to things, so that it's seen as informational and not promotional.

I don't know who you are. If you told me in a signature, I'd have more context for your comments in GCA-related topics.

[Jason Topp]

I have always understood links to articles to be appropriate.  I know there are elements of self promotion associated with such links but elements of self promotion exist in any posting, particularly from those in the industry who provide such valuable input here.  I would rather err on the side of including content and let the reader judge whether it has value.[size=78%] [/size]

[Tim Martin]

It’s a shame that you see GCA as a potential marketplace. Saying that “yeah it’s the internet” is a straight up cop out. I would have a little more respect for you if you would just own it.

This is not at all what I said. And the "it's the Internet" was re: Ron's rare link to an article. Turn off signatures if you want. I specifically don't link to anything but the "@iacas" in my signature, even though I could link to things, so that it's seen as informational and not promotional.

I don't know who you are. If you told me in a signature, I'd have more context for your comments in GCA-related topics.

Your signature is a resume. As I said before that’s a shame.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Your signature is a resume. As I said before that’s a shame.

So hide it and stop complaining about it.

It's information, and as I said, I wish others posted their information so I had more context for their comments.