I'd echo folks like Tony. I've already posted a basic answer to my intentions of not reading the daily diatribes of Merion threads, on one of those threads weeks ago. And, they have since been so convoluted, I can't even find that reply of mine among the piles of bickering and multiple threads.
In a nutshell... I still scan or keep my eye open for someone to start a thread that actually appears it might have the potential to actually inform us of something new and credible on a factual basis of the origins of Merion. I still retain the inclination that while interesting, David's piece is merely interesting, informs there might be more collaborative involvement by CB-Whig, and nothing I can comprehend has altered the basic history of Wilson and the committee input and responsibility for the beginnings of Merion, its design, and construction that led to an evolution of design features added over time to make it the highly acclaimed course it was and is.
When I see the hysterical posts about "I'm through with this website, sayonara" and such, I then scan the landscape of Merion threads to try to see; what now? And, I find the bickering has merely set off another huff, and nothing new seems to have actually been advanced in meaningful factual terms, from my perspective.
I look into threads on that basis to see what happen for two somewhat conflicting reasons.
One, because I've met most of the players, except Morrison, and care about them as I have found them all to be good people whom I really feel bad about them getting so emotionally invested and disappointingly stooping to the insult game.
And two, it is like looking at the train wreck, and myself being too weak to fully avoid looking at the carnage.
But, to use Pat Mucci's method for the following, I'd like to respond to specific statements...
Interesting thread, and it basically completely proves why Wayne Morrison was probably right to hang his "final straw" thread on here the other day. Why should we even think about spending the time to do the legwork and the analysis of all these MCC archives and such and then write a comprehensive report from the club's meeting minutes archives to put it ON HERE if no one has the interest to take the time to read it and consider it?
I think you are making an assumption of 'no one has the interest to take the time to read it and consider it'. Many have read the issue for YEARS! Many, like myself have concluded nothing in the basic history has changed. But, they will look in to see if you folks actually do have something new and relevant. And, you all did come up with some minutia that was new. Yet, the basic known history doesn't seem to be changed appreciably to declare a great historical mistake was made. But you Tom, and Wayne, don't seem to have the confidence to just put your information and facts up in a thread without the temptation to smack down in vitriolic terms the opposition. Which also leads the opposition (Moriarity and supporters) to also put down an unwarranted amount of smack mixed with their rebuttals. Who first started it has really become irrelavant to most of us, I suspect. All of the debatants didn't seem to give the peanut gallery (the rest of the GCA.com readers), enough respect that we can read and comprehend facts and narratives and come to our own conclusions; no different in process than who we are going to vote for in elections. And, like the annoying polititians, you all have lost the plot and have gotten so wrapped up in the smackdowns, that you all lost perspective of the issue, and understanding that people will come to their own conclusions despite the vitriol, not due to one or the other's reply is more vitriolic or laced with insults and put-downs. So, if you don't want to do the legwork and put your conclusions on here because you don't respect the audience, fine. But, don't blame the audience for being turned off because of the vitriol, and then say they are not worthy to read your POV.
I think Wayne is right, we'll do it and put it into Merion's archive for THEIR record and perhaps on the USGA's new Architecture Archive site. Maybe some "serious researcher" 
will want to see it in either place about once every ten years.
And, if some serious researcher does have to go to the trouble to see it every ten years in obscure archives, so be it. I assume that researcher will then either put his findings in his own book with an audience of about 200 people world wide (if that is why he is researching) or file it in his mind for his own personal knowledge and inject it in some conversation at some old fossil cocktail party to impress other folks know how erudite he is on this obscure subject, which seems a sad audience of disinterested club socialites, indeed.
As for most on here it's probably better to go back to the type of thread that discusses in quick bites whether Erica Blasberg is the hottest little chicklet on the LPGA Tour this year. That seems to be about all most on here can handle these days. If about the only person we'd be doing this for is David Moriarty and his ramped up and new found curiosity about Macdonald or Merion or whatever, it's probably more appropriate if he does it himself, including coming over here and spending about ten years at it, as we have!
Again, I think you sell the GCA.com community a bit short. But, you have a point as far as furthering the discussion on the basis you all have conducted it. You could gun it out in private on the streets of Philly, let DAvid satisfy his own curiosity at his own expense and allow him to post his POV or conclusions, and let the rest of us consider what he'd like to share.
If you ask me there are probably less than a handful of really serious researchers on this website, whatever that means anyway. I've been on here from the beginning and it definitely is not the same as it once was---not even close. I guess it just proves that all good things do come to an end, and they probably need to, including GOLFCLUBATLAS.com.
Perhaps the discussion isn't the same as it once was, because those of us who have been on here since the beginning have basically heard all the same old notions, histories, etc., and not much is new anymore. But, we can't (or shouldn't) manufacture "new history" for the sake of keeping it interesting as opposed to sharing new facts or information to be 'considered'. If we don't have anything new to consider, then what else is there to turn to except current events and such? Honestly, while some of the stuff on here wanders into the inane and irrelavant, we still come up with new courses, archies, developments, techniques, ideas, that are worth discussion between posts on LPGA fashion tips. Again IMHO, you shouldn't sell the audience short, nor be the one to determine IF:
" I guess it just proves that all good things do come to an end, and they probably need to, including GOLFCLUBATLAS.com"