Distinguished Gentlemen:
I'm so glad that I had the chance to stop back today to read the kind references by TimW, A_Clay_Man and TomH -- made my day, guys!
Tim, in response to your comment:
...this being an international forum is one of my greatest concerns. Recently I received a lengthy private e mail from someone overseas that is extremely knowledgeable about golf architecture. He does feel, however, that the DG is a bit too clique-ish, American clique-ish that is, with all sorts of chatter about personal things that have little to do with golf architecture. He sees that as an impediment to attracting more international participaton.As I mentioned previously, I can understand that that may be the perception of a "first time" or infrequent visitor to this DG. Timing is everything. I respect the opinion of the person you reference -- afterall, perception = reality to the person doing the perceiving. That said, unless a post is specifically directed to me, it makes little sense (to me) to engage in that level of value-judging. If a thread or post seems trite or rude, most persons will just scroll past until they find something of interest. The "internal or participant policing" (for the lack of a better term) that I have observed on this DG has been generally effective, or at the least, has expressed a differing opinion regarding either the tone or content of a thread or post.
IMHO, I'd rather participate in a DG that utilizes an informal approach of "policing" over an approach that "encourages" posts which are so "sanitized" that they appear to be written by a robot. GCA is an artform. Individuals who are interested in this art, aren't likely to be ambivalent. They like what they like. But even though an individual has an opinion, I think the primary reason they visit this DG is to learn more about something they love and, as such, they're open to differing perspectives (yes, sometimes receptive more than others).
It makes little sense to me that someone would visit this site regularly out of some type of "evangelical zeal" to convert DG participants to his point of view. That motivation would be transparent and unlikely to be successful.
Whether any DG is exclusive to the US or International in participation, existing social and cultural diversity combined with varying skills in expressing strong opinions provide a natural framework for misunderstandings to occur from time to time and I doubt if there is
any approach or ground rules that can be realistically adopted to eliminate it. Isn't that just part of life and everyday living?
I'm blathering on and on and it occurs to me that "A_Clay_Man" said it well,
...there is no "we" here. I don't feel that statments about how "we" blasted someone or something is plausable since it is clearly in black and white, all individual's posts.Sure, some threads may attract posts that appear to be skewed in a particular direction, but each post within a thread has an author.
I also doubt if there is any universally accepted understanding of what taking this DG to a "higher level" even means. If we, humans, shared an absolute understanding of every word spoken or written, spouses would
always sleep in the same bed and one spouse would
never banish the other to a couch because of something said. I may not readily admit it as often as I should, but I'm just as capable as anyone to be a jerk, obtuse, insensitive, rude, obnoxious, condescending -- whatever offensive
du jour behavior. There's no halo over my head and experience tells me that I am in good company in this world.
Tim, your comments are well-taken. From my perspective, you and the vast majority of participants post comments if the tone or content of a thread appears inappropriate. "Peer pressure"
is generally effective and appreciated.
A forum representative of all shapes and sizes, etc., is educational, keeps the juices flowing, challenges the mind and makes life interesting -- even on those occasions wherein I have an urge to smack someone!
