Mark, Great post.
Wayne, While I'll side with you regarding the silliness of some of the final product, but my efforts, as well as many others are of nothing but the best effort in a world that is going to have some sort of scale whether we like it or not.
I'm a student of the Game first, and I liken my findings as research, and in many cases (Mark will tell you) various opinions of what I have found from studying.
Say hypothetically, there were no ranking panels--what level do you think golf architectural interest be then? I suspect it would be far and away different, and not nearly as popular amongst us masses--I'll even let you come to your own conclusions!
Perhaps Ron Whitten would even be out of a job!
Last night I called Brad Klein to talk for a bit, and he literally was ready to jump out of his skin. He was workign on the talley of all of the ballots that have been pouring in. He said to me, "You don't know how much work this is!" I replied, 'Oh yes I do!," and he replied--"NO, you don't!" I for one believe him now for sure. Compiling this stuff--making sure all of the raters are getting in their ballots ON TIME, handling calls regarding out of control panelists, etc. has to takes its toll somewhere amongst the task of performing his daily duties of writing for a living. In fact, my call affected him from getting work done I'm sure!
Then you have other panelists who will go out of their way to see as many courses to aid in this quest--spending their own money to travel and see courses, having to call many of these places and deal with the endless seasons in phone hell that amount to ten calls to their one. It isn't easy doing this stuff--and it amounts to the same thing you get form particpating on Golf Club Atlas--further knowledge of golf architecture. At least that's what I do it for. I don't consider myself an authority, I consider myself a student first and last--I have so much to learn as well as an open mind to learn it.
But the thing that ruins it all is when you see or hear of panelists that have little regard to golf architecture and are authorities on the subject. They are the ones that have to keep score of their round, or tabs of what course slope ratings and yardages. I can't remember who it was, but a while back someone who was actively petitioning himself for membership on the Golfweek panel, actually wrote to me, "You don't know what it would mean to me to have the "magic card." and I felt that was quite odd. That is what it means to him a card that gets him on courses, and given his supposedly astute knowledge of the golf courses, if I remember right, he ended up on the right panel--the Golf Digest panel.
This is the type of guy that ruins it because its all about free golf. But as my Father once taught me, "Son, nothing in this life is free" and I think that should be reason enough to understand that ranking golf courses is not neccessarily a free thing, but something that requires time, money and travel, and foremost--an open mind.