News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #50 on: February 20, 2014, 06:15:48 PM »
Not that he needs any support, but Pazin also started that great Oakmont thread in advance of the US Open there. As I recall, it really raised the bar for photo tours around here.
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Joe Hancock

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #51 on: February 20, 2014, 07:08:51 PM »
And please correct me if you are wrong.......

This is really good. May I use it without any copyright infringement?

It's stuff like this that make me call my cousin, and then we cry from laughing together for a good 10-15 minutes as we twist it even further.

Joe
" What the hell is the point of architecture and excellence in design if a "clever" set up trumps it all?" Peter Pallotta, June 21, 2016

"People aren't picking a side of the fairway off a tee because of a randomly internally contoured green ."  jeffwarne, February 24, 2017

Patrick_Mucci

Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #52 on: February 20, 2014, 10:41:45 PM »
Jason Thurman,

I'm less concerned about the format or structure of replies than I am about their content.

Everyone is free to structure their replies as they see fit.

Even if that means that some moron, or "moron in chief" will resort to that heinous method of color coding their responses, especially in green.

One would think that you would be more concerned with subject matter.
Especially, the reduction or eradication of "off topic" threads.

Formating is of no concern to me and I haven't seen it as a concern of substance in the 12+ years that I've been tuning in.

Let's focus on substance, not form.

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #53 on: February 20, 2014, 11:18:15 PM »
And please correct me if you are wrong.......

This is really good. May I use it without any copyright infringement?

It's stuff like this that make me call my cousin, and then we cry from laughing together for a good 10-15 minutes as we twist it even further.

Joe

Is it true that Mahaffey is your cousin?

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #54 on: February 20, 2014, 11:26:07 PM »
Not that he needs any support, but Pazin also started that great Oakmont thread in advance of the US Open there. As I recall, it really raised the bar for photo tours around here.

When Kavanaugh fires at Pazin he really shows off his psychological dyspepsia.   George has been a first rate contributor to this site since early days.   I first met him at the "Land of Enchantment Tour" in 2002 or 2003 in Santa Fe, when he brought tee shirts for all the participants, gratis. 

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #55 on: February 20, 2014, 11:30:54 PM »
Every good story needs a villain.  As evidenced by this thread most of the "contributors" on this site have little to say unless the tea cart of their little world is tousled.  

Hence your role as self-appointed Cart Tousler.

You're a giver, John.

God, I admire you...

-----

Jon W, perhaps another option would be to respond as though the person wasn't a troll, and simply answer the questions/challenges/whatever. You and Adrian are certainly two of the better posters on the site, it's a shame to have you adopt a tactic that may not be necessary.

Bill, I love George but you see above where he fired the first shot as he does at me on everyone of these threads. I did not understand why until he reminded me of his GTK series. I apologized.

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #56 on: February 20, 2014, 11:37:13 PM »
Every good story needs a villain.  As evidenced by this thread most of the "contributors" on this site have little to say unless the tea cart of their little world is tousled.  

Hence your role as self-appointed Cart Tousler.

You're a giver, John.

God, I admire you...

-----

Jon W, perhaps another option would be to respond as though the person wasn't a troll, and simply answer the questions/challenges/whatever. You and Adrian are certainly two of the better posters on the site, it's a shame to have you adopt a tactic that may not be necessary.

Bill, I love George but you see above where he fired the first shot as he does at me on everyone of these threads. I did not understand why until he reminded me of his GTK series. I apologized.

Your post #45 was out of line and not reality-based. 

My mother used a probably trite saying:  "If you can't say anything nice about someone, don't say anything at all."

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #57 on: February 20, 2014, 11:50:22 PM »
I believe what I said to George is true and am thankful that we now know why he thinks I am a bully, troll and or sadist.  He had a point as I do recall being overly critical of his GTK series. I didn't realize at the time that he was pioneering what Facebook has become today. Just because I hate something I shouldn't care if other people, in fact most people, love it. I have apologized, learned from my errors and hope to move on. What more can I do  

Now if I can just figure out what got Whitaker's panties in a bunch we can make progress.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2014, 11:52:17 PM by John Kavanaugh »

BHoover

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #58 on: February 21, 2014, 06:52:23 AM »
Seems to be the case that discussions on here have become much more bitter and acrimonious recently. There seems to be less thoughtful discussion and more criticism, airing of personal gripes and just downright animosity. I wonder whether we are all suffering from cabin fever brought on by a long, dreary winter (either that or we're all just a bunch of miserable SOBs).
« Last Edit: February 21, 2014, 06:55:22 AM by Brian Hoover »

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #59 on: February 21, 2014, 08:56:44 AM »
Seems to be the case that discussions on here have become much more bitter and acrimonious recently. There seems to be less thoughtful discussion and more criticism, airing of personal gripes and just downright animosity. I wonder whether we are all suffering from cabin fever brought on by a long, dreary winter (either that or we're all just a bunch of miserable SOBs).

You may be right, but I take a different view of these contretemps.

I think it is probably a combination of excessive introspection, fragility and an incessant desire on the part of some to feel appreciated even if they are typically spouting OT psychobabble instead of trying to talk about gca. If there is a turn that the site has taken recently, it is more related to some members wanting to feel loved while trying to change the culture of the place.  Then, of course, we have this thread about internet etiquette. Now, there's some value added!  

I'll sound like a bitter old man when I say this, but a guy who started a thread a few years ago bemoaning the lack of new courses like some old courses THAT HE HAD NEVER PLAYED would have been laughed off the site. Now, others chime in to keep the discussion going rather than telling the thread's progenitor to go play the courses and do some research before getting all lathered up.

If anything, there's less bitterness and edge than ever before, because the hurt feelings crowd is so vocal now.  Just my two cents. Here's hoping nobody's feelings get hurt!
« Last Edit: February 21, 2014, 10:19:24 AM by Terry Lavin »
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #60 on: February 21, 2014, 10:24:20 AM »
Bill, I love George but you see above where he fired the first shot as he does at me on everyone of these threads.

When you're right, you're right again. I did indeed take the first shot this time, and probably many others as well on threads like these; I do apologize for that. Can't say I like your tactic of frequent of cart tousling, but it's time I stop beating a dead horse, so have at it.

 :)

-----

Terry, thanks for the support, but that was too long ago to qualify. Maybe if I got out to see more courses, I'd have some fresh ideas, but that's not happening anytime soon.
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Terry Lavin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #61 on: February 21, 2014, 11:10:56 AM »
George,

It may have been a long time ago, but I do recall that it was the first comprehensive photo/narrative analysis of a great course in advance of a major championship.  It got a lot of looks and replies and built a lot of enthusiasm for that Open.  Not as much as Merion, of course, but you can't have everything...
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.  H.L. Mencken

Patrick_Mucci

Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #62 on: February 22, 2014, 12:33:25 PM »

If anything, there's less bitterness and edge than ever before, because the hurt feelings crowd is so vocal now.  Just my two cents. Here's hoping nobody's feelings get hurt!

Terry,

Careful now, you could be accused of being insensitive or even cyber-bullying  :D


Michael Moore

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #63 on: February 22, 2014, 01:32:14 PM »
I haven't seen it as a concern of substance in the 12+ years that I've been tuning in.

Let me be the first. Nested responses that are colored and italicized are difficult enough to follow, but the single page print view, which is invaluable for reading long threads, removes all formatting, which renders these responses absolutely undifferentiated and unreadable.
Metaphor is social and shares the table with the objects it intertwines and the attitudes it reconciles. Opinion, like the Michelin inspector, dines alone. - Adam Gopnik, The Table Comes First

Patrick_Mucci

Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #64 on: February 22, 2014, 03:14:48 PM »
I haven't seen it as a concern of substance in the 12+ years that I've been tuning in.

Let me be the first. Nested responses that are colored and italicized are difficult enough to follow, but the single page print view, which is invaluable for reading long threads, removes all formatting, which renders these responses absolutely undifferentiated and unreadable.

You didn't seem to have any trouble reading the above thread, hence I think your complaint is much ado about nothing.





Carl Nichols

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette
« Reply #65 on: February 25, 2014, 11:31:15 AM »
Quote from: JTigerman
It's also much easier once you've met a guy face to face, so that you know whether to take what he says with a grain of salt or not (hello Jason!)

I worked with a girl for six months who couldn't ever tell when I was being serious or kidding. One day she came into my office and asked me how she could tell, and if there was some sort of trick.

I told her, "Gina, it's simple. I don't think stupid things. So if I say something that sounds stupid, I'm kidding. If I say something that sounds intelligent, I'm serious."

My language is basically 30% English and 70% irony and pop culture quotes.

Did she ask you whether you were kidding? 

Ken Moum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: OT, unless you think frank discussion is on topic: Reply Etiquette New
« Reply #66 on: February 26, 2014, 10:08:49 AM »
I have argued lots of times with Sean, Mark Pearce and Jon Wiggett. I consider them all friends. I have met Sean a couple of times, and have Mark Pearce as a facebook friend and want to see Jon's course (it is just a long way up). It is a discussion group and if we all agreed on everything it would be a waste of time. I don't think Jason is talking about arguments

Grasses behave differently in different places it is good to get both sides sometimes, I find this site educational and expect many of the bigger names do too I know I find this site very educational and filled with extremely smart and great-writing people.  

 I know I have learned. It's just that it's much easier to learn when it's a well written and constructed paragraph vs. a choppy and segmented, colored reply.

It is a shame the Pat behaves as he does, maybe he will see this thread and change, lots of people say he is a great bloke 'live'. There was a chap on here that lost his job for his internet comments, some people get weird behind a steering wheel and I guess some with a keyboard.  I don't have a problem with Pat or anyone's opinion on here.  

This site has a huge amount of onlookers as well that use this for resource. How often do we hear "I want to be a golf course architect, what should I do"...well there might be some do's and don'ts but being part of this group is a good DO. But many times I like to read more than post and  I just wish people would consider readers vs. their opponent in an argument.

It is a shame that people leave this site, driven away by what amounts to trolling. Not having a moderator is a weak part about this great forum.

I don't think Jason is talking about arguments.  I know I find this site very educational and filled with extremely smart and great-writing people.  It's just that it's much easier to learn when it's a well written and constructed paragraph vs. a choppy and segmented, colored reply.  I don't have a problem with Pat or anyone's opinion on here.  But many times I like to read more than post and  I just wish people would consider readers vs. their opponent in an argument.

Don't you find my paragraph easier to read than the one I dissected to reply to you?  That's all this thread is about.

Personally, I prefer the color, line-by-line version for a lot of the things I see on here. It let's me know precisely what part of the original post your comments apply to.  But I also understand that when a discussion/argument goes on for several replies, it can get difficult to figure who is responding to what. IMHO, that's partly because only a few people are really good at doing it that way.

Of course there are plenty of times when replying to individual points makes no sense at all.

For instance, I rarely see one of Palotta's thoughtful essays as a series of individual points.

K
« Last Edit: February 26, 2014, 10:21:35 AM by Ken Moum »
Over time, the guy in the ideal position derives an advantage, and delivering him further  advantage is not worth making the rest of the players suffer at the expense of fun, variety, and ultimately cost -- Jeff Warne, 12-08-2010