[TEPaul]

I'm beginning to think so and obviously plenty of others seem to think so too. I've seen too many threads on here recently wondering why there are so many OT threads and basically just too much irrelevent "chat-room" type stuff. What's going on, on here? Maybe I'm one of the worst offenders with all my thousands of "instant answer" posts, and if so I volunteer to quit that. But what's going on? We've lost so many good contributors. Is this discussion section becoming redundant, boring or even dangerous for good contributors to continue to participate? Is that why so many are gone?

I've got a suggestion.

How about all those registered on here who're in the business or actively involved in architecture, maintenance or architectural projects somehow just start some threads you think are truly relevent to golf architecture, maintenance to do with architecture or projects and discuss them amongst yourselves only, and the rest of us will just watch for a week or so?

Talk about the things that concern you about the business, the direction of architecture, maintenance or projects, whatever, even what you think has happened to this website and its evolution and the rest of us will just read and watch for a week.  

Tom Doak, over the years, and in my opinion, you have to be about the most valuable contributor on here for a number of reasons. What do you think is going on with this website? Is the way it's gotten to be recently what we should expect in the future, and if so what do you and some of those in the business recommend to make it better?

To stay relevent and endure, I think this website's discussion group has just got to find some way to tighten up.

Don't you agree? And if not, why not?

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom,

I don't mean this to come across as sarcastic as it may sound, but after 21,431 posts you are just now, "beginning to think so?"  

There is that old saying about familiarity breeding contempt. Is it possible that you need a break from posting? I ask because, while I agree there are a good number of OT subject lines, for as long as I've been on-site, and that is nowhere near as long as many, there have always been these.

Ignore them. Like disobedient children who do so just for attention, they will get better if you do so.

Why don't you start giving some of the gems up that you have found out about Flynn? Everyone is waiting for you & Wayne to finish the book, and with very good reason. Isn't it time to start teasing us with info?  

Whether Flynn or other topics, why don't you take the lead in bringing up insightful topics?  

[TEPaul]

Phil:

No, after 21,000 post I'm not just beginning to think so, I'm only beginning to say so. If it's as simple as my excessive posts I have no problem stopping that. I probably will anyway for the simple reason posting on here is wearing thin with me too as it obviously has with so many of those really good contributors we've had on here over the years who are gone now. But maybe that's just normal attrition on websites in this day and age, I don't know. I sure can't forget what one of the best contributors on here said when I asked him why he stopped participating. He said most of the core contributors on here know all this stuff anyway and how many times can they go over it again and discuss it again with someone new. Maybe one of the solutions is to make the search engine work really well. I see old thread from the past that are more than enough information for the same redundant current threads come back up every now and again but maybe that's what ought to happen a whole lot more often. Why should some of us really long time contributors write the same stuff over and over again for those coming on if it's in the back pages?

[Joe Perches]

Maybe one of the solutions is to make the search engine work really well.

That's the primary solution.  That solution is the one I hope is implemented.  The secondary solution is an "off-topic" forum.

In any case, please do not stop posting.

[Peter Galea]

I've seen too many threads on here recently wondering why there are so many OT threads and basically just too much irrelevent "chat-room" type stuff. What's going on, on here?

Cabin fever?

[TEPaul]

Joe:

Where have you been Pal? You're a good example. You're a very good contributor. What about this place drives you away?

[CHrisB]

Tom,
In my opinion, this is still a great Discussion Group, but if I do have a mild criticism it is that there is too much of a focus on technology and it's effect on how far and how straight players are hitting the ball. As I write, I count 10 threads just on the first two pages that relate to technology, increased distance, etc.

To me, while that is an architectural-related issue, it really is tangential to the main focus of this website. Throw in OT threads and there can be quite a bit of digging for threads directly related to golf course architecture.

GolfClubAtlas.com is presented to promote the frank commentary on the world's finest golf courses.

This appears on the home page of GolfClubAtlas.com. In my opinion, this Discussion Group is about as far away from that ideal since I joined the Discussion Group in 2002.

It's difficult to do but if you go back and look at threads from a few years ago (for example go to http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forums2/index.php?board=1;action=messageindex;start=12800 to see threads from July 2003 and then you can move page by page from there) you'll still see some OT threads but very little talk about technology, reduced distance balls, etc. In fact, I looked at five or six straight pages without a single thread about technology-related issues.

It's one thing to talk about specific measures that specific courses can take or are taking to counter improvements in technology--that in my opinion stays on topic--but it's another thing to talk about spin rates, square grooves, shaft lengths, COR, etc. That's not discussing architecure--that's discussing technology. And I wonder if constantly discussing technology may give outsiders the impression that this is an agenda-driven DG--the agenda being the protection of classic courses from advances in technology, or perhaps the protection of the game as a whole from advances in technology (noble causes, by the way).

That being said, I'm still on here every day reading practically every thread! But since you brought this up I thought I'd offer my opinion. I'm not saying this is THE reason that you perceive GolfClubAtlas to be "out of touch", but it may be a contributor.

[Rick Shefchik]

One of the best contributors on here said...most of the core contributors on here know all this stuff anyway and how many times can they go over it again and discuss it again with someone new...Why should some of us really long time contributors write the same stuff over and over again for those coming on if it's in the back pages?

Tom --

Whether the search engine makes it easier to bring up old threads or not, long-time contributors will continue to drift away if they believe they've seen this movie before, and don't have the time or energy or inclination to watch it again. I'm not sure it's anything to lament. People will always leave a lingering conversation as others join in.

[Ryan Crago]

just a thought:

perhaps it is that there seems to be a gradual alignment of ideals and theories between the key and even the not-so-key contributors to the site?

there are almost always a few threads with some good, even heated discussion (which is also good!), however, i think we'd be naive to not suggest that the greater majority of posters, and perhaps even lurkers subscribe to the same ideals of architecture on a larger scale (that being the 'minimalist' company line - or some variation on the theme).

is it because we've scared the non-conformists away? where are the nicklaus and faz lovers (for example)? is it the contrasting POV thats missing?

is the treehouse ALIGNED?

again, just a thought.  

[TEPaul]

"Tom,
In my opinion, this is still a great Discussion Group, but if I do have a mild criticism it is that there is too much of a focus on technology and it's effect on how far and how straight players are hitting the ball. As I write, I count 10 threads just on the first two pages that relate to technology, increased distance, etc."

Chris:

That's a good point and suggestion. Distance and technology seems to be a particularly hot issue right now.There are contributors on here who are really upset with the regulatory bodies on that one, that's for sure.

"Tom --
Whether the search engine makes it easier to bring up old threads or not, long-time contributors will continue to drift away if they believe they've seen this movie before, and don't have the time or energy or inclination to watch it again. I'm not sure it's anything to lament. People will always leave a lingering conversation as others join in."

RickS:

I like that one. It's pithy, and impossible to argue with. Maybe I shouldn't have posted this thread. If one looks back at the beginning of this website it's interesting how it caught on and very few threads went past a single page. I wonder what that means? I really mean that, believe me, because if anyone drives threads in page volume I guess that would be me.

[Jim Thompson]

Tom,

I think in a way, it may be a result of a loss of patience.  In the past ideas and points were thrown out and left to fester and develop among the membership and of late many threads become limited to just a couple of parties.  Granted the parties are having a great discussion, but many either don't want to get in the middle of what seems like on going feuds or don't have the time to look through the fragmented quips that the parties are throwing at each other.  I believe it was Pascal who once apologized that a letter he had written was so long because he had not had the time to make it short.  Logorrhea may be the disease that is working its way into GCA.

Cheers!

JT

Edit - The real Pascal Quote:
The letter I have written today is longer than usual because I lacked the time to make it shorter.

Blaise Pascal

[Joe Perches]

You're a very good contributor.

<blush>  Perhaps you are thinking of someone else.

What about this place drives you away?

Drives me away?  That is not the phrasing I would chose.  I look at the topics of this site at least weekly.  I do not imagine being driven away soon.

What stops me from posting more is lack of skill.  My own skill.  I have a humble engineering background.  I enjoy reading the thought provoking posts but I believe I have relatively little to contribute to interesting topics like "evolutionary sand splash", which is itself fascinating to me.  What am I to contribute?  An estimation of that sand buildup for each green per round played?  A function to describe that buildup for AutoCad?  Am I to contribute a model for determination of architectural merit as a function of topographic complexity?

Golf architecture has always been a compelling, fascinating and interesting topic to me.  At the age of 12, I remember my childhood friend Steve Sailer and myself laying out improvements to courses we had played.  3D chess, what fun!

Still, I will not likely become someone like Sir Thomas of Huckaby any time soon, willing to propound on topics known and unknown just for familiarities sake.  His personality, pleasant as it is, is different than mine.  I believe I know most of the Southern California courses reasonably well.  I simply do not know enough of the rest of the world to make cogent contributions to the majority of topics that are presented here on GCA.

Of course I do wish that the signal to noise ratio were higher.  If there is anything I can do from a technical standpoint to improve that, I would be delighted to help.

cheers,  Joe

[Rick Baril]

Tom,

Falling in the “registered on here who’re in the business” category, I admire the tenacity of the core contributors.  

With my travel and family commitments, it is illogical to start or engage in yet another unfinished “conversation” – which is what happens when you periodically visit the discussion group (and home for that matter).  My admiration is especially high for those who handily manage travel, family AND constantly contribute to the discussion group.

I leave you (once again) - but not without a vote of encouragement - to discuss among yourselves…..

Good point Jim.

[Kyle Harris]

You're a very good contributor.

<blush>  Perhaps you are thinking of someone else.

What about this place drives you away?

Drives me away?  That is not the phrasing I would chose.  I look at the topics of this site at least weekly.  I do not imagine being driven away soon.

What stops me from posting more is lack of skill.  My own skill.  I have a humble engineering background.  I enjoy reading the thought provoking posts but I believe I have relatively little to contribute to interesting topics like "evolutionary sand splash", which is itself fascinating to me.  What am I to contribute?  An estimation of that sand buildup for each green per round played?  A function to describe that buildup for AutoCad?  Am I to contribute a model for determination of architectural merit as a function of topographic complexity?

Golf architecture has always been a compelling, fascinating and interesting topic to me.  At the age of 12, I remember my childhood friend Steve Sailer and myself laying out improvements to courses we had played.  3D chess, what fun!

Still, I will not likely become someone like Sir Thomas of Huckaby any time soon, willing to propound on topics known and unknown just for familiarities sake.  His personality, pleasant as it is, is different than mine.  I believe I know most of the Southern California courses reasonably well.  I simply do not know enough of the rest of the world to make cogent contributions to the majority of topics that are presented here on GCA.

Of course I do wish that the signal to noise ratio were higher.  If there is anything I can do from a technical standpoint to improve that, I would be delighted to help.

cheers,  Joe

Joe,

You asked a very engaging question regarding green sizes the other day that I've been waiting a response on. Sorry it my overly authoritative tone discouraged your response, but I felt you had more to say, at least that's what I gleaned from your initial question.

[TEPaul]

JimT:

Reply #10 is really good. That's me too. I got to go to bed but I've heard some valuable stuff in the last 45 minutes.

Here's a question;

Do you think it's a reasonable suggestion that if someone is going to post a thread to which they attach "OT" that maybe it would be a good idea to just not post it?

[Jim Thompson]

Tom,

Out of pure selfishness, I enjoy the OT items.  I think it is an adequate level of courtesy to designate them as OT, but would agree that an OT subsection is probably a good idea.  I spend a good deal of time in front of a screen on a daily basis and consider most of you all to be much more than acquaintances.  I truly enjoy getting a look into the personal lives and non golf passions of our brethren and tend to look at all of this as good with out much judgment.  Then again, I consider golfer’s to be the best people on earth and consider 99% of the membership to fall into that same category.

All the best!

JT

[Brad Klein]

The issue of GCA getting tired or stale is also an issue of the style of posting - not just the topics. I am amazed that so very few women post here, for example. It has to do with a highly gendered style of bar-room brawling, personality insults, lambasting people because of ideas being associated with individuals and presumed schools of thought. There's an incredible tendency for people to get nasty, judgmental and dismissive and to revert to a frat house mentality in the process.

There's a lot of good mateial here, but it can be daunting to wade into, and there's a widespread fear among lurkers and reluctant contributors about getting one's head bitten off in the process. That's distinct from the other issue of professionals in the business worried about exposing their company or their colleagues or themselves to ridicule for taking on views. Many turf professionals, architects, golf pros and serious people in the business are engineering or technical types who are by nature a little on the modest side and thus not quite as willing to throw their opinions around, so they tend to look on and watch and read but get gun shy. The result is that the conversational flow here leads to the most vocal, active and aggressive personalities taking over. There are enough people who enjoy that kind of theatrics that serious discussion is limited and squeezed into a corner.

What results is a clubhouse atmosphere of 19th hole drunks more than an open, inviting conversation about architecture. As far as Web site chat groups go, the result is that the flow here is actually far better than most. But it could be a lot better. Much depends on self-restraint and ignoring topics or responses.

[paul cowley]

Why do I feel any attempts at modifying  GCAtlas has as little hope as the anti technology movement?
Evolution is easiest to identify viewed in hindsight as its hard to know where its going when you are in its midst.
OT doesn't bother me as I can tune it out. The quantity of OT topics usually signals a time of greater interest [or the opposite], in the outside world.

Maybe GCA lost an edge when many of us got real names?

caio....linksland

[wsmorrison]

I" am amazed that so very few women post here, for example. It has to do with a highly gendered style of bar-room brawling, personality insults, lambasting people because of ideas being associated with individuals and presumed schools of thought. There's an incredible tendency for people to get nasty, judgmental and dismissive and to revert to a frat house mentality in the process. "

I think that Brad is right when it comes to women that join the site and leave or stop posting.  However, the fact remains that women are not attracted to the subject matter in nearly the same proportion to the population as men are.  They are however drawn to men who are drawn to the subject matter.  Tom Paul has more groupies than Mick Jagger ever had  

[PThomas]

Tom - I think your post is another one of the recent ones that looks at the glass as half empty instead of half full

I joined GCA last January, and I've learned a lot a met a lot of great new friends..not much more I can really ask for

it's Ran' site, and if people have suggestions they should IM him, IMHO

as for people who are "scared" to post, not sure what can be done to encourage them...as someone posted already some people are shy, and I don't think you can change that....

if those types or other post and they receive strong replies in return, they should just give it right back...most of what is on here is opinions anyway

it bothers me when people criticize OT posts , but yet those people make OT posts...

I just woke up, haven't had my coffee yet, and DO have cabin fever, so pardon me if my reply seems terse...maybe my language could be softer, but I do mean what I wrote

so much bad shit in our world every day...every day is a gift...I know I have SO MUCH to be thankful for, including GCA and all my friends from here

CARPE DIEM!!!

[Brian Phillips]

I personally wish some of the architects would document their work here.

As soon as we do it Mike we would be accused by some on here as self promotion.  I have some wonderful pictures of some tough sites that we worked on that I would like to post but it just doesn't seem right.

The other problem is we don't want to get our worked ripped apart by the crowd on here.

Why should I post pictures of the work Graeme is doing at Murcar for people on here to start judging the work?

Why should I post pictures of a site in Norway where we moved over 100 000 m3 of peat for it to be knocked for not being minimalist?

Here is a good quote to help you understand how I feel about this site:

If you give me six lines written by the most honest man, I will find something in them to hang him. - RICHELIEU, Cardinal (1585-1642)

[paul cowley]

...I  concur with much of Brads post....as one of those in the business I rarely want to duke ideas out here with some of those who relish it.... I do enough of that internally or with colleagues in a different setting and I feel I have little to gain for the effort spent....and its not my nature to preach or do I enjoy being preached to.

I still feel there is always a lot to learn and ponder from topics and people posting here....its not quite broken yet.

Some aboard could lighten up a little...a little levity never hurts....... a Tom Paul groupie corner would be a hoot!

[paul cowley]

...ditto Brians post.

 ....although I will always be very happy to discuss any of the work and ideas I have put out for others to see [or play].

[Patrick_Mucci]

What's the purpose of giving someone access to the site if they're only going to lurk and not contribute ?

[paul cowley]

Patrick...so maybe they can LEARN to contribute, just like some on here can even learn to type .

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()