"BUT... this new site would need a very dedicated moderator (a) to keep out those uninvited;  and (b) to monitor posts and suspend and throw out offenders.  Absent that it just plain won't work.  Don't know if you saw it, but Darren has nominated YOU for this job.  I assume you have the 16-20 free hours each day required for these tasks?"

TomH:

I realize that--it'd have to have a very active moderator and everyone would have to be aware of that. Darren Kilfara thought I should be the moderator? I didn't know that and I'm stunned and would never think of such a thing! I wouldn't even expect them to let me into that alternate discussion group section.

But if they did and I were to ACCEPT such a MISSION IMPOSSIBLE, I, of course, would have to be completely OBJECTIVE, as all good moderators must be, and I would ONLY ACCEPT it under ONE CONDITION!

That condition would be that Pat Mucci would be the co-moderator with me! Didn't expect that did you? But I'm serious.

It'd be a good balance because he disagrees with 98% of what I say and I know what he says is wrong 98% of the time so it would be a perfect balance. One might even call it the "Big World" theory of the Golfclubatlas.com alternate discussion group section!  

The other benefit is JakaB is known to hate the "Big World" theory so the thought of him wondering what's going on in there to destroy the future of architecture is appealing beyond words!

JakaB,

I will supply the first answer for Tom.  Infrequent GCA contributor Bruce Matthews created what I believe will be a masterpiece called Angels Crossing in Western Michigan.  It will open this spring and I expect you to join me at the grand opening.  Bruce told me point blank that the inspiration for him to produce a classical golf course with a Redan, Biarritz, Cape, Volcano, Eden, etc. was GCA.  Western Michigan will now have one of the best valued public courses in the country and GCA is no small part of the reason.

Having had a chance to re-look at the old threads, I think we have jumped the shark backwards.  Things are a LOT better than they were in the "good old days" when comments were few, far between, self-centered and mostly naive.  If there is ever a poster child for the value of diversity, the current un-monitored version of GCA is surely it.

Also, if there is ever an argument against the strict "moderation" that Darren and others advocate, just look at those old "threads."  They have been so moderated to death that they have no substance, and certainly no soul.

If that's the ideal, by all menas set up that "GCA for the In-Crowd" sub-site, and let us peons talk about the things that interest us, golf and otherwise, without having "soup Nazis" tell us what we should be reading or even saying.

A couple of more positives evolved from GCA as it has been. (of course a contrarian can and would argue and deny anything I would state here), but here goes...

Several people from superintendents to green committee people have come on this site (sometimes saying what they were but not who they were by name) and asked or threw out some issue about remodelling/restoration/maintenance meld, to be hashed over.  I assume they do so inorder to get informed IDEAS.

Architects, including Jeff Brauer have said they have incorporated some of the things we talk about here, either on new courses, or remodel/restore jobs, to some degree.  

Construction people have weighed in on techniques.  And, developers have weighed in here.  Ken Bakst, Mike Keiser, Mr. Robertson in NZ, Mr Ramsey in OZ, the gentleman from Angels Crossing (I'm sorry his name escapes me just now) and just several others.  I assume they get IDEAS and INSPIRATIONS here John Kavanaugh!!!

I'm sorry, but what seems to be happening here is that many are expressing good points from different perspectives.  But, John Kavanaugh is becoming only a contrarian for the sake of tearing down everything - from what I can observe as his posts are regressing lately.  

John, in your heart of hearts, would you be glad to say some vitriolic and critical, cynical, biting thing to long time contributors here that you don't agree with, and see them hurt to the point of ending a relationship with a discussion community that maybe - just maybe - is an important part of their day?

Can't you just make your point without throwing bombs and taking out everyone in the general proximity?  You have been witty and entertaining, and many times insightful.  But, don't you see you are regressing to the roll of a discourse vandal?

I don't want to hurt your feelings any more than anyone elses here.  But, I honestly do think you need to re-examine your motives and methods here, because I sense it goes beyond that of contrarian trying to present the other side of debates.  I really hope I am wrong and miss-understanding the situation.

I should not have named names...post is modified.  I need some time to reply to RJ...give me a few.   I don't know Golden..sorry to see you go.

If there's one thing this thread has taught me (which I knew already, but it bears repeating/reinforcing), it's that you can't have a strongly held opinion about anything on the internet without offending at least one other person, and usually just about everybody.

Cheers,
Darren

Contributors on GCA are not so much teaching the teachers, whether they be developer's like the Bakst's or Keiser's of the world nor their architects like C&C or Doak.  They are PARTICIPATING in an ongoing discussion of ideas, and any wise man will tell you - if they are paying attention - one learns from that process, no matter how small the point of learning may be.  Guys like the above are successful and intelligent because they do discuss, pay attention to their market, clients, and those who are passionate about these issues.  They know they are just part of a community of people that share interests.  If all that didn't matter, then burn the books, delete the discussion, and go forth in a uninformed state of being, howling invectives at the moon.

I really do think that Keiser's complex received a boost, a hightened or more prompt recognition due to all the buzz on GCA.  I would hope he, Doak, and others would recognise that GCA has been a launch pad for their endeavors.  Not an entity that they would have depended on for success, but one they could count on for recognition in a specific targetted sector or the market that helped in some manner more so than if GCA did not exist at all.  

How soon would Cape Kidnappers, Barnbougle, Friars Head, St Andrews Beach, Kingsley Club, Black Mesa and many others have come to your attention had there been no GCA.  After you destroy GCA, you can go after the magazines and writers and call them irrelavant too.

Why do you think these people I named as Archies, Supers, construction personnel, developers, writers, historians and such bother to come on GCA, if not to learn 'SOMETHING"?  Do you think they just come on here to laugh at a bunch of old white men typing away in their pajamas?  Is that about it for you John?  Do I amuuuuse you? (said like Joe Pesci)  What color are your pajamas?

 

Pat, I can just visualize Ran sitting there in his paisley smoking jacket, in the den, seated at the computer, puffing away on his pipe, with child and wife nearby, and moderating and prequalifying, and facilitating our little community of lofty architectural ideals discussion.  I heard he is a man of leisure, but my he must have something better to do than that, I pray!

For what it's worth, all that "strong moderator involvement" requires is a moderator willing to read (or even skim) all (or even most) of the posts written on a daily basis, and to respond with a short message to any offending ones. On most days, once the parameters of moderated discussion are established, I'd guess that the moderator will be writing zero messages. How much time and effort would that take?

Here's the real secret of my master plan to hire Tom Paul as chief moderator: he'd have so much less work to do than anyone else!

Cheers,
Darren

Mr. Mucci,

With all due respect, I suggest you create your own website and pre-qualify all of the people you want to talk with yourself.  To suggest that this website should fit your model of decorum, ideals, and "pre-qualified" membership is preposterous.  

Mr. Mucci, I have enjoyed many of your posts and find you to be quite educated and informed on the topic of GCA.  However, your exclusionary, good 'ol boys club mentality reeks of arrogance and greatly disappoints me.  I would have thought better of you.

One question.....

Would you qualify for "certification" to join the discussion group?  If so, what qualifications do you have in the field?  Have you ever designed a course?  Are you a superintendant?  Are you a golf professional?  Don't try to tell me greens chairmen count.  Being elected greens chairman by your frat brothers is hardly a qualification.

I look forward to your opinions in the future as I am confident they will appear on this forum and not some facist led Reichstag.


Jeff F.

I don't know Tom Doak at all and have only played his worse effort...but the thought that one blade of grass or one grain of sand is improved at Pacific Dunes because of this site put me on one knee.  Tom Doak has a finite amount of time to shape and sharpen his personal experience...the time he spends on this site could be put to better use...but I think he likes golf and this is a nice place to get a kick....plus who couldn't use a dose of love now and then...and baby we can spoon out all the love an architect who panders to us can stomach.

I think the majority of discussion or raterspeak on this site stifles creativity in golf....the it could have been, should have been, is or is not a redan crap stinks to high heaven....what if an architect designs a half redan and his raterspeak tells him..go full redan...go for the points...what if he does this and a half redan fits the land and fits the demographic of his client.....this site is so one sided that I am called a contrarian because I don't think like the group.   I simply try to never make a post to make friends or gain access...and it has cost me both.   This is where I am an idiot by popular standards and should be ignored...wheres PJ when I need him.

Huckster, you've at last convinced me: I'm the Pollyanna.  

Huckster, you've at last convinced me: I'm the Pollyanna.  

Well that was one goal!

And I swear I am not trying to be negative, or a prick, or anything of the sort (thought it sure does come off that way)... I have just seen this happen several times over the last 12 years or so that I've been participating in groups like this.

This site ain't broke, and don't need fixin'.

TH