I’m sure there are several topics that have been beaten to death and new contributors like myself may be hesitant to rehash topics that can be searched.  Also, it is my opinion that there is a small pool of people that have been fortunate enough to play a good amount of the classics so you don’t necessarily have “new blood” livening up classic debates.

I’ve seen some very good discussions on here recently (natural vs. manmade thread for ex.) and for someone new they been stimulating and educational.  However, I would surmise that more golf is played on non-golden age architects and non Hanse, Doak, DeVries, Coore etc. courses.  A discussion of most others does not seem very popular, and I think it is a shame.  I think I'll be less shy about posting and hope that this site remains welcoming and tolerant of people that are still learning.  

There’s a big world out there and it’s important to keep an open mind when running through it.  I know there is a lot more to talk about and when the season gets into swing this site will be humming!

I could post how overrated quite a few courses are, ditto underrated, and it would educate those GCA who are open minded, but you have to take the rath of the "bias", and its not worth it...giving reports based on my traveling are probably a thing of the past, as I'm not sure enough enjoy my opinion vs. the energy it takes to fight the bias.

Hope you reconsider, Cary.  I enjoy your reports.  Hope to play several courses -- Lakota Canyon comes to mind -- you reported on, that I would never have known about otherwise. Pictures of the course look spectacular to me.  

I see this (as I do most other passion/hobby specific well run sites) as sort of a one-room school house. Some older students, some teachers, some graduates (those that basically don't post) and some new students (put me squarely in that category).

I recently posted about "The Hideout", a course that I strongly suspect has been discussed here before, but I wasn't able to use the search engine feature successfully to research the previous comments. Not that I'm asking those who already commented to comment again, but I remain interested in what they have to say.

John,

If you don't mind, what is it you fear losing?  How does it affect your posts?  What do you suggest be changed (ethos or whatever) so it doesn't have to be this way?

Brian & Tim,

Is it self promotion if there are individuals who are interested in what you are working on?
I would very much like to read about your projects.  Post them for me please.

I learn a great deal by reading the posts of Tom, Kelly, Ian, Jeff, Mark, every single superintendent....

In the context that I'm sharing what others would like to learn about, I am ok with talking about my work and will be more in the near future if there is interest.

Cheers

I enjoy reading the opinions of others, whether I agree or not.  The site has many fine contributers, both professionals in the business and interested accomplished players.

I've met and corresponded through the site different people involved in different aspects of the business.  For me, it's as much (if not more) a business than a hobby. Our company is involved in the business of golf to make money and deliver a good product to our customer.

We're very interested on how to expose new customers to the product of golf and retain those customers once they have been identified.  The game is not easy to play and retention of a custoemr base is required to be successful.

It's great to discuss the issue of " fast and firm v. hit and hold" as a hypothetical.  The opinion of the site is well known.  What matters as much to operators is the impact to the bottom line....can I move more customers through using one technique or the other, which maintenance method ultimately costs me more and which technique will retain the most customers.

Tom Paul,

I think it's definitely been worth it.

I'm not a big fan of the Far OT stuff and I think we should all do a better job policing ourselves from getting personal or insulting or just using the forum to spew vendetta.

However, I think that 75% of this site is still pretty good to great and that's not bad for a public forum with minimal restrictions.

My biggest gripe is simply that so many people contribute way too fast before thinking resulting in the case of good threads drifting off the first page and the more frustrating factor is that I barely have enough time to read, much less post as much as I'd like anymore.

 I have been fortunate enough to have reaped tangible benefits from this site. As a result of the past few years of posting here , meeting fellow posters at my home course and other courses ,  walking my home course with people like Ron Forse (a few years ago) and recently Joe Hancock and his sons, and gathering with fellow GCAers at Pat's gatherings  I have built a level of confidence and knowledge to have had specific impact on changes made at my home course.

   This has given me great satisfaction because I have a passion for the course. But I have needed the Philly guys who post and lurk here and the far flung guidance of the Scots ,Brits, Californians and others.

     The interactions will continue because ,as I'm sure Wayne will point out , I have a lot to learn.

   Maybe after my meeting at the diner with Tom Paul and Wayne Morrison I will know all that I need to know.

John,

If you don't mind, what is it you fear losing?  How does it affect your posts?  What do you suggest be changed (ethos or whatever) so it doesn't have to be this way?

It is really quite simple...I don't want to be thrown off the site.  That is what I will lose if I stray from the party line...and you know I'm on a high wire as it is.  I don't think it is a coincidence that TePaul feels like GCA has lost its touch the same week that a new ranking list falls on deaf ears....Hmmmm...funny how so many of those we have lost have ties to the list...scary..

I really have no problem with the OT stuff as each thread has a subject and unlike wading through the prompts when making a phone call these days, you can simply look at the subject and if you want to read what is being discussed or participate in that discussion you can do so and if not, then simply don't open the thread.  I know that I have met a great bunch of people through this site and I think that despite the fact that sometimes the exchanges can be rather heated, nearly all of us would love to have a drink with the other guys and discusss architecture.  I have had my head handed to me after some of my posts but I never took it so personally that I would no longer participate.  So long as Ran is in charge I'm in - period - end of discussion.  

Tom,
I have tried (of late, at least) to stay away from the OT threads, at least as far as posting.  However, I'm not sure that "tightening up" is a good long-run idea.

The membership here breaks into three groups for the purposes of discussing GCA, as I see it:
 
Group 1--Professionals in the industry, including archies, supers, operators, etc.

Group 2--Nonprofessionals who have, for one reason or another, seen a relatively high % of the world's (or at least the U.S.'s) great golf courses, many of which are very exclusive and/or very expensive and/or very remote.

Group 3--Nonprofessionals who love GCA as much as the first two groups, may or may not know as much, but have much more limited access/experience seeing or studying great courses other than on television, magazines, books, or here.

Group 3 (of which I am a member  ) is by far the largest group, I would imagine, and that limits things here somewhat.  I can't discuss NGLA or Sand Hills intelligently, but I LOVE seeing pictures posted and reading others' thoughts, and every now and then something comes along where I CAN contribute.  I imagine many here are in that same boat.  If things tighten up a lot, this becomes only groups 1 and 2, and inbred pretty quickly.  
I can't really imagine how the site becomes better with MORE restrictions or limitations.  The "OT" label works for me.

I have no doubt that if such a medium like the Internet existed in the era of the early and great golf writers, architects, amatuer players, and mover and shakers that founded great golf clubs, when the game was in closer to its beginings; that the same sort group behaviors would have evolved.  

People are people and if given a social forum where they can express themselves they will act in all the diverse styles that mimic their personalities.  Some will post and interact cautiously.  Some will be gregarious and post affably.  Some will post on everything and anything, whether they know anything or everything.  Some will be disgruntled.  Some will assume leadership in the group and attempt to regulate the rest.

It is what it is, and GCA.com for better or worse will ride on the tide of the information super-highway.  

One reason that GCA.com has not become a flame war is that everyone on here shares a basic interest about some form of the game of golf, its playing fields, and the company of similarly inclined people.  So, we self regulate when something goes so far astray that the whole group forms a bit of consensus that something has gone off the track.  That is why we now have this redundant thread discussion the same basic theme of GCA loosing its touch, etc.

I'm surely no intellectual, and I hardly know any.  But, my understanding is that in serious intellectual circles, where ideas are sifted and winnowed in the most esoteric fashion, that those so-called intellectual people get pretty nasty in their discussions and debates.  One has to loose their sensitivity if one wants to play in that league.

Oversensitivity = repression = lack of real exchange of ideas = loss of knowledge.