Interesting and entertaining response. I would say that it is the EA that is labelling the good guys approach as binary, while seemingly supporting a whimsical, shrug your shoulders, who cares what anyone does to any course approach.
Further, if you can look past Tommy's opening remarks to Cliffhenry for just one moment, you'll see that there was certainly no effort to engage anyone in any sort of dialogue on the part of Mr. Henry. The impression I got from all the various posts was that Mindy had already spoken to Tommy and others in a more private forum - for all I know, she continues to do so.
How do you juxtapose your disdain for the approach of the "SS" with the discussion on this very thread? I haven't seen anyone take shots at rgkeller, I've seen quite a bit of good dialogue going on. I'd like to know specifically why rgkeller feels water is a better hazard than a bunker - I myself fall into the "water hazards are like plane crashes while bunkers are like car crashes" camp, I think sand tempts better, while water encourages repetitious conservative play - but the discussion has been pretty good. Most restoration discussions are, if you can get by the personal stuff.
As usual, the truth likely falls somewhere in between. But I believe far more good comes from respecting the original work than chalking everything up to "progress." I don't see the desire to remain as original as possible having its logical conclusion in ad hominem attacks, but I definitely see the logical conclusion of "who cares, golf courses evolve" resulting in the destruction of classic golf courses.