I definitely think the site would be immeasurably less interesting, less enjoyable and less useful without the architects participating (I'd further extend that to all industry participants). That's why I chose to defend Tom D's comments in the Ballyneal thread last week (and was myself criticised and ridiculed for doing so, not that I really care, it's just indicative of the types of people out there).
I hate when anyone questions anyone else's motives (unless of course they are responding to a personal attack). I don't see where anyone gets off thinking his own motives are somehow more pure than another's. (I could also make a similar comment about reading comprehension, golf knowledge, etc.)
If I could make a couple little suggestions to the architects (and other industry people) out there:
- realize that they are going to be bozos and try to ignore them (or at least not get dragged into the type of personal battle I did last week! Do as I say....)
- more importantly, don't be afraid to call BS on those of us who spout off without really understanding the nuts and bolts of what is going on. You can do it politely while still informing and educating the rest of us.
In regard to the quality of content on the site, many of us look to the architects to lead the way, so don't be hesitant to start topics yourself. Everyone knows it's a lot easier to be a critic than to have original ideas yourself, which is probably why a lot of people on this site focus on criticising or discussing golf courses, without delving into the other aspects of architecture. That is where we need your help!
Lastly, thanks to all the industry guys out there who contribute your time and thoughts to the site. Don't let distractions like Michelle Wie or things like juvenile personal attacks stop you from sharing your passion with the rest of us. You are truly appreciated, whether we take the time to thank you or not.
