[TEPaul]

MikeC:

Post #38?? What's up pal? Have you been hanging around me too much lately or something?  


David Stamm and others:

Come on now, you guys have been on this site a long time and you all know Mike Cirba, he's probably the most level-headed person this site has or has ever had. For someone to piss him off like that, well, I think some of you guys better begin to open your eyes and look at the facts here on the give and take on these threads. Maintaining civility is important but so is the implications of what someone says about people and places and facts and times. This website and golf architectural history is not a courtroom, you know, and none of us should act like it is.

And David, I definitely don't want to push you away again but you really do have to start taking some personal responsibility for some of the things it seems you've been implying not just about us here in Philly today but some people we have real respect for from back then. Delving research and honest discussions are one thing but you're over the line and perhaps bigtime on the way you're going about it.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Let me preface this by saying I am just speculating and probably shouldn't. Like others, I prefer history.

That said, I don't find it inconcievalble that the Merion committee made up a fairy tale about Wilson going to Scotland, esp. if MacDonald was asked and then dimissed regarding helping at Merion.  No doubt CBM was going around saying it "couldn't be a great course unless they studied Scotish courses like I did."  So, to shut him up, they said Wilson went.

Again, pure speculation but such things do happen.  I mean, Al Gore got away with saying he invented the internet for years until scrutinized in a Presidential election, and so have many other politicians and business people.  Don't most corporate (and club) histories sound kind of heroic?  And don't you suspect some of that is exageration or image building?  Did Merion feel any need to elevate itself to the status of NGLA?  Was studying the great courses the badge of honor at the time that a "signature course" is now?

I don't know, but I can imagine all of those things possibly happening and Wilson not going over until after construction to fulfill his story, and maybe come up with some ideas for future use.  So, there may never have been two trips.

Sorry in advance if this takes the thread on an ugly turn.  I know others are more emotionally involved than I.

[David Stamm]

MikeC:

Post #38?? What's up pal? Have you been hanging around me too much lately or something?  


David Stamm and others:

Come on now, you guys have been on this site a long time and you all know Mike Cirba, he's probably the most level-headed person this site has or has ever had. For someone to piss him off like that, well, I think some of you guys better begin to open your eyes and look at the facts here on the give and take on these threads. Maintaining civility is important but so is the implications of what someone says about people and places and facts and times. This website and golf architectural history is not a courtroom, you know, and none of us should act like it is.

And David, I definitely don't want to push you away again but you really do have to start taking some personal responsibility for some of the things it seems you've been implying not just about us here in Philly today but some people we have real respect for from back then. Delving research and honest discussions are one thing but you're over the line and perhaps bigtime on the way you're going about it.

Tom, I'm all for spirited discussion and know Mike has shown he is a stand up guy and usually civil. Not to mention funny as hell at times. To be honest, I was quite shocked by Mike's reaction. I just would hate to see this get out of hand and don't want to see some things said that will be regreted later. This isn't life or death stuff here and I hope we can all go a few rounds with each other metaphorically without resorting to any uncouth comments and respect each others positions no matter how much we disagree with each other. Now, let's enjoy the debate......

[Joe Hancock]

Jeff,

What do you mean, IF this thread takes an ugly turn?....

It seems to me that the ones devoting great amounts of time and energy into this research are the same ones that get bent out of shape at someone else's conclusions. Wouldn't it be prudent for all parties doing the research to compile all the facts into one chronologically arranged document and then dissect it together, as group? Rather than work as individual researchers trying to hit the jackpot alone, try to share evidence and discuss the whole body of evidence as a team. After all, no one is going to win a Nobel over this, so you all may as well enjoy each other's company along the journey.

You know Hugh, don't you? Hugh damn right I do!

 

[DMoriarty]

Gee it is great to be back! 


Mike Cirba, let us review.   I have been back 2 days.   Before coming back, I emailed a list of potential topics I might address, in order to gauge the potential hostility of the response.  There were 5 potential topics, but  not one of them addressed Hugh Wilson's trip to Europe.   Yesterday I started a thread on one of those 5 topics . . . perhaps you missed it.   I do not have time nor do I think it productive to address them all at once.  I'll get to them and others when I have time and when they are ready. 

I did not start a thread on Hugh Wilson's trip.  You did.   I merely responded, corrected a false statement, and asked a very pertinent question.  DOES ANY HARD EVIDENCE EXIST THAT HUGH WILSON TRAVELED OVERSEAS BEFORE 1912?

After one of the times I asked this question I wrote "Buehler?"   It was meant to point out that, despite many requests, no answer has been forthcoming,  It is a movie quote and humor, and by no means a personal insult nor one directed at you.

Mike, you seemed to have lost it.   Please pull yourself together.  If you cant then you should take a break.  If you wont then I will request that you are removed from the site until you can act like a gentleman.    I am not putting up with this garbage again.   

David.
____________________________

Joe,

I have not been a member of this site for about a year and one half.   During that time I have come across lots of interesting things that I havent posted.   Do you really think it reasonable to expect me to post everything I have found  in the first two days I am back?   

If so, do you hold others to the same standard?  For example, do you think that Wayne and TPaul have posted everything relevant they know about these issues??  If not, should they?  And on whose time-table?

I planned on addressing the article in due course, when I had a chance to put it in context.
________________________

TEPaul.   Colt's wife was with him in 1913.   I have the manifest.   I have yet to come across a situation where I could  otherwise verify travel but could not find the manifest. 

__________________

TEPaul and MCirba,

You have both (Mike on site, Tom off) recently said that by pursuing my research, I am essentially calling favored dead Philadelphians liars.   Such a position is absolutely preposterous, for reasons that ought to be obvious.  Do you really think you guys are ready for a frank conversation about these issues if you feel the need to so accuse me even before the conversation even gets started?? 


Like I said, It is sure great to be back.   

[Joe Hancock]

David,

I posed no timeline for you or anyone else. I am attempting to encourage all to work together, in a time frame that is convenient for those of you doing the work. I understand about time constraints, family, etc., so if I sounded like I was pushing you or anyone else to hurry through this, I apologize.

Joe

[DMoriarty]

Joe Bausch, not Joe Hancock.   Sorry,.

 Could one of you please change your name if you are going  to post on the same thread??

[Joe Hancock]

I'll volunteer to go by my NY mafia name....Joey the Nose (best when pronounced with a NY Italian accent)......or, JTN as I'm respectfully called when in NY.

 

Carry on.....

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jeff,

What do you mean, IF this thread takes an ugly turn?....

It seems to me that the ones devoting great amounts of time and energy into this research are the same ones that get bent out of shape at someone else's conclusions. Wouldn't it be prudent for all parties doing the research to compile all the facts into one chronologically arranged document and then dissect it together, as group? Rather than work as individual researchers trying to hit the jackpot alone, try to share evidence and discuss the whole body of evidence as a team. After all, no one is going to win a Nobel over this, so you all may as well enjoy each other's company along the journey.

You know Hugh, don't you? Hugh damn right I do!

 

Joe,

I meant if it took an ugly thread because of my speculation in the middle of what might be a historical debate. it crossed my mind that my comments were inappropriate.

For that matter, I can understand why the Philly guys are emotionally invested in whether some dead guy took a boat trip with his wife and/or housekeepers and kids. I'm not, but even I find myself now wanting to know if Hugh took another trip prior to 1912!  It has moved to no. 3 on my list of questions to ask when I get to heaven........4 if you count "Whew, am I really here?" as a question rather than exclamation.

[Pete_Pittock]

I have no pony in the show, Dick Daley already used my previous opening.
Question 1- At what point did Wilson attain enough social standing to have his travelling contemporaneously reported in the newspapers.
Question 2 -If you were contemplating travelling from the UK to America by steamship in late October and early November, accompanied by family, would you take a direct route across the North Atlantic, against all prevailing sailing conditions, or would you opt for a great circle route with warmer weather and calmer seas.
    Consider that time may not be an important consideration and at that time Argentina was replacing the West Indies as the major commercial outpost in the southern Americas. Since Wilson was in maritime insurance,
a trip to Buenos Aires for business (and tax?) purposes is not unreasonable.
    As an aside the Asturias was built in 1905 and was a 12,000 ton twin screw, single stack royal mail liner. Her successor namesake (1926) as used in filming the lifeboat lowering scene in "A Night to Remember".

[TEPaul]

hmmm

[DMoriarty]

Hey Pete. 

Somewhere I have a 1910 article from one of the golf mags that lists various clubmen who are traveling abroad. If I recall correctly, the same article mentions that Hugh Wilson has not been playing much, but does not include him in the group traveling.   I ll dig it up when I get the chance.

The Scottish Hugh Wilson who traveled from England to Buenos Aeres is not our guy.  The domestic help listed as traveling with him were not his. Seriously.   

[TEPaul]

Jeff Brauer:

Yeah, you took the thread on what you said might be an ugly turn. Never again will I think of your sensibilities like I once did.

[TEPaul]

"I have not been a member of this site for about a year and one half.   During that time I have come across lots of interesting things that I havent posted.   Do you really think it reasonable to expect me to post everything I have found  in the first two days I am back?"


David Moriarty:

You are damned right I do or why did you come back? We haven't seen a scintilla of evidence of anything new from you in a week and why is that?  I think everybody on here expects you to post everything you've found. Why else did you come back on here?   

"If so, do you hold others to the same standard?  For example, do you think that Wayne and TPaul have posted everything relevant they know about these issues??  If not, should they?  And on whose time-table?"

Basically we have posted a great deal of what's relevant to Merion on this website. You may not be aware of that because you left and with the rest of it you seem to have no conception of giving credit where it's due. Wayne and I (well basically Wayne) have written a book on Flynn and the Merion section basically covers the entire history of all the Merions. The book hasn't been published or even edited yet. Do you expect we would publish the entire unedited section of Merion on here?

There are other avenues of historical dissemination and this website certainly isn't the only one. The USGA is one and we are both working on that. And what are you doing but leaving this website like a spoilt child and then fairly trying to negotiate your way back on with new material and pontifications of how some treated you so badly a year ago.

I think a lot of us suspected this would happen again if some of us made the offer. There is nothing here that's any different from a year ago. Merion doesn't really need your catechism any more than NGLA, Pine Valley or any other famous course does. Basically you are just a pot-stirer with no historical purpose or benefit at all.

[TEPaul]

My distinct sense is research-wise and fact-wise we will be taking you down David Moriarty and the joke on this website will be you won't be able to admit it or even recognize it.

Oh, by the way, then don't put ALL your new material on here in 2-3 days but I think the website would appreciate something eventually! 

[DMoriarty]

This is absolutely insane . . .

[TEPaul]

Yes, it most certainly is, and now I think it's time with Merion to drop all these preposterous and contentious "Moriarty Returns with new Information" threads and get into some interesting ideas Peter Pallota has on this subject of Merion and Macdonald! 

At least we know things with PeterP and the rest of us on here will be civil.

[DMoriarty]

Are you suggesting that I have been less than civil since my return Tom?  How so?

[TEPaul]

"Are you suggesting that I have been less than civil since my return Tom?  How so?"

David:

No, I don't mean to suggest anything of the kind and so I don't think your question of 'how so' is worth answering.

What I do think is PeterP made some very fine remarks as what seemed to be a direct counter-point to what  seems to be your implications, and I think it's time to let his ideas, and any responses to them, air for a while. That's why I started another thread on his ideas. Maybe his ideas on the other thread won't get as much play but that doesn't matter to me, and if they don't I think that's also indicative of Golfclubatlasers and this website.

[Michael Dugger]

Will someone help me understand what Tom Paul just said regarding the Crump story because what I think he said is pretty much the most ridiculous thing I've ever read here.

[Rich Goodale]

What do you find ridiculous, Michael?  Tom has made virtually all those points before on this site, many times.

[DMoriarty]

Richard. 

So if you repeat something over and over again then it makes sense?  Interesting.   That that only work in Philadelphia?

[TEPaul]

 

[TEPaul]

"Richard. 

So if you repeat something over and over again then it makes sense?  Interesting.   That that only work in Philadelphia?"

David,

Perhaps, but I think this website now sees it sure doesn't work with one Californian.

[Rich Goodale]

Richard. 

So if you repeat something over and over again then it makes sense?  Interesting.   That that only work in Philadelphia?

OK, David, I'll ask you the same honest question I asked Michael.  What (if anything) do you find ridiculous in Tom Paul's post on Crump?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()