Technically, Tom MacWood is correct here and on some level, academic freedom is important. I would never argue otherwise, and perhaps in some idealized world there is some value to the "ivory tower" detached, purportedly objective approach that claims to only want to know "facts" and people be damned.
Yet, we do not exist as islands of information, and we are all collective members of this website, for better or worse, so what any one person does reflects on all of us here, like it or not. If you think that's not true, you are naive, because this site is read by an unbelievable amount of industry people, and the general tenor, tone, and content here ARE important.
In an age of instant "misinformation", where an Internet rumor can be started that Barack Obama is a muslim or John McCain is gay, and left unchallenged, can and will be seen as "Fact" in some uninformed circles, I think all of us here has a greater responsibility.
Given that shared destiny and as important as academic freedom admittedly is, I think if we ask ourselves some common-sense, fundamental questions, I think they crystallize most of the salient issues here very well.
If any of us were to write something for publication about the history of Garden City, would you contact Patrick Mucci to discuss first? Especially if Patrick had been acting as an archivist for that club?
What about Olympic Club? Would it be important or just common cooperative good sense and decency to try and work with Joel Stewart, Gib Papazian, Kevin Reilly, and others??
Personally, I can't imagine writing something for publication about Ohio State GC without trying to work cooperatively with Tom MacWood. Especially if the contention was something like "Mackenzie had absolutely nothing to do with the design of the course"....
Even if one answers "Yes" to all of the above, and I can't imagine too many of us here who honestly believe that, can you imagine afterwards sitting here week after week whining and demanding that the member you just slighted and tried to make look uninformed is somehow now obligated to provide you with source materials of items you didn't have access to originally....just so you can argumentatively have all the ammo for a fair fight as "facts" and premises in your original piece start crumbling into dust based on closer scrutiny?
Would anyone do that to Patrick Mucci?? DEMAND that he give them records and private minutes of Garden City GC because they weren't able to get them originally and now their knowingly controversial and even inflammatory paper is suffering based on additional findings?
How about Bob Huntley at his club?? Would anyone here have the unmitigated gall to make demands of him??
And if they did, wouldn't many here jump to their defense, stating rightly that NO ONE had the right to trample on a GCA friend or even aquaintance that way, and essentially misuse this site for that purpose.
I apologize for naming names, above, but I have to wonder what Wayne Morrison ever did wrong here that he didn't deserve the same courtesy, righteous indignation in his defense, and simple common decency and respect for the fact that he has a life and relations beyond this website.
I find myself asking many of the same questions Wayne has asked himself recently.
Bullies like John Kavanaugh above walk with inpunity around here. Once again he comes forward pretending that he's interested in this website by ending this discussion with his "suggestion".
His suggestion was for Brad Klein to remove me from the Golfweek panel, even though to my knowledge, I'm the only member of that panel in the Merion discussions.
John has always hated Golfweek, has a clear animosity and issue with Brad Klein, and has used this site over and over to insinuate all sorts of BS about the panel and it's members, yet most here seem to think he's just a misguided, nice guy. "OH...that's just John".
However, unlike Wayne, I'm not quitting this website. I frankly wouldn't give some people here that satisfaction, and to the rest of you, I value your friendship and camaraderie.
Melvyn is also correct.
When personal attacks happen here, if we don't self-govern and rise to the defense of the attacked, this place is going to be exactly what it is fast becoming. I'm sure that sounds hypocritical coming from me, as some here believe I unfairly attacked David Moriarty. While that's true, I had heard from what I believe to be impeccable sources that his reasons for coming back here and writing his piece (which was also in conjunction with Tom MacWood) was based on personal vendettas for past wounds against Tom Paul and Wayne Morrison. So, in trying to defend against this site being used for that type of thing, I did go too far and later apologized to David, both publicy and privately. Neither was accepted, but since that time I've tried to keep personal stuff out of the debates, and have tried to lighten the mood with humor, despite the fact that it's been a one-way effort.
This site is important to some of us, which is why my defense has been so unreasonably strident at times.
Some of us had hoped this place could be a forum for actually accomplishing something REAL and USEFUL, besides the expenditure of hot air and keystrokes...likeworking in close conjunction with new initiatives like the USGA architectural museum, or the Cobb's Creek restoration effort, or just hoping to be a resource for clubs looking to go back to their classic architectural roots. Perhaps, THAT was naive on our part.
Instead, it seems as if its been shanghai'd and is simply destined to continue as some sort of fringe, self-appointed, "gadfly" of architectural wackos way outside the mainstream, having little or no actual impact to what gets done "on the ground", and largely irrelevant....