News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #350 on: August 13, 2010, 09:15:16 AM »
No Tom, I don't want you to do that, but I would be really interested in hearing MacWood's explanation of the sudden appearance of the word "originally"...maybe he thinks Billy Penn ran HDC's hedge fund division for Lloyd...which would be a better explanation than what I suspect is the truth...considering his mandate for to the letter accuracy in all this.

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #351 on: August 13, 2010, 09:49:51 AM »
MikeC and Sully:

It doesn't look like MacWood and particularly Moriarty are going to answer your good questions of them to show you the "FACTS" of some CBM or Barker involvement with the routing and design of Merion in 1910, the lack of which pretty much showing that essay, "The Missing Faces of Merion" to be all wet and all wrong. Therefore perhaps the two of you could do another essay or even a good timeline on 1910 about the CBM and Barker involvement at Merion in 1910 entitled "The Missing Facts of Merion." ;)

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #352 on: August 13, 2010, 09:51:05 AM »

"In 1909, the golfers of the Merion Cricket club formed the Merion Cricket GC Association to examine the problem presented by the Haskell ball, namely that it had made theri course obsolete. The moving spirits of this organization were Rodman E. Griscom, Charlton Yarnall, Robert Lelsey, Walter Stephenson, Alan Wilson and his younger brother, Hugh.

They explored the possibility of acquiring land around the old course so that it could be lengthened. However, no such land was available. They eventually settles on a 120-acre tract, located a little south of the Phila and Western Railroad tracks on both sides of Ardmore Avenue. The golf association bought the property and leased it back to the Cricket Club. Much of the land had been part of a William Penn grant. Since 1744, it had belonged to the Johnson family. Originally a farm, the place was now neglected. On the property stood a stone farmhouse, built in 1824, and large bank barn.

The Annual Report of 1910 informed Merion Cricket Club member of these developments.

Jim
Take out originally if you'd like. This paragraph was based on the annual report of 1910 (circular) and Tolhurst got the chain of events wrong. Not only did he get the chain events wrong as detailed in the circular, he got simple details wrong too.

There is mention of the Johnson Farm property, there is mention of the MCCGA, there is no mention of the Haverford Development Co. That is a major omission and leaves an inaccurate picture of what actually occured.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2010, 09:52:49 AM by Tom MacWood »

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #353 on: August 13, 2010, 09:53:55 AM »
Don't try to pull me in with you two...I have my own theory and I'm sticking to it.

Besides, why are you and Mike in such a rush? If we are going to make progress on Desmond Tolhurst's Account we should do it methodically...like a John Holmes pre-shot routine...

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #354 on: August 13, 2010, 09:56:32 AM »
Tom M,

That read like a concession on point #3...I had to read it out loud to see if it sounded like a confession (and it did) so I think we'll mark point #3 in the win column.

I guess the appropriate thing to do would be for you to modify that original post (and each copy of it) to remove that particular underline...then we'll move on to the next block of underlines.

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #355 on: August 13, 2010, 10:02:40 AM »
"Take out originilly if you'd like. This paragraph was based on the annual report of 1910 (circular) and Tolhurst got the chain of events wrong. Not only did he get the chain events wrong as detailed in the circular, he got simple details wrong too.

There is mention of the Johnson Farm property, there is mention of the MCCGA, there is no mention of the Haverford Development Co. That is a major omission and leaves an inaccurate picture of what actually occured."




The only thing in Tolhurst's two history books that I can see he got wrong was the story about Wilson going abroad in 1910 and for seven months. It looks pretty certain that never happened. And he got another minor point wrong that the old Haverford course shut down in 1912 when the new Merion East course opened for play. That was actually the initial intention of MCC and it was recorded in the board meeting minutes but they changed their minds and kept the old Haverford course open for play until the end of 1913.

But it is important to know that when Tolhurst said the land of Merion East went from being owned by the Johnson Family (The Johnson Farm) to being owned by MCCGA that is technically correct even though apparently Tom MacWood doesn't see that or can't understand it.

That is technically correct and all one could say about the way Tolhurst reported it is that he didn't report it very COMPLETELY or COMPREHENSIVELY because between being owned by the Johnsons and being owned by MCCGA, a period of about three years transpired with three different owners or title holders of that land.

But techinically what Tolhurst reported was correct and not inaccurate, meaningfully or otherwise. Apparently Tom MacWood is under the impression that if something does not include every single DETAIL in a chain of events or a particular time span it makes what is reported in less detail INACCURATE or MEANINGFULLY ;) inaccurate. It doesn't, it only makes it something less than totally comprehensive in detail.

Why didn't Tolhurst report all those details more completely or comprehensively? Well, according to Merion's long-time historian it was because Merion was calling for a 176 page history book and not something like a 1,000 page history book that perhaps could've included every single administrative piece of material information in the club's history. Merion's historian said the club just didn't think the membership wanted to pay for something like that or read something like that but that if someone really cared about all that detail then all they would need to do is go to the Merion Archives and look it all up because most all of it was there except many of the old administrative records that were still over at MCC when the course was run by the MCCGA for MCC.

It might be interesting for those folks who don't know Merion very well, folks that would include Moriarty and MacWood, to appreciate that there may be more cross-over members between MCC and Merion GC than any two separate clubs I'm aware of. For that reason it isn't that hard for some of those members, including the aforementioned long-term historian (who was for years a member of both clubs) to just ask MCC if he could see those old administrative records. That is what he did with Desmond Tolhurst and I believe we can even see Tolhurst notations on the sides of many of those old MCC administrative records.



Guys, you are not going to get a much more detailed account or explanation of the series of events that transpired in this timespan such as what's reported above in this post unless of course you actually decide to try to establish your own good working research relationship with Merion Golf Club and Merion Cricket Club!
 
 
 
« Last Edit: August 13, 2010, 10:23:14 AM by TEPaul »

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #356 on: August 13, 2010, 10:03:24 AM »
Even though I believe the statement is inaccurate and misleading in the spirit of cooperation I will remove the underline. I will add an underline to the part about the annual report.

"In 1909, the golfers of the Merion Cricket club formed the Merion Cricket GC Association to examine the problem presented by the Haskell ball, namely that it had made theri course obsolete. The moving spirits of this organization were Rodman E. Griscom, Charlton Yarnall, Robert Lelsey, Walter Stephenson, Alan Wilson and his younger brother, Hugh.

They explored the possibility of acquiring land around the old course so that it could be lengthened. However, no such land was available. They eventually settles on a 120-acre tract, located a little south of the Phila and Western Railroad tracks on both sides of Ardmore Avenue. The golf association bought the property and leased it back to the Cricket Club. Much of the land had been part of a William Penn grant. Since 1744, it had belonged to the Johnson family. Originally a farm, the place was now neglected. On the property stood a stone farmhouse, built in 1824, and large bank barn.

The Annual Report of 1910 informed Merion Cricket Club member of these developments.

The MCC Golf Association appointed a committee to lay out the new course. Its chairman was Hugh Wilson. The other members were Rodman E. Griscom, Dr. Henry Toulmin, Richard S. Francis and Horatio Gates Llloyd, who originally acquired the land.

This was a fine Committee for the job. Griscoms' accomplishments have been outlined in the first chapter. Francis was an officer of a construction company, an engineer and a surveyor, and his skills were invaluable. However, the chief burden fell on Wilson, who was the principal architect of the course.

Hugh Wilson was an excellent golfer, and learned the game on Merion's Haverford course. At Princeton, he was captian of the university's golf team. Graduating in 1902, Wilson returned to Philadelphia and joined his brother Alan in the insurance business. Eventually, Hugh became the president of the business.

A golf pilgrimage
In 1910, the Committee decided to send Hugh Wilson to Scotland and England to study their best courses and develop ideas for thr new course. Before he left, he visited the site of the NGLA, America's first modern golf course, then under constrcution in Southampton, NY. While there he discussed his itinerary with Charles B. Macdonald, the designer of the National and winner of the first US Amateur in 1895. Macdonald had made a similar journey for the same purpose some eight years earlier.

Wilson spent about seven months abroad, playing and studying course and sketching the features that struck him most favorably. When he returned, he carried a pile of notes as well as sheaves of sketches and surveyor's maps of outstanding holes and features. All of these avidly studied by the Committee.

One mystery still surrounds Wilson's trip to Britain, and that is the origin of the wicker flagsticks now so much a part of Merions' mystique. For years, it was said Wilson first saw them at Sunningdale Golf club located in Berkshire, England. However when the Captain of Sunningdale visited Merion in September, 1987, for the 75th Anniverserary, he averred that Sunningdale never had wickers! So where did Wilson see them?

Some say that it was another course near London with a similar name to Sunningdale. Others tell the story of a lady member of Merion who married an English lord and then put in a nine-hole course on his estate, using flower decorated baskets instead of flagsticks. Since she was a Philadelphian, Wilson is said to have visited her on his British trip and borrowed the basket idea. However, so far both the 'other course' near London and the lady from Merion have proved elusive.

When Wilson returned from England, both Macdonald and his son-in-law HJ Whigham (an Oxford player and 1896 and 1897 US Am Champion) freely gave him their advice. So the Club had the benefit of their experience as well as the skill and knoweldge of the committee.

Francis takes a hand
An interesting sidelight on the design of the new course comes from Richard Francis, who wrote the following in 1950:
"Except for many hours over a drawing board, running instruments in the field and just plain talking, I made but one important contribution to the layout of the course.
 The land was shaped like a capital “L” and it was not very difficult to get the first 13 holes into the upright portion – with the help of a little ground on the north side of Ardmore avenue – but the last five holes were another question.
 I was looking at a map of the property one night when I had an idea. Not realizing it was nearly midnight, I called Mr. Lloyd on the telephone, found he had not gone to bed, got on my bicycle and rode a mile or so to see him. (Richard Francis lived next to the Haverford Station of the PRR) The idea was this: We had some property west of the present course which did not fit in with any golf layout. Perhaps we could swap it for some good use?"

A great team
Besides the expertise of Francis, Wilson also had a first-class crew. Supervising construction was Merion's first greenkeeper William S. Flynn, who had been groundskeeper with the Cricket Club. Also involved was Howard C. Toomey, another groundskeeper at the Cricket Club, and civil engineer. After World War I, the pair formed the golf course architecture firm of Toomey and Flynn and designed such outstanding courses as Rolling Green in Philadlephia, the Cascades course at the Homestead, Hot Springs, VA, the James River course for the CC of Virginia, and Cherry Hill Country Club in Denver. The firm was also chosen to finish and revising the bunkering at Merion after Hugh Wilson's untimely death. Flynn appointed Joe Valentine as his construction foreman. Valentine had also worked as a groundskeeper at the Cricket Club, and as an immigrant from Italy, his knowledge of Italian was invaluable in supervising the largely Italian-speaking constrcution crew with their horsedrawn roadscrapers.

Flynn and Wilson were close friends and thought alike on the subject of golf architecture. For example both agreed that hazards should be plainly visible and abhorred the invisible pot bunker so often encountered on older British courses. 'A concealed bunker has no place on a golf course,' Flynn declared. 'When concealed, it does not register on the players' mind as he is about to play the shot, thus loses its value.' He added, 'The best looking bunkers are those that are gouged out of faces of slopes, especially when the slope faces the player. They are much more effective in that thaey stand there like sentinals beckoning the player.' When the course was under construction and later, during revisions, Valentine would spread bed sheets on the sire of a proposed bunker so the Wilson, standing on the tee or the area from which the shot would be played, could be certain that the hazard could be plainly seen by the golfer.

Merion, a masterpiece
The payout that Wilson fashioned at Merion was masterly. It was even more remarkable considering it was his first effort in course architecture. He fitted the holes onto the land as compactly as jigsaw puzzle. As a result, player only had to step a few yards from each green to the next tee. The trip to the Old country had certainly paid off.

While Wilson admitted that his concepts sprang from the holes he'd seen in Scotland and England--the third hole was inspired by North Berwick's fifteenth hole (The Redan) and the 17th, with its swale fronting the green, is reminiscent of the famed Valley of Sin at St. Andrews' 18th hole--none of the holes at Merion is an out and out copy. They are all original holes in their own right. Wilson had absorbed the principles underlying the great hole, then applied them to the terrain at his command.

It has been said that Hugh Wilson grasped these principles of Scottish and English course design and conveyed them in his work better than Charles Blair Macdonald. However, to compare Merion to the NGL is somewhat of an 'apples and oranges' proposition. Macdonald set out to 'model each of the 18 holes (at the National) after the most famous holes abroad.' that is, to duplicate these holes. Wilson never intended to design Merion under such constraints. His objective was to build a course that would rival the finest British parkland course in beauty and shot values. He succeeded admirably.

If it were possible to physically lift Merion and set it dons at an appropriate site Britain, the native golfers would feel right at home on it in not time at all. they would appreciate the artfully set tees, aligned toward trouble rather straight down the fairway, and the sloping fairways, which so often present a hilly lie that makes the best shape of a shot doubly difficult, the naturalness of the bunkers and their plantings of dune grass and Scottish broom, the variety of green shape and the subtle contours of the putting surfaces, which sometimes almost defy reading, as well as their fast pace. The British love a course where you have to use your head, place your tee shots and hit precise shots with every club in your bag; that's Merion East, exactly.

Construction of the new course began in the early spring of 1911. By September, the grass seed, a German variety chose after much investigation and tests, had been sown. It was allowed to grow that autumn and the following spring and summer. On September 12, 1912, the old course at Haverford was closed, and on the 14th, the new course and the clubhouse were opened to members.

Incidentally, that date work started on the new course lays to rest an oft-told, rather romantic story that Wilson, on his return from Britain, miraculously avoided a planned sailing home on the pride of the White Star line, the SS Titanic. The liner struck an iceberg and sank on the night of April 14-15th, 1912. Obviously, if work started on the course in the spring of 1911, Wilson was already safely back in the United States before the ill-fated ship ever set out on its maiden voyage.

A report of the opening said that the course was 'among experts considered the finest inland links in the country.' This was the assessment that has been echoed down through the years."

« Last Edit: August 13, 2010, 10:09:54 AM by Tom MacWood »

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #357 on: August 13, 2010, 10:09:12 AM »
Sean,

The refusal of Tom and David to provide any factual evidence to backup their specious claims, and then to divert and deflect the discussion when pressed to provide factual evidence is the reason this thread is making no progress.

That, and their refusal to acknowledge even the most obvious disproven allegations get old.

Mike

Well then, isn't it time to write your own IMO Piece?  These "conversations" surely show that their continuation will not be fruitful.  In the amount of time spent on these threads you could have written a proper piece which could make sense of the arguments.

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #358 on: August 13, 2010, 10:10:58 AM »
Tom M,

Thank you.

Can you elaborate on the Annual Report inaccuracy? I don't know the answer, nor do I have any information, but how do you know 1910 MCC Board of Governors Annual Report contained in full?

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #359 on: August 13, 2010, 10:26:11 AM »
Jim
A circular was distrubuted to the membership informing them of recent developments, not an annual report. In the circular there is no mention of acquiring land around the old property; there is no mention of lengthening the old course; there is no mention of 120 acres.

Here is follow up letter to the membership from Sayers that mentions the circular.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2010, 10:30:30 AM by Tom MacWood »

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #360 on: August 13, 2010, 10:27:40 AM »
Just noticed something...don't want to sound like Columbo, but as of January 1911, Merion was still intent on putting lawn tennis courts on the 117 acres they had secured that they illustrated in Green in that initial November 15, 1910 announcement letter to their members.

Aren't lawn tennis courts pretty big, especially if you have a goodly number of courts?   Wouldn't that also include some space for spectators?

Since we're talking black and white here, where exactly does anyone think they were those going to be located if the course had already been routed prior to then?






JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #361 on: August 13, 2010, 10:32:58 AM »
Tom,

I don't understand how you can state the Tolhurst was wrong regarding the 1910 Annual Report when your examples only reference these letters. I must be missing somehting in you connections.

Tom MacWood

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #362 on: August 13, 2010, 10:46:45 AM »
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is an accepted fact that the membership was informed of the golf course developments in a 11/15/1910 circular. 

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #363 on: August 13, 2010, 10:55:00 AM »
It looks to me that the membership was notified that the golf course was moving locations after the land had been secured and they would have an opportunity to invest in a bond which would fund the development of the new facilities...this segment of the club's activities in 1910 can hardly be considered an Annual Report which would provide exponentially more information on golf and all aspects of a club's activities.

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #364 on: August 13, 2010, 11:20:21 AM »
Mike

Well then, isn't it time to write your own IMO Piece?  These "conversations" surely show that their continuation will not be fruitful.  In the amount of time spent on these threads you could have written a proper piece which could make sense of the arguments.

Ciao

Hear, Hear!   
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Mike Cirba

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #365 on: August 13, 2010, 01:50:27 PM »
Write an IMO to be followed by another 100 page thread here?   No thanks.

It would be much easier if David and Tom just provided any and all of their factual evidence of anyone's involvement in the second half of 1910 and we could move on.

That's the crux of the matter and it's not surprising at all that they both want to talk/argue about ANYTHING but their invisible evidence upon which their wholly speculative house of cards assumptions are built.

I would too if I were them.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #366 on: August 13, 2010, 02:16:30 PM »
"Write an IMO to be followed by another 100 page thread here?   No thanks."


I think the best redemption of this entire topic would be for you, Tom and Wayne to do just that.

DMoriarty

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #367 on: August 13, 2010, 02:18:01 PM »
Mike, I don't know about you, but I am not five years old.   So your attempts to goad me into the same tired conversation we've had at least a dozen times isn't going to get anywhere.  I've said what I am going to say to you on that issue in the past threads and in my IMO.  If you don't understand my position or don't think I have proved it to your satisfaction, then I can live with that.  Obviously nothing I write will change your mind.  

______________________________________


"Write an IMO to be followed by another 100 page thread here?   No thanks."


I think the best redemption of this entire topic would be for you, Tom and Wayne to do just that.

Hear, hear!
« Last Edit: August 13, 2010, 02:21:09 PM by DMoriarty »
Golf history can be quite interesting if you just let your favorite legends go and allow the truth to take you where it will.
--Tom MacWood (1958-2012)

Mike Cirba

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #368 on: August 13, 2010, 02:36:20 PM »
Jim,

That's not going to happen unfortunately.

For starters, I know that Wayne has no interest in participating here much less contributing an IMO piece.

Second, if Tom and Wayne were writing it they wouldn't need me.

And last, perhaps it's just me, but I'm not a member of Merion, and I would never presume to re-write their club history without being asked to do so by the club.  Just as importantly, I would never presume to rewrite their history without access to their club minutes and relevant documentation.

My ego is not that super-sized.


Finally, did you ever wonder why David and Tom are happy to talk /argue about any topic at all except when asked to produce factual evidence about the second half of 1910, which of course ironically is when they contend that the course was built.

I guess when Toto pulls the curtain back it makes sense that they'd ask us to pay no aTtention to the less than magical truth  behind it.

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #369 on: August 13, 2010, 02:51:22 PM »
I know it's not going to happen Mike...but it would go a long way towards redemption for this topic and this site if a rational conversation could take place involving the primary interested parties.

As far as why Tom and David don't directly answer your questions for factual evidence, I agree. They don't have it or else it would have been posted.

They do have a very legitimate position for debate however...even if it relies on several assumptions on top of each other.

Mike Cirba

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #370 on: August 13, 2010, 03:12:17 PM »
Jim,

I agree; there is some room for debate and interpretation and I was hoping we could explore some of them.

But those items have been phrased as factual, proven answers instead of interesting questions, and nothing shuts down reasonable dialogue quicker than pretending to know all the answers...by either side.

Instead, this is simply a rhetorical game.

Mike Cirba

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #371 on: August 13, 2010, 03:14:19 PM »
...And will remain so as long as we don't insist on separating factual evidence from speculative inference masquerading as factual evidence.

TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #372 on: August 13, 2010, 04:05:10 PM »
"I think the best redemption of this entire topic would be for you, Tom and Wayne to do just that."


Sully:

Actually, I've mentioned it a few times on here but nobody seems to have noticed (which isn't surprising for some on here) but Wayne Morrison has written about a 200+ page architectural evolution report of the entire history of the golf course at MCC and Merion from the beginning (1896) until to date. It is Merion's history of the architects and architecture of their courses. It certainly is no counterpoint to Moriarty's ridiculous essay because as I've said on here numerous times no one that has anything to do with that club thinks that's necessary to do. His 200+ page architect and architecture report is part of the Merion archives and may be part of the USGA's Architecture Archive.
 
 
 

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #373 on: August 13, 2010, 08:04:26 PM »
Tom,

I know, and look forward to it...but I doubt we're putting 200 pages on here though...in an essay, obviously the arguments about it will go well past that. I do look forward to reading it, especially the section covering 1909 through 1912.


Mike,

You asked for the Holy Grail when they haven't found it yet. I think you should think of a few questions that might focus on some of their smaller points if you're interested in the conversation moving along. If not, fine. But your question about proof of a CBM routing developed in the time from June - November 1910 is like the retorical question...are you still beating your wife?

Take a specific "speculative inference" in David's essay and drill on it.

Just my opinion on moving the thread along...



TEPaul

Re: Desmond Tolhurst's account
« Reply #374 on: August 13, 2010, 09:00:54 PM »
"Mike:
You asked for the Holy Grail when they haven't found it yet. I think you should think of a few questions that might focus on some of their smaller points if you're interested in the conversation moving along. If not, fine. But your question about proof of a CBM routing developed in the time from June - November 1910 is like the retorical question...are you still beating your wife?

Take a specific "speculative inference" in David's essay and drill on it.

Just my opinion on moving the thread along..."




Sully:

That's a very interesting post with some thoughtful and potential points. Having talked with you the other day, I think I understand much better where you are coming from or want to come from on this thread and general subject.

There most certainly are some inferences (or assumptions and premises and even conclusions) Moriarty (and/or MacWood) made in that essay with something far less than complete documentary material and information on Merion which admittedly (by that I mean even he may admit it now) he did not have or have access to when he researched and wrote his essay.  

If you take what he actually did have with documentary material when he researched and wrote his essay and then plug into it or add to it what he did not have that was found later by others after his essay-----and then analyze and evaluate the one against the other it may not be all that hard for anyone (even including us ;) ) with a modicum of understanding of Merion's over-all history to understand and appreciate both how and why he came to the assumptions, premises, a priori reasoning, and conclusions he did in that essay.

However, I think, at this point, there is one very important factor going on here now with these more recent Merion discussions or even those older really voluminous ones following the putting of his essay on here that needs to be factored in here and that is one very important point that I think Peter Pallotta mentioned in his post on here of yesterday or so.

But I think you are right-----there are some points that Moriarty made that are seminal given what was found later that can be reviewed and very much drilled into (as you say) to determine not just how and why this evolved as it did but perhaps even to resolve it finally if all parties are willing to do that and reanalyze it all in an intelligent and moderately cooperative manner.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2010, 09:07:27 PM by TEPaul »

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back