Phil,
I'm with TePaul on this one. I have been told that if you resign, you can't come back. So, just in case you want to, just lay in the bushes for a while. Putting up with argumentative A$#(*&#% is part of the whole, uh, "charm" of this place!
BTW, I agree with your last few posts. TMac has as of yet produced exactly zero documents to back up his theory that makes up this thread. That kind of "logic" is an insult to all of us here. And, he defends himself by speculating, calling you dumb and a liar (well, a bluffer for TMac's defenders).
I merely pointed out that it was possible that Worthington could have thown out an idea or two, since he was there. That is about all we can speculate on. The other thing about these attribution threads is that we sometimes miss the obvious. TMac may say that at that time Worthington was more experienced, so he HAD to have designed the golf course. However, that ignores what transpired in reality - Tillie gets credit in all magazine articles, Tillie goes on to become famous GCA and Worthington disappears, etc. To argue that Tillie couldn't have designed the course because of lack of experience ignores all of that.
Again, if TMac is arguing that Worthington has some input, I can agree that speculation would say that of course he may have. But, while logical, its all speculation. I haven't seen TMac admit any of that. And yet, we all get called out for our supposed lack of historical accumen. Things that make you go hmmm.