Sticky threads & the tenor of the Discussion Group

[Ran Morrissett]

Sticky threads (i.e. threads that are stuck to the top of the Discussion Group) are put there for ~ two weeks and generally fall under one of several categories including:

1) Letting folks know when something new has been added to the web site like a Feature Interview or course profile.

2) Topics that are extremely well done like Chris Buie's current one on Overhills. I would hate for someone who only checks the Discussion Group once a week to miss it.

3) Any general announcements re: the web site. For instance, Ben and I are currently looking at upgrading the Discussion Group platform. It is over four years old and by updating it, we hope it will improve the image issues that we have been experiencing of late.

4) Also, I am going to start sticking the Big Four GolfClubAtlas.com events (Budda, Dixie, Kings, any Pat Mucci event) when they are announced with firm details.

Sticky threads hopefully highlight some of the best things that GolfClubAtlas.com has to offer. At present, the Discussion Group unfortunately isn't one of them as too many threads devolve away from their original subject matter and turn into nothing more than childish spitball contests  - and people are tired of such personal attacks.

When John and I started this in 1998/9, there was much thought given about naming it GolfCourseAtlas vs. GolfClubAtlas. The latter obviously won out but some days it feels more like GolfOctoganAtlas.com. I understand disagreeing (and discussing points, by definition, is at the heart of any great Discussion Group) but it is the manner in which things get discussed that defines the quality of a Discussion Group. Winston Churchill was the master of the clever civil discourse but he is dead, as is the Discussion Group until people interact and discuss opposing viewpoints with more aplomb.

To help build a greater sense of community, we are going to shrink the number of registered participants in the Discussion Group from 1,500 to a number well less than that, perhaps 1,000, perhaps less. Profit driven web sites (of which this isn't one) seek to expand their footprint. Instead, from Day One, GolfClubAtlas.com has been about quality. By getting rid of access hounds, people with hidden agendas like those who get paid to pump a course, people who have little to add to the subject of golf course architecture yet post frequently, etc., the Discussion Group will free up from some of the clutter that dilutes the quality topics/posts (OF WHICH THERE ARE MANY). In part, this move of reducing the number of participants is done so with the idea of building a greater sense of community, rather than one in which people spend time tearing each other down.

New participants will always be added but will need to spell out clearly in their introductory email to GolfClubAtlas.com what they hope to add - not just take away - from the Discussion Group.

Golf course architecture is an endlessly fascinating subject and it is one of the reasons why far more people follow the Discussion Group than whom actually post. For everyone's sake, we need to do better. One way or another, we are going to change the antagonistic nature found within the Discussion Group with the end result being an atmosphere that promotes healthy discourse.

Cheers,

[Jonathan Cummings]

Amen Ran!

[Sean_A]

Ran

Thanks for giving the events enjoyed by so many on the site some extra attention because I do think there is confusion at times if these are free for alls or invite only affairs.  

I think it a good idea to reduce the number of partipants.  However, unless one is the head honcho one can't say that unless he is willing to get the chop himself.  I understand that trying to select who goes and who stays is likely to be a difficult task, therefore if you are stuck for who to ditch I volunteer myself.  Let me know either way as I don't want to try and log in, fail and think there is an issue with my computer.

Ciao

[Carl Rogers]

Mr. Morrissett,
I, too, would like to understand the criteria for dismissal.

[Steve Lang]

  Ran, Ben,

I do hope you change the last three words in the presentation

"Click here » Golf Course Architecture (free access forum)"

as once so adroitly pointed out i think by W Halliday.. (someone correct me if i'm wrong).

Perhaps a 10% - 15%  contraction per year is all that's needed to send the message and test your theory on improving the tenor of the site.  While I don't think you intend to create a "choir," the unintended consequences of dropping folks may in itself lead the site and "off-discussion group" activities to parts unknown or undesired.

Bon Chance!

[Mike Sweeney]

Ran

Thanks for giving the events enjoyed by so many on the site some extra attention because I do think there is confusion at times if these are free for alls or invite only affairs.  

I think it a good idea to reduce the number of partipants.  However, unless one is the head honcho one can't say that unless he is willing to get the chop himself.  I understand that trying to select who goes and who stays is likely to be a difficult task, therefore if you are stuck for who to ditch I volunteer myself.  Let me know either way as I don't want to try and log in, fail and think there is an issue with my computer.

Ciao

Clearly this is going the wrong way if Sean is thinking of leaving. The guy has to be a Top 5 content contributor and number 2 most opinionated poster behind Pat Mucci.  

One of the all time great threads on this site is often mentioned as "Pizza Man".
http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=ik85vnlg0r2uetpdbi5rsdob03&/topic,12142.0/

Reality is the name of the thread by former poster Ed Baker   was   "GCA and the Pizza Man! The Silent Majority?". It was posted by Ed back in the days of open access to GCA and it was a story about a guy who loved golf course architecture and was afraid to post on the open forum.

If we are moving more and more to some Tom Doak and C&C 1000 fan club site where fans of Atlantic GC will be mocked, I will follow Sean's lead in saying I volunteer to "ditch" myself.

There are a significant number of "Contributors" to this site now. An occasional poke from a moderately paid moderator would go along way to clean up the BS.

[Ran Morrissett]

Carl,

My initial post must not have been clearly worded. People whose presence doesn't add to the discussion of golf course architecture are going to be culled. While that may not be in their best interest, it IS in the best interest of the web site.

Who will go between now and Thanksgiving? People who have nothing to add yet elect to do so frequently  , people who wake up mad at the world and take out their hostilities on other posters by attacking the poster as opposed to discussing the subject matter, and people who are more worried about setting up a 10:00am Saturday tee time at Cypress Point than they are about drilling down on the various nuisances of golf course architecture.

Golf in general has always attracted people of outstanding character - and the quality of the posts found throughout this Discussion Group should reflect that fact.

Since making my post, several people have instant messaged me saying they are infrequent posters (average between 5-25 posts per year) but they enjoy the site and don't want to have their account deleted. There is no issue there at all. I reviewed a couple of the accounts and they a) stick to golf course architecture and b) only contribute to subjects where they can add something. Imagine that! They must definitely aren't the problem.

All the information contained throughout the web site (including the Discussion Group) is free access. Everyone - whether you are registered or not - can avail themselves of this information and attend any event that is posted. Looking at it from the glass half full perspective, people who will no longer be registered are being saved from an invariable argument with Pat Mucci where they will be squashed. So really, look at it as a good thing 

Cheers,

PS I agree with Mike and Sean is being a drama queen as he posts more fresh material than just about anyone.

[Bill_McBride]

Could you do something about the debating style Mr. Mucci learned during his undergraduate days at Notre Dame?   

[Kris Shreiner]

Ran,

I appreciate your trying to improve the understanding of what you wish the site to deliver. That "greater sense of community" line really strikes a chord for me, as to what each of us should be striving for as contributors. While certainly not shy in my comments, I believe that except for one or two departures from my normally civil tenor, my intentions have been in the manner you stated.

When we give our best, even if quite frank or when we disagree, the group attitude tends to stay on that higher plane that this forum should function on more consistently. Thanks again for a wonderful contribution the the game!

Cheers,
Kris

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ran,

I presume I would be one on the chopping block as well.  Its well known I know little about golf design and only hang around the Merion threads.......If it comes to that, you have my permission to axe me.

I have said this before, but I am often reminded of Animal House, where Katy (Karen Allen) tries to tell her boyfriend Boone not to go to another drunken party, hopefully adding that she will write a note for him saying “he is too well to attend.”  

It is a disease, and maybe we should all be too well to attend this discussion group!  I do apologize for any contribution to the nastiness on here.  On occasion, I stoop to that level, most recently with my parody of the DM posting style which wasn't clever enough to overcome its bad tone and be valuble.  

More seriously, I have been here nine years now.  Most of what I actually do know about the subject has been presented over the years. Maybe I have little else to give.  Obviously, you have not been impressed, since I am the only participating gca who isn't worthy of an interview.  At least I was the first in the get to know you series.  

I also sometimes think that you come in with a group and tend to lose intersest as others take over the site.  Maybe I am losing interest because of who is here and who is not.  Part of that is the natural evolution of a long term, fluid asset, and part is the evolution of each of our personalities.  If we divorce here, I will always look back fondly at our time together and the three great kids we produced....oh wait, wrong speech! (or right speech, wrong person)

[Sean_A]

Ran wrote "PS I agree with Mike and Sean is being a drama queen as he posts more fresh material than just about anyone."

My response:

"You can't eat the orange and throw the peel away - a man is not a piece of fruit." A Miller: Death of a Salesman (don't recall which Act).

Ciao

[PCCraig]

Ran:

I think your "Sticky" option is a very good one and well used on threads such as Chris' fantastic lost Pinehurst course thread. May I also recommend using the sticky option for the upcoming 2nd Annual Midwest Mashie...we're gunning for the title of GCA's 5th Major

Thanks again for all you do.

[Michael Whitaker]

Ran - the site needs a couple of ACTIVE moderators who will keep things on track. Without them it has devolved into a playground too often dominated by the loud and arrogant. Ongoing, CONSISTANT oversight would do a lot more to improve the discussions than chopping the number of participants.

[George Pazin]

Ran:

I think your "Sticky" option is a very good one and well used on threads such as Chris' fantastic lost Pinehurst course thread.

Couldn't agree more with this observation, well said Pat and nice choice Ran.

I'll politely disagree with my friend Michael Whitaker about needing oversight - I think the group generally does a tremendous job of policing itself. I understand his point, but it would place an undue burden on someone to be a moderator. Unless he knows people, it will be too easy to infer things that aren't there and misunderstand humor. Heck, it took me a long time to realize that Pat M and Tom P are long time friends who enjoy giving each other a hard time! And I think the disagreements, warts and all, are a part of what makes any community real. Do we all want someone looking over our shoulders as we type...I sure don't.

In short, I'll second Pat C in saying thanks for all you do, Ran (and Ben and John and anyone else involved with the site).

The bad things may stick out in one's memory, but they are a tremendously small part of the site. And I say that as one who's had more than his fair share of disagreements on here.

Lastly, I do think there are a lot of people who can offer a lot more to the architectural side, but haven't, for whatever reason - they're intimidated, they get ignored, whatever. I have no idea what to do about that. Might help if some of us long-timers took the step to occasionally bump a thread of someone less known to the group with a comment or question.

Nice thread, it's a topic near and dear to my heart, obviously.

[Michael Whitaker]

George - I don't want a Big Brother looking over our shoulders, but firm consistent guidance would be a good thing. Just like the best run golf clubs, this site needs a benevolent dictator to decide what is appropriate behavior and what is not. If Clifford Roberts had only put his foot down once every year or so ANGC might not have the standards it has today. There is nothing wrong with ongoing, consistent oversight.

You don't HAVE to wait until the air is filled with spitballs and paper airplanes to call the class to order!

[Bill Hyde]

As an infrequent commenter and heavy reader of this site, I can say that this effort comes as a great relief to me. It is difficult to get past the first three comments on any posting without the conversation devolving into a completely unrelated direction that usually is nothing more than a social media pissing contest. I am tired of someone saying they like a course and then being challenged and berated about their impression and belittled for their lack of exposure to the top 100. I am blown away at the online stoning of guys who appreciate a course that isn't the product of one of the favored architects on the site. And I cannot fathom the time it must take to research architectural attribution minutiae with the sole intent of saying "I told ya so." Perhaps we should all re-read the course profiles that drew us here in the first place - nary a dagger in any of them. I guess the bottom line is if you don't have anything nice to say, go work on your short game.

[Brian Phillips]

Obviously, you have not been impressed, since I am the only participating gca who isn't worthy of an interview.

Jeff,

Make that two

[George Pazin]

George - I don't want a Big Brother looking over our shoulders, but firm consistent guidance would be a good thing. Just like the best run golf clubs, this site needs a benevolent dictator to decide what is appropriate behavior and what is not. If Clifford Roberts had only put his foot down once every year or so ANGC might not have the standards it has today. There is nothing wrong with ongoing, consistent oversight.

You don't HAVE to wait until the air is filled with spitballs and paper airplanes to call the class to order!

I guess I just fundamentally disagree with this approach. If you were getting together with a bunch of friends to BS about golf courses at the 19th, would someone act, formally or informally, as a moderator? A golf club is a completely different animal - someone has to run the course, run the club, keep things clean and orderly, etc. This is a discussion site. We're all adult here (well, most of us anyway... ).

I think the minor tiffs are just that, minor. They don't even come close to approaching all of the great stuff on here. Tolerating the occasion a-hole is a small price to pay for the wondrous site we have here.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Brian,

Now that I think about it, I am sure there are many more of you on the Euro side that haven't been subject to an interview. Sorry for that omission!  Hope all is well and look forward to your post on St Andrews....just keep the tenor and tone nice.  You know how you get sometimes~

[Peter Pallotta]

It's striking how 'multi-dimensional' this site is, i.e. how it operates on a number of levels at once, from the sacred (well, rarified at least) to the profane. When, say, the Paul Turners and Sean Arbles discuss some English course; or when the Tom Ds and Jeff Bs go back and forth on some practical draining issue; or when the Tom Ps and Tom Macs and Mike Cs and David Ms get into the details of co-temporaneous Merion documents  -- well, in those instances how many of us are NOT merely spectators and/or cheerleaders and/or dead weights dragging down an otherwise high-flying discussion. On the other hand, many of us deadwights might, for example, occassionally and in the very next post enliven a ranking thread, or a theoretical discussion on the nature of the sport, or an OT topic, or at least we might bug the hell out of Pat Mucci.

I think this is just fine, this variety - but the question (that no one really wants to ask or answer definitively) is: "What SHOULD gca.com be about?"...and if that answer is "Highly informed, articulate voices of opinion debating and discussing the great architecture of the world based on personal experience and extensive reading", well then someone needs to cut down the membership around here to about 100 people, and be done with it once and for all.  I'd be fine with that too.    

[Cristian]

Ran,

Thanks for running this website. I understand your concerns, it happens more and more that the first page of the DB is half or more filled with OT, or non-GCA or Banter-threads. It is a good initiative, I feel, to restore the point of gravity lying at GCA-related topics. Axing some members may seem harsh although in some cases it might be inevitable indeed. I must however say that some of the people frequently posting on the OT-subjects and even on the banter threads also sometimes post very interesting and knowledgable opinions on gca.

Make no mistake; I feel the people who created this site should always be able to determine the direction in which the DG is headed. If 70% wants to post on the Woods divorce and you feel it is inappropriate, by all means put a stop to it, so interesting stuff is not pushed from page 1 in a matter of hours. The sticky topic facility helps, but perhaps there is another idea; How about you showing your appreciation of a certain topic, ie by adding a star or a thumbs up symbol to indicate the topic is in the spirit of what you had in mind when you created this site. That will give instant feedback to anybody and I am sure will help the DG in the right direction in a positive way.

I hope you will succeed in changing the DG back towards frank and open gca discussion, hopefully without axing people who have contributed with their knowledge, even if they have sinned in the past as well, also I hope that the international character of the site is maintained and maybe enhanced. It is sometimes difficult to keep a european topic on the first page for fellow posters this side of the pond to be able to notice and react, but then again the OT-stuff doesn't help there either.

[PThomas]

for those wanting a moderator:  i think Ran's message today answers some/all of your concerns!

like anything else, GCA is not perfect, and i think it will get better soon

thanks Ran and to all the fine people i've met here and learned from!

[George Pazin]

I understand your concerns, it happens more and more that the first page of the DB is half or more filled with OT, or non-GCA or Banter-threads.

Your entire post is excellent, but I am picking out this sentence to highlight what I think is the misperception on here: I count 34 topics on the front page, and I only see 5 that are OT, and that is counting the Dixie Cup thread and the "How is your club surviving?" threads as OT, both of which could be called on topic.

I think we all tend to make much ado about nothing on here - the site is terrific. Could it be better? Maybe. But I am concerned that attempts to improve it will end up being counterproductive.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Does this mean that at last my comment regards cart, cart paths, distance aids, island Greens, the impact of technology and long courses will finally be discussed? Or are you asking me to turn the club upon myself in an act of extreme culling.


The culling is not the problem it’s the knowledge that course ratings appear for more important than the design consequences of that most innocent of items yet greatly disliked by our Doctor, that killer in the wings, the self-propelled polluter of our environment the ubiquitous cart. 


The proudest boast will one day again be “Sorry Sir, this is a Walking and Think Golf Club and Course where the Great Game of Golf is played”. Designers will never again burn the midnight oil trying to compromise the design of the course to accommodate cart paths.


Remember for the greater good I was asked to fall upon my “Long Spoon” made by Hugh Philp but first I must take my long cleansing walk off a short Pier in preparation for the act of Seppuku.



 Have no fear No American was hurt in the production of the Pro Culling Advert for GCA.com

Melvyn 

[Michael Whitaker]

George - I don't want a Big Brother looking over our shoulders, but firm consistent guidance would be a good thing. Just like the best run golf clubs, this site needs a benevolent dictator to decide what is appropriate behavior and what is not. If Clifford Roberts had only put his foot down once every year or so ANGC might not have the standards it has today. There is nothing wrong with ongoing, consistent oversight.

You don't HAVE to wait until the air is filled with spitballs and paper airplanes to call the class to order!

I guess I just fundamentally disagree with this approach. If you were getting together with a bunch of friends to BS about golf courses at the 19th, would someone act, formally or informally, as a moderator? A golf club is a completely different animal - someone has to run the course, run the club, keep things clean and orderly, etc. This is a discussion site. We're all adult here (well, most of us anyway... ).

I think the minor tiffs are just that, minor. They don't even come close to approaching all of the great stuff on here. Tolerating the occasion a-hole is a small price to pay for the wondrous site we have here.

George - I wasn't talking about making sure the the toilets are clean and the grass trimmed... and you know that. The best clubs are run by one or two people who make all the serious decisions about who gets in and how everyone should act when they are on property. The problem here, IMHO, is that too few people are allowed to control the tone of conversations without any checks from "management." There have been a LOT of people shouted off of this site (or pushed into being non-contributors) by a few who are skilled at bullying their "opponents" into submission. An occasional "stop that" or "please change your tone" from a moderator would go a long way to improving the discourse here. Those kinds of requests from the rank-and-file on this site do not carry enough weight to do any good. How many threads have you seen where NUMEROUS requests have been made for someone to "tone it down" by the "ordinary" members of this site... only to be ignored or, often, make matters worse.

On occasion, even in the 19th hole at your favorite club, someone might have to say to a group having a "serious" discussion... "guys, you're getting a little out of control." In your setting most would heed the warning. On this site, however, that type of rebuke is often taken as an opportunity to try and come up with another "brilliant" or smartass comeback. Moderators would put a stop to that stuff in a hurry... just like a president/captain of a club looking up from his pint with a disapproving scowl.

The problem here is that no one with any authority ever challenges over-the-top comments or conversations until they are so far out of control (or feelings are so damaged) that there is nothing left to do but remove the offender from the site. We had one of those happen this week. I feel well timed comments... on an ongoing basis... from someone who carries weight... would prevent most of these situations from escalating beyond the point of no return.