[TEPaul]

Very good Andrew!

There is never anything quite as good as a modicum of humor with these kinds of things that some become so super-serious about. Disguise or no disguise it seems neither Tom MacWood nor David Moriarty have ever felt particularly inclined to actually visit either Merion GC or MCC with the idea of researching their archives. Instead they seem intent on asking both clubs to just send them any material they are looking for despite the fact that both clubs and others familiar with their procedures have for a good long time now told them that is not the way those clubs do things. Unfortunately, that just isn't the policy either club follows for any of us interested in accessing and researching their histories and its material at those clubs. Alternatively those two constantly demand it on this website from some of us who have it or are aware of what it says. At this point, my philosophy would be that if they want to "vet it" or whatever they call what some of us say on here they should just go to the clubs themselves and research it as a few of us have been doing over the years.

I also think it would be most helpful to all of us if Ran Morrissett would create what could be called a GCA Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for all of us to follow in approaching clubs who are interested in accessing and researching any club's private archive material and using it to discuss it on this website.

[JESII]

Tom,

After Ran produces his Standard Operating Procedure would we then all be calling on these clubs as representatives of Golf Club Atlas? Would the information gleaned then be GCA property? Has Ran actually done this sort of historical analysis before?

[TEPaul]

Sully:

I suggest you IM or email Ran with those questions.

My basic feeling about this issue has simply been that GOLFCLUBATLAS.com should endeavor to establish and maintain good relations with any golf club in this vein when it comes to the participants on this website. Frankly, I think it is more important by a factor of perhaps 1,000 than the issue of participants on this site using it to access clubs to play golf! I doubt Ran or most of us want to negatively influence any club when it comes to their approach to any good and credible researcher because of the actions of a few on here. And that's why I think a GOLFCLUBALTAS Standard Operating Procedure for research access to clubs would be most helpful for all of us and for this website generally.

[JESII]

You missed my point...these are individuals, like you and Wayne, going to these clubs for their own interests. It's up to those very individuals to present themselves appropriately and the clubs to respond as they wish...

[DMoriarty]

Tom,

First, can I get an answer to my question?

"Let's start with a simple clarification for your friends who think you have been lying about all of this:  Did you make it up, or do you really have information indicating that Macdonald and Whigam may've been the actual designers?

Second, your post above contains a number of falsehoods and misrepresentations concerning my dealings with Merion, and I find it insulting.  For example, among other things, you falsely claim that I have never been inclined to visit either Merion or MCC with the idea researching, you falsely claim that I have "asked both clubs to just send [me] the material I am looking for," and you misrepresent the archival policies of both clubs.    You should knock it off.   Quit misrepresenting my dealings with these clubs.

Third, you ironically suggest that Ran come up with some SOP for dealing with "for all of us to follow in approaching clubs who are interested in accessing and researching any club's private archive material and using it to discuss it on this website."  That is a splendid idea, and we should consider using Merion as an example of what to do and not to do.   But why wait for Ran?  Here are a few suggestions of things not to do, mostly based upon your post above.

1.  If you are not a member of a club, do not pretend to speak for a club or to know what goes on inside a club.

2.  Even if you are a member of a club, do not pretend to represent the club or speak for the club unless you are actually authorized to do so.    

3.  Do not pretend to understand the archival policies of a club if you do not understand the archival policies of a club.

4.  Do not lecture others on the archival policies of a club, especially if you do not understand them yourself.

5.  Do not pretend to have followed the archival policies of a club if you have not.  

6.   If you are privy to a club's records (either officially or clandestinely) you should follow the clubs policies regarding their use and dissemination.  

7.  Do not use the private information of your club (or any other club) for your rhetorical gain unless the club is fully aware and supportive of your actions.

These are just a few suggestions for your SOP.  I have many more.     Maybe you should start a thread?  

[JESII]

David,

Any good hostage negotiator knows you have to get proof of life before going any further...



For what it's worth, the boorish, insulting threads were better than this one...this one makes me really wonder.

[Jeff Taylor]

I don't expect replies to this post but this thread has me wondering;
1. Why would a member of Merion (or any club for that matter) care what is said about it's history on this website?
2. Why would a member of any club care about GCA.com SOP's for course history investigations in general?
3. Why would any club want to participate in this endeavor after reading these threads? Is that the motive for deleting insults? Is there and expectation that they won't find them and then feel more willing to participate?
4. Does a discussion group of 1500 really mean that much to private clubs?


 

[DMoriarty]

David,

Any good hostage negotiator knows you have to get proof of life before going any further...

Oh well.  I knew I should have taken Advanced Negotiations: Hostages in law school.

Truth is I find this type of negotiation to be in extremely bad taste, and am therefore trying not to negotiate at all.   I am just trying to start a frank discussion about golf course design.  To that end, I'll gladly try to clean up my act, and will even delete material Tom wants me to delete, if Ran sees fit.   And I will do these things and anything else that helps the website with no strings attached.   Now how is that a novel negotiation tactic?

For what it's worth, the boorish, insulting threads were better than this one...this one makes me really wonder.

I agree totally.  

My theory is that the boorishness and insults have oftentimes masked the true, deep seated and ugly nature of these conversations.  When there are fists and blood flying everywhere it is easy to write it all off as an emotional, childish, and immature dispute, where all sides are equally to blame.      But when we strip out the emotion and exclamation, we really can get a glimpse of what each side is really after, the reasonableness of the various positions, and the harsh premeditation and calculation behind some of the supposedly emotionally disputes

Frankly, even as a participant, it leaves me cold.  

_____________________________________

Jeff Taylor,

Those are all terrific questions.  I can't speak for Merion, but I really doubt the club cares one bit about much of anything I have posted.   If they do, they should contact me directly and I will be glad to address it with them.  

But like you, I cannot imagine that the the club cares one bit.   So then we must ask ourselves, what is this really all about?   Certainly it has nothing to do with improving relations with Merion or any other club.   TEPaul isn't even a member of Merion!   And certainly it has nothing to do with advancing the conversation regarding Merion's history.   In fact, it is being used as an excuse to block that conversation. 

So what is TEPaul really after?    And what does it have to do with Ran's purposes and goals for this website?

[JESII]

My theory is that the boorishness and insults have oftentimes masked the true, deep seated and ugly nature of these conversations.  When there are fists and blood flying everywhere it is easy to write it all off as an emotional, childish, and immature dispute, where all sides are equally to blame.      But when we strip out the emotion and exclamation, we really can get a glimpse of what each side is really after, the reasonableness of the various positions, and the harsh premeditation and calculation behind some of the supposedly emotionally disputes

Frankly, even as a participant, it leaves me cold.  

I don't understand this section.

[TEPaul]

"You missed my point...these are individuals, like you and Wayne, going to these clubs for their own interests. It's up to those very individuals to present themselves appropriately and the clubs to respond as they wish..."


Sully:

Sorry if you think I missed your point. Of course these are individuals going to these clubs for their own interests, and of course it's up to those individuals to present themselves appropriately. But I think if those indivuduals who do not have a research relationship with a club they are interested in on here use this site to insult members and friends of that club and to also try to browbeat those members and friends into providing them with any and all research material rather than getting it themselves from the club it then gets into the interest of this website to prevent that so as not to negatively influence the club now and in the future towards other credible researchers they may not know.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Can we stop worrying about the clubs where we're not members.

They're perfectly capable of taking care of themselves and don't need our assistance.

Also, it would help if the question David and others have asked, can be answered, succinctly.

[JESII]

Tom,

We've spoken on these threads, on the phone and in person regarding this topic over the last few years. I consider you a friend and I consider several of your friends at Merion to be friends of mine.

I have tried to participate in these threads with an open mind...which hasn't been all that tough because I had noting invested in either version, or the one in th emiddle.

If you would like my personal observation of the way this conversation has evolved between your side and David's side over these three years I'd be happy to give it to you...on one condition...

[TEPaul]

"To that end, I'll gladly try to clean up my act, and will even delete material Tom wants me to delete, if Ran sees fit."


David:

Thank you very much for that. I view that as a real positive step forward. Why don't the both of us email Ran Morrissett that remark of yours and this apparent understanding between us and see what he says about it? Would you agree to that?

Sully:

Whatever you say; I'm willing to at least listen to anything.  

[TEPaul]

"Can we stop worrying about the clubs where we're not members?"


Pat:

Others on here can answer that question for themselves, but as for me, no, I cannot stop worrying about the clubs themselves, including ones I do not belong to if any of them and their members and friends are treated now and in the future the way Merion (and some others) has been on this website by a few. My concerns are both for the clubs and for GOLFCLUBATLAS.com and its ability to potentially and maximally be involved with clubs themselves and their histories and particularly their historical material now and in the future.

On the other hand, if this website, its participants and its administrators do not want to do that or do not understand it then I can certainly accept that and I would be happy, in that case, to basically not participate, at least on the subject of Merion. That's no problem for me but I should remind you as far as I can see I am the only one left on this website who actually has a direct working research relationship with Merion GC and I have had that relationship with them for years.

I suppose it's actually possible that some on here see that as some kind of an impediment, perhaps even some kind of an obstacle to freedom of expression and opinion. I guess stranger things have happened in this new era of instant world-wide communication where it seems too many think they know more than they do about too many things and people and such or should have access to anything just because they think they show interest in it on some website. 

[DMoriarty]

Tom,  

You can of course email Ran all you like and with whatever you like.  But I don't know what you mean by an "apparent understanding between us" so let me clarify my position.  I've stated about four times now that I would delete posts as Ran saw fit.   After all, it is his website.   Whether you or anyone else supplies him a list or not, it is Ran's call.  Not yours.   Understood?

Patrick wrote:

Can we stop worrying about the clubs where we're not members.

They're perfectly capable of taking care of themselves and don't need our assistance

Hear Hear!    Whatever the intentions of those claiming to defend the clubs, in my experience their positions and representations rarely match the clubs' actual policies and representations.  TEPaul's post No. 76 above is a perfect example.   As such, these self-appointed guardains run the risk of harming the clubs' reputation more than helping it.

That said, this isn't a thread about Tom's SOP for dealing with clubs. If he wants to have that discussion I wish he'd take it to another thread.  

Frankly, I wish he would start a thread, because I've grown tired of the constant misrepresentations about my dealings with Merion, and would like to set the record straight.

First though, I'd like some movement on the issue at hand . . .
Patrick wrote:  

Also, it would help if the question David and others have asked, can be answered, succinctly.

Thanks for mentioning that Patrick.  I had a feeling I wasn't the only one who would like to see TEPaul set things straight on that issue.  

[Sean Leary]

Perhaps Tom is awaiting confirmation from the powers that be at Merion before he says anything more publicly, out of respect to the club. Who knows how they want to announce something like this, as it is un precedented. That would be my guess.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sean,

Waiting for what ?

Permission to disclose or hide the truth ?

TEPaul & David Moriarty,

I don't want to speak for Ran, primarily because I already speak for CBM, SR and CB and I don't want the appearance of any further conflicts of interest.
Plus, there's only so much time in the day and I can only represent so many voices.

Having said that, 
Ran doesn't want to get involved in these petty squabbles. 
He doesn't want to be a referee or arbitor, nor should he.
He has a life, his time is important, he has a business, a family, hobbies and more important than that, he has friends like me to take advantage of him on the golf course.
Ran isn't going to sit around all day reviewing and editing posts and mediating disputes.

Leave the guy out of this.

TEPaul,

STOP WORRYING ABOUT OTHER ENTITIES !

Let them worry about themselves.

You can't act as their self appointed protector.

The time you spend worrying about and defending clubs could be better spent devoted to charities, like funding cancer research, diabetes awareness and a cure for Progeria.

I understand your passion for the game, architecture and historic clubs, but, they got along just fine without you for about a century and they'll get along without you for the next century, provided that the White House doesn't make them extinct 

You're certainly entitled to challenge and refute any comments or opinions regarding those clubs, courses or memberships, but don't appoint yourself as their guardian.

You know that I agree with you on a lot of issues and that I also disagree with you on others.

I can say the same thing to David Moriarty.  We agree on some things and we disagree on others.

Jim Sullivan and I don't agree on everything, but, on this topic, I think we agree,

Let's not send David and/or others on wild goose chases.

If you have some interesting information, post it.
If you don't, just say, "Trick or Treat" and lets get on with it.

[DMoriarty]

Perhaps Tom is awaiting confirmation from the powers that be at Merion before he says anything more publicly, out of respect to the club. Who knows how they want to announce something like this, as it is un precedented. That would be my guess.

Sean that could be and I hope that is the case.  

But if it is the case, then I have to wonder why TEPaul posted about the issue in the first place?  Or why he keeps stringing us along as if he is about to come clean? Or why no doesn't he just explain the situation?  

Also even if it is the case, it is not as if anyone has asked him for much of anything here.  The immediate issue is whether this just some convoluted and cynical joke.   There has been much speculation among TEPaul's usual friends and supporters that this is all just an ongoing cynical charade; a nasty lie to try and make a fool of me.  I hope that this is not the case, and surely Tom should at least put these nasty rumors to rest.  Or confirm them.

Also Sean, I am not sure it is entirely unprecedented, and if TEPaul is telling the truth, I doubt it will be much of a surprise to most at Merion who have actually read my essay or followed the subsequent developments in the historical record.   Despite the vehement protestations on this website, the evidence was all pointed this direction anyway, and I this will very likely remain so whether or not this is a cynical charade on TEPaul's part.  
_________________________________________________________________

Patrick,

I agree with you that Ran will not want to be part of these petty squabbles and I don't think he should be bothered with it.   I don't want any part of these petty squabbles either, and don't plan on bothering Ran about it at all.  But this is all about TEPaul.   If TEPaul thinks it appropriate to bother Ran with his peculiar plan to purge my past participation, it is all on him, not me.    

Frankly, despite TEPaul's representations to the contrary I don't think Ran wants me to purge my posts. He certainly has never suggested it to me.  Surely Ran knows that this sort of historical cleansing is a bad idea.  For one thing, this stuff is asbestos-- trying to remove it risks more harm than just leaving it alone.   For another, I don't believe it is possible to rewrite history by deleting my past posts, or deleting TEPaul's past posts for that matter.   I think it is a bad idea all around.   My point is the same here as it has been with the substantive discussion for years now.   We cannot alter history by manipulating and controlling the historical record and we should not try.  Yet that is exactly what TEPaul is proposing here.

[Tom MacWood]

I don't expect replies to this post but this thread has me wondering;
1. Why would a member of Merion (or any club for that matter) care what is said about it's history on this website?
They don't care. The only the people who care are a very small localized group of mostly non-members with an ego driven agenda, unfortunately they have somehow convinced the club historian that he should care.
2. Why would a member of any club care about GCA.com SOP's for course history investigations in general?
They don't care. And as far as I can tell the only individuals calling for a SOP have either never written histories or have written questionably researched ones. IMO this site (and Ran) has done a very poor job lately encouraging IMO pieces and histories, and a result very few have been written lately. The SOP will only add to that trend.
3. Why would any club want to participate in this endeavor after reading these threads? Is that the motive for deleting insults? Is there and expectation that they won't find them and then feel more willing to participate? I've been on this site for a long time and you can probably count on one hand when I've thrown a personal insult at anyone - perhaps one finger of one hand. In fact the only time I can recall deleting a post is when I wrote something about TEP, passed out, wallowing in his own urine, and that was several years ago. The reason some club members, golf architects, and others don't participate is because they don't like difficult, pointed questions. Exchanges like that have the potential for embarrassment. You cannot delete difficult, pointed questions, can you?
4. Does a discussion group of 1500 really mean that much to private clubs?
No, most members of private clubs have little interest in the history of golf architecture. Like I said it is a very small group of mostly non-members who are pushing this.


 

[Bill_McBride]

Glancing at this thread is like going to a hockey game to see the fights, or a NASCAR race hoping for a major crash.

Or watching a World Series game to see when the Texas bullpen implodes.   

[Steve Lang]

  I still wonder who has rights to the screen play..  all that's needed is a diversionary femme fatale reporter, some money laundering or fiscal subterfuge, maybe a dead body , ooops, i think there already is one, two, man the DG is down 300 members to 1201.   

[Jeff_Brauer]

I have done two google searches since this came up using key words Drexel University and Horatio Gates Lloyd.  If they were digital and sent to TePaul on disc, I am pretty sure they would have been in Drexel's on line data base.

For that matter, in the little historic research I have done, not all relatively unimportant items, which these might be, have been scanned, and thus, probably wouldn't have been sent to TePaul on disc.

I could be wrong, but I think they don't exist, or at least, haven't been found, and this whole thread is moot, but displaying the back and forth tendencies of its principles, albeit in more civil fashion. 

I wish it were true!  We need some new Merion dox to argue about!

[TEPaul]

 " I still wonder who has rights to the screen play.."  



SteveL:

Are you joking? I have the rights to the screen play. Why do you think I keep participating on these Merion threads?


Andrew Mitchell:

Once again I need to tell you that photo you posted above of MacWood and Moriarty (aka Baxter and Chester) with Stephanie Wei is absolutely hilarious, and not to even mention the fact I never realized their faces are so similar they must be brothers or at least first cousins. I did not click on the bottom of your post to bring up the website of Stephanie Wei until this morning though. Interesting little golfer gal and very hot looking too. I think she may be the one who wrote about her exhiliration of standing behind Tiger at the range at Pebble Beach during a former US Open and how amazed she was that he stopped practicing and came back and chatted her up in a remarkably friendly way. But now we have a much clearer idea why don't we?

More humor, Andrew---more humor please!

[TEPaul]

Jeffrey Sir:

I would love to discuss with you how I came by those Drexel docs but of late I have become quite impressed by David Moriarty's MO on here of refusing to discuss with any of us his ongoing discussions with Merion GC and MCC in his belated attempt to gain research access to their archives and "vet"   what we have relayed on these threads about the 1910, 1911 records of MCC. I think he is absolutely right about that----eg that is a private matter between him and those clubs and it's none of our damn business.

In the same vein, my discussions and dealings with Drexel are none of your damn business or the damn biz-nuss of anyone else on here.   All I can tell you is that they came my way through a new and very comprehensive fund-raising campaign with Drexel involving the entire extended family of Anthony J. Drexel. I can't be completely certain of it at this time but "to the best my knowledge" (a brilliant and usual qualifier or our own Tom MacWood) those Horatio Gates Lloyd papers came out of the wine-cellar of one nee Eleanor Biddle (a distant cousin of mine) who was married to Horatio Gates Lloyd's son.

I could tell you more, Jeffrey, but I probably shouldn't as I might have to kill you.

[Dan_Callahan]

It's hard to believe this is a conversation between adults.

I have three young boys, and if I overheard a similar conversation I'd tell them to either show what they've got or stop teasing.

From an outsider looking in who knows very little about the history of this dispute, that's what this looks like. Childish teasing.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()