[Tom MacWood]

I was going to post this on the Shinnecock thread, but I think there is chance it might be back on track despite the efforts of Mike C and TEP to derail it.

Geoff Childs, it was good to speak with you today. Your prediction was right on the money and your timing was incredibly accurate. I mean we're talking here timing in a matter of hours. You predicted Shinnecock and I predicted Oakmont. You're good, my friend, but I've always known that!

Mike
Are you referring to this bizarre post? Who knows what Geoff told TEP, and whatever he said, why TEP felt compelled to post it here is strange. Normal people don't do that. I'm sure if Geoff wanted to get involved he would post something himself, and by the way Geoff can get pretty passionate about the subject, I wouldn't consider him an innocent bystander.

TEP has always had a screw loose, but I think he is getting worse. Now he has become paranoid about our motivations, as if there is some kind of coordinated effort. I could care less about which clubs are associated with TEP (& Wayne). Myopia? TEP spent sometime with the historian, big deal. I spent good amount of time with the historians at Oyster Harbors and Congress Lake, am I now associated with those clubs? Hell no. Perhaps you could start a separate thread where they all could be listed, entitled: 'Clubs Associated with TEP & Wayne, tread lightly.'  

I'm sure when the Flynn book comes out it will be very informative, but beyond that why should anyone give more than a passing interest to what TEP has to say about golf architecture history? You can learn everything TEP knows by picking up Cornish & Whitten, and as far as I know Wayne still dedicated to Flynn and hopefully doesn't share the same paranoia as TEP, though he does send me some strange emails periodically.

And the idea that a historian owes it to a club to share all his findings before publishing is stupid. Only someone who has never spent hours upon hours researching and writing would come up with such idiotic statement. These are not state secrets or embarrassing personal information; this is golf course architecture. Golf architecture history is an interesting subject for a few wack jobs, beyond that nobody cares.

[Tom MacWood]

Perhaps were could avoid future difficulties if we created a list of courses associated with TEP & Wayne (and maybe also explain the association), clubs that should be off limits to future research (by someone other than TEP & Wayne or someone they designate). Once this list is created I would suggest the USGA archive site should place an asterisk by those clubs that are profiled on their site.

* This is a club associated with TEP & Wayne, any further research requires permission from these gentlemen.  

[Mike Cirba]

Tom MacWood,

At least you hit the nail squarely on the head with your last statement.   

 

[Phil_the_Author]

Ran,

This thread is just plain wrong. It is beyond disrespectful and is nothing more than an opportunity to argue. There are more thanh enough of those threads on here without producing a pointedly-personal topic for discussion.

Please remove this.

[Tom MacWood]

Phil
This thread is designed as a place to vent without screwing up a very good thread. The Shinnecock thread was in the process of being derailed by selfish people not interested in the subject. See your last post over there.

[PCCraig]

End this.

[DMoriarty]

Ran,

This thread is just plain wrong. It is beyond disrespectful and is nothing more than an opportunity to argue. There are more thanh enough of those threads on here without producing a pointedly-personal topic for discussion.

Please remove this.

Phillip, what is "just plain wrong" is what TEPaul and his loyal lapdog have done to my Shinnecock thread.

This thread makes some sense.   Those two are comparing what I did to the National Enquirer and such, and trying to make the case that such posts have no place on GCA.com.  Why?  

I for one would like a list of courses where I am expected to tread lightly.   Who knew I was not allowed to even discuss the origins of Shinnecock?  Saint Flynn was not at Shinnecock until 40 years later.       Yet they still claim ownership over the history and have the nerve to tell me, and you, that WE NEEDED TO COME TO THEM BEFORE WE EVEN POST ON THE TOPIC.

They have gone too far and this has gone on two long.

[Mike_Young]

It's good that historians have such passion....
but ain't no one gonna win this talk...
so I say let's make it pay per view and raise $$$ for the website...

[PCCraig]

It's good that historians have such passion....
but ain't no one gonna win this talk...
so I say let's make it pay per view and raise $$$ for the website...

You would actually pay to read these arguements?

[Mike_Young]

Sort of like watching  this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUZH_HNBrbs&NR=1

I would pay to watch

[DMoriarty]

Pat Craig,

Have you seen what TEPaul and Cirba have done to my Shinnecock thread?  Why not be productive and end that sort of thing?     This thread is an honest assessment of someone who is obviously out of control and needs help.    Those of you who protect him are doing him no favors.  

[Bob_Huntley]

I could be wrong but I thought this was the "Season of Goodwill to all Men."

Bob

[TEPaul]

"I could be wrong but I thought this was the "Season of Goodwill to all Men."


LOL

Me too, Bob. Whatever this is I hope you had a very Merry Christmas and I wish you a most Happy New Next Year!

[PCCraig]

Pat Craig,

Have you seen what TEPaul and Cirba have done to my Shinnecock thread.   Why not be productive and end that sort of thing?     This thread is an honest assessment of someone who is obviously out of control and needs help.    Those of you who protect him are doing him no favors. 

I'm not protecting any one of the participants of these fights. If someone can't be objective to information, then they can't judge or discuss the validity of it. I understand you think you're the objective one, trying to search for truth despite the Merion crowd's best efforts. But with your obvious dislike and hatred, it's impossible to give even your very thoughtful research validity. The same goes for TEPaul and Cirba and Wayne and whoever is in on the fight.

It's tiring and in the end good work and information is overlooked because people only want to see the train crash.

[Sean_A]

I despise all the epic Moriarty/TomP/Mike C/Tommy Mac threads not so much because of their childish nature or the poor light they shine on this site.  No, more because they represent an incredible amount of wasted resources - such a valuable commodity shoved down the garbage disposal - its disgraceful.  Imagine what these knuckleheads could have accomplished by now with collaboration?  Such a waste and yet I am sure there is a large amount of regret on all sides.  So long as there is that I am hopeful this lot can turn a few corners even if the first turn is a sabbatical from GCA.com.

Ciao   

[DMoriarty]

Did you, TEPaul?

Then explain your outrageous behavior on the Shinnecock thread.  Does Goodwill have a different meaning among those who you describe as "people of worth?"     Does it entail doing everything you can to tear down someone else's work before you had even bothered to read it or consider it?

I want no part of your version of Goodwill, no matter what the Season.  

______________________

Pat Craig,

My post was on the 1891 origins of Shinnecock.  It had absolutely nothing to to with TEPaul, Merion, Wayne, or anything that had ever been contentious in the past.  

How is it my fault or my doing when TEPaul inserts himself into subjects where he has no expertise or knowledge?  Can I control what histories TEPaul chooses to pollute?    I knew he and Wayne claimed the entire mid-atlantic region from the D.C. area through New Jersey.  And Boston.  And substantial portions of the South.  But Shinnecocck in 1891?   How am I to know that?

Obviously there is good reason for this thread.   Let's have a list of course histories that TEPaul and Wayne think they control. That way, we will know whether to tread lightly or to avoid the issue all together.  
______________________________

Sean,

Do you have a problem with my posts on Shinnecock?   Did they deserve the response they got?  

I know that the tendency is to blame all sides equally in these situations, but all sides are not equal.  One side researches and the other side tries to build themselves up by tearing down that research.  So please quit assuming that this is about bad blood on all sides.  Because my Shinnecock work had nothing to do with bad blood.   In fact the focus was INTENTIONALLY NARROW as an attempt to avoid bad blood.

Collaboration is impossible so long as TEPaul insists on trying to control the histories of these clubs, despite the facts.  Plus, TEPaul has nothing to offer except for access.  He is not a researcher of any sort.   All his information comes from course histories and Whitten.   Even when he has had access to internal club records he as proven that he cannot and/or will not accurately convey the information.

And look at the response I got.

[PCCraig]

Did you, TEPaul?

Then explain your outrageous behavior on the Shinnecock thread.  Does Goodwill have a different meaning among those who you describe as "people of worth?"     Does it entail doing everything you can to tear down someone else's work before you had even bothered to read it or consider it?

I want no part of your version of Goodwill, no matter what the Season.  

______________________

Pat Craig,

My post was on the 1891 origins of Shinnecock.  It had absolutely nothing to to with TEPaul, Merion, Wayne, or anything that had ever been contentious in the past.  

How is it my fault or my doing when inserts himself into subjects where he has no expertise or knowledge.   Can I control what istories this pathetic excuse for a man chooses to pollute.    I knew they claimed the entire mid-atlantic region from the D.C. area through New Jersey.  And Boston.  And substantial portions of the South.  But Shinnecocck in 1891?   How am I to know that?

Obviously there is good reason for this thread.   Let's have a list of course histories that TEPaul and Wayne think they control. That way, we will know whether to tread lightly or to avoid the issue all together.  


, about which TEPaul thinks he contorls old man decides to pollute pathetic excuse for a man inserts himself

I know your post was about Shinnecock. But what you, Tom Macwood, Cirba, TEPaul, Wayne, etc..., etc..., don't realize is that one side isn't winning, in fact, both sides are loosing. Even if your first post on Shinnecock was great, it has no credibility when motives are questionable.

[Michael Dugger]

If simple truth is sometimes the goal here, then the title of this thread hits the nail on the head.

And I agree with Pat Craig.  Complete fiasco....embarrassing. 

No golf club history is worth preserving (or whatever  ) if it means you must stoop to such immature and disrespectful lows to accomplish such.

And folks sometimes wonder why the public thinks of golfers as elite?

[DMoriarty]

I know your post was about Shinnecock. But what you, Tom Macwood, Cirba, TEPaul, Wayne, etc..., etc..., don't realize is that one side isn't winning, in fact, both sides are loosing. Even if your first post on Shinnecock was great, it has no credibility when motives are questionable.

What on Earth is questionable about my motives in those posts?   They were about Shinnecock in 1891 for God sakes!

[Sean_A]

Sean,

Do you have a problem with my posts on Shinnecock?   Did they deserve the response they got?  

I know that the tendency is to blame all sides equally in these situations, but all sides are not equal.  One side researches and the other side tries to build themselves up by tearing down that research.  So please quit assuming that this is about bad blood.  Because my Shinnecock work had nothing to do with bad blood.   In fact the focus was INTENTIONALLY NARROW as an attempt to avoid bad blood.

Collaboration is impossible so long as TEPaul insists on trying to control the histories of these clubs, despite the facts.  Plus, TEPaul has nothing to offer except for access.  He is not a researcher of any sort.   All his information comes from course histories and Whitten.   Even when he has had access to internal club records he as proven that he cannot and/or will not accurately convey the information.

And look at the response I got.

David

Your protestations aside, I don't need to make any assumptions to know there is a river of bad blood flowing between you lot.  Like it or not, you are guilty by association.  I have a lot of time for your research (and Tommy Mac's), but I have to wonder why you constantly engage in "debate" with TomP and Mike C.  If there can be no collobaration - ignore them and carry on - even if it means ditching this site.  Force that lot to be shut out or write their own response on a separate thread/In My Opinion piece - which we regretfully never saw concerning Merion despite there being ample time and resources to get te job done.  These guys are obviously being distracted by easier methods of response - don't engage. 

Ciao

[DMoriarty]

Sean,

Sound advice but easier said than done.   Would you just turn the other cheek if these guys were constantly misrepresenting and disparaging you, your motives, and your ideas?   Whether you posted or not?   Would you let stand outright lies about you and your posts?  

In the past I have disengaged, taking long breaks from posting of many months (and years) at a time.  And when I have, these two "gentleman" continue with their misrepresentations and attempts at character assassination, despite my absence.   And unfortunately their posts influence what people believe about the histories of these clubs.  

It may be a personal failing on my part, but I have trouble ceding the history of golf course architecture to incompetent zealots who use this forum advance their own personal agendas.   Plus, this is supposed to be a place for the open and frank discussion of golf course architecture.  There should be no place for the kind of garbage they pulled with my piece on Shinnecock.    I shouldn't have to run away with my tail between my legs just because Ran and other participants are unwilling to stand up to the resident bully and his loyal lapdog.    

Perhaps it would be more pleasant for me and others if I would cower when they act up, but it is not in my nature.

[Tom MacWood]

Sean
I don't think David or I'm guilty of constantly engaging TEP in debate. My interests are broad and I could care less if a particular subject is of interest to TEP or not. If he is involved in a thread I don't automatically jump in, and I'll only get involved if I some insight to add. In his case it doesn't matter (and Mike Cirba has increasingly gotten that way too)...if he sees my name he will jump in full force even if he knows nothing about the subject, which is the majority of the time. Here is a recent example with HJ Tweedie. With that subject you would have thought you couldn't get more further removed from TEP, but without actually counting up the posts I'd guess he doubled everyone, including me. I've learned to live with it, but there are some threads that deserve better treatment, and the Shinnecock thread was one of them...hence this thread was born.

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,46602.0.html

And as far as the In My Opinion pieces are concerned no one is writing any. I would like to write and present more, but I'm still waiting for my last one to be posted. I'm not going to work that hard on something and not have it posted. It is also very discouraging to see how my other essays have been butchered by the change in format.

[Bill_McBride]

Sort of like watching  this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUZH_HNBrbs&NR=1

I would pay to watch

What percentage of NASCAR fans go to a race to see the race?  What percentage goes to maybe see a good wreck?

[George Pazin]

This situation is by far the most vexing for me, in regards to the site. Neither "side" does itself any favors with its style of posting - yet both "sides" frequently offer some of the most compelling posts on the site.

Wish I had anything remotely resembling a solution...at present, the only solution is for every to simply accept the ugliness in return for getting the good stuff.

Both sides are too valuable to lose. I hope everyone who dislikes the ugliness understands and accepts that.

[Kevin Lynch]

David,

I echo everything Sean has said.  Engaging in shouting matches (whether right or wrong) isn't going to do anything but derail the productive debate & discussion that your threads are intended to provoke.  You get upset when your motives are questioned - I understand that.  However, at the same time, using phrases like "lapdog" and "revisionist" doesn't do much to help you sustain the moral high ground.

Like Pat Craig said, you need to make your points about the research only and let others make their conclusions regarding motivations.

Look, if you keep providing objective research and evidence, and people who disagree provide no contrary evidence except questions of your motives, that will become apparent without you needing to engage on a personal level.  Until you can simply ignore the personal stuff and stick to objective facts, those threads are going to remain a waste of time.

That's not "cowering" - it's called taking the high road.  If it were easy to do, it would be called the "easy road."

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()