When did Golf Club Atlas "jump the shark"?

[TEPaul]

"BUT... this new site would need a very dedicated moderator (a) to keep out those uninvited;  and (b) to monitor posts and suspend and throw out offenders.  Absent that it just plain won't work.  Don't know if you saw it, but Darren has nominated YOU for this job.  I assume you have the 16-20 free hours each day required for these tasks?"

TomH:

I realize that--it'd have to have a very active moderator and everyone would have to be aware of that. Darren Kilfara thought I should be the moderator? I didn't know that and I'm stunned and would never think of such a thing! I wouldn't even expect them to let me into that alternate discussion group section.

But if they did and I were to ACCEPT such a MISSION IMPOSSIBLE, I, of course, would have to be completely OBJECTIVE, as all good moderators must be, and I would ONLY ACCEPT it under ONE CONDITION!

That condition would be that Pat Mucci would be the co-moderator with me! Didn't expect that did you? But I'm serious.

It'd be a good balance because he disagrees with 98% of what I say and I know what he says is wrong 98% of the time so it would be a perfect balance. One might even call it the "Big World" theory of the Golfclubatlas.com alternate discussion group section!  

The other benefit is JakaB is known to hate the "Big World" theory so the thought of him wondering what's going on in there to destroy the future of architecture is appealing beyond words!

[JakaB]

TomP,

I think this site is bad for golf and its archtecture...you think it is good...name one good thing that this site has done either for golf or architecture and if I can't name two things that are bad for each one you name...I will admit I am wrong and try to promote the site in a more positive manner in the future.  I give you the two to one edge because I understand how very much more difficult it is to be constructive than desructive...I will also relate my things to yours in proper context so we don't produce only so much dribble...or in my case double dribble.

[David Wigler]

JakaB,

I will supply the first answer for Tom.  Infrequent GCA contributor Bruce Matthews created what I believe will be a masterpiece called Angels Crossing in Western Michigan.  It will open this spring and I expect you to join me at the grand opening.  Bruce told me point blank that the inspiration for him to produce a classical golf course with a Redan, Biarritz, Cape, Volcano, Eden, etc. was GCA.  Western Michigan will now have one of the best valued public courses in the country and GCA is no small part of the reason.

[JakaB]

David,

Two replies to what you propose..as I promised.

1. I think GCA.com has made architects talk like they hire publicists...They might need too...I don't know but spin is never a good thing..

2. I think GCA.com has led to too many historians getting into the architecture business...the hiring of authors and historians are bogus publicity stunts.

Thanks for the invite...Bruce sounds like a great guy..

[ForkaB]

Having had a chance to re-look at the old threads, I think we have jumped the shark backwards.  Things are a LOT better than they were in the "good old days" when comments were few, far between, self-centered and mostly naive.  If there is ever a poster child for the value of diversity, the current un-monitored version of GCA is surely it.

Also, if there is ever an argument against the strict "moderation" that Darren and others advocate, just look at those old "threads."  They have been so moderated to death that they have no substance, and certainly no soul.

If that's the ideal, by all menas set up that "GCA for the In-Crowd" sub-site, and let us peons talk about the things that interest us, golf and otherwise, without having "soup Nazis" tell us what we should be reading or even saying.

[frank_D]

i'm sorry but i don't get the comparison -

the fonz as entertainment was desperate for ratings [for financial purposes - advertising] and the show eventually ended

this forum of the various and sundry postings subjectively identified here as OT or which are objectionable can be ignored and passed over

what's the connection ?

if a certain highbrowed / chatty group wants to secede from the chatty / highbrowed group or vice versa - why not offer up two discussion groups to eliminate mixing those who prefer not to mingle ?

unless of course the purpose is financial - like promoting golf tour packages or products / ideas specifically aimed for the "industry" types ?

i for one have directly contacted Ron Whitten by telephone each time i attempted to reach him - so i do NOT need this site cleared like some seem to imply

maybe i'm missing the point - like i said openning - i don't get it

[RJ_Daley]

A couple of more positives evolved from GCA as it has been. (of course a contrarian can and would argue and deny anything I would state here), but here goes...

Several people from superintendents to green committee people have come on this site (sometimes saying what they were but not who they were by name) and asked or threw out some issue about remodelling/restoration/maintenance meld, to be hashed over.  I assume they do so inorder to get informed IDEAS.

Architects, including Jeff Brauer have said they have incorporated some of the things we talk about here, either on new courses, or remodel/restore jobs, to some degree.  

Construction people have weighed in on techniques.  And, developers have weighed in here.  Ken Bakst, Mike Keiser, Mr. Robertson in NZ, Mr Ramsey in OZ, the gentleman from Angels Crossing (I'm sorry his name escapes me just now) and just several others.  I assume they get IDEAS and INSPIRATIONS here John Kavanaugh!!!

I'm sorry, but what seems to be happening here is that many are expressing good points from different perspectives.  But, John Kavanaugh is becoming only a contrarian for the sake of tearing down everything - from what I can observe as his posts are regressing lately.  

John, in your heart of hearts, would you be glad to say some vitriolic and critical, cynical, biting thing to long time contributors here that you don't agree with, and see them hurt to the point of ending a relationship with a discussion community that maybe - just maybe - is an important part of their day?

Can't you just make your point without throwing bombs and taking out everyone in the general proximity?  You have been witty and entertaining, and many times insightful.  But, don't you see you are regressing to the roll of a discourse vandal?

I don't want to hurt your feelings any more than anyone elses here.  But, I honestly do think you need to re-examine your motives and methods here, because I sense it goes beyond that of contrarian trying to present the other side of debates.  I really hope I am wrong and miss-understanding the situation.

[Mike_Golden]

In what will most likely be my last post on GCA I need to tell most of you that there is a world beyond an internet discussion group and you should all get lives.  This is a discussion group about golf architecture and the community of people that participate, both of which are important if something is to be sustained for a long period of time.  Do any of  you really believe that there would still be a discussion group if most of us hadn't met so many others and formed friendships that stretch beyond a discussion thread?

If an elite discussion group floats your boat go start one and do me a favor, don't email me the URL.

And JakaB, it isn't in your best interests to insult Tommy or his love of golf architecture.  I suppose, though, that it just makes you feel better and helps you cope with your clearly well below average intelligence.

[JakaB]

I should not have named names...post is modified.  I need some time to reply to RJ...give me a few.   I don't know Golden..sorry to see you go.

[JakaB]

Several people from superintendents to green committee people have come on this site (sometimes saying what they were but not who they were by name) and asked or threw out some issue about remodelling/restoration/maintenance meld, to be hashed over.  I assume they do so inorder to get informed IDEAS.

Architects, including Jeff Brauer have said they have incorporated some of the things we talk about here, either on new courses, or remodel/restore jobs, to some degree.  

Construction people have weighed in on techniques.  And, developers have weighed in here.  Ken Bakst, Mike Keiser, Mr. Robertson in NZ, Mr Ramsey in OZ, the gentleman from Angels Crossing (I'm sorry his name escapes me just now) and just several others.  I assume they get IDEAS and INSPIRATIONS here John Kavanaugh!!!

I'm sorry, but what seems to be happening here is that many are expressing good points from different perspectives.  But, John Kavanaugh is becoming only a contrarian for the sake of tearing down everything - from what I can observe as his posts are regressing lately.  

In jumping of shark thinking....Thinking that Mike Keiser improved his resorts because of this web site is way out of line...Friars Head is a better course because of GCA...puke.  You can't be serious...do you think we are a bunch of 12yr old Mesiahs teaching the teachers....get your head out of your temple my friend.   We are a bunch of golfers having a laugh...the professionals are out building courses... not reading GCA looking for new IDEAS..

modified response to follow..

Can you honestly tell me that you think Bill Coore or Ben Crenshaw found one additional architectural feature because of a thought they read on here or a picture they saw posted...do you have any idea the things those men have seen in person and the experiences they have first hand...wasn't Sand Hills pre GCA...this is one way I see this site hurting golf....The only influence this site possibly has is in the ratings game...influencing other raters...is that good for golf.  If you think so defend it..

[Darren_Kilfara]

If there's one thing this thread has taught me (which I knew already, but it bears repeating/reinforcing), it's that you can't have a strongly held opinion about anything on the internet without offending at least one other person, and usually just about everybody.

Cheers,
Darren

[ian]

Did the fonz make it over the shark?

[RJ_Daley]

Contributors on GCA are not so much teaching the teachers, whether they be developer's like the Bakst's or Keiser's of the world nor their architects like C&C or Doak.  They are PARTICIPATING in an ongoing discussion of ideas, and any wise man will tell you - if they are paying attention - one learns from that process, no matter how small the point of learning may be.  Guys like the above are successful and intelligent because they do discuss, pay attention to their market, clients, and those who are passionate about these issues.  They know they are just part of a community of people that share interests.  If all that didn't matter, then burn the books, delete the discussion, and go forth in a uninformed state of being, howling invectives at the moon.

I really do think that Keiser's complex received a boost, a hightened or more prompt recognition due to all the buzz on GCA.  I would hope he, Doak, and others would recognise that GCA has been a launch pad for their endeavors.  Not an entity that they would have depended on for success, but one they could count on for recognition in a specific targetted sector or the market that helped in some manner more so than if GCA did not exist at all.  

How soon would Cape Kidnappers, Barnbougle, Friars Head, St Andrews Beach, Kingsley Club, Black Mesa and many others have come to your attention had there been no GCA.  After you destroy GCA, you can go after the magazines and writers and call them irrelavant too.

Why do you think these people I named as Archies, Supers, construction personnel, developers, writers, historians and such bother to come on GCA, if not to learn 'SOMETHING"?  Do you think they just come on here to laugh at a bunch of old white men typing away in their pajamas?  Is that about it for you John?  Do I amuuuuse you? (said like Joe Pesci)  What color are your pajamas?

 

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Tom Huckaby,

Patrick:

You can't possibly be that naive.  There is literally no way to protect such a site from intrusion from those who would want to do so, absent a moderator.

You can't be that obtuse  

Of course it can be done without strong moderator involvement.  

The key is in the selection process.

You won't be able to participate unless you've been pre-qualified.  And, if your behavior is unacceptable, when Ran reviews the participation and participants after an initial phase, he'll make the call as to whether you stay or go.  
I think that provides all of the self discipline you'll ever need.

[RJ_Daley]

Pat, I can just visualize Ran sitting there in his paisley smoking jacket, in the den, seated at the computer, puffing away on his pipe, with child and wife nearby, and moderating and prequalifying, and facilitating our little community of lofty architectural ideals discussion.  I heard he is a man of leisure, but my he must have something better to do than that, I pray!

[Michael Dugger]

This thread stinks.  What is this all about?  We are a bunch of people who admire golf courses.  We come here to talk about it.  Sometimes we learn something we didn't know, sometimes we argue.  

That goes for any walk in life.  

GCA is good even if it is just for the great pictures of NGLA!  I love this place!

[Darren_Kilfara]

For what it's worth, all that "strong moderator involvement" requires is a moderator willing to read (or even skim) all (or even most) of the posts written on a daily basis, and to respond with a short message to any offending ones. On most days, once the parameters of moderated discussion are established, I'd guess that the moderator will be writing zero messages. How much time and effort would that take?

Here's the real secret of my master plan to hire Tom Paul as chief moderator: he'd have so much less work to do than anyone else!

Cheers,
Darren

[TEPaul]

I just noticed Jeff F's "bunch of babies" post a page or so back. I like that--good show Jeff F. I think that quack Katz told us all to go to our rooms and take naps a couple of pages before that--perhaps we should have listened to him.    

[Jeff Fortson]

Mr. Mucci,

With all due respect, I suggest you create your own website and pre-qualify all of the people you want to talk with yourself.  To suggest that this website should fit your model of decorum, ideals, and "pre-qualified" membership is preposterous.  

Mr. Mucci, I have enjoyed many of your posts and find you to be quite educated and informed on the topic of GCA.  However, your exclusionary, good 'ol boys club mentality reeks of arrogance and greatly disappoints me.  I would have thought better of you.

One question.....

Would you qualify for "certification" to join the discussion group?  If so, what qualifications do you have in the field?  Have you ever designed a course?  Are you a superintendant?  Are you a golf professional?  Don't try to tell me greens chairmen count.  Being elected greens chairman by your frat brothers is hardly a qualification.

I look forward to your opinions in the future as I am confident they will appear on this forum and not some facist led Reichstag.


Jeff F.

[THuckaby2]

Patrick/Darren:

Neither of you cannot possibly be this inexperienced.
 
Just how do you plan on keeping out the uninvited?

The ONLY way to do so is via a moderator with extreme vigilance, immediately removing those who find their way in.

You guys don't think people will be able to get past whatever security you set up?  Please.  It's remarkably easy, and this too has been proven time and time again.  Set up this group in an attempt to keep people out and as I say, they just treat it as a challenge to get in.

THAT is the issue here, far more than improper posts.

TH

[JakaB]

I don't know Tom Doak at all and have only played his worse effort...but the thought that one blade of grass or one grain of sand is improved at Pacific Dunes because of this site put me on one knee.  Tom Doak has a finite amount of time to shape and sharpen his personal experience...the time he spends on this site could be put to better use...but I think he likes golf and this is a nice place to get a kick....plus who couldn't use a dose of love now and then...and baby we can spoon out all the love an architect who panders to us can stomach.

I think the majority of discussion or raterspeak on this site stifles creativity in golf....the it could have been, should have been, is or is not a redan crap stinks to high heaven....what if an architect designs a half redan and his raterspeak tells him..go full redan...go for the points...what if he does this and a half redan fits the land and fits the demographic of his client.....this site is so one sided that I am called a contrarian because I don't think like the group.   I simply try to never make a post to make friends or gain access...and it has cost me both.   This is where I am an idiot by popular standards and should be ignored...wheres PJ when I need him.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

JakaB,

I'm not so sure that I would totally dismiss the impact of the site.
The site has educated many and heightened the awareness of many individuals interested in architecture and related topics.

I don't know what the ultimate affect of that has been, but, I believe it has had a positive influence.

If you asked me to cite exactly where that positive influence resides, I'd say in many green chairman and green committee members, and I believe that the influence of the site has manifested itself on many a golf course, whether it be a tree clearing program, opposition to a tree planting program, introduction and/or support of a restoration project and many other areas.

And, it may have had an influence on an architect or two.

I know that I've learned a great deal from the site, although not one iota of that knowledge was derived from TEPaul.

The expanding number of inane, non-architecturally related topics is not healthy for the improvement, let alone, the survival of this site.

But, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

[Darren_Kilfara]

Huckster, you've at last convinced me: I'm the Pollyanna.  

[JakaB]

Pat,

I don't think the site is without merit...I just think the bad outweighs the good.   Look at all the great courses built before 1999...and then compare the ones built since...how did the old guys do it without us...

I would gladly serve as moderator and delete every damn non-architectural post in no less than 24 hours gauranteed...I will even post a bond of some sort to prove it.

[THuckaby2]

Huckster, you've at last convinced me: I'm the Pollyanna.  

Well that was one goal!

And I swear I am not trying to be negative, or a prick, or anything of the sort (thought it sure does come off that way)... I have just seen this happen several times over the last 12 years or so that I've been participating in groups like this.

This site ain't broke, and don't need fixin'.

TH