Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture => Topic started by: Ted Sturges on October 02, 2002, 06:54:43 PM
-
Time never stands still does it? Ran and John started this site a few years ago, and it grew, and it grew, and it grew. Then, "Golf's Most Loved Figure" has his mug in Sports Illustrated, and the site grows some more. The old gang doesn't hang out as much around here as they used to. Too bad. I have learned so much from some of you who don't frequent the site as much these days. I too am guilty of not participating as much as I once did.
What this site is (to me)-
This site is a miracle. Through this site, I've made some great friends and met some fascinating people. I've met people like Tom MacWood, Robert Huntley, Steve Smyers, Brad Miller, Khristine Januzik, Richard Mandell, Bob Harrison and of course, Tommy Nacarrato. I've shared rounds of golf with people on both coasts that I had not met (other than at this site) prior to meeting them at the 1st tee on those special days. I would NEVER had made many of these acquaintances if it were not for this site. How cool is that? This site is a place to LEARN. My mother told me when I was about 10 years old that I would have a much easier time learning with my ears open and my mouth shut. (Advice to GCA participants: There are some really smart people who are willing to help the rest of us learn more about architecture at this site. If we stop telling everyone else how much we (don't) know, and ask more questions and listen to the answers you get, you just might learn something). Have fun with it and enjoy the wealth of information this site can offer.
What this site isn't (to me)-
A general site on golf. (It's about the architecture stupid!) Please leave the non architecture topics to sites that cater to those topics. This site also isn't a place for lynchings and mean spirited posting. I know there are the occasional uninformed posters hanging out here, but who among you knew everything there was to know about architecture the day you were born (OK Ran, don't answer that question). All these fueds and wars really drag this site down (and is why, I believe, many of my favorite GCA'ers don't participate as much any more). PLEASE COME BACK! Anyway, enjoy the site for what it is (a place to make friends and learn about golf architecture) and when posting, apply the rule Ran always uses when he evaluates topics on this site: "What can we learn about architecture within this topic".
OK, I'll get off of my soap box now. Thanks for listening.
TS
-
Ted;
Tremendous post!
I would simply add that there is nothing at all wrong with passionate, strongly argued debates about golf courses and golf architecture, leaving personalities aside. People should feel free here to speak frankly about their likes and dislikes, but I'd encourage all of us to try to explain our tastes in a detailed way that stimulates further education and discussion.
-
Ted, Absolutely the best post of the year, and not just because you had my name in it!:)
I would like to express to ALL of you, and I can only assume that Ran would concur, is that this is a GOLF ARCHITECTURE site--PERIOD!
Ted outlines, If we stop telling everyone else how much we (don't) know, and ask more questions and listen to the answers you get, you just might learn something.
I too agree with this statement because even with all of the knowledge I have gained from all, I still learn more and more each day. You simply have to have an open mind and an open ear. If you think you know it all, then you really don't, no matter how passionate the argument. Its like going out time and time again to your favorite modern course, learning each and every nook and cranny of the course as well as how it plays to your game. Its what keeps you coming back again and again.
Let this TOPIC of Ted's be the rebirth of Golf Club Atlas, and welcome all that have joined us since the SI article. Make every question no matter how simple to some, even more interesting to all so we can keep furthering our minds on the subject.
And my list:
Things that amaze me the most about golf architecture that I have learned on Golf Club Atlas--
1. That golf courses and their architecture do parallel life in many more ways then most could ever think.
2. That the simplest of natural features are in most ways some of the Game's finest.
3. That Golf Club Atlas may be the new age or old university Philadelphia School, as far as when it comes to honoring the old masters as well as the modern artisans of OUR Golden Age. It is OUR job of hi-lighting these GREATS who go out of their way to prove to themselves as well as us, of the interpretation all while educating us in the process. It is also OUR job of showing the descrepencies of those who think that anything less then a full effort is futile. (For those of you architects who have gone to school, paid the price, and have had the opportunity to produce, we will always celebrate your efforts until it becomes nothing more then just another course in just another place. Golf Courses are much more then that. At least the good ones!
-
I pose a question then: Is the thread tittled "Tiger and The Ryder Cup" allowed into GCA ? It was a very poular thread that dealt mainly with Tiger, strategy, Curtis Strange...... There was not much about hard core GCA architecture. On the other side these events Ryder Cups, Majors and Tiger's play have a deep effect on the public's view of golf which puts pressure on architects to stretch old courses or build long new courses.
Thus is "Tiger and The Ryder Cup" on or off in the New GCA world ?
-
Ted,
Great post! As an architect I applaud the the honest and often no holds barred discussion on architecture. I e-mailed Ran when I signed on that what I liked best was that it was just not an "I like or I don't like" site on various courses and design. I have learned to appreciate certain criticisms of design and often people tend to view these criticisms negatively. But the worst discussion on architecture would be no discussion at all.
I have seen on other sites, non-golf course architecture related, where they have a separate board for other topics of discussion. Maybe Ran could add another board called the Lockeroom or the Grill or the 19th hole or some other cheesey name for these topics to be addressed.
-
Ted
Superb post!
I can't even remember how I found this site. Must have been from some search engine, but I can't remember what I was searching for. When I found the DG, I couldn't believe what I had stumbled on to. And I couldn't wait to get involved in the discussion. Only one problem though...it became apparent quick enough to me, that although I'm a decent player and had pretty strong ideas on what I liked and didn't like in golf courses, I didn't know **** about the "academia" of golf course architecture. I realized I was overmatched in that area, so most of my posts stuck to the area I know the most about...playing and how it relates to the architecture (or vice versa). But now a funny thing is happening to me:
I now have a rapidly developing thirst for more knowledge about the classics (courses and architects) and less of a need to feel like I need to blast my opinions on areas I've come to realize I have, at best, half-informed and half-baked ideas.
And so, I'd like to add my two cents on what this site is: Its about the architecture...but to me, more importantly, its about the people on here who have the knowledge and passion to discuss and inform and teach about gca. And, in the process, pass that passion on.
And so, Ted, as you say: "Anyway, enjoy the site for what it is (a place to make friends and learn about golf architecture)"
-
Hmmmm....
Ted makes some very good points. Obviously a wonderful by-product of this discussion group is meeting some GREAT people. I have met and played golf with too many to list here, all of whom I value, all of whom I consider good friends.
BUT... as a regular participant in threads like Tiger and Ryder Cup, I am a firm believe that golf course architecture cannot exist in a vacuum. That is, you can talk about the what Raynor would have done, where to put a bunker, is this course worthwhile etc. till the cows come home, but in the end the playing of the game matters most. Are these courses works of art to be looked at from afar, or are they living organisms to be PLAYED?
Obviously this is Ran's site and he has full autocratic power. If he comes on here and says he wants pure architecture discussions and nothing but, then that's it, end of story.
I just do believe "architecture" means a lot more than what others do... Tommy N. has it right - golf courses and their architecture do parallel life in many more ways then most could ever think - so prohibiting discussion of the "life" part of this equation seems shortsighted, to me.
Of course there are limits to this - we don't want inanities - but the every so often inane post can certainly be tolerated and even laughed at, if the overall discussion is good. And I still find the overall discussion level here to be fantastic.
Tommy N. can also attest that discussion groups come and go and this one is experiencing the normal life cycle of such ... too popular, too big leads to too many inane posts, the regulars complain and/or leave, some regulars stay, life goes on. I for one think this dg is great enough and has a strong enough group of "regulars" that we will survive the SI-related onslaught. It really hasn't been that bad to date... jeez you guys should have seen golfonline's grillroom and how horrible that got, from what was once a wonderful dg... Several regulars here were regulars there and they can attest to that.
So I'd just say hang in there guys - this is a fantastic dg - my God have I learned a lot here - this too shall pass.
TH
-
I am a relative newcomer, and I came to this site solely to better understand golf course architecture. But I am also the one who started the Tiger & The Ryder Cup thread--after asking for indulgence in starting a non-architecture topic. I assumed that it would be deleted if not appropriate, but that it was too topical not to be proposed as a subject. I have asked several other purely architecture questions. I will look to others who have been around longer to decide what is out of order, and would encourage more use of the delete button. I fully agree with the thoughts in the What This Site Is and Isn't post.
-
This is what the DG is to me...
First of all, I am 18, and in college studying turf(WE ARE PENN STATE!!!!). I actually don't get to play much at all, but I too have learned a great deal from this site. I too have been guilty of posting threads that deviate from architecture, but I have learned from them. I also have learned "how not to hi-jack my own thread!!!!" Anyway, I love reading all of your posts and opinions and being able to take all this information in and form my own opinions and so forth. This is a great distraction from school work and allows me to relax when I get stressful. To an extent it keeps me grounded, and focused on the ultimate goals of becoming a super and maybe even a designer. Anyway, so all of you who know a lot about arch. and don't post as much, get back on and help a young impressionable kid learn about the Great Golden Age Designers!!!
Thank you everyone,
Justin Zook
-
I think this was a great post myself, but what did we learn about course architecture from it?
Jeff F.
-
Justin - it is GREAT to have people "in the business" participate here, and although some may say you are "only 18", to me a student of turf is way more valuable here than some yahoo like me who just likes to talk! So please do chime in on whatever you want, I'd say.
I won't mention last Saturday's events, hate to kick a man while he's down. And what the hell, after the last two years, this season is a roaring success even with last Saturday's "event"....
TH
-
Ted,
Great post.
I would like to the see the Tiger and the Ryder cup posts go by the wayside, but retain the people who are posting them.
I remember reading the site for six months before I joined the DG. There was so much to learn in the DG and other facets of the site, that I felt I should get that under my belt first.
You summarized it so well, I will leave it at that.
Ben
-
Interesting. Ben, I know you and I have talked about MANY things besides golf course architecture... but we have always done so "off-line". So yeah, I'm not gonna get into the prospects of my beloved Sharks on here, but isn't Tiger and the Ryder Cup just SO "topical" given last weekend's Ryder Cup, in the "golf" context... that how could you love the game of golf and NOT talk about it, at least for Americans and Europeans? If Weir dominates in the next Presidents Cup, are you Canadians gonna be silent about it on this dg? I'd be the first one wanting to hear how the nation felt about that....
Yes, none of this involves golf "architecture". But is this site really to be that mundane? We can't talk about golf as its played at all?
Again, don't get me wrong, I don't want to go overboard and make this a PGA Tour dg. But the RC is one BIG event and to ignore it is to put one's head in the sand, right now anyway...
I'm at a loss as to what's wrong with that thread. Someone enlighten me.
Again, what Ran says goes.. so until he weighs in....
TH
-
I ask again, what have we learned about architecture from this thread? This all seems like a little bit of hypocrisy to me.
Jeff F.
-
Good points, Ted.
Re: the Ryder Cup type threads:
I believe Ran has stated in the past that when there are topical issues of the day, the site will allow discussion for a limited period of time, but that it reserves the right to terminate these discussions if it feels that things are either out of control or too dominating intheir presence. Speaking as one who frequently participates in said discussions, I think David has done a tremendous job indulging us, but I fully support any decisions to pull the plug on such threads.
As far as adding separate sideboards, good lord, haven't our hosts done much more than enough? If you want a sideboard, start one yourself.
Look forward to meeting more of you soon...
-
I'd say we can bear with it, Jeff. It's a chicken/egg thing. Where else could one discuss the status of the board and what is proper/improper than on the board itself? I guess this could be handled via email with Ran, but that man has enough to do.
TH
-
George: I concur 100% - thanks.
TH
-
Tom,
You are very correct in saying we have discussed other things, but always off the board.
I just feel that these discussions are best saved for the instant message option or email.
Jeff,
The point of the post would seemingly be to get the group back on architecture. A worthy endeavour indeed.
-
Ben - ok, gotcha. I just think George P. summed this up well - topical golf-reated matters aren't out of place here, so long as they remain civil, etc. That's why I have no problem with the ryder cup discussion....
TH
-
This thread can ultimately help us learn more about architecture. This individual thread will not help us learn anything about architecture, but if this thread stimulates us to get back to discussing primarily architecture in the DG, then in a way, it will help us learn. But someone must stimulate such change in some way, and I think Mr. Sturges has done so in this thread.
Also, deviation from architecture isn't alwasy a bad thing. I remember on September 11th in school, most teachers forgot their lesson plans, and allowed us to just talk about what happened, and get the emotion out.
Personally, I didn't agree with the game plan of the U.S. at the Ryder Cup. Because I love this country and because I love golf, and specifically match-play, I just felt the need to post on the Ryder Cup thread, kind of like when I spoke up in class.
Perhaps, talk of Majors, and other events like the Ryder Cup, Walker Cup, Presidents Cup could be allowed.
I don't mean to compare the events of Sept. 11th to our loosing of the Ryder Cup, please don't get me wrong here, but I think the analogy does a good enough job of showing what I mean. I think we all Americans who had a vested interest in golf were upset that we lost.
Justin Zook
P.S. One thing I forgot to mention in my previous post, is that this DG has helped me become a much better writer, and when you are still in school, this improvement has really benefited me so many ways! Anyway, that's another thing that this DG has helped me with and why this DG is important to me!
-
Well said, Justin. You are most definitely wise beyond your years, I'd say. Great thoughts most definitely!
TH
-
This is a good thread and I'm appreciative for it. I have to believe its in response to my other thread and if Ted or anyone can get this site back on track then I'm all for it. I've thought about this over the last few days and wondered if golf is a gentlemans game why should this site be any different?
I'll leave with an email that has been circulating and of all the people to send it to me, it was my wise mother.
Golf is an honorable game, with the overwhelming majority of players being honorable people who don't need referees.
Golfers don't scratch their privates on the golf course.
Golfers don't kick dirt on, or throw bottles at, other people.
Professional golfers are compensated in direct proportion to how well they play.
Golfers don't get per diem and two seats on a charter flight when they travel between tournaments.
Golfers don't hold out for more money, or demand new contracts, because of another player's deal.
Professional Golfers don't demand that the taxpayers pay for the courses on which they play.
When golfers make a mistake, nobody is there to cover for them or back them up.
The PGA Tour raises more money for charity in one year than the National Football League does in two.
You can watch the best golfers in the world up close, at any tournament, including the majors, all day, every day for $25 or $30. The cost for a seat in the nosebleed section at the Super Bowl will cost around $300 or more.
You can bring a picnic lunch to the tournament golf course, watch the best in the world and not spend a small fortune on food and drink. Try that at one of the taxpayer funded baseball or football stadium. I brought a Coke into Oriole Park at Camden Yards last year, and an usher came to my seat and told me I had to dispose of it, or I would not be allowed to stay in the stadium.
In golf you cannot fail 70% of the time and make $9 million a season, like the best baseball hitters (.300 batting average) do.
Golf doesn't change its rules to attract Fans.
Golfers keep their clothes on while they are being interviewed.
Golf doesn't have free agency.
In their prime, Greg Norman, Arnold Palmer and other stars would shake your hand and say they were happy to meet you. In his prime Jose Canseco wore
T-shirts that read ;Leave Me Alone.;
You can hear birds chirping on the golf course during a tournament.
Ladies are welcome players.
At a golf tournament (unlike at taxpayer funded sports stadium's and arenas) you won't hear a steady stream of four letter words and nasty name calling while you're hoping that no one spills beer on you.
Why I play golf. Now you know
-
Joel,
I happen to do some work for a very highly ranked professional golfer. You'd be amazed at what they get at each tournament, it's a hell of a lot more then a couple of plane tickets and a per diem!
Make no mistake about it, professional golfers are the number one prima donna's in the nation. Just ask a "non-American" pro for his comparision of the PGA Tour vs any other tour in the world, that's why they play here.
-
Just be careful what you wish for gentlemen, since the new Dg format the responses are running an anemic 5% to views.
Theres a whole lotta folks out there lurking and not writing.
Now, I'm no doyen, but I put up a bunker thread yesterday that got 1 response, in the old days at least 10 people would have at least chided me for a shitty topic, yet we get 45 written responses on yardage markers on sprinkler heads?
The regulars are gettin' tired or bored and the newbies are intimidated to post, pure architecture threads are a nice goal, but until we can archive the threads from the old format its tough to find an original topic. Some of those old threads had 100 "nuts and bolts" responses cogent to the topic and could spawn several other threads. I just think were in a little slump,
but I sure wouldn't put any pressure on the new guys worrying about whats pure.
End of my $.02
-
Ed:
Could not have been put any better. While there are some topics that stray from the pure architecture it's not all that bad.
The discussions of Augusta, Ken Venturi, etc. were timely and entertaining and during these threads we do tend to learn something about courses, how they play and what people think of them.
Almost everything in golf revolves around the architecture of the course including the new technologies on balls, and clubs.
Heck it's not really a stretch to say the Ken Venturi thread related to architecture because so many things he said and tried to explain over the years revolved around the courses, how they play, what type of shots are required, etc. Isn't this all dictated primarily by the architecture.
Mean spirited posts have no place, ignore them. Light hearted or humorous posts, enjoy them.
Long Live GCA and Golf's Most Beloved.
That's my $.02
Fairways and Greens (They gotta' be architecture)
Dave
-
None of us, even the Doyens, stick to only architecture. Check your own posting history, you may be suprised.
The golf talk can be as interesting as the architecture. Speaking for myself, I don't come hear for an education, I come here because its enjoyable. And dammit, I usually learn something in the process (that's the bonus).
A little courtesy would fix more problems than a strict agenda of golf architecture.
-
Well put Ian Andrew.
Cheers,
Dave
-
Ted,
The site is what you put into it, and what you extract from it.
-
"What can we learn about architecture within this topic"
The model participants for this site have always been Ran and John. You will not find a more well travelled twosome. I don't know any two who have seen as much. I know Ran is a serious golf course rater and I don't know if John is or was, but he would make a hell of a rater. But I guarentee rating status or no rating status, these two would have carried on in their pursuits. Pasion is what drives them. Yet, with all their expertise, they are also the most inquisitive dual I have met. They will express their exceedingly well-read and well-traveled opinions, but they are more likely to ask you to express yours and share what you have discovered. And both are true gentleman, with never an in your face word -- rarely.
This site is full of golf course raters and golf course collecters and well travelled amateurs who are anxious to express their expert opinions (rating). But those opinions pale in comparison to the give and take that the Morrissetts originally created on this site.
-
Well said re Ran and John, Tom - though I've never met either, I have spoken to Ran and that was great fun... and their efforts in creating and maintaining this web site are absolutely great fun... now if each would only post here once in awhile! ;)
BTW, it's interesting to me that as I type this, the Tiger & Ryder Cup thread has 114 responses, the VERY thoughtful and erudite "bunker location" thread has 20.
TH
-
Dave,
FYI, the Tiger post is still here, it has not been deleted.
-
Mike,
Dave SAID it wasn't deleted. Why are you reiterating it?
-
I know this is long. Too long! Hey, we're busy men here! But please bear with me -- and I'll try not to disappoint you. (Thank you.)
I speak from experience here (for once) -- as a person who created (and still edits, 12 years later) a 365-days-a-year newspaper column written primarily by its readers (most of them known by name to me, but anonymous to the other readers).
My column (if you don't mind my calling it mine) is not unlike this Discussion Group, except for two things: (1) The discussion is very, very rarely about golf (and even more rarely about Golf Course Architecture); and (2) I edit it; I decide what gets into the column and what does not -- and what does not get into print goes, sooner or later, to the wastebasket, unread except by me. (Oops. Make that three things. Tom Paul has not written even one item for me!) (Or four: Neither has Pat Mucci.) (Five! I don't allow the readers to get nasty with one another. [The commands "Get a life" and "Lighten up" are Officially Verboten.])
This is the most valuable thing I have to say about the subject under discussion in this thread -- and you can decide, individually, if it's at all valuable, or quite worthless (and now that I think about it, this just MAY have some application to Golf Course Architecture ;D -- though, of course, you may disagree, and as nastily as you like!):
Sometimes the thing you create changes into something very different from the thing you had in mind when you created it.
And sometimes that change, as Martha (Stewart, not Burk) would say, is a Good Thing.
Witness my column: What I had in mind was entertainment. Nothing more, and nothing less. The column was to be a diversion from all of the serious (and, often, seriously depressing) news in the rest of the paper. It was to be FUNNY -- goofily funny, or bitingly funny, or darkly funny, but FUNNY first, last and always.
And so it went for the first couple of years. People submitted their (allegedly) hilarious or wry or sly or silly observations, and I printed them -- sometimes with comment, sometimes without.
And then, strangely and without provocation, the readers started telling me not just stuff designed to make people laugh, but SERIOUS stories about their lives -- about their marriages, and their parents, and their children, and their jobs, and their hobbies, and their passions ... about Life, and about Death, in all of its manifestations (politics excluded; politicians, amateur or professional, are not, and never have been, and never will be welcome to pollute my column). Sometimes it was tragic, heartbreaking stuff they sent me; sometimes it was sentimental; sometimes it was curious; sometimes it was gentle; sometimes it was contemptuous; sometimes it was angry. But whatever its mood, it was real, honest-to-goodness stuff from real, honest-to-goodness Midwesterners -- many of them the sort of people who, without a trace of irony or self-consciousness, use expressions like "honest-to-goodness." They really do!
When those softer-edged stories started arriving, I'll never forget thinking: But THAT'S not what I had in mind! I wanted something biting and witty and sharp. I wanted a smart-aleck's paradise. Some of this gooey stuff sounded like what you could read in some little weekly in some backwater hick-town!
And then I got smart. I listened to what the readers wanted to say. And I let them say it, in print -- the result being, all these years later, that what had been (and had been meant to be) nothing more than a trifle, ever, became, for me and for many of the readers, a very rich, profoundly educational mix of stories about Life As We Know It, about the human condition from the ridiculous to the sublime. (I don't know how to say that without sounding horribly pretentious. Sorry. If I do say so myself: It's an extraordinary column, primarily because of its extraordinary contributors; all I need to do is pay attention and choose well.)
My point, after all that, is: Same goes for GolfClubAtlas! I believe that gca.com has hugely benefitted (and will continue to benefit) from (1) the contributions of many posters (including, just coincidentally, me 8) ) who have not yet played many of the World's Great Courses, and who have no proven or proveable expertise in Golf Course Architecture; and (2) golfish discussions that have little or nothing to do with Golf Course Architecture, narrowly defined.
Check my signature quotation, below, from Mr. TE ("Tom I") Paul. What he says goes for me.
I came here because I love golf (more than is good for me), and because, though I love to play the game and to watch the game being played, I care particularly intensely about the courses where the game is played. Some of the very best days of my life have been spent on golf courses -- most memorably at Sand Hills, Highlands Links, Pebble Beach, Lahinch, North Berwick, the Old Course at St. Andrews, but also at Little Traverse Bay in Northern Michigan, and at Black Butte Ranch in Oregon, and at Kebo Valley in Maine, and at Lawsonia in Wisconsin, and at Hazeltine and Woodhill and North Oaks and Somerset and Northland and Giants Ridge here in Minnesota, and even at the humble but intermittenly lovable Oak Glen, where Rick Shefchik and I keep our cards, and where, later this month, we will play, as we always do, an end-of-the-season, dawn-to-dusk, 72-hole marathon (yes, with carts); those were some of the very best days of my life not because of the company (though that's part of it), and not because of the golf itself (though that's part of it), and not at all because of how well I played that golf (I shudder to think of how poorly I played Sand Hills the one chance I got!), but because when the weather is nice and the wind is blowing and the sun is rising or setting, those PLACES THEMSELVES (including, but not limited to, the golf holes) can be transcendent. They can take me where I want to be -- to a state of contentment I have rarely experienced in the rest of what passes for life.
I want more of that! And that's why I came here: to learn where others had found such transcendence, and where I might someday look for it.
I came here after I stumbled upon a newspaper story (Philly Inquirer, I think) about the new bunkers at Merion ... a story that happened to mention that a bunch of nut-cases at www.golfclubatlas.com were arguing about it at insane length -- and I stayed here because, after I checked out that discussion and read a couple of hundred posts about the (alleged) desecration of the old White Faces, and after I checked out a few dozen other threads and a few course profiles and a couple of "My Home Courses"s and an "In My Opinion" or two, I felt as though (even though I'd never played Merion, or NGLA, or Pine Valley, or Cypress Point, and maybe never will) I'd finally found ... MY NUT-CASES!
You know who you are!
What is here at this Web site today, and what will be here tomorrow, may not be precisely what the Morrissetts had in mind. But to my mind -- and, I hope, to theirs -- that is at least potentially a Good Thing.
Here's my vote:
The more, the better.
The more wide-ranging, the better.
The more civil, the better.
The more welcoming, the better.
The more flexible, the better.
The more educational, the better.
The more tolerant of the friendly, entertainingly non-educational, the better.
Oh, and one more thing:
The more concise, the better. :P
-
Dan,
That is a beautiful and evocative piece of writing. Thank you for summing up how many of us feel about golf and this website.
Where can I read your column? I'm the son of a newspaper man and love good writing as much as I love golf.
Wow...
-
A.G._Crockett --
Thank you.
You'll find links to today's column (and the past week's) at http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/living/people/.
How's that for concise?
-
I've always been a sucker for the written word. I can't write a lick, but I could read others works all day long. English was always my worst subject (My Dad, a 35 year High School English teacher would shudder at that thought). When I see these tremendous posts like Dan Kelly's above, I feel blessed that I get to participate.
When guys like Dan, Tom MacWood, Rich, Tommy (and so many others) who have the gift of putting their thoughts, comments or idea's down in cyberspace, I get to share their pasion.
Everyone of us would love to be playing right now. W/ the million commitments we all juggle, this incredible space gives us solace and a connection to that pasion.
That's why I'm glad to be here.
-
I never thought Tom MacWood would come between Rich and me!
-
Dan
A wonderful commentary. You stated very eloquently why I check this site with my coffee every morning. I look for the diferent perspectives of Huck and Rich, who have enjoyed the pleasure of playing with. But Tommy and Tom Paul and Pat and Dan and.... are teachers I have never met. I enjoy the wide ranging topics because golf at its best is a living metaphor for life. the things that the game has taught me about myself and life in general are here for me every dayand always with unique view points that make me look at things from the Philly view or the Long Island or Midwest. So I say to all write on!
Cheers
Stan Dodd
-
Dan;
In my best, stodgy British inflection..."Good show, old man!"
You know, in thinking about it, my major complaint with the site these days is that my schedule has become somewhat constricted and I'm finding it impossible to keep up.
Inevitably, that says more about my life than anything negative about this site, and I'm learning to recognize that the symptoms I'm suffering are not part of some general disease.
Frankly, I'm about full expression and varied opinions, and I'd hate for anyone to read anything I might write and feel deterred from posting their own thoughts as a result.
I just wish I didn't feel like I'm chasing a train that has long since left the station...
-
Getagameatagreatprivateclub.com
-
or more popularly known as......
GolfClubAccess.com
Jeff F.
-
Dan Kelly:
No one could have put it any better. Great post and a great explanation of what GCA has come to mean to so many people. :)
If some of the discussion is changed somewhat that's ok. It is about golf and IMHO everything about Golf ultimately revolves around the architecture.
Long live Ran (GMB) and the GCA.
Dan Kelly keep on writing.
Fairways and Greens,
Dave
-
Let me add this to Dan's 200-yard hole-out:
We all come here because we we have a common interest in golf course architecture. If some of us veer off track now and then, at least we agree what the site's main purpose is.
Like Dan, I believe a little general conversation between afficionados of golf course architecture does nothing but deepen our understanding of each other and where we're coming from.
-
Dan,
a fine and excellent piece of writing, and yes, I do think that a lot of this about all of us, as a discussion group, and that more then anything, is why there might be a disturbance or two. Call it growing pains if you will. Even call it family squabbles.
Yes, there are those that don't understand what golf architecture is all about, just as much of those of us that take it to the point of religious jihad. But in all of that comes the passion, and I can more then respect anyone with that knowledge to go with that belief--that they will go to the matresses for what they believe.
Its unfortunate that sometimes there has to be a negative slant about certain things or certain people here, but from me, (I can't speak for the others) I hate the fact that modernism has to affect classicism (It should be the other way around.) and anyone thinking that it can work is just plainly not well read on the subject, therfore should at least make an effort to read and interpret it. I hate the fact that there are some that think that they know so much, and thus, have noting more to learn because they already know it and are ready to argue about it just so they can play the advocate.
In truth Golf Architecture is the one thing in my personal life where I find contentment (besides praying:)) and some of us who really spend the time reading and researching and learning and looking, knowing that there will never be a finalization, but more of an enlightenment and most of all inspriation of from which to build knowledge on, further.
-Bunkers are in fact hazards, and thereforth shouldn't look like the surrounds of a parking median.
-The flair of that hillside should flow into the fairway and dissapate subtlely, not abruptly. Nor should a cart path dictate that line off of the hillside.
-That the imperfection is the perfection.
-If the client(s) wanted it, then maybe there is a hope to further school the client(s) on why it isn't in tune with the what Golf should really be about. Lets see these marketing whiz's market that! (Not you Josh!)
So much to learn. So very much to learn.
Thankfully we have some pretty special people here to teach it to us.
-
Dan Kelly (tm):
That's a great post and I hope it has a real influence on Golfclubatlas!
The supreme irony of that post, at least to me, though, was the last line; "The more concise the better."
You said that despite the fact that your post clearly outworded anything I've ever written--and I've never been known to be concise or for my brevity--that's for sure!
-
Thank you, gentlemen.
Tom I --
Supreme irony fully intended. Seems maybe you didn't grasp that?
Not your fault, I'm sure. I'm really not very good at self-mockery.
Haven't had much practice, after all! ;)
-
Jeff Fortson's "new topic" asking if CGA had jumped the shark got me to reading some old threads to see if this website really was better in the good old days. (My answer is NO, it reads just about the same!)
But low and behold I find this 8 year old thread, including Jeff's lame compaint in 2002 !!! that the site is abused by access whores... Have you really been posting the same crap about CGA.com for 8 years Jeff?
-
Nice pull, Bill.
-
Jeff Fortson's "new topic" asking if CGA had jumped the shark got me to reading some old threads to see if this website really was better in the good old days. (My answer is NO, it reads just about the same!)
But low and behold I find this 8 year old thread, including Jeff's lame compaint in 2002 !!! that the site is abused by access whores... Have you really been posting the same crap about CGA.com for 8 years Jeff?
Bill,
The access whoring did start a long time ago. Now we see how voices of concern like mine went on deaf ears and now gca.com has turned into the Match.com for golfing whores. Sure, some good posters still sprinkle in the good threads, but come on. If you think my point, that this site has gone from being about course architecture to accessing golf courses through members on here is "lame", I am ok with that. If you think this thread you brought back is a good example of what it was like on here years ago, you are mistaken. It's a nice attempt at spin, but this I'm not ok with. I have never claimed to be one of the influential posters or some mystical authority on gca from long ago, but there are many people I enjoyed reading that left. The likes of which you couldn't hope to replace.
Now, I ask you... what do you do for a living? Just imagine receiving multiple calls/emails/etc. a week asking you for free services? 99% of which came from a website that you once enjoyed being a part of. Would that upset you? Would that drive you away from the site? It did me for much of the last few years. It did to the likes of Gib Papazian, Tommy Naccarato, Rich Goodale, Jeff Stettner, Dan King, and the list goes on and on. Some of those guys still lurk and post occasionally, but it just isn't the same. Now it is infiltrated by the likes of people one-upping each other with what courses they have shagged. If you can't see that, then I really could care less what you think of my "lame" observations.
Jeff F.
-
Jeff,
I also like the "old GCA guys". I got to meet and play golf with Gib P. in Bandon this year. He is a blast and I'm sure his posts were great. I know he lurks but I find it impossible to believe that he no longer posts because he does not know how to say no to an access whore! That is not the guy I met...
I never really buy stories about "the good old days" because such tales invariably involve a heavy dose of selective memory. People remember the good and forget the bad, it is human nature. I spent two hours reading ten-year-old threads. Some were good, MANY were lame. There were many threads complaining about how far the ball travels today, calls for a rollback on the ball and equipment, etc. People complained about the scores pros were shooting on great courses, etc...all stuff we talk about today. In no way were the old discussions "architectually pure." In no way are there less good architecture discussions today. And today's posts often include GREAT photos of golf courses that many of us will never get to play. There were no such photos in the old threads I read, so GCA.com is FAR better in that respect now.
What IS different is that the site is no longer brand new, and like your first true love, some things cannot be duplicated...So instead of complaining, start making some good posts relating to architecture. I really don't know your occupation and what happened with acess requests.
-
Bill,
The access whoring did start a long time ago. Now we see how voices of concern like mine went on deaf ears and now gca.com has turned into the Match.com for golfing whores. Sure, some good posters still sprinkle in the good threads, but come on. If you think my point that this site has gone from being about course architecture to accessing golf courses through members on here is "lame" I am ok with that.
Jeff F.
Jeff,
I am a fairly new member, so feel free to take my views with a grain of salt. However, as many posters in your other thread have mentioned, the access whoring is not as obviously prevalent in the day to day public spaces of the DG as you are suggesting. To call this DG the Match.com for "golfing whores" is an insult to the large majority who have never sought access, and post on a myriad of other topics every day. Again, you were/are in a position that would draw attention from access seekers. I can understand how annoying and shallow that must feel, but so many other people are having different experiences via the DG. I would assume that the majority of the requests you received were via PM and email, am I right? Therefore, I can't agree with your blanket claim that the "site has gone from being about course architecture to accessing golf courses through members on here". For the vast majority of us, access whoring just isn't a part of the experience, but it is unfortunate that it is/was such a part of the experience for you...take care...
-
I'll stay out of the topic at hand, but I wanted to note that I'm still friends with Ted Sturges, and just talked to him on Tuesday, as a matter of fact. He'd gotten away from golf for a while after a divorce, but he remarried this spring and he is headed out to Bandon in October for the first time in a long time.
-
Jeff,
I also like the "old GCA guys". I got to meet and play golf with Gib P. in Bandon this year. He is a blast and I'm sure his posts were great. I know he lurks but I find it impossible to believe that he no longer posts because he does not know how to say no to an access whore! That is not the guy I met...
I never really buy stories about "the good old days" because such tales invariably involve a heavy dose of selective memory. People remember the good and forget the bad, it is human nature. I spent two hours reading ten-year-old threads. Some were good, MANY were lame. There were many threads complaining about how far the ball travels today, calls for a rollback on the ball and equipment, etc. People complained about the scores pros were shooting on great courses, etc...all stuff we talk about today. In no way were the old discussions "architectually pure." In no way are there less good architecture discussions today. And today's posts often include GREAT photos of golf courses that many of us will never get to play. There were no such photos in the old threads I read, so GCA.com is FAR better in that respect now.
What IS different is that the site is no longer brand new, and like your first true love, some things cannot be duplicated...So instead of complaining, start making some good posts relating to architecture. I really don't know your occupation and what happened with acess requests.
Bill,
Gib is a legend. He is one of my favorite people on the planet. I met him at the King's Putter II at Pasatiempo and he and I started to talk about the greatness of NGLA. As we discussed in detail the holes Gib literally pulled out his pencil from the round and turned our conversation into a diagram on the table cloth to help explain what we were discussing to those that had never been there. It was then and there that I knew GCA had attracted a group of people that "got it". Gib and I both have similar situations in our personal lives and he directed me to some stuff that not only helped my family but changed our lives for the better. I will forever be indebted to the man for his acts of kindness to me, a virtual stranger up until we simply talked about a golf course.
Look, I have never met many of the "new guys". My comments aren't directed at individuals (except for my total incapability of understanding much of what Melvyn Morrow says and what I think is a squandered ability to use his family name). I certainly don't think every single person on here is looking for access to golf courses. However, to deny it's existence and its total infiltration of the site is blind. It doesn't have to be public in the threads to be real. I can't speak for Bob Huntley, but I can only imagine how many requests he has gotten over the years. It shows you what kind of character he has to have been so gracious to so many people, even those that appealed to him unsolicited.
My experience is different. I was a golf pro at a high profile club. People figured I could just wave a magic wand and get them out. Sorry to say, that unless you were a PGA member or played with me, I couldn't do much for you (I say "you" in general terms). I was working 50+ hours a week and teaching another 10+ on top of that and I literally had guys from GCA.com that I had never met asking me to make time on my days off so that they could play Riviera. Now, you and many here weren't the culprits, nor does it really matter to most of you. I'm ok with that. But when I see threads that are pissing contests of what courses we have all played and the "light hearted" posts about how to get on at "such and such" country club, I start to question the motives of many and the overall direction of the site. After hosting some of these people they didn't attempt to enlighten others of their experience in an educational sense on the DG which was always my hope. I didn't want a public thank you, I wanted to see their opinions and experiences. I believe that all levels of golfers can contribute to the betterment of course architecture if they understand not only the game in general, but their game as well.
There is no question there are still great threads and pictorials. I am happy to see those continue. I haven't even began to crack the nut of the "rater" fiasco of years back. If you think my opinions are harsh on the access whoring you should dig up my feeling about the entitled "rater". I have no problem with raters or the rating bodies per se, I have a problem with people begging others to make them raters so that they feel entitled to play free golf wherever they like. Don't get me started on that one!
I don't think all the guys I have mentioned don't contribute only because of "access whoring". Actually, I was asking others to help me answer as to why the site has "jumped the shark"? Maybe I am wrong. Maybe it hasn't jumped. My opinion is that it has in many ways. I knew I would ruffle some feathers with the initial post. I figured I would be calling out people I don't even know about this topic. I hope it got their eye. I am not trying to be the police of gca.com, I simply hope it survives. And, by surviving I mean actually continuing to be relevant. Fortunately, there are people like Jeff Brauer, Tom Doak, some great supers, Pat Mucci, Tom Paul, and many others I fail to mention that keep this DG going. Like I said before, I have never claimed to be an authority on the subject. I want to learn. I love contributing when I can, but I learn nothing from people seeking to check off another Top 100 course from their list.
Jeff F.
-
Bill,
The access whoring did start a long time ago. Now we see how voices of concern like mine went on deaf ears and now gca.com has turned into the Match.com for golfing whores. Sure, some good posters still sprinkle in the good threads, but come on. If you think my point that this site has gone from being about course architecture to accessing golf courses through members on here is "lame" I am ok with that.
Jeff F.
Jeff,
I am a fairly new member, so feel free to take my views with a grain of salt. However, as many posters in your other thread have mentioned, the access whoring is not as obviously prevalent in the day to day public spaces of the DG as you are suggesting. To call this DG the Match.com for "golfing whores" is an insult to the large majority who have never sought access, and post on a myriad of other topics every day. Again, you were/are in a position that would draw attention from access seekers. I can understand how annoying and shallow that must feel, but so many other people are having different experiences via the DG. I would assume that the majority of the requests you received were via PM and email, am I right? Therefore, I can't agree with your blanket claim that the "site has gone from being about course architecture to accessing golf courses through members on here". For the vast majority of us, access whoring just isn't a part of the experience, but it is unfortunate that it is/was such a part of the experience for you...take care...
Sorry if you were insulted. I certainly wasn't calling you out personally. It's less of calling out individuals about the problem and more about bringing attention to the problem. It exists. You may not be part of it, but I just felt the urge to address it. I certainly understand that many people on here don't use the site for it.
When was the last pictorial about the strategy of a hole? Or, the reconstruction/restoration of a green complex? I see a lot of ass shots which are all fine and dandy, but many of the threads are literally a circle jerk of what courses one has played. Not all of them mind you, but many of them.
Like I have said before, I hope newer folks to this site are getting some great insight to a topic they love as I did years ago. I just wish more threads were dedicated to the education of course architecture. Maybe you get that from here. If so, great and ignore me. Sorry if I insulted you.
Jeff F.
-
Jeff Forston, reply #49, to Bill Brightly:
"...there are many people I enjoyed reading that left. The likes of which you couldn't hope to replace."
"Now it is infiltrated by the likes of people one-upping each other with what courses they have shagged. If you can't see that, then I really could care less what you think of my 'lame' observations."
Jeff Fortson, reply #54, to Bill Brightly:
"Sorry if you were insulted. I certainly wasn't calling you out personally." (emphasis mine)
-
Jeff,
You did not insult me in the least.
To answer your questions. the "last" pictorial about the strategy of a hole was posted yesterday, it discussses a Principal Nose bunker complex built by C and C. I dont know the course yet and I did not know that C and C built a PN complex, Follow the thread, we both may learn something.
I posted a photo last week of a hole at Hackensack (Banks) undergoing restoration and two weeks earlier I showed photos of an entire green re-building project: Saucon Valley, Weyhill course.
Your last post proves what I suspected: you have some sort of ax to grind with GCA.com. There are great threads on every page, including a current one by Tom Doak comparing the routing of great course being equivilant to a great concert, where he sometimes "throws the whole band" at a hole, so I posted pics of Pac Dunes #18 as an example.
So this tells me your purpose is to criticize and NOT to discusss architecture...So I am done with this thread, off to learn more about gca.
-
Jeff, is it fair to say you've come out of those experiences with a very broad brush?
-
Recently, I hosted a fellow GCAer who finally took me up on my invitation from a couple of years ago. We had a really great day -- a ton of laughs.
A couple of days ago I got a package in the mail. My wife and kids were in the kitchen when I came home from work and they were excited to hand it to me. "Open it daddy!" I thought it was from them, so I tore into it and opened it up. Inside was a scarlet golf shirt with The Ohio State Buckeyes logo on it! ??? I asked them why did they get me this? "We didn't."
GCA has a ton of good going on, most of you know that. No matter if you read it on here in a thread or not, there are countless good stories happening along with friendships made, all the time.
Eric
-
Jeff Forston, reply #49, to Bill Brightly:
"...there are many people I enjoyed reading that left. The likes of which you couldn't hope to replace."
"Now it is infiltrated by the likes of people one-upping each other with what courses they have shagged. If you can't see that, then I really could care less what you think of my 'lame' observations."
Jeff Fortson, reply #54, to Bill Brightly:
"Sorry if you were insulted. I certainly wasn't calling you out personally." (emphasis mine)
Phil,
You do realize post #54 was not addressed to Bill, right? I was addressing Matthew.
Plus, in post #53 I actually state that I am using the word "you" in general terms.
Please get the facts straight and don't distort them. Thanks.
Jeff F.
-
Jeff, is it fair to say you've come out of those experiences with a very broad brush?
Yes and no. There are some generalizations I have flung out there but I'm not blind enough to assume that everyone on here is an access whore. It's just way more prevalent than it used to be. I think it detracts from the site, so I shared that opinion. I knew I would ruffle the feathers of some. Most likely, I ruffled the feathers of people that are guilty of it. I'm fine with that.
Jeff F.
-
Jeff: this is the most egregious attempt I've seen. It was sent privately to me.
Your brush was even broader when you were waging jihad against magazine raters. Was that crusade an offshoot of the access issue?
Obviously your experiences are different than mine and those of others. When I got this PM it was easy to laugh at the absurdity. (For one, Florida has never held a US Open.) If I got them unsolicited from strangers daily, yeah...I guess it would taint my views.
=====
florida golf post GCA
« Sent to: John_Conley on: January 08, 2004, 12:07:23 PM » Quote Reply Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi John- I was reading your post on Florida golf on GCA and wanted to know if you have any suggestions re: getting on Seminole. I'm on a quest to play all the U.S. Open courses ( 21 so far) , but am running into a brick wall. I thought I had my connection because I know the events director there, but he said he couldn't help me and that you have to play with a member. If you could help me in any way, I would really appreciate it. I've got a good connection for Jupiter Hills already. Also if you wanted to play any name courses in New York, Conn. or Mass. I've got a lot of connections there. Thankyou. *&^%$ )%$#^&
-
...and now gca.com has turned into the Match.com for golfing whores. Sure, some good posters still sprinkle in the good threads, but come on
Intended or not, this is majorly insulting to most of the posters on here. Thankfully, one can only be offended by choice.
I've had so many positive experiences with people on here - receiving books in the mail, yardage guides in the mail, books brought back from the other side of the world, emails with photos of courses people know I love, invitations to join posters I've never even meet, not to mention the time spent with friends on here, golfing and otherwise - that I can only read what some people post and marvel at how different their experiences have been. Sorry your experiences have been so bad.
Tom, glad to hear Ted is doing well, I always enjoyed his posts on here.
-
florida golf post GCA
« Sent to: John_Conley on: January 08, 2004, 12:07:23 PM » Quote Reply Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi John- I was reading your post on Florida golf on GCA and wanted to know if you have any suggestions re: getting on Seminole. I'm on a quest to play all the U.S. Open courses ( 21 so far) , but am running into a brick wall. I thought I had my connection because I know the events director there, but he said he couldn't help me and that you have to play with a member. If you could help me in any way, I would really appreciate it. I've got a good connection for Jupiter Hills already. Also if you wanted to play any name courses in New York, Conn. or Mass. I've got a lot of connections there. Thankyou. *&^%$ )%$#^&
I saw this in The Da Access Code...
*&^%$ )%$#^&
(http://www.movie-collectible.com/images/XNOB5335_7845.jpg)
Just a minute...
Voilą !!
Cryptex says... JASON JONES!
-
Jeff: this is the most egregious attempt I've seen. It was sent privately to me.
Your brush was even broader when you were waging jihad against magazine raters. Was that crusade an offshoot of the access issue?
Obviously your experiences are different than mine and those of others. When I got this PM it was easy to laugh at the absurdity. (For one, Florida has never held a US Open.) If I got them unsolicited from strangers daily, yeah...I guess it would taint my views.
=====
florida golf post GCA
« Sent to: John_Conley on: January 08, 2004, 12:07:23 PM » Quote Reply Remove
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi John- I was reading your post on Florida golf on GCA and wanted to know if you have any suggestions re: getting on Seminole. I'm on a quest to play all the U.S. Open courses ( 21 so far) , but am running into a brick wall. I thought I had my connection because I know the events director there, but he said he couldn't help me and that you have to play with a member. If you could help me in any way, I would really appreciate it. I've got a good connection for Jupiter Hills already. Also if you wanted to play any name courses in New York, Conn. or Mass. I've got a lot of connections there. Thankyou. *&^%$ )%$#^&
I sent a message similar to this, but what I asked was if I decided to write a letter to someone at a club (none specifically mentioned) in order to see if it was possible to play there, to whom should I address the letter. I asked this since I had read on here several times that some courses are somewhat receptive to written letters. I have yet to send off any of those letters.
-
You know whaT Eric? I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for you meddling kids.
-
...and now gca.com has turned into the Match.com for golfing whores. Sure, some good posters still sprinkle in the good threads, but come on
Intended or not, this is majorly insulting to most of the posters on here. Thankfully, one can only be offended by choice.
I've had so many positive experiences with people on here - receiving books in the mail, yardage guides in the mail, books brought back from the other side of the world, emails with photos of courses people know I love, invitations to join posters I've never even meet, not to mention the time spent with friends on here, golfing and otherwise - that I can only read what some people post and marvel at how different their experiences have been. Sorry your experiences have been so bad.
Tom, glad to hear Ted is doing well, I always enjoyed his posts on here.
If people are insulted then they are either guilty or have thin skin. This is not a slam on any one individual. This is an observation of mine about the site. If you don't agree, I'm ok with that. The only people upset with me appear to be those that don't want the topic brought to light or exposed.
Jeff F.
-
...and now gca.com has turned into the Match.com for golfing whores. Sure, some good posters still sprinkle in the good threads, but come on
Intended or not, this is majorly insulting to most of the posters on here. Thankfully, one can only be offended by choice.
I've had so many positive experiences with people on here - receiving books in the mail, yardage guides in the mail, books brought back from the other side of the world, emails with photos of courses people know I love, invitations to join posters I've never even meet, not to mention the time spent with friends on here, golfing and otherwise - that I can only read what some people post and marvel at how different their experiences have been. Sorry your experiences have been so bad.
Tom, glad to hear Ted is doing well, I always enjoyed his posts on here.
"I'm not blind enough to assume that everyone on here is an access whore. It's just way more prevalent than it used to be. I think it detracts from the site, so I shared that opinion. I knew I would ruffle the feathers of some. Most likely, I ruffled the feathers of people that are guilty of it. I'm fine with that."
And this comment is a close second for most offensive of those posted by Jeff recently. The implication, of course, that those who disagree with Jeff's assessment of this site, and his views on access requests, are those making such requests in manners that he deems offensive.
The broad brush is a tool most often used by those who have no specifics to back up their argument.
-
He outed me. I would have otherwise been cool with his completely out of the blue, random first post in many moons but I know he did it because of me so now I am pissed.
-
...and now gca.com has turned into the Match.com for golfing whores. Sure, some good posters still sprinkle in the good threads, but come on
Intended or not, this is majorly insulting to most of the posters on here. Thankfully, one can only be offended by choice.
I've had so many positive experiences with people on here - receiving books in the mail, yardage guides in the mail, books brought back from the other side of the world, emails with photos of courses people know I love, invitations to join posters I've never even meet, not to mention the time spent with friends on here, golfing and otherwise - that I can only read what some people post and marvel at how different their experiences have been. Sorry your experiences have been so bad.
Tom, glad to hear Ted is doing well, I always enjoyed his posts on here.
"I'm not blind enough to assume that everyone on here is an access whore. It's just way more prevalent than it used to be. I think it detracts from the site, so I shared that opinion. I knew I would ruffle the feathers of some. Most likely, I ruffled the feathers of people that are guilty of it. I'm fine with that."
And this comment is a close second for most offensive of those posted by Jeff recently. The implication, of course, that those who disagree with Jeff's assessment of this site, and his views on access requests, are those making such requests in manners that he deems offensive.
The broad brush is a tool most often used by those who have no specifics to back up their argument.
Phil,
What is so offensive? If you are not guilty of it then why be offended? Your conclusion is not correct. You have lumped everyone in my statement. I said I ruffled feathers and that "most likely" it ruffled the feather of those guilty of it. That certainly doesn't imply that if you disagree with me that you are certainly guilty. What's offensive is misconstruing someone's words and not taking back obvious mistakes when criticizing someone which you have already done on this thread (i.e. my response to you in post #59).
Jeff F.
-
Inside was a scarlet golf shirt with The Ohio State Buckeyes logo on it! ??? I asked them why did they get me this? "We didn't."
Eric
Why would ANYONE do that to someone...
-
Kyle,
Took me a second and then I remembered. That's one really funny post!
-
You know Kyle, now that you mention it, I think his purpose in sending me the shirt was in fact more of a 'booyah' rather than a thank you! I lost both lunch and dinner to him that day, plus he did seem to hold a grudge over the fact that my Vols knocked his Buckeyes out of the NCAA tournament this year.
Great Observation!! ;) ;D
-
You know Kyle, now that you mention it, I think his purpose in sending me the shirt was in fact more of a 'booyah' rather than a thank you! I lost both lunch and dinner to him that day, plus he did seem to hold a grudge over the fact that my Vols knocked his Buckeyes out of the NCAA tournament this year.
Great Observation!! ;) ;D
The sender will certainly be satisfied to know that every time you look at/put on that shirt, you'll be reminded of the can of whoop-ass opened up on the Vols contingent that day. ;)
Can't wait for the rematch!
Woops...what was this thread about again?
-
It is a reminder that there is indeed life after forty. Just ask all the cougars out there.
-
You know Kyle, now that you mention it, I think his purpose in sending me the shirt was in fact more of a 'booyah' rather than a thank you! I lost both lunch and dinner to him that day, plus he did seem to hold a grudge over the fact that my Vols knocked his Buckeyes out of the NCAA tournament this year.
Great Observation!! ;) ;D
You never mentioned the I'm with stupid shirt I got for JC Jones.
Anthony
-
This thread was very good except it was then hijacked.
The point is with the new year, the rules and posts need to be discussed on what this site is and for. Thanks