News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Patrick_Mucci

David Moriarty
« on: April 06, 2008, 08:16:13 PM »
Well .......... we're waiting.    ;D

Mike_Cirba

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #1 on: April 06, 2008, 08:40:14 PM »
C'mon David....if you don't think this place is "honest researcher friendly" you haven't been watching.   

I've had my research, assumptions, and opinions challenged, vetted, and even spat upon...well, not quite spat upon, but probably reviled and slurred in some quarters, but if you have something to bring to the table, let's not be coy.   

Just bring us the facts and let people make their own interpretations.

Label assumptions clearly and when you're guessing, say so.

I think we can all have a good discussion because as I mentioned recently, I think the larger part of the historic iceberg is just now coming up from below the surface.

Joe Bausch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #2 on: April 06, 2008, 08:54:30 PM »
Have I missed a previous thread or something?!

MikeC:  where are you quoting from?!!

DavidM:  we've never met but somehow I feel like we know each other.  I do scientific research for a living and this golf research stuff is fun, and the peer review process here isn't all the much different than publishing in a journal.  I live in the Philly area but I don't belong to any of the 'name clubs', heck, I don't belong to any club at all.  If I can step into the ring here and show my cards from the research I've unearthed, so can you (again).
@jwbausch (for new photo albums)
The site for the Cobb's Creek project:  https://cobbscreek.org/
Nearly all Delaware Valley golf courses in photo albums: Bausch Collection

TEPaul

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #3 on: April 06, 2008, 09:11:30 PM »
"Have I missed a previous thread or something?!"

No, you haven't Joseph, well not a recent one, but your name sure has been brought up on an email chain pertaining to this thread.

David Moriarty left this site about a year ago because he felt there was too much fightin' and fussin' and personal vendettas going on particularly around some of his feelings and proposals about the architectural attribution of Merion. The two perpetrators were Wayne and me and maybe just Philadelphians generally. I think it's safe to say, and would be undisputed by them, that David and Tom MacWood felt Philadelphia and some Philadelphians were into distorting certain architectural facts and truths all with the aim of giving some Philadelphia architects too much credit for the courses attributed to them, or something like that.

He would like to air his views on here in that vein about Merion and some other courses, namely Pine Valley, GCGC and NGLA. We've encouraged him to do that again, but, for my part, only if he does have some new facts as he seems to be claiming he does. I, for one, do not want to rerun those Merion threads from a year or so ago.

I asked David and Tom MacWood to come back on here on this email chain. I think it was Pat Mucci who claims he was the one who asked David to come back but as we all know Patrick hears something from me and about two days later he thinks he thought of it. In this manner Patrick is like some little Pavlovian dog.  ;)

« Last Edit: April 06, 2008, 09:16:51 PM by TEPaul »

TEPaul

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #4 on: April 06, 2008, 09:21:44 PM »
JoeB:

One of the real bones of contention on those Merion threads of a year ago was David's contention that Wilson had not been to Europe to research architecture for the creation of Merion East until AFTER the course was built, not before, as most of the history books have claimed. David even did some pretty impressive research on ship manifests from that time to prove his point.

However, I don't know that he's aware of Verdant Greene's article, I think it is, you found in your research which seems to shed more light on that particular issue.

Joe Bausch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #5 on: April 06, 2008, 09:30:45 PM »

David even did some pretty impressive research on ship manifests from that time to prove his point.


Did these ship manifests list all those people by name that did NOT sail on said ship?  Or did they instead try to name all those people on those ships and perhaps weren't always complete or accurate?
@jwbausch (for new photo albums)
The site for the Cobb's Creek project:  https://cobbscreek.org/
Nearly all Delaware Valley golf courses in photo albums: Bausch Collection

TEPaul

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #6 on: April 06, 2008, 09:42:53 PM »
Joe, does your question imply that if Wilson's name was not found on some ship's manifest before 1912 that might not mean he did not go over there before 1912?
« Last Edit: April 07, 2008, 08:30:39 AM by TEPaul »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #7 on: April 06, 2008, 09:47:51 PM »
TEPaul,

You should know that David Moriarty and I have been corresponding on the issue of him returning to the site and posting some interesting, if not controversial, topics, long before you became involved in the email loop.

But, I've learned that it's important for you to think that you thought of it first, so I let you appear to win every now and then ;D

David Moriarty,

Why not start a post on April 7th ?

TEPaul

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #8 on: April 06, 2008, 09:56:39 PM »
"But, I've learned that it's important for you to think that you thought of it first, so I let you appear to win every now and then.  ;)

Well, I guess you didn't read that email chain then Pat. Doesn't surprise me since you don't seem to read very well, not to mention the fact you asked to be taken off the email chain that you started because you get a million and two emails a day ;). But don't worry about it, you should take credit for asking David to come back on here. You need some crumbs every now and again.

I asked Tom MacWood to come back on that email chain too but he didn't respond. Do you think you could get him back on here? I, for one, would really like to see both of them back on here, and it appears a lot of others would too.

Phil_the_Author

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #9 on: April 06, 2008, 11:22:37 PM »
Not only should this be labeled as "Off Topic," I for one don't think that it is something thta should be open to discussion as an open topic to all.

Consider what is already being posted and might be construed by some as a personal attack:

From Tom Paul, "Joe, does your question imply that if Wilson's name was not found on some ship's manifest before 1912 that might not mean he did not go over there before 1912? Don't ask stupid questions, at least not at this point..." 

For someone who wants, "David to come back on here and produce what he seems to be implying is new information so we can discuss it in a civil manner..." that statement certainly doesn't sound too civil. You then follow it up by saying, "Are you another one of those Philadelphians who's trying to minmize C.B. Macdonald and Harry Colt and unfairly pump up the likes of Wilson and Crump? If you are clean up your act right now!"

Now usually when you are saying something in jest you follow it with at least one, if not ten or more  ;)'s. This time there are none.

I want to categorically state that I believe that you DIDN'T mean it as offensive, but many might not. It is because of the history of the contentious discussions between those already mentioned and others who haven't been, and for the sake of candor I will lay claim to being one of those, that comments such as these might be viewed the wrong way by some.

That is why this thread, in my opinion should be pulled. This is a discussion that should be done privately by email, as has already been mentioned, as these are private matters.

If one wants David and Tom to come back to the DG then email them and ask them. If you don't have their email addresses, then realize that a number on here have already stated that they do. One might prevail upon them to pass it on to you...
« Last Edit: April 06, 2008, 11:24:16 PM by Philip Young »

TEPaul

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #10 on: April 06, 2008, 11:37:05 PM »
It's humor, Philip, but if you and others think my remarks need fifteen smiley faces behind them, then the hell with it. It was a nice try until that last post. This place isn't a forum for discussion, it's more like a soapbox for super serious pontification.  :o
« Last Edit: April 06, 2008, 11:57:09 PM by TEPaul »

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #11 on: April 07, 2008, 12:56:58 AM »
C'mon David....if you don't think this place is "honest researcher friendly" you haven't been watching.   

I've had my research, assumptions, and opinions challenged, vetted, and even spat upon...well, not quite spat upon, but probably reviled and slurred in some quarters, but if you have something to bring to the table, let's not be coy.   

Just bring us the facts and let people make their own interpretations.

Label assumptions clearly and when you're guessing, say so.

I think we can all have a good discussion because as I mentioned recently, I think the larger part of the historic iceberg is just now coming up from below the surface.


Mike,
    What are you guys referring to? Where are these remarks by David?
"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

ed_getka

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #12 on: April 07, 2008, 01:07:33 AM »
Joe, does your question imply that if Wilson's name was not found on some ship's manifest before 1912 that might not mean he did not go over there before 1912? Don't ask stupid questions, at least not at this point. We want David to come back on here and produce what he seems to be implying is new information so we can discuss it in a civil manner. Are you another one of those Philadelphians who's trying to minmize C.B. Macdonald and Harry Colt and unfairly pump up the likes of Wilson and Crump? If you are clean up your act right now!

"Don't ask stupid questions..."     

Tom Paul,
   Is there some reason you couldn't simply clarify what point Joe is trying to make? I can see at the end of the above post that you are simply trying to be humourous, but it would be pretty difficult for anyone to spin "Don't ask stupid questions...".
    I presume you think there is some sort of vendetta being pursued in this matter of Wilson's travels. Instead of assuming the worst, why don't you just let one side make their case, and you provide what information you have, and I would imagine the line of inquiry will reach a conclusion or come to a roadblock where there is no more information from which to learn.
    Sorry to be so overly serious. :)













"Perimeter-weighted fairways", The best euphemism for containment mounding I've ever heard.

Rich Goodale

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #13 on: April 07, 2008, 03:43:50 AM »

David even did some pretty impressive research on ship manifests from that time to prove his point.


Did these ship manifests list all those people by name that did NOT sail on said ship?  Or did they instead try to name all those people on those ships and perhaps weren't always complete or accurate?

Joe

I've done a little bit of research using those ship manifests, and they are very detailed and DO include lists of passengers who had booked, but cancelled their booking.  I assume that they were compiled for legal requirements, and so probably were as inclusive as possible.  If they don't show Wilson going to Europe prior to Merion, those trying to prove otherwise would need to find an explanation for that negative "fact."

Rich

PS--come on back Dr. Moriarty.  You've been trapped beneath the Reichenbach Falls for too long.
PPS--bring back MacWood with you too.  Life here would be less boring here with him around

R
« Last Edit: April 07, 2008, 03:52:59 AM by Richard Farnsworth Goodale »

Tony Petersen

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #14 on: April 07, 2008, 03:55:05 AM »
I think y'all need to grab a room and take care of this case of puppy love... Christ, can you say "Cat Fight."  ;)

And seriously, how can ANYONE EVER quantify the accuracy of a ships manifest, passenger list, tickets sold, etc. that dates back from 1912...13...14? Simply cannot be done. or verified. or cross-referenced. or proved (though I do admire the gumption in finding the materials, etc.)  :D
Ski - U - Mah... University of Minnesota... "Seven beers followed by two Scotches and a thimble of marijuana and it's funny how sleep comes all on it's own.”

SL_Solow

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #15 on: April 07, 2008, 08:15:58 AM »
In the interests of a better discussion group we would all welcome back David and Tom.  However we should remember what drove the gentlemen(?) out in the first instance was not the substantive disputes but rather their perception that the arguments were becoming personal, both publicly in this forum and privately elsewhere.  The conclusion they reached thwas that participation just wasn't worth it.  Whether they return or not, we should remember that this is a discussion group and nothing more.  A vigorous exchange of conflicting views is to be encouraged but the exchange should be relatively civilized and confined to the topics at hand.  I am certainly not above sticking the needle from time to time but there is a point at which we go too far.  Some of those old disputes appeared to have crossed the line.

TEPaul

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #16 on: April 07, 2008, 08:35:30 AM »
"Tom Paul,
   Is there some reason you couldn't simply clarify what point Joe is trying to make?"

Ed:

No reason at all. I removed the rest of the post and just asked Joe the question. I hope he clarifies it himself.

" If they don't show Wilson going to Europe prior to Merion, those trying to prove otherwise would need to find an explanation for that negative "fact."

Rich:

Are you saying if you or David Moriarty did not find Hugh Wilson's name on a ship manifest prior to 1912 that we should conclude he did not go to GB prior to 1912? Are you sure that all ship's manifests from that time have been digitized or that you and David have seen them all? Are you sure everyone who crossed the Atlantic in that time was on a ship manifest? If so, how have you become sure of that? One interesting fact to know is that Hugh and Alan Wilson's insurance company apparently did ship insurance.

Let's see if you and David Moriarty can find the exact dates of the apparent three times Harry Colt crossed the Atlantic both ways. That info would be quite important to some of the facts involved in material of Pine Valley. 

Tony Petersen:

In my opinion, you have some very good points there. It's this kind of "assumption" that drives some of us crazy with some of the conclusions offered on this website. To some of us it smacks of what might be referred to as convenience or what Brad Klein once referred to as academic "positivism" in a research sense.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2008, 08:58:54 AM by TEPaul »

Steve Lang

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #17 on: April 07, 2008, 09:11:28 AM »
 8)  is it germain that DM & TN often have the first tee time at Rustic Canyon?
Inverness (Toledo, OH) cathedral clock inscription: "God measures men by what they are. Not what they in wealth possess.  That vibrant message chimes afar.
The voice of Inverness"

TEPaul

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #18 on: April 07, 2008, 09:14:06 AM »
Since some of you seemed confused about what's been going on here and hoping, on my part, that the participants on a recent email communication that begun with a very funny email from Pat Mucci to an email group here is an appropriate section that should explain this thread to all;




"Is gca.com ready for open  and frank discussion about the World's great courses? After having been  encouraged by a poster for whom I have great respect, I’ve been reconsidering  TEPaul’s kind invitation asking a few of us to return to gca.com.    I remain concerned that, despite good intentions, the site may  still remain hostile toward certain ideas that run contrary to the accepted  wisdom of the golfing Establishment, particularly in and around Philadelphia.  
 
What if I come back and pick up where I left off with my  series of threads on the early history of the great Merion East course?    Is the website ready and willing to enter into a frank discussion  about Merion, or for that matter, about Pine Valley, NGLA, Garden City, or any  other of the World’s truly important courses?
 
By way of example,  what if I post that Merion East came into being as an enticement to attract  buyers to a real estate development.
 
. . Or that Merion chose  the precise property based largely on what Macdonald and Whigham thought could  be done with the site.
 
. . Or that the routing plan for Merion  East was in place before the parcel was secured, long before Merion even  appointed Hugh Wilson and his construction committee to build the  course.
 
. . Or that, reportedly, nearly every hole on the East  Course was patterned after famous holes abroad.
 
. . Or that the  revised 10th hole was not the only hole at Merion East where the yardage was  significantly overstated; the total yardage at the early Merion East was off  by hundreds of yards, probably due to faulty measuring  methodology.

While any such posts—or posts that go much  further—would be accompanied by significant factual support, I would welcome  any challenges, corrections, and discussion, so long as civilized, reasonable,  and aimed at a furtherance of understanding of gca.
 
What say  you?  Is gca.com a place for open and frank discussion of the world’s  great golf courses, or not?
 
[Patrick’s mailing list looks like a  pretty good representation of long time gca.com posters, and he gave me  permission to address the questions to you all.  Many of you know me, and  some of you don’t. Regardless I’d appreciate any and all comments and  concerns.]
 
Thanks.  
David"


"I think my research could use some vetting, and since I am not going to get to philadelphia anytime soon I could use some help with that." 





Again, I hope posting these DM remarks from an email chain doesn't violate some classified state secret or get me in trouble with some little known new Internet law.  ;)

Now you should all understand the reason Pat made this thread post, not to mention the fact that most of the participants on the email chain seemed to get tired of it and asked that there names be removed, including me and Wayne, Noel Freeman, Matt Burrows, Geoff Childs and even Pat.  ;)
« Last Edit: April 07, 2008, 09:28:08 AM by TEPaul »

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #19 on: April 07, 2008, 09:20:14 AM »
I think one of the first and best steps in determining possible chain of events is to create a timeline of what is known.  So far as I could tell, this is what Tommy Mac and David were trying to do - gather info to create a timeline.  Less any positive and accountable info to place a person somewhere, these two chaps were only looking at other possibilities - nothing wrong with that.  I like the bits where reasonable conjecture is put forth because it can often lead to a more accurate picture of events.  Regardless of beliefs, imo, how these two were treated was not on and the cause of an unneccessary rif which happened to be one of the two or three worst episodes I have witnessed on GCA.com.  Hopefully, Tom and David will come back. 

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Dunfanaghy, Fraserburgh, Hankley Common, Ashridge, Gog Magog Old & Cruden Bay St Olaf

TEPaul

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #20 on: April 07, 2008, 09:59:25 AM »
"I think one of the first and best steps in determining possible chain of events is to create a timeline of what is known.  So far as I could tell, this is what Tommy Mac and David were trying to do - gather info to create a timeline."

Sean:

"Timelining" is really important and I think that's exactly what David Moriarty was trying to do particularly with his ship manifest research. That was some pretty cool stuff. I don't remember what Tom MacWood's point was about the history of Merion other than some Philadelphians may've been trying to distort architectural attribution and perhaps not give C.B. Macdonald the credit he deserved for the design of Merion. He essentially once maintained the same thing about Pine Valley and Harry Colt's contributions. All that is in the back pages of this website.

Timelining is very important and it's amazing what it can sometimes turn up and prove. Timelining with PV's creation was completely essential to a renewed understanding of what happened down there and by whom.

The issue of whether Wilson was in Europe only once or maybe twice or more and whether he was over there studying architecture before or after Merion East was created or perhaps both is very interesting to know.

David Moriarty seemed to be concluding that since he could not find Wilson's name on a ship manifest before 1912 that he couldn't have been over there before that. I don't know that one can or should conclude something like that and if they did it really does leave some unanswered questions such as how the club and those who participated in its creation could've kept saying he not only was over there before the creation of Merion but he was over there for approximately six or seven months.

It appears from that ship manifest research from 1912 that Wilson was only over there for a few weeks in 1912. That was also the trip that created the story in Merion's history that he almost went down on the Titanic.

So the question becomes how could the club and the participants in it get the dates and the duration of what was said about his trip before Merion was created so wrong? Those reports were made pretty public it seems and it would seem to me if Wilson had not been over there before Merion and for six or seven months, at least he and others at that time would've said so and corrected those erroneous reports at the time.

My recollection is that when Wayne and I mentioned that over a year ago on those Merion threads neither David or Tom MacWood even acknowledged it. I can't see how that can make for a particularly productive discussion on this subject.

And then Joe Bausch recently found another Philly newspaper article from a reliable reporter at that time that mentioned in 1913, I think (I'm sure Joe will produce it) that Wilson was in GB a few years before. That would seem to put Wilson in GB before Merion was created.

I guess anyone could claim that that newspaper reporter was wrong too but again it would seem to me if he was that wrong contemporaneously that Wilson himself or others at that time would've corrected him.

TEPaul

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #21 on: April 07, 2008, 10:07:12 AM »
Sean:

But I think the real gist of DM's Merion analysis was that Macdonald's contributions to Merion have been minimized by either the participants in the creation or by us today. Neither Wayne nor I see that at all as both Wilsons particularly wrote somewhat contemporaneous reports citing Macdonald for seemingly exactly what he did for them and when. If he had done a lot more neither of us can see why either or both Wilsons wouldn't have said so, not to even mention some of the others on the committee who talked about who actually was responsible for the creation of Merion. We want to get the facts of the creation of Merion and its architectural evolution right and if that means Macdonald was way more responsible for it than has ever been reported, I, for one, sure don't have any problem with that. In the meantime to have some from other places state or even imply that either we or Philadelphians are trying to distort architectural history for some reason is getting a bit insulting, to say the least. I'm sure you and others can understand that particularly if those people offer nothing we've never seen before. We've been hearing from some others that DM may have some new evidence of something to do with Merion. We've simply been asking him to produce it if that's true. To date he hasn't for some reason. If he has something new we've never been aware of before I hope he does produce it. But if this is just going to be a reinterpretation of the same things we went over last year I can't see that's worth doing on here.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2008, 10:15:43 AM by TEPaul »

Joe Bausch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #22 on: April 07, 2008, 10:25:55 AM »
Here is a snippet of the October 12, 1913 Philadelphia Public Ledger article by William H. Evans that talked about all kinds of stuff that day, including Sea View:



Note:  we've since learned that Evans was a member at Lansdowne Country Club during those years he wrote for the Ledger.
@jwbausch (for new photo albums)
The site for the Cobb's Creek project:  https://cobbscreek.org/
Nearly all Delaware Valley golf courses in photo albums: Bausch Collection

Patrick_Mucci

Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #23 on: April 07, 2008, 10:50:30 AM »

David even did some pretty impressive research on ship manifests from that time to prove his point.


Did these ship manifests list all those people by name that did NOT sail on said ship?  Or did they instead try to name all those people on those ships and perhaps weren't always complete or accurate?

Joe,

Ship Manifests were like bar codes on your boarding pass today.
It's unlikely that their margins for error were substantive.
Ship Manifests were an integral part of standard maritime practices long before 1912.

David Moriarty's, Tom MacWood's and others research have seemed to have taught us that written accounts in newspapers, magazines and books weren't as accurate.

TEPaul,

Tom MacWood and I have traded emails.

I'd like to see Tom MacWood return as well.

I respected his research efforts, but, I didn't always agree with his conclusions.  Nonetheless, he created and discussed meaningful architectural subjects, not the OT drivel now systemic on the site.

I've encouraged Tom MacWood and David Moriarty to return, I learned a great deal from both of them, and enjoyed discussion and debate with them.

RJ_Daley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: David Moriarty
« Reply #24 on: April 07, 2008, 12:06:40 PM »
Pat, me too... 8) ;D
No actual golf rounds were ruined or delayed, nor golf rules broken, in the taking of any photographs that may be displayed by the above forum user.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back