Has GolfWRX lost its Luster (Split from Lurker thread)

[Gxgolfer]

I started the lurker thread on April 6 2005, 12:46 PM. Posting traffic was low and I was encouraging people to interact with each other and share common experiences. Same as its intent now. I didn't want people to be seemingly intimidated because of the level of conversation or people's supposed skill level. This forum is for everyone of all skill levels to learn, enjoy, and share.

 

 

Duncan, Zack and all instructors are busy people and offered information based on what was presented to them. Are they obligated to provide in depth 12 step analytical instruction on your swing from videos on the Internet which may not provide the right angles or other key points of relevant information?

 

If you have a specific issue or swing theory you wish to talk about, there are more than a few people that will go deep into the process as their time allows. Look at the multitude of Stack and Tilt and Hogan thread.

 

Obviously you found other sites that fits your interest more, taking shots at owners, admins, and other members here is certainly not the right approach to express your opinions.

[Furrankee]

I started the lurker thread on April 6 2005, 12:46 PM. Posting traffic was low and I was encouraging people to interact with each other and share common experiences. Same as its intent now.

 

 

Duncan, Zack and all instructors are busy people and offered information based on what was presented to them. Are they obligated to provide in depth 12 step analytical instruction on your swing from videos on the Internet which may not provide the right angles or other key points of relevant information?

 

If you have a specific issue or swing theory you wish to talk about, there are more than a few people that will go deep into the process as their time allows. Look at the multitude of Stack and Tilt and Hogan thread.

 

Obviously you found other sites that fits your interest more, taking shots at owners, admins, and other members here is certainly not the right approach to express your opinions.

 

 

Why do you think posting traffic was low then? Why do you think it was low now?

[Gxgolfer]

I started the lurker thread on April 6 2005, 12:46 PM. Posting traffic was low and I was encouraging people to interact with each other and share common experiences. Same as its intent now.

 

 

Duncan, Zack and all instructors are busy people and offered information based on what was presented to them. Are they obligated to provide in depth 12 step analytical instruction on your swing from videos on the Internet which may not provide the right angles or other key points of relevant information?

 

If you have a specific issue or swing theory you wish to talk about, there are more than a few people that will go deep into the process as their time allows. Look at the multitude of Stack and Tilt and Hogan thread.

 

Obviously you found other sites that fits your interest more, taking shots at owners, admins, and other members here is certainly not the right approach to express your opinions.

 

 

Why do you think posting traffic was low then? Why do you think it was low now?

 

Because the site was one month old. Posting Traffic is fine now but, we are always welcoming of more intelligent, thought provoking and enjoyable posts. Its mostly a legacy thread now to encourage others to join in and to show others that its never too late to join in on the fun.

[Furrankee]

I started the lurker thread on April 6 2005, 12:46 PM. Posting traffic was low and I was encouraging people to interact with each other and share common experiences. Same as its intent now.

 

 

Duncan, Zack and all instructors are busy people and offered information based on what was presented to them. Are they obligated to provide in depth 12 step analytical instruction on your swing from videos on the Internet which may not provide the right angles or other key points of relevant information?

 

If you have a specific issue or swing theory you wish to talk about, there are more than a few people that will go deep into the process as their time allows. Look at the multitude of Stack and Tilt and Hogan thread.

 

Obviously you found other sites that fits your interest more, taking shots at owners, admins, and other members here is certainly not the right approach to express your opinions.

 

 

Why do you think posting traffic was low then? Why do you think it was low now?

 

Because the site was one month old. Posting Traffic is fine now but, we are always welcoming of more intelligent, thought provoking and enjoyable posts. Its mostly a legacy thread now to encourage others to join in and to show others that its never too late to join in on the fun.

 

So it's a morale booster thread. I had no idea. I thought the "Are you a lurker" question was a nice way of asking "why are you lurking?"

[Gxgolfer]

I started the lurker thread on April 6 2005, 12:46 PM. Posting traffic was low and I was encouraging people to interact with each other and share common experiences. Same as its intent now.

 

 

Duncan, Zack and all instructors are busy people and offered information based on what was presented to them. Are they obligated to provide in depth 12 step analytical instruction on your swing from videos on the Internet which may not provide the right angles or other key points of relevant information?

 

If you have a specific issue or swing theory you wish to talk about, there are more than a few people that will go deep into the process as their time allows. Look at the multitude of Stack and Tilt and Hogan thread.

 

Obviously you found other sites that fits your interest more, taking shots at owners, admins, and other members here is certainly not the right approach to express your opinions.

 

 

Why do you think posting traffic was low then? Why do you think it was low now?

 

Because the site was one month old. Posting Traffic is fine now but, we are always welcoming of more intelligent, thought provoking and enjoyable posts. Its mostly a legacy thread now to encourage others to join in and to show others that its never too late to join in on the fun.

 

So it's a morale booster thread. I had no idea. I thought the "Are you a lurker" question was a nice way of asking "why are you lurking?"

 

 

Morale booster??? On April 6, 2005, there were 9 new topics created that day. Yesterday there were 159 new topics. We have 100k unique Viewers a month. Those are people who regularly visit this site. We have 35k registered Members and a fraction of them post frequently. The thread is there to encourage people to break the ice because generally after they have overcome that fear, then they get more courage to speak out.

 

It's not a trash the owners and site question. There are much more tactful and classier ways to do that.

 

This site is like an Online Country Club. We have Head Pros, Marshals, etc. Are most Country Club Owners Golf Professionals?

[Viking Golfer]

I still think it's great that this thread hasn't been closed yet. I know of some other site, where this discussion would have been terminated by now :russian_roulette:

 

BTW I'm not a lurker in here :cheesy:

[DemolitionMan]

I still think it's great that this thread hasn't been closed yet. I know of some other site, where this discussion would have been terminated by now :russian_roulette:

 

BTW I'm not a lurker in here :cheesy:

 

Well, it should be closed, but it's better when the community as a whole votes for thread popularity with their keyboards rather than moderators making the determination all the time. Perhaps we are just showing that we can provide the deepest of wet, sandy bunkers.

 

Here at GolfWRX, we try and support all members, even those with a learning disability. Stay tuned for the announcement of our sister site GolfWLD.com for all the details.

 

Cheers

[easyyy]

Honestly, this site lost its luster long ago.

 

Three reasons.

 

One. It's too much about equipment. Understand marketing. It's all hype. Please. I could care less about Mizuno's MP 57s. Won't make a difference in my game at all. Neither will the next new product coming out in 2010 UNLESS the USGA alters equipment rules.

 

Two. There's no focus on this site.

 

Three. Does the sites' owners have any golf-related credentials? GSED? PGA certified teaching pro? Even play on a college golf team?

 

Probably not.

 

Which leads to my last point. How can members respect the authorities that create a website related to golf when they don't even have credentials related to golf?

 

I think that's why everyone feels like they can be their own king in here. There's no authority here that shows his face, hears his voice, understand his philosophies. ON GOLF.

 

I lurk to find the focus, to read something appealing, but there aren't many nowadays.

 

EDIT: I can see why this first post reads as "bashing". My apologies. No offense given to owners of site.

 

 

Well this is a good topic for me. Talk about close for comfort, this is it.

 

Ryan and I as well as the Marshall's and many of our active members have spent countless hours dedicated to supporting this open community. We have invested time and $ to create a very focused website dedicated to golf. Then I here it has lost it luster???? Well please understand when I say "don't let the door hit you in the A**". Seriously please do so and find you way elsewhere. Times change and people change. You can find your thing elsewhere.

 

Coming off a trip to Chicago to cover the Cog Hill for the site it seems we have fallen short to satisfy your requirements. Luckily for you there is many other places you can go.

 

Do I have enough credentials to run the site? Sure do. Here they are...

 

I love the game.

 

That is the credential that got me here and all the credentials I need to be in the position I am in. I love to create a healthy place like this and I love this game. We have to remember this site is here for all golfers. It is a community of golf fanatics and one is no better than another. The only requirement for membership is an email address and the love of the game. We can talk all day about why GolfWRX is here and what separates us from others. Most of you know Ryan and I do not lean on this site for income. We are here so you can have a place to be proud of. A place that has high standards and is clean from bias and ulterior motivations. We consider this site an oasis for golfers to come and voice an opinion about golf related topics. To actually come and contribute to a community that has integity with high standards.

 

Do I need credentials? Sure I do. I need to stay true to our values and maintain a high level of integrity every day. I have to maintain the love of this game with the passion I had years ago when we started. I fight for the future of this site with unyielding passion for all of us on a regular basis.

 

Why? So we can all have a place to be proud of. A place we are all proud to be contributors to. Our experts are in our membership. They are here every day.

 

 

 

When my love for this game becomes so intense I come here to find and extention of it. A 24hr store for golf. What not to love??? Place rocks.

 

Richard

[DemolitionMan]

Honestly, this site lost its luster long ago.

 

Three reasons.

 

One. It's too much about equipment. Understand marketing. It's all hype. Please. I could care less about Mizuno's MP 57s. Won't make a difference in my game at all. Neither will the next new product coming out in 2010 UNLESS the USGA alters equipment rules.

 

Two. There's no focus on this site.

 

Three. Does the sites' owners have any golf-related credentials? GSED? PGA certified teaching pro? Even play on a college golf team?

 

Probably not.

 

Which leads to my last point. How can members respect the authorities that create a website related to golf when they don't even have credentials related to golf?

 

I think that's why everyone feels like they can be their own king in here. There's no authority here that shows his face, hears his voice, understand his philosophies. ON GOLF.

 

I lurk to find the focus, to read something appealing, but there aren't many nowadays.

 

EDIT: I can see why this first post reads as "bashing". My apologies. No offense given to owners of site.

 

 

Do I have enough credentials to run the site? Sure do. Here they are...

 

I love the game.

 

 

Richard

 

And that is the only credential that matters.

[trashhaulinggolfer316]

I don't understand the purpose of this post. If you have a problem with the site then you should find another site or something else to divulge your time into.

 

Some people like seeing info on new equipment and some don't. If you don't like posts about things like that then skip that post and go onto another post.

 

I am growing tired of people complaining about piddle things like this. It is posts like this one that put a negative spin on the site.

 

Sorry you don't enjoy the site, but there are plenty of us that do.

 

As for the moderators and owners, who cares what their background is in golf? They enjoy the sport just as much as we do and they created and run this site for golf nuts like us who want to talk about the in and outs of the sport. I don't care if they are a PGA teacher, former college golfer, or a garbage man (not bashing garbage men).

 

Hey now!!!! :russian_roulette: Just kidding, nothin' but love. I know I don't have the capacity to run a site such as this, that is why I'm a manager for a large waste hauling company, it takes far less talent!!!

 

Just a quick comment on Richards last post- Absolutely the reason why I have come to love, and rely, on this community to feed this addiction known as "Golfing"!!!!!! Enough procrastinating, where do I sign up for membership? Whatever effort I can make to make this a better place, and a permanant one on the internet, deserves my full support.

[bjackson]

When my love for this game becomes so intense I come here to find and extention of it. A 24hr store for golf. What not to love??? Place rocks.

 

 

Hell yeah Richard. That's why this is my hompage. Sure this place seems slower some days, but honestly now, name one other UNBIASED ORGANIZED DEMOCRATIC golf website of the web that is not specific to one part of the game. This is it. This is my online home. This place has done everything but lose its luster. Keep it up to those that run the site. It's appreciated.

[Roland]

I'd thought id give my 2p since i am fairly new. Im quite focused on equipment and coaching, im in my last year of the pga degree and a club geek. I always look here for equipment info but didnt actually know there was a swing forum here until yesterday. I like this site a lot because of the massive amount of posts and threads on golf regardless if it is in my interest or not. My only problem I have had so far is not having enough time to read everything. If something doesnt interest me or catch my "focus", I wont read it. E.g i rarely read a S & T thread as i disagree with the method and dont want to upset anyone with having a blazing argument over a golf swing :russian_roulette:

 

This site is the best around for golf as a whole topic. End of. The owners here and the mods do a very good job and I dont think they should be attacked like i have noticed. I Mod for a uk site and I know how difficult it is to keep the peace. For all those poking endless questions in this thread i feel the answer is simple. Make your criticisms constructive, dont attack or poke holes in the system or who runs it. These guys put in a lot of hard work to keep this place going and run fuctionally.

 

keep up the good work guys

 

 

Off to the swing forum

 

Ben

[iyan7]

I love this site, has improved my play, my knowledge and my love for the game. But enough said about that.

 

Maybe we can find some constructive things as a take away from furrankee's post. Perhaps for the better?

 

Been following this thread, at least comments stay professional enough. As it should be in our game.

 

Catch you guys again later when I get home.

[Golfchicago]

One: Too many equipment posts? You're opinion I guess. Here's a solution for you - go to the threads that don't cover equipment (and there are many). The Header "General Golf (non-equipment)" might be a bit of a clue. Another secret I find really helpful - that I'll reveal here free of charge: I ignore the threads I'm not interested in.

 

Two: Loss of focus? What? This is a user driven board. As with any such discussion board based on that model, it is never going to be "focused" - it ebbs and flows with the interests of the users. The only way to "focus" a discussion board is for the moderators to assert content control. I certainly am happy they don't. There are general categories that organize the board (different than "focusing" it), and these not only work pretty well, the mods are good about relocating posts if the a thread is better in another category.

 

Three: Qualifications of the owners? This is the most absurd argument I've ever seen. Are they PGA Credentialed? Who cares? They aren't playing in the PGA, or giving you lessons. They are running a website. Tiger Woods is the most qualified golfer on earth. Guess what, Tiger Woods does not run the Tiger Woods website. Why? He's qualified to golf - not to run a website (he's merely a "content provider)". He hires people that can run websites (a very different skill set than golfing) to run his.

 

What are the qualifications to run a website? Well (as someone that hires people to do so) there is no single credential that is universally recognized (like a PGA test or something) ... in fact, many of those that run some of the biggest websites don't even have IT degrees ... but in general, the test of someone's ability to run a public, user driven website is ... eyeballs. Does the site have 20 users? 200? 2,000? or 20,000?

 

In these terms, the "credentials" of the owners are the fact that they've built one of the biggest, busiest, most active discussion boards on the internet for serious golfers.

 

 

Very intelligent response. This is the best presented rebuttal to the orginal poster. This basically blows away the attack on the owners and the comments about this Board. Furrankee claims he didn't mean what he said. Well you just can't come into our sandbox, throw sand in our eyes three times and say I didn't mean to throw sand in your eyes. Give me a break, he knew exactly what he was writing and he knew exactly what he was saying. Sorry Furrankee, I don't believe your retraction. I don't know if I should even label it as a retraction. At one point you even said we haven't convinced you and let bygones be bygones. No way. You insulted the community and you insulted the ownership. There is no way I am letting bygones be bygones without a formal apology. All you dished out is excuses. I can easily walk away from this thread, but my opinion of you is not a good one. Let me make this very clear, if you decide to insult us with another thread, you will be corrected again. Quite frankly, the more you post in this thread the worse you look. You are better off letting this post die, then trying to lie your way out of your original statements. Let me be the first to say that I am human and make mistakes. When I realize I've made a mistake, I apologize immediately. I don't make up excuses or give lame reasons for why I screwed up. The problem I have with Furrankee is his apoplgy isn't an apology. I'm done.

[Furrankee]

One: Too many equipment posts? You're opinion I guess. Here's a solution for you - go to the threads that don't cover equipment (and there are many). The Header "General Golf (non-equipment)" might be a bit of a clue. Another secret I find really helpful - that I'll reveal here free of charge: I ignore the threads I'm not interested in.

 

Two: Loss of focus? What? This is a user driven board. As with any such discussion board based on that model, it is never going to be "focused" - it ebbs and flows with the interests of the users. The only way to "focus" a discussion board is for the moderators to assert content control. I certainly am happy they don't. There are general categories that organize the board (different than "focusing" it), and these not only work pretty well, the mods are good about relocating posts if the a thread is better in another category.

 

Three: Qualifications of the owners? This is the most absurd argument I've ever seen. Are they PGA Credentialed? Who cares? They aren't playing in the PGA, or giving you lessons. They are running a website. Tiger Woods is the most qualified golfer on earth. Guess what, Tiger Woods does not run the Tiger Woods website. Why? He's qualified to golf - not to run a website (he's merely a "content provider)". He hires people that can run websites (a very different skill set than golfing) to run his.

 

What are the qualifications to run a website? Well (as someone that hires people to do so) there is no single credential that is universally recognized (like a PGA test or something) ... in fact, many of those that run some of the biggest websites don't even have IT degrees ... but in general, the test of someone's ability to run a public, user driven website is ... eyeballs. Does the site have 20 users? 200? 2,000? or 20,000?

 

In these terms, the "credentials" of the owners are the fact that they've built one of the biggest, busiest, most active discussion boards on the internet for serious golfers.

 

For every example you provide that has an owner of a site provide content but not run his or her website (Tiger Woods), there is an equal amount of those that do provide the content and run their own site (Brian Manzella). You can't be cherry picking with your arguments. And I'm sure you know this extends far beyond just the golfing sites. I can list countless other start-ups that are managed and content driven by the owners themselves - that is message board based.

 

Tiger Woods, even though he isn't the web programmer or management of his own site, he does provide the content and therefore his usefulness is honored. In that case, he is the website. Without him there is no Tiger Woods website driven by the content provided by Tiger Woods.

 

Would the army, have as a general, someone who only had experience in combat...from basic training? The arguments can go back and forth.

 

I do have many arguments supporting many of your opinions. Many many in fact. I love this site. I love the fact that I can read slicefixer, tiltmaetro and hayam with swing theories. sergizmo and choeppner with the putters, jkwok and taylormadefan with clubmaking amongst other things, midasmulligan with his reasoning ability, hoganfan924, texasag, boba, rareguitar, metalhead with their input, knowledge and humor, eassy, gxgolfer and others with tour pix. I know there are science guys in here too. And I know I left hundreds out.

 

But the post trend nowadays, in my opinion anyway (I could be completely wrong) is that it's getting a little community college.

 

And when the majority of the members that create new topics, post on every new post they see, are the community college type, the older ones that want stimulation, lurk. Worst case, they move on.

 

Last point: the mods. You guys remind me so much of the Stanford Prison experiment.

[Keyser Soze]

focus? you're the guy who posted youtube links of his daughter playing kung-fu, right?

repetitious coverage? how many times you going to ask how to regrip your clubs?

you've apologized for making the crazy comment about the owners' qualifications, and still you're defending the position?

 

you may not have been born stupid, but you own the title now. way to go, you. :russian_roulette:

[Gxgolfer]

One: Too many equipment posts? You're opinion I guess. Here's a solution for you - go to the threads that don't cover equipment (and there are many). The Header "General Golf (non-equipment)" might be a bit of a clue. Another secret I find really helpful - that I'll reveal here free of charge: I ignore the threads I'm not interested in.

 

Two: Loss of focus? What? This is a user driven board. As with any such discussion board based on that model, it is never going to be "focused" - it ebbs and flows with the interests of the users. The only way to "focus" a discussion board is for the moderators to assert content control. I certainly am happy they don't. There are general categories that organize the board (different than "focusing" it), and these not only work pretty well, the mods are good about relocating posts if the a thread is better in another category.

 

Three: Qualifications of the owners? This is the most absurd argument I've ever seen. Are they PGA Credentialed? Who cares? They aren't playing in the PGA, or giving you lessons. They are running a website. Tiger Woods is the most qualified golfer on earth. Guess what, Tiger Woods does not run the Tiger Woods website. Why? He's qualified to golf - not to run a website (he's merely a "content provider)". He hires people that can run websites (a very different skill set than golfing) to run his.

 

What are the qualifications to run a website? Well (as someone that hires people to do so) there is no single credential that is universally recognized (like a PGA test or something) ... in fact, many of those that run some of the biggest websites don't even have IT degrees ... but in general, the test of someone's ability to run a public, user driven website is ... eyeballs. Does the site have 20 users? 200? 2,000? or 20,000?

 

In these terms, the "credentials" of the owners are the fact that they've built one of the biggest, busiest, most active discussion boards on the internet for serious golfers.

 

Midasmulligan,

 

For every example you provide that has an owner of a site provide content but not run his or her website (Tiger Woods), there is an equal amount of those that do provide the content and run their own site (Brian Manzella). You can't be cherry picking with your arguments. And I'm sure you know this extends far beyond just the golfing sites. I can list countless other start-ups that are managed and content driven by the owners themselves.

 

Tiger Woods, even though he isn't the web programmer or managmenet of his own site, he does provide the content and therefore his usefulness is honored. In that case, he is the website.

 

What happens when this site gets sold? Who's going to be compensated? Are they even?

 

furrankee this is getting comical,

 

I hope you are finding this funny because if not, then there are some deeper issues here.

 

I really don't understand your point? Are you now discounting the website owners credentials still or are you still trying to support your point that only Industry Insider can run a succesful business? Are you now questioning the website owners motives as purely monetary? As stated many times, Richard and I don't plan on selling this site but, what does that matter? Business change hands everyday, its part of life. Also, I'm sure if there is such a big pay day in this, my wife and family would be more understanding. Are you saying that those with credentials who run a website, like Brian Manzella, don't do it for profit and to directly benefit themselves? Or are you implying that this is just a big scheme Richard and I have come up with to build a business and sell the membership down the river?

 

You also clearly seem to not understand the cost, technology, or time involved to run a website of this size or, what is like to deal with the public 24/7/365. What are your credentials that you can critique a website and how its run? What's your hourly rate as we clearly must be doing something wrong.

 

You still have offered no solutions beyond criticizing ownership and the website.

[Placebo]

When pigs fly this thread will turn in a positive direction. When the argument starts breaking down into symantecs it is done imo. :russian_roulette:

 

Focus on your goals, and don't worry about others.

[Placebo]

Why are you here then?

Because negative attention is better than NO attention.

[littlepingman]

focus? you're the guy who posted youtube links of his daughter playing kung-fu, right?

repetitious coverage? how many times you going to ask how to regrip your clubs?

you've apologized for making the crazy comment about the owners' qualifications, and still you're defending the position?

 

you may not have been born stupid, but you own the title now. way to go, you. :russian_roulette:

 

Nice signature Mr. Durden. :cheesy:

[HeadonaStick]

One: Too many equipment posts? You're opinion I guess. Here's a solution for you - go to the threads that don't cover equipment (and there are many). The Header "General Golf (non-equipment)" might be a bit of a clue. Another secret I find really helpful - that I'll reveal here free of charge: I ignore the threads I'm not interested in.

 

Two: Loss of focus? What? This is a user driven board. As with any such discussion board based on that model, it is never going to be "focused" - it ebbs and flows with the interests of the users. The only way to "focus" a discussion board is for the moderators to assert content control. I certainly am happy they don't. There are general categories that organize the board (different than "focusing" it), and these not only work pretty well, the mods are good about relocating posts if the a thread is better in another category.

 

Three: Qualifications of the owners? This is the most absurd argument I've ever seen. Are they PGA Credentialed? Who cares? They aren't playing in the PGA, or giving you lessons. They are running a website. Tiger Woods is the most qualified golfer on earth. Guess what, Tiger Woods does not run the Tiger Woods website. Why? He's qualified to golf - not to run a website (he's merely a "content provider)". He hires people that can run websites (a very different skill set than golfing) to run his.

 

What are the qualifications to run a website? Well (as someone that hires people to do so) there is no single credential that is universally recognized (like a PGA test or something) ... in fact, many of those that run some of the biggest websites don't even have IT degrees ... but in general, the test of someone's ability to run a public, user driven website is ... eyeballs. Does the site have 20 users? 200? 2,000? or 20,000?

 

In these terms, the "credentials" of the owners are the fact that they've built one of the biggest, busiest, most active discussion boards on the internet for serious golfers.

 

For every example you provide that has an owner of a site provide content but not run his or her website (Tiger Woods), there is an equal amount of those that do provide the content and run their own site (Brian Manzella). You can't be cherry picking with your arguments. And I'm sure you know this extends far beyond just the golfing sites. I can list countless other start-ups that are managed and content driven by the owners themselves - that is message board based.

 

Tiger Woods, even though he isn't the web programmer or management of his own site, he does provide the content and therefore his usefulness is honored. In that case, he is the website. Without him there is no Tiger Woods website driven by the content provided by Tiger Woods.

 

Your argument is fatally flawed.

 

The owners here do not provide the content; the members do.

 

Would the army, have as a general, someone who only had experience in combat...from basic training? The arguments can go back and forth.

 

The Army does, as do the other branches of the service, have generals who have never experienced combat.

 

I do have many arguments supporting many of your opinions. Many many in fact. I love this site. I love the fact that I can read slicefixer, tiltmaetro and hayam with swing theories. sergizmo and choeppner with the putters, jkwok and taylormadefan with clubmaking amongst other things, midasmulligan with his reasoning ability, hoganfan924, texasag, boba, rareguitar, metalhead with their input, knowledge and humor, eassy, gxgolfer and others with tour pix. I know there are science guys in here too. And I know I left hundreds out.

 

But, do you have an ygood arguments? Could you pull those out?

 

But the post trend nowadays, in my opinion anyway (I could be completely wrong) is that it's getting a little community college.

 

And when the majority of the members that create new topics, post on every new post they see, are the community college type, the older ones that want stimulation, lurk. Worst case, they move on.

I am not sure what you are getting at here.

 

People in a community shouldn't contribute? People who want stimulation don't participate? People in an informal setting must be experts to chat?

 

Please, could you say more on this?

 

Last point: the mods. You guys remind me so much of the Stanford Prison experiment.

Really? I'd like your informed opinion on how anything here is like the Stanford Prison experiment? You'll have to work hard to make an analogy comparing the experiment to an internet forum.

[stage1350]

Finally, I don't care if the site is run by Lesbian Albino Eskimos who visit kindergarten every day.

 

Do the lesbians have their own subsection yet? :russian_roulette:

[raidernut1234]

OK, I vote this thread has run its course. CLOSE IT NOW!! Anyone else agree??

[Gxgolfer]

Closed per furrankee request.

[dmboak]

I like golf.