Scotty Cameron Classic Mini

[tpariff]

You know what's interesting about "stuff" vs. friendships? I see people regularly state that they are more proud of the friends they've made collecting than the items they've collected. But it's funny how that changes when there's a threat of being cut off from special things. I guess those friendships really aren't that important after all.

Kevin

[biscuity]

[quote name='RobotDoctor' post='1843158' date='Jul 25 2009, 04:50 PM']How about some people (a moderator for example) making a decision that friendships cannot be bought by some putter designer and perks when the line in the sand is drawn. Maybe a former moderator of a fan site takes friendship over personal greed and does not take ranting threats kindly and will buy their [i]"oil cloth"[/i] anywhere they choose. I just know that for some people friendships and associations cannot be purchased but a perk putter here and there.[/quote]


The line in the sand was only drawn for a few people. Those people were insiders with special access and special responsibilities. They, of all people, need to be 100% dedicated, trustworthy with passwords, resposible for special information, and able to moderate according to the rules of the forum. Especially on a forum that is dedicated 100% to Cameron products. If the moderators don't agree with that, then they should not be moderators.

Everyone else (the public) has the opportunity to subscribe to as many forums as they want.

[RobotDoctor]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1843186' date='Jul 25 2009, 06:12 PM'][quote name='RobotDoctor' post='1843158' date='Jul 25 2009, 04:50 PM']How about some people (a moderator for example) making a decision that friendships cannot be bought by some putter designer and perks when the line in the sand is drawn. Maybe a former moderator of a fan site takes friendship over personal greed and does not take ranting threats kindly and will buy their [i]"oil cloth"[/i] anywhere they choose. I just know that for some people friendships and associations cannot be purchased but a perk putter here and there.[/quote]


The line in the sand was only drawn for a few people. Those people were insiders with special access and special responsibilities. They, of all people, need to be 100% dedicated, trustworthy with passwords, resposible for special information, and able to moderate according to the rules of the forum. Especially on a forum that is dedicated 100% to Cameron products. If the moderators don't agree with that, then they should not be moderators.

Everyone else (the public) has the opportunity to subscribe to as many forums as they want.
[/quote]


I agree that the public are free to subscribe to any forum they want, as many as they want. However, when a dedicated forum is owned by a private individual and that individual wants to create another then they are free to do so. People have moderators on IBBs because this is the only way to manage these sites. Let's just say we probably will never come to a consensus regarding this particular topic. I was not at the location where the specifics of the TCC/PT ordeal (and players) was revealed. I have come to learn of some details pertaining to the conversation and I will leave anything that I know, that was not posted by Greg, to be revealed by the appropriate people.

I just know if anyone ever made me choose an IBB over friendship then my decision would be easily made. And that is all I have to say about that.

[reflog74]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1843150' date='Jul 25 2009, 07:43 PM'][quote name='reflog74' post='1842900' date='Jul 25 2009, 01:46 PM']Clint,

What you've been assuming, i.e. what you stated your understanding to be, is wrong. You don't know me. We've never met. You don't know that I received any "special" consideration for being a TCC mod (I did not). And, you don't know what I was told about my choices with regard to TCC/PT.

Don't post as if you do. And don't include me in your assumptions and generalizations.

Finally, don't forget that back then TCC was an independent website and we had no "masters". The same is true at PT today. I think we could have run both sites peacefully, but we never got a chance to try.

John[/quote]

The information that CPSOX wrote was right in line with the information I received from a former TCC "insider". He stated that TCC moderators [b]"have access to Scotty and regularly get custom putters and other items that no one else has access to."[/b]

So, while you may have not been given the perks, other TCC moderators have clearly received special items and opportunities. Which is fine with me, I have no problem with moderators being rewarded for their efforts. But, as we've seen, when someone gets cut off from the perks they sometimes decide to go on an internet-wide mission of bashing.
[/quote]

Maybe that's true now. As for prior to the changeover, you don't know what you're talking about.

John

[tangojay]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1843150' date='Jul 25 2009, 06:43 PM'][quote name='reflog74' post='1842900' date='Jul 25 2009, 01:46 PM']Clint,

What you've been assuming, i.e. what you stated your understanding to be, is wrong. You don't know me. We've never met. You don't know that I received any "special" consideration for being a TCC mod (I did not). And, you don't know what I was told about my choices with regard to TCC/PT.

Don't post as if you do. And don't include me in your assumptions and generalizations.

Finally, don't forget that back then TCC was an independent website and we had no "masters". The same is true at PT today. I think we could have run both sites peacefully, but we never got a chance to try.

John[/quote]

The information that CPSOX wrote was right in line with the information I received from a former TCC "insider". He stated that TCC moderators [b]"have access to Scotty and regularly get custom putters and other items that no one else has access to."[/b]

So, while you may have not been given the perks, other TCC moderators have clearly received special items and opportunities. Which is fine with me, I have no problem with moderators being rewarded for their efforts. But, as we've seen, when someone gets cut off from the perks they sometimes decide to go on an internet-wide mission of bashing.
[/quote]

Those who defend SC "honor" over and over have also been know to be rewarded for their efforts, you have continued to state that you have nothing against anyone but yet every reply is in defense of SC, you have been critic of PT mods but praised TCC mods.

So are we to surmise that there is something in it for you ?

[xxio]

I wonder what Scotty would offer Jick to moderate TCC/change sides?

[biscuity]

[quote name='tangojay' post='1843416' date='Jul 25 2009, 08:03 PM']Those who defend SC "honor" over and over have also been know to be rewarded for their efforts, you have continued to state that you have nothing against anyone but yet every reply is in defense of SC, you have been critic of PT mods but praised TCC mods.

So are we to surmise that there is something in it for you ?[/quote]


There's nothing in it for me at all. The main reason I'm interested is because the hypocrisy of the Scotty Haters is hilarious to me. They freely call Scotty a copy-cat, yet when someone calls one of their favorite brands a copy-cat they freak out and call it a low blow. And then when I call them Scotty Haters they deny they hate him. In one thread on Puttertalk a guy denied he hated Scotty, then proceeded to call him a "jerk" twice in the same post.

There are at least two sides to every story. A little bit of research and some common sense tell me that if Scotty Cameron is such an evil person he wouldn't be as successful and popular as he is today. A little bit of research shows that saying Scotty ordered 5 Classic Mini putters is definitely a possibility, certainly not "complete BS". A little bit of research shows who foregasim really is, and why he hates Scotty so much. With that much hatred I'm not going to put very much faith in what he writes, it's all skewed with his obviously bitter perspective.

Clearly there are some people who have had negative experiences with Scotty Cameron and the whole collectables situation. Clearly Scotty Cameron is a savvy businessman who can strong-arm people if he wants to, but he's worked hard to get in that position. A few strong-arm moves don't mean everything he does is evil. He's been in business for almost 20 years and must have had personal dealings with thousands of different vendors. If he was that bad there would be a lot more than a handful of stories for foregasim to use.

If you read Scotty's personal [url="http://scottycameronblog.com/"]blog[/url] it's obvious he is talented, passionate about putters, gives a lot of personal attention to thousands of touring pros around the world, cares about his customers, maintains a solid business relationship with Acushnet, and combines all of that to bring nice equipment to the golf market. Thousands and thousands of people are happy with their Scotty Cameron putters, a few people are very bitter. A forum like this gives a soap box to the vocal minority. It's our responsibility to weigh both sides of the story and put it in perspective before we start believing everything either side says.

[xxio]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1843490' date='Jul 26 2009, 12:09 PM']It's our responsibility to weigh both sides of the story and put it in perspective before we start believing everything either side says.[/quote]


I agree.

Does that mean you agree that there are inconsistencies in on the website and what Scotty has said/stamped with regards to the Mini? I will repeat nothing is wrong if Scotty wants to claim all the accolades but if there is something wrong somewhere he should be ready to take the blame as well. Same with the fans. Go ahead claim the value of $35-40k for the Mini and the interest that goes with that, but if there is something wrong or inconsistent with the history around it. Man up and take that too.

If we research on Forgaism and his hatred, it means we should also research on NickPoz and his background just to be fair? He should be asked to answer the same collection questions you asked Foregasim to answer.

Maybe we should research on every CC and Golfwrx member who has posted in this thread as well.

[biscuity]

Sure, there are inconsistencies. If it was my web site I'd change it right away. I'd just list it as "extremely rare" and be done with it. I see no need for a public apology because there is a lot of confusion about how many really exist. I don't think Scotty knows. Like CPSOX said, all of this happened a long time ago before there was a significant collectible market, before Scotty was a big success, the Classic Minis were worth very little when they were made, they never sold them on the retail market.

I'd recommend doing research on the main players in any debate, that includes both sides. I've been up front with who I am and why I'm interested. Nick and Greg as well. Foregasim refuses to answer a simple yes or no question on who he is. That alone should tell you something.

[jick]

I think we should not go into individual personalities but more about the issue.

Does it matter who foregasim or biscuity really are? As long as what they say has basis and deals with the issues, then it should be ok.

There is no need for a background check for the individual posters to confirm the things Cameron has said because they were posted in official sites and interviews.

Cameron said "less than 5" minis were made. That is fair game to discuss his statement and disprove it otherwise.

When Cameron gives over-the-top ego-centric statements such as him improving on Karsten and Mills, or that he is paving the way to the new puttermakers who owe him a debt of gratitude, or that his stainless steel putters are made from recycled forks and knives, or that he feels the jealousy of many, or that he is on the verge of a discovery that will alter the future of putting itself --- then those can be attributed to Cameron and reflect on his person.

When some detectives here find out some switching of entries in the registry, that is still a public Cameron area and is fair game to discuss.

Being a section devoted purely to putters, Cameron would quality as a "public figure" here and everything he says/writes/posts is subject to public scrutiny - with all its inconsistencies, revisions, and absurdity.

So again, I think the focus should not be on who foregasim of biscuity or scottym are - but the focus should be on the issue which is Cameron.

[xxio]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1843527' date='Jul 26 2009, 12:43 PM']Sure, there are inconsistencies. If it was my web site I'd change it right away. I'd just list it as "extremely rare" and be done with it. I see no need for a public apology because there is a lot of confusion about how many really exist. I don't think Scotty knows. Like CPSOX said, all of this happened a long time ago before there was a significant collectible market, before Scotty was a big success, the Classic Minis were worth very little when they were made, they never sold them on the retail market.

I'd recommend doing research on the main players in any debate, that includes both sides. I've been up front with who I am and why I'm interested. Nick and Greg as well. Foregasim refuses to answer a simple yes or no question on who he is. That alone should tell you something.[/quote]


Good for you. Unfortunately it is not your website so until it has been corrected it is fair game.

Scotty [b]should[/b] know for the all COAs he produces or are you saying the COA system is faulty and the $80 or whatever amount people send to have their putter/poster/ball marker/divot tool graded is based on the memory of someone who makes these types of mistakes and has memory lapses. I guess Scotty Cameron should never issue a COA for any of the Minis because you say he doesn't know.

Again it is important because in the Cameron world limited=greater value.

Value......There are putters out there that have a slightly higher value than the rest of their OTR counterparts and the ONLY difference is that they say First of 500 (and to add in the edit, there are more than 500 total made, Just that there are 500 stamped with the first of 500?). It has even been argued by metallurgists and people in the metal purchasing industry that German Stainless Steel and any 303 Stainless steel is the same. GSS has no mythical properties that the "feel" difference is because that it just happens that "GSS" putters have tended to come in finishes/beadblasting or whatever media/process that produces a softer feeling putter. There is nothing wrong with paying $2,500 more for that GSS stamp IMHO as long as it is clear that you know that the trademarked stamp and not the mythical steel is what you are paying for.

If this is all dependent on the memory of one man and you say it is okay for him to have memory lapses you are a very trusting man.

[JeffreySpicoli]

There are clear themes in your attempted defenses of Scotty Cameron, biscuity.

1. At best, you overstate your case. At worst, you spread falsehoods.

Sadly, you operate as a run-and-hit smear operator. You attack and then you ignore anyone that notes where you're mistaken.

Here's a recent example:

[quote name='reflog74' post='1843265' date='Jul 25 2009, 09:09 PM'][quote name='biscuity' post='1843150' date='Jul 25 2009, 07:43 PM'][quote name='reflog74' post='1842900' date='Jul 25 2009, 01:46 PM']Clint,

What you've been assuming, i.e. what you stated your understanding to be, is wrong. You don't know me. We've never met. You don't know that I received any "special" consideration for being a TCC mod (I did not). And, you don't know what I was told about my choices with regard to TCC/PT.

Don't post as if you do. And don't include me in your assumptions and generalizations.

Finally, don't forget that back then TCC was an independent website and we had no "masters". The same is true at PT today. I think we could have run both sites peacefully, but we never got a chance to try.

John[/quote]

The information that CPSOX wrote was right in line with the information I received from a former TCC "insider". He stated that TCC moderators [b]"have access to Scotty and regularly get custom putters and other items that no one else has access to."[/b]

So, while you may have not been given the perks, other TCC moderators have clearly received special items and opportunities. Which is fine with me, I have no problem with moderators being rewarded for their efforts. But, as we've seen, when someone gets cut off from the perks they sometimes decide to go on an internet-wide mission of bashing.
[/quote]

Maybe that's true now. As for prior to the changeover, you don't know what you're talking about.

John
[/quote]

2. You play very loosely with the agreed upon principles and structures of rational argumentation (how many times can you trod out your tired [i]ad hominem[/i] attacks on foregasim?) when it suits your case but you hold others to very high and strict standards of argumentation. This is clear-cut hypocrisy. And you double the irony where you accuse others of hypocrisy!

[quote name='biscuity' post='1843490' date='Jul 26 2009, 12:09 AM']The main reason I'm interested is because the hypocrisy of the Scotty Haters is hilarious to me.[/quote]

3. You claim that you have no stake in this debate.

[quote name='biscuity' post='1843490' date='Jul 26 2009, 12:09 AM']There's nothing in it for me at all.[/quote]

But this is a quite narrow and incorrect understanding of whom may have a stake in this debate. You assume that foregasim is a collector with an axe to grind and that since you're not a big collector then you don't have a stake. In other words, you don't have enough money in the game to have a stake.

Given your irrational and concerted efforts to defend Cameron and that you do so in such an highly illogical manner, it is reasonable to conclude that you do have a stake in the game.

While your stake is not money, your actual stake has motives just as strong or stronger than the desire of money.

Your stake is your deep and abiding personal love for Scotty Cameron.

And we all know the severity of love that is blind.

[hodges]

[quote name='reflog74' post='1843265' date='Jul 25 2009, 09:09 PM'][quote name='biscuity' post='1843150' date='Jul 25 2009, 07:43 PM'][quote name='reflog74' post='1842900' date='Jul 25 2009, 01:46 PM']Clint,

What you've been assuming, i.e. what you stated your understanding to be, is wrong. You don't know me. We've never met. You don't know that I received any "special" consideration for being a TCC mod (I did not). And, you don't know what I was told about my choices with regard to TCC/PT.

Don't post as if you do. And don't include me in your assumptions and generalizations.

Finally, don't forget that back then TCC was an independent website and we had no "masters". The same is true at PT today. I think we could have run both sites peacefully, but we never got a chance to try.

John[/quote]

The information that CPSOX wrote was right in line with the information I received from a former TCC "insider". He stated that TCC moderators [b]"have access to Scotty and regularly get custom putters and other items that no one else has access to."[/b]

So, while you may have not been given the perks, other TCC moderators have clearly received special items and opportunities. Which is fine with me, I have no problem with moderators being rewarded for their efforts. But, as we've seen, when someone gets cut off from the perks they sometimes decide to go on an internet-wide mission of bashing.
[/quote]

Maybe that's true now. As for prior to the changeover, you don't know what you're talking about.

John
[/quote]

As much as Clint can't speak for you John, I don't think you can speak for all the others that were/are Mods on TCC at the time. There was a group of Mods on TCC that are west coast based and were friends of Scotty with different access that you. I believe they were friends of Scottys before they met Doug, JR or you. Obviously your choice wasn't as hard if you had no special privleges.

I found the concept of choosing friends challenging at first but as other circumstances have become known to me, as I see peoples true personalities revealed, I understand better. In this case it was better to stick with old friends.

[tangojay]

Here are my views:

1) If your not a PGA star, SC he does not care who you are!

2) SC will use you until he does not need you anymore.

3) The chances of SC being the one who "stamps" your putter are less than 1%

4) If you like SC merchandise, buy it now, prices are great , but remember, most experts agree that it no longer an investement.



Biscuty, you stated the following (excuse the cut and paste, I have not figured out the quote insert feature):

[u]"I'd recommend doing research on the main players in any debate, that includes both sides" [/u]

You also stated :

[i]" Clearly there are some people who have had negative experiences with Scotty Cameron and the whole collectables situation. Clearly Scotty Cameron is a savvy businessman who can strong-arm people if he wants to, but he's worked hard to get in that position. A few strong-arm moves don't mean everything he does is evil. He's been in business for almost 20 years and must have had personal dealings with thousands of different vendors. If he was that bad there would be a lot more than a handful of stories for foregasim to use.

If you read Scotty's personal blog it's obvious he is talented, passionate about putters, gives a lot of personal attention to thousands of touring pros around the world, cares about his customers, maintains a solid business relationship with Acushnet, and combines all of that to bring nice equipment to the golf market. Thousands and thousands of people are happy with their Scotty Cameron putters, a few people are very bitter"[/i]

Seems you need to follow your own advise and research SC, the strong arm comment reminds of the old mob movies were the gangster tells merchants to do as he says or else.
You continue to defend SC and bash those who say anything remotely negative about SC, you made statemets against ALL PT moderators, I asked you to explain your statemet , you never did,
You want others to answer your questions and comments, you did the same in PT, you made statements, members contradicted you and answered your questions requesting for you to do the same,but, you never did, see the pattern?
If you passionate about SC products, that great, his company does put out some nice products, but dont try to justify the injustices which some who have posted here have become victims of at the hands of SC fans and in some occasions SC himself unless you know the facts or were a player.
When someone compares himself to the likes of Mills and Kerstein, they better be ready to prove themselves and be ready to take a shot, no maker has made the statemets about Mills or Kerstein that SC has made.
I have asked many times (did it once before I knew better in TCC) how many of todays putter designs can be credited to SC,,,,, never got an answer.

[Pure745]

[quote name='CallawayOnly' post='1844069' date='Jul 26 2009, 10:30 AM']TJ, I doubt you will ever get an honest answer from either side. Both sides of the fence lack in the credibility department. I no longer know who to believe. Hard to get to the truth on a internet forum as everyone wants to hide behind their PC's.[/quote]

I agree with you to a certain extent. However, I am basing my opinions on the facts that were presented. A long time ago in this post, a lot of evidence was presented and I find that evindence hard to dispute.

A few members from another side(site) came over here and started attacking certain members to cloud their credibility (hence your post.. and me somewhat agreeing with it) they did a great job and differing everyone's attention from the evidence that was presented in a very non-threatening manner to people questioning credibility of certain members.

[JeffreySpicoli]

[quote name='CallawayOnly' post='1844069' date='Jul 26 2009, 01:30 PM']TJ, I doubt you will ever get an honest answer from either side. Both sides of the fence lack in the credibility department. I no longer know who to believe. Hard to get to the truth on a internet forum as everyone wants to hide behind their PC's.[/quote]

The pro-Cameron camp would have us believe that truth can only be found if we agree on the "true" identities of this debate's major parties.

However, that's a logical fallacy known as the genetic fallacy:

[quote][b]Explanation[/b]

The genetic fallacy is committed when an idea is either accepted or rejected because of its source, rather than its merit.

Even from bad things, good may come; we therefore ought not to reject an idea just because of where it comes from, as [url="http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/ad-hominem/"]ad hominem[/url] arguments do.

Equally, even good sources may sometimes produce bad results; accepting an idea because of the goodness of its source, as in [url="http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/appeals/appeal-to-authority/"]appeals to authority[/url], is therefore no better than rejecting an idea because of the badness of its source. Both types of argument are fallacious.

Examples

(1) My mommy told me that the tooth fairy is real.
Therefore:
(2) The tooth fairy is real.

(1) Eugenics was pioneered in Germany during the war.
Therefore:
(2) Eugenics is a bad thing.

Each of these arguments commits the genetic fallacy, because each judges an idea by the goodness or badness of its source, rather than on its own merits.[/quote]

From: [url="http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/genetic/"]LogicalFallacies.Info -- Genetic Fallacy[/url]


While knowing "true" identities would perhaps add some additional color, said identities will bring us no closer to the truth of the matter.

[JeffreySpicoli]

While we're on the topic of logical fallacies . . .

Another fallacy that keeps floating in this thread is the claim by the pro-Cameron camp that the burden of proof rests on those that do not believe in five Cameron Minis.

Rather the burden of proof rests on those that claim only five Minis exist for the purposes of collecting.

The only real question concerns what an appropriate level of proof would be required to reasonably establish the existence of only five Minis.

[hodges]

[quote name='CallawayOnly' post='1841317' date='Jul 24 2009, 03:20 PM'][quote name='easyyy' post='1840907' date='Jul 24 2009, 12:14 PM']3,2,1
This thread is bringing the negative meter to an all time high. We are thinking of locking her up.[/quote]
I agree! I lost confidence sometime ago that we would ever get the truth on any of the subjects addressed here in this thread.
Both sides have lost credibility with me by hidding behind their PC's and not allowing their true identies to be known. Hard to know now who is telling the truth when you have no idea who is doing the talking.
Both sides have lost this debate.
[/quote]


I am not sure you ever could find all the truth you wanted on an internet.

The people that are subject to the questions seem to have had some kind of legal action in the past. Quite often those settlements include clauses that restrict the ability to discuss some subjects. I can't tell you that it is a facts in many of these situations. Hence it is left to speculation.
Don't feel bad, as you grow older there will be many more subjects that you will never find the truth to. It is a part of life. It makes it each of our choices weather to worry about the things we can't do anything about or to take care of what we can.

[biscuity]

[quote name='tangojay' post='1844000' date='Jul 26 2009, 09:30 AM']You continue to defend SC and bash those who say anything remotely negative about SC, you made statemets against ALL PT moderators, I asked you to explain your statemet , you never did,[/quote]

Here are my feelings about Puttertalk and the Puttertalk moderators, contained in the letter I wrote to JR with the reasons I requested him to delete my Puttertalk account:

Feb 16, 2009, at 11:24 AM:
[i]...So I ended up at Puttertalk, hoping to learn more about putters. I looked through some of the sections and liked what I saw, but there was no Scotty section. I wasn't able to see photos as a guest, so I registered an account. Once I had my account I saw that there was a Scotty section, so I took a look and read several of the threads. What I saw really surprised me. Three or four of the moderators appeared to be fueling the fire of the arguments and attacking the guests frequently. Honestly, I thought to myself, what the heck is going on here? The other parts of the forum, like the TP Mills section, appeared to be very friendly, what is wrong in the Scotty section?

So I asked a simple, honest and genuine question using forum-speak that I'm accustomed to... "Why do so many Scotty Haters hang out in the Scotty section?"

Since that post I have been called... a liar, pompous, ignorant, a trouble maker, childish, and a blind Scotty follower who loves everything that Scotty has ever made. My IP address and personal information have been disclosed to the public. And, sadly, most of that was from the [b]forum moderators[/b].

So your history lesson indicates that all of you guys have some major issues with anything related to Scotty Cameron. Unfortunately, I wasn't warned about that and ended up walking into a firestorm. If the problems stemmed from a few rogue forum members, like Joker, I would have gutted it out. But that's not the case, [b]most of the flogging is happening from the moderators[/b]. And, my take on the situation is that you like to do the flogging, and that the flogging will continue on anyone else that wanders into the Scotty section after I'm gone. Whether you recognize it or not, and you probably do, you're using the Scotty section to create a place where you can vent your frustration and spread your opinion that Scotty Cameron has turned into something other than a guy who hangs out with his buddies and makes custom putters for them in his garage. You're kidding yourself if you can't admit that you're bitter. Maybe the term "Hater" is stronger than you'd like to admit, but I don't think it's far off the mark.

Anyway, you can have your drama. I have no desire to be into it as far as you guys are, I'm just a golfer looking to get down to scratch. Please remove the posts where you disclosed my IP address and the map of where I live. You shouldn't do that kind of thing on a public forum, it opens you up to potentially bad situations.[/i]


[quote]You want others to answer your questions and comments, you did the same in PT, you made statements, members contradicted you and answered your questions requesting for you to do the same,but, you never did, see the pattern?[/quote]

Ask me a specific question and I will give you a specific answer.


[quote]I have asked many times (did it once before I knew better in TCC) how many of todays putter designs can be credited to SC,,,,, never got an answer.[/quote]

Technically, every Scotty Cameron putter is his design because none of them are exact copies of any other putter. Similarly, every Byron putter is a Byron design. Karsten Solheim didn't design any of Byron's putters. Byron designed his putters using inspiration from Karsten Solheim's designs. Byron didn't invent milled putters, but his milled putters are still his own designs. Byron didn't invent hand stamping, Byron didn't invent gun blue finishes, Byron didn't invent welded necks, Byron didn't invent the Skull and Crossbones stamp. But his putters are still his design.

[rrkman]

[quote name='matthewb' post='1844190' date='Jul 26 2009, 03:42 PM']While we're on the topic of logical fallacies . . .

Another fallacy that keeps floating in this thread is the claim by the pro-Cameron camp that the burden of proof rests on those that do not believe in five Cameron Minis.

Rather the burden of proof rests on those that claim only five Minis exist for the purposes of collecting.

The only real question concerns what an appropriate level of proof would be required to reasonably establish the existence of only five Minis.[/quote]

Personally, I think the burden of proof is still on both sides. Cameron side has shown a 1/5 stamped putter and a quote from SC.com saying that fewer than 4 (or was it 5) putters were made prior to the Titleist merger.

Other side posted a quote from a site (TCC) that many called full of lies and propaganda saying that 8 heads were milled but maybe only 5 still existed. And also showed a picture of a head from Studio B.

Do either of these prove that only 5 were made or that more than 5 were made? Personally, I don't think so. IMO, I would guess that about 8 were milled....and most likely not all of them were made into putters (or even finished heads). How many? I don't know. Sounds like Cameron thinks that there are 5 out there. Does this include the studio B one? I have no idea. The list that I saw of the 5 has one that is listed as unknown....is it listed that way because they don't want to list bettinardi? Maybe. Is the 5th somewhere else and the studio B one not even included on there? Maybe. Is the one at studio b the only one left and all of the others have been lost or destroyed? Maybe because I think that is the only one with a current picture...although I think there was also some pics from Nick showing one - not sure when that was from (or what mini that was).

I would love real proof from either side. A copy of the order where 5 (or however many) were ordered. A personal quote from bettinardi saying that he milled 8 and sent 7 to Cameron and kept one. Anything like that would be helpful.

Here's an idea....how about we list them? Feel free to add to it of known mini's.

1. Studio B
2. Japanese Collector has one with Japanese tour player's name stamped on it.
3. One stamped 1/5 - originally Levine's but now with another collector
4. the one Nick posted actual pics of
5. Scotty has one

Anyone else have proof of others? Or something to falsify any of these?

[RobotDoctor]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1844254' date='Jul 26 2009, 02:25 PM'][quote name='tangojay' post='1844000' date='Jul 26 2009, 09:30 AM']You continue to defend SC and bash those who say anything remotely negative about SC, you made statemets against ALL PT moderators, I asked you to explain your statemet , you never did,[/quote]

Here are my feelings about Puttertalk and the Puttertalk moderators, contained in the letter I wrote to JR with the reasons I requested him to delete my Puttertalk account:

Feb 16, 2009, at 11:24 AM:
[i]...So I ended up at Puttertalk, hoping to learn more about putters. I looked through some of the sections and liked what I saw, but there was no Scotty section. I wasn't able to see photos as a guest, so I registered an account. Once I had my account I saw that there was a Scotty section, so I took a look and read several of the threads. What I saw really surprised me. Three or four of the moderators appeared to be fueling the fire of the arguments and attacking the guests frequently. Honestly, I thought to myself, what the heck is going on here? The other parts of the forum, like the TP Mills section, appeared to be very friendly, what is wrong in the Scotty section?

So I asked a simple, honest and genuine question using forum-speak that I'm accustomed to... "Why do so many Scotty Haters hang out in the Scotty section?"

Since that post I have been called... a liar, pompous, ignorant, a trouble maker, childish, and a blind Scotty follower who loves everything that Scotty has ever made. My IP address and personal information have been disclosed to the public. And, sadly, most of that was from the [b]forum moderators[/b].

So your history lesson indicates that all of you guys have some major issues with anything related to Scotty Cameron. Unfortunately, I wasn't warned about that and ended up walking into a firestorm. If the problems stemmed from a few rogue forum members, like Joker, I would have gutted it out. But that's not the case, [b]most of the flogging is happening from the moderators[/b]. And, my take on the situation is that you like to do the flogging, and that the flogging will continue on anyone else that wanders into the Scotty section after I'm gone. Whether you recognize it or not, and you probably do, you're using the Scotty section to create a place where you can vent your frustration and spread your opinion that Scotty Cameron has turned into something other than a guy who hangs out with his buddies and makes custom putters for them in his garage. You're kidding yourself if you can't admit that you're bitter. Maybe the term "Hater" is stronger than you'd like to admit, but I don't think it's far off the mark.

Anyway, you can have your drama. I have no desire to be into it as far as you guys are, I'm just a golfer looking to get down to scratch. Please remove the posts where you disclosed my IP address and the map of where I live. You shouldn't do that kind of thing on a public forum, it opens you up to potentially bad situations.[/i]


[quote]You want others to answer your questions and comments, you did the same in PT, you made statements, members contradicted you and answered your questions requesting for you to do the same,but, you never did, see the pattern?[/quote]

Ask me a specific question and I will give you a specific answer.


[quote]I have asked many times (did it once before I knew better in TCC) how many of todays putter designs can be credited to SC,,,,, never got an answer.[/quote]

Technically, every Scotty Cameron putter is his design because none of them are exact copies of any other putter. Similarly, every Byron putter is a Byron design. Karsten Solheim didn't design any of Byron's putters. Byron designed his putters using inspiration from Karsten Solheim's designs. Byron didn't invent milled putters, but his milled putters are still his own designs. Byron didn't invent hand stamping, Byron didn't invent gun blue finishes, Byron didn't invent welded necks, Byron didn't invent the Skull and Crossbones stamp. But his putters are still his design.
[/quote]

Let's tell the full story here biscuity. Your first several posts (5 or 6 or so) were basically calling members at PT that did not agree with you Scotty Haters. In fact, your very first post called members Scotty Haters. Normally, most new IBB members follow standard etiquette and posts something like [i]"Hi, I'm ________. Glad to be here."[/i] Instead, your first post was [i]"Why do so many Scotty Haters hang out in the Scotty section?"[/i] Again, you fail to understand the reason for the disagreement in this thread. This thread has more to do with a dislike of Cameron's business practices. The members of PT do not voice disdain when someone asks about a Cameron putter. If a person is saying they think (and I repeat THINK) that they might get a Cameron putter then all putters of a requested style are talked about. Afterall, the site is PT. If members want to know more about a Cameron putter then they get other's opinions. It is only when a very few members of another site come to PT and invade Cameron threads when trouble starts. Not all members of the other site are bad, most are great to hear from. However, some are just on PT to instigate problems. That is where I see it. You apparently did not like PT because you won't find members at PT that are blindly following Cameron and his wares. You will find differentiating point of views at PT, some complimentary and some not. You have said that you do not post at TCC and maybe you should because the tone at that site reflects what it appears that you want in Cameron discussion. The moderators of PT are also members of PT and have a wealth of knowledge pertaining to putters, including Cameron putters. A few were big collectors so I would hope that they contribute. Being that a few of the moderators at PT were big collectors, they have insight that few have so I value their opinion. I have asked questions regarding Cameron putters and other things and found the moderators to be honest and NOT exhibit disdain towards the product. Yes, some comments are critical because not everything that Cameron makes is the Holy Grail. Some comments were positive. At the end of the day I believe that I received the honest feelings from them and, in no way-shape-or form, was steered towards how I feel about Cameron's business practices. The reason to hide the Cameron forum from guests is because there were a large number of guests viewing that board and few others (I wonder what IBB these people were members of? ). That said, membership to PT is free and with membership comes the ability of viewing the Cameron board and view pictures. Speaking of pictures, you cannot see them at TCC unless you are a member as well and I believe not all boards are visible as a guest. So why not be critical to that site in the same breath?

That said, instead of trying to make PT a better place for you by becoming engaged, you ran away. Since you did not want to stick it out and make the place a better place then maybe you should stop with the references. PT is not as bad as you make it. If people want to find out for themselves then the owner, moderators, and members welcome all those who want to learn about all putters, Cameron included. Maybe it is getting old when I blather about why I was banned at TCC but your blather about PT is equally as old, at least to me.

That said, how about a beverage? Cheers!

[adamsstaff]

NUTS!

[biscuity]

Sorry RobotDoctor, but my post was a direct response to matthewb's request for me to answer a question he had. It was my interpretation of what happened to me on Puttertalk and why I deleted my account. I don't view my decision to delete my account as running away from anything. I said from the beginning that if I felt the PT Scotty section was only there as a sounding board to bash Scotty Cameron products that I would leave. That is the decision I made, I have no desire to try to make Puttertalk a "better place" because the attitude of the moderators is the root of their problems. There are some great people like yourself on that forum. The sections for Byron, TP Mills etc are great. Their Scotty section is an embarassment, I'm glad it is hidden from non-members. I'm glad that JR blocked my IP address so that I don't have to see the ridiculous whining that Scotty stole the peace/heart symbol idea from a Puttertalk moderator etc etc etc.

I wasn't complaining that you can't see pictures without a membership on PT, it was an explanation of why I signed up on PT in the first place. Before I signed up I had no idea they had a hidden Scotty Cameron section.

Regarding the tone of my first few posts on PT, I usually base my tone on the tone of the forum. If it looks like a calm and friendly place like TCC, I would post calm and friendly comments. If it looks like a bash-fest with people using strong statements and openly criticizing each other, I'll post accordingly. Prior to posting anything I read a lot of threads. Personally, I'm used to seeing things like [url="http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/9440681/9440928"]Favre-hater[/url], [url="http://groups.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=groups.groupProfile&groupID=100512401"]Earnhardt-hater[/url], [url="http://proletariat.wordpress.com/2008/06/04/a-confession-of-an-obama-hater/"]Obama-hater[/url], [url="http://fox-tractorfacts.blogspot.com/2008/11/why-do-people-hate-tom-cruise.html"]Tom Cruise-hater[/url], [url="http://www.goodreads.com/group/show/14657.New_Disney_Haters"]Disney-hater[/url] so it's not that big of a deal for me. I was surprised that they were so thin skinned based on what I had read. That's part of the hypocrisy on their part, and part of the reason I deleted my Puttertalk account. They wouldn't allow the same kind of bashing in the TP Mills section that they do in the Scotty section. They have their reasons, I don't agree, so I left.

[HeadonaStick]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1844254' date='Jul 26 2009, 04:25 PM'][...]

Technically, every Scotty Cameron putter is his design because none of them are exact copies of any other putter. Similarly, every Byron putter is a Byron design. Karsten Solheim didn't design any of Byron's putters. Byron designed his putters using inspiration from Karsten Solheim's designs. Byron didn't invent milled putters, but his milled putters are still his own designs. Byron didn't invent hand stamping, Byron didn't invent gun blue finishes, Byron didn't invent welded necks, Byron didn't invent the Skull and Crossbones stamp. But his putters are still his design.[/quote]

Rationalization.

[JeffreySpicoli]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1844424' date='Jul 26 2009, 06:12 PM']Sorry RobotDoctor, but my post was a direct response to matthewb's request for me to answer a question he had. It was my interpretation of what happened to me on Puttertalk and why I deleted my account.

<snip>[/quote]

A direct response to which request from me?

Can you keep straight any part of this discussion?

Here are some questions from me to you . . .

First, why does Scotty Cameron need you to defend him in Internet discussion forums?

Second, if Scotty Cameron is aware of what you're doing, what value does he perceive that you bring to him?

[biscuity]

Sorry, the question was from tangojay.

[quote name='matthewb' post='1844521' date='Jul 26 2009, 04:13 PM']Here are some questions from me to you . . .

First, why does Scotty Cameron need you to defend him in Internet discussion forums?[/quote]

He doesn't need me to defend him. I never said he did.

[quote]Second, if Scotty Cameron is aware of what you're doing, what value does he perceive that you bring to him?[/quote]

I would guess: none. You'd have to ask Scotty. He might be completely against what I'm doing. His blog has a statement about how he feels about the "rumblings" on the internet, he can speak for himself: [url="http://scottycameronblog.com/2007/12/13/scotty-straight-from-the-hip/"]http://scottycameronblog.com/2007/12/13/sc...t-from-the-hip/[/url]

[Tim Delgado]

Bisquity, Having followed this entire thread, I found your last two posts to be very reasonable and logical.

There were no personal attacks made and your last two posts make it sounds like you just elected not to participate in a forum that was made up of mostly negative energy towards Cameron. Seems reasonable to me.

I have not explored the Putter Talk forum, so I cannot agree or disagree that the threads are too negative in the Cameron section. However, having surfed around the Cameron site, it is clear to me that the site really is more of a fan-club site than an actual forum with open discussion and debate. There is a LOT of idol-worship going on there. But there is nothing wrong with that if that is what you are looking for.

Clearly there are some bitter ex-Cameron Insiders at PT and on this thread, and (to an outsider) they do seem to be a bit TOO anxious to hammer all things Cameron.

But having read some of Cameron's quotes, I think most people can tell that he is clearly a little full of himself. MANY super-successful people and celebrities are, and part of the reason is that they are CONSTANTLY worshipped by the masses and told how great they are. I've never had that problem but I'm guessing (based on seeing SO many famous or successful people act like clowns) that after a while, the subject of all the idol worship actually starts to believe to hype. Of course, they are motly full of it and kidding themselves.

And to the objective outsider, some of the "limited" headcovers and "drawings" where the same guys seem to always get the "valuable" items (just to sell for a profit) are a bit absurd. So many people can kind of see where some of the disdain comes from.

Tim

[JeffreySpicoli]

[quote name='biscuity' post='1844545' date='Jul 26 2009, 07:27 PM']Sorry, the question was from tangojay.

[quote name='matthewb' post='1844521' date='Jul 26 2009, 04:13 PM']Here are some questions from me to you . . .

First, why does Scotty Cameron need you to defend him in Internet discussion forums?[/quote]

He doesn't need me to defend him. I never said he did.

[/quote]

So you're simply a zealous Cameron fanatic that patrols Internet golf forums in order to defend the interests of Cameron?

And you don't get paid for this?

[biscuity]

[quote name='matthewb' post='1844589' date='Jul 26 2009, 04:55 PM']So you're simply a zealous Cameron fanatic that patrols Internet golf forums in order to defend the interests of Cameron?

And you don't get paid for this?[/quote]

I don't consider myself a zealous Cameron fanatic. I'm a golfer who owns about 20 putters, 4 of which are used Cameron OTR putters. I'm a bigger fan of Ping than I am of Cameron.

I'm a member of TCC so I can see photos, but I've never made a post on their forum.

I don't get paid for this. I don't work in the golf industry. I've never met Scotty Cameron. I've never received anything from Scotty Cameron. Come to think of it, I've actually never bought a single Scotty Cameron product that was new, so he's made zero profit from me.

[xxio]

[quote name='rrkman' post='1844288' date='Jul 27 2009, 04:50 AM'][quote name='matthewb' post='1844190' date='Jul 26 2009, 03:42 PM']While we're on the topic of logical fallacies . . .

Another fallacy that keeps floating in this thread is the claim by the pro-Cameron camp that the burden of proof rests on those that do not believe in five Cameron Minis.

Rather the burden of proof rests on those that claim only five Minis exist for the purposes of collecting.

The only real question concerns what an appropriate level of proof would be required to reasonably establish the existence of only five Minis.[/quote]

Personally, I think the burden of proof is still on both sides. Cameron side has shown a 1/5 stamped putter and a quote from SC.com saying that fewer than 4 (or was it 5) putters were made prior to the Titleist merger.

Other side posted a quote from a site (TCC) that many called full of lies and propaganda saying that 8 heads were milled but maybe only 5 still existed. And also showed a picture of a head from Studio B.

Do either of these prove that only 5 were made or that more than 5 were made? Personally, I don't think so. IMO, I would guess that about 8 were milled....and most likely not all of them were made into putters (or even finished heads). How many? I don't know. Sounds like Cameron thinks that there are 5 out there. Does this include the studio B one? I have no idea. The list that I saw of the 5 has one that is listed as unknown....is it listed that way because they don't want to list bettinardi? Maybe. Is the 5th somewhere else and the studio B one not even included on there? Maybe. Is the one at studio b the only one left and all of the others have been lost or destroyed? Maybe because I think that is the only one with a current picture...although I think there was also some pics from Nick showing one - not sure when that was from (or what mini that was).

I would love real proof from either side. A copy of the order where 5 (or however many) were ordered. A personal quote from bettinardi saying that he milled 8 and sent 7 to Cameron and kept one. Anything like that would be helpful.

Here's an idea....how about we list them? Feel free to add to it of known mini's.

1. Studio B
2. Japanese Collector has one with Japanese tour player's name stamped on it.
3. One stamped 1/5 - originally Levine's but now with another collector
4. the one Nick posted actual pics of
5. Scotty has one

Anyone else have proof of others? Or something to falsify any of these?
[/quote]



Welcome back. Nice presentation.

The problem is not that the "pro Camerons" count vs the "anti-Camerons" count. The problem is that [b]there is inconsistency[/b] on the count of one side, the Cameron side.

A simple correction somewhere along the line either in the stamp of 1/5 or "the fewer than 5" NOT "more than 5" as you mentioned in your post, we don't want history to get changed along the way now do we

I have suggested a few hypotheses that may make sense. The one making most sense without attributing fault to either the stamp or the website comment is that there are 2 lines/runs of Minis. One before the merger with Titleist of which fewer than 5 were made and another one were 5 were made of which the 1/5 belongs. That way no one from both sides is wrong, and no one is correct either, that would be hard for you to accept because SC doesn't make mistakes only his webmaster and maybe his staff do right?


Edit for spellcheck