You just KNEW I would show up here, dincha?! 
I hear my name ( a reasonable facsimile or rhyme ) and I appear.
First of all, let me say here and now, that I truly hope Faterson's prediction is wrong. I do not want to see this thread deleted or modified in any way, shape or form. There is some very good information and background... and, as per WGT's Forum Admin's notes, this discussion IS constructive. To that end and for that purpose, I will endeavor to keep my sarcasm and causticity to an absolute minimum.
To answer Jake's (Sorry Jakestanfill7, your nom de guerre is a mouthful and I'm going to shorten it, hope you don't mind) circumlocutory question; I can't play enough. Simple as that. Since December, 08, I have recorded 175 ranked rounds, probably somwhere between 200 and 250 rounds started. A quick bit of math will tell you that's less than one round a day. Currently at 68.xx something. Progress is being made in that regard. I could enter the August International Tourney and shoot an artificially low score to gain it, but I refuse. I want to EARN it. I am not in a hurry to gain Master status, but when I do I want to know that not only can I PLAY on that stage, I want to be able to COMPETE there, as well. The forums are way too full of "WHY AM I A MASTER?" whines threads as it is. (sorry... sarcasm slipped through)
Which brings us to the aforementioned forums... Jake's other question is basically why do I do it? The answer is a bit more complicated. The majority of my time is spent away from the computer... I have 2 opportunities a day to log on to WGT. The first opportunity is on a computer that will never be able to play the actual game... ( a number of reasons I won't go into ) ... but will allow me to browse the forums. So, like Faterson, the forum's windows are basically in the background for that part of the day. There are moments in my day, between the episodes of utter chaos, that I am able to sit down and read... respond if I think I have something to add. The 2nd opportunity to log on, although much much shorter than the first, is on a machine that will actually let me play a round of golf or two. (Of course, while in a foursome and waiting for my next shot, I can be found in the forums as well.)
Unlike my antagonist , the absolute king of circumlocution, I believe in the short, sharp, cutting, quick, funny (albeit sometimes a bit painful) reply. When you ask me the time, I will not build you a clock. I will tell you the time. The nail that has come loose needs a hammer to put it back, not a psychologist to understand why it's loose. Jake, you experienced this in some of the very first post/replies you made, IIRC, (a bit of "smart-assery" if you will remember).. your 2nd and 3rd posts. Some people take offense, some don't. It is not my concern one way or the other.
I like WGT... the golf is fun, the rules are simple, and the whole setup is easy to understand. If someone has a legitimate question, I will try to answer them accordingly. If someone acts stupid, I will try to answer them accordingly. There are good ideas and bad ideas in the forums... I will agree with the good ones and make sure that my disagreement with the bad ones is known. I may not be right, most of the time, but anyone who has read what I write will know where I stand. One thing I cannot abide is the breaking of the rules and the blatant cheating.. these individuals get nothing but dripping resentment and rancor. There are not enough bullets for my sarcasm gun for them. For this I get labeled "unstable", "vain", "b!tch", "verbous".. etc... /shrug.. it really doesn't matter.
Overall, that is what makes me 'tick', Jake... I hope you understand a little bit.
Now, on to the topic of Forum Moderators... Yes, yes yes and YES.. we need forum moderators. This may be one of the very few topics the Forum King and I can agree on. ( I am certain there are others, but none are currently top-of-mind. ) I would also agree that a team of moderators is needed, as long as they were SUPERVISED by a WGT employee. I would, however, STRENUOUSLY and ZEALOUSLY object to a moderator who has shown a propensity for bias and prejudicial thinking... thereby eliminating both "Snaike" and "Faterson" for the job. Moderators should work, as stated in a post above, both silenty and invisibly... neither quality is possesed by either person.
So, there you have it... a bit of long-windedness from myself. I hope you found your answers from this side of the camp, Jake. I can't speak for the others.
Peace.