Re: Grateful acknowledgements

Apologies for the repetition, the last message sliped away before I had
added my response - see below:

"Peter Stewart" <p_m_stewart@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Os16j.21163$CN4.9875@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<harv2.lawref@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:98bf9044-442d-40e0-9de5-a85499138fd7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Dec 6, 4:57 pm, "Peter Stewart" <p_m_stew...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
"Douglas Richardson" <royalances...@xxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:bdf6dab3-ed92-4b01-b7af-2038d1136d11@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



On Dec 5, 11:54 pm, wjhonson <wjhon...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
<
< Sure, except for those people from whom he lifts and refuses to
< acknowledge.
<
< Will Johnson

Will ~

I don't have just a page of acknowledgements in my books. My books
have HUGE bibliographies where EVERY published source that I 've
consulted in the preparation of my books is fully cited and GRATEFULLY
acknowledged. And my bibliography continues to expand and grow!

Speaking of which, have you ever lifted one of my discoveries and
added it to your database without attribution? Just so you'll know, I
already know the answer to this question. So don't fudge. What I
want to know if why you did it.

Now Richardson is spewing off in his usually smarmy, and most
hypocritical,
fashion about "fully" and "gratefully" acknowledging his sources in his
books.

One important and illuminating discussion that took place in sgm was
about
the Longford family of Derbyshire, that Rosie Bevan had worked on and
published the results in an excellent serial article in _Foundations_,
vol.
1.

Richardson's account of this Longford family is based on Rosie's work
(_Plantagenet Ancestry_, pages 460-461), yet NOWHERE is her name to be
found. Nor will the curious reader find her name OR HER PUBLISHED
ARTICLE
cited in his bibliography. How could Richardson have so accidentally
expunged any reference to Rosie Bevan, one of the most valued and expert
contributors who has ever participated in this newsgroup? Let him
explain
THAT...And let him utter a humble apology for his oversight in using her
work without due acknowledgment.

As to the Walter Aston matter:
From: Douglas Richardson <royalances...@xxxxxxx>
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval, soc.history.medieval,
alt.history.british,
alt.talk.royalty
Subject: Re: "Order of the Merovingian Dynasty"
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007> As for the "former" Walter Aston line, new
evidence
has surfaced in> recent time. The Aston line has now been fully
reinstated.

That is a bold statement, contradicting a scholarly article published by
Paul Reed in a major genealogical journal, with sound reasoning as
evaluated
here by Nat Taylor.

Since Richardson demands citation of sources or documents, how about
even
the slightest clue from the lion aka packhorse (aka donkey) of sgm as to
what type of source was used in "fully" (not to say "gratefully")
reinstating the origin and ancestry of this immigrant?

Peter Stewart

Your timeline doesn't work out too well. Rosie's article, part one,
appeared in Foundations 1:4 which according to the FMG website was
published in July 2004. Richardson's Plantagenet Ancestry was
published in 2004 and if memory serves came out in June, 2004 (June
30, 2004 according to Amazon.com). So, how could Doug cite to an
article that hadn't been published yet? I'm assuming the book
(Richardson's) went to press say March/April of 2004.

You have got to be kidding. The Longford family as detailed in Richardson's
book was based not on his own independent work but on information that Rosie
had generously shared with the newsgroup.

You must know that thanks are frequently given to colleagues who have
assisted the author from as-yet unpublished research, often referring to the
journal where this is expected to appear in a future issue, if progressed to
that point when the work finished earlier went to press.

That is the scholarly norm that I assume you would observe in the same
circumstances. I don't know why you would now post such disingenuous
remarks, having the appearance of an attempt to exculpate Richardson, but
I've already stated my opinion of some others who have taken a more explicit
line of unwarranted indulgence of his offenses.

Peter Stewart


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: why python is slower than java?
    ... my errorous impressions might have been formed by books and publications ... "Learning python" and "Python, the complete reference". ... My apologies for raising your blood pressure, ... there is the issue of selection and structuring. ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • (and also Lazy Buttheads)...was: Re: Simple Questions and Assholes
    ... I read several of these posts, and the responses. ... Its not just this newsgroup, but also on lots of technical newsgroups. ... There are a lot of people that think: i) NGs are a source of _free_ advice, and ii) you not only can come up with any question, but the _lazy-easy_ way to do anything is preferred over doing any research via, say, google and heaven forbid that anyone should read books any more. ... What is wrong with doing some broad reading and thinking, ...
    (rec.radio.amateur.boatanchors)
  • Re: Web Application Security
    ... You might get much better answers asking these questions in a newsgroup for ... and books like Hacking Web Apps Exposed ... > security. ... > 1) Do we have to have Database Roles mapped to Database user's to ensure ...
    (microsoft.public.security)
  • Re: Worldcon news
    ... rasff the other two. ... answer EVERY post) in a newsgroup during a break, ... But several of us keep a book or magazine to hand to read during breaks. ... We even have a "recycle and share" rack for books and magazines. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.fandom)
  • Re: out on a limb
    ... Then main purpose of this newsgroup is sharing knowledge. ... their experiences by telling the experience that they encounter in ... a couple of books covering the topic: ...
    (rec.pyrotechnics)
Loading