[ Back to the listing ]
[ Post Reply ]
[ Help ]
[ Search ]
[ List All Forums ]
Posted By: Chuck Lee on: 06/23/2002 21:12:46 CDT|
Subject: RE: Time Out - What's THIS About?
Forgive me for being obtuse here, but I'm mystified by every little bit that transpired here in Saturday's posts. Bumfuzzled, as it were. So I have to ask, What's THIS all about NOW?!?!?!|
Mr. Bock, I read your latest post, which appears to be a response to Mr. Mathers' having asked you if you'll restore the reciprocal link that evidently was, from what I gather from Mr. Mathers' post, inadvertently omitted at some point; and which you stated was omitted deliberately, in response first from the other two joint owners of the OVCWA site, and which in this post you say was "at the request of some SCARD members".
Sir, Mr. Mathers was asking that you link BACK to SCARD, which links to your site. That's not unusual Netiquette - not as common as it should be, but it's quite acceptable and desirable Netiquette. Actually, Martha Stewart would identify that as "a GOOD thing".
Since Mr. Mathers is the head of SCARD, it seems altogether reasonable that you would give his request for a reciprocal link more weight than a request to drop the link from anonymous, unnamed "some SCARD members". Doesn't it? Unless the anonymous, unnamed "some SCARD members" is only another way of referring to the folks you named originally as joint owners with you of your site(s), in which case the reference to "some SCARD members" is a rather disingenuous way of stating what would be a form of the truth, one that comes in through the back door. That would surely be disappointing if that were the case here, sir, and I have difficulty believing that of you, though I don't know you.
It also seems incredible that the "some SCARD members" to which you referred would share identity with your site's other joint owners, given the value of their contributions to this forum and the congenial fashion in which they've not only contributed, but also taken differing stands from some of those posted on the forum. They have been nothing if not gentlemen, and their valued contributions have been in keeping with the spirit of SCARD. Having contributed as they have, it's hard to believe that they would have advocated dropping the reciprocal link to SCARD; yet you've said it was at their behest that it was done, and apparently in conjunction with anonymous, unnamed "some SCARD members". Given their participation here - particularly Mr. Wagner's - that seems almost incredible, and would be totally incredible had you not said so, Mr. Bock.
Let's assume for the sake of discussion them that the anonymous, unnamed "some SCARD members" to which you referred, sir, are not one and the same as your site(s) joint owners. Surely you wouldn't give their request more weight than the leadership of SCARD, would you? Does each member of the OVCWA speak with greater authority, or authority co-equal with yours (or whoever the commander is of your group, sir - I apologize, for I haven't bothered to see who actually commands your group by rank)? If they do - which strikes me as improbable - then I can see why you'd value the comments of two or more SCARD members over that of its own command staff or commander, working that way in your own group.
I, Mr. Bock, am also a SCARD member, even if surely the least of them, and I join Mr. Mathers in asking that you establish a reciprocal link to the SCARD site. Isn't that reasonable? So now two SCARD members (at least) have requested that you re-establish the link - Mr. Mathers and I. How many named SCARD members will it take to out-vote the anonymous, unnamed "some SCARD members"?
SCARD is an organization of inclusion, not exclusion. They, through Mr. Mathers and a number of others on this forum, have recognized the contributions to SCARD, Signal Corps research, and reenacting of the OVCWA site owners' consortium individually, and I think not stintingly. Is it unreasonable that, recognizing your OVCWA site as a fellow traveler in this journey of discovery of historical fact and re-creation, of which obviously Mr. Harbin is a significant part as is Mr. Wagner, SCARD would not only desire to link with your site, but ask also that your site link to theirs?
It seems self-evident to me.
If you have decided to leave the forum, Mr. Bock, that's unfortunate for all of us, and for you as well. That's how I understood your "Goodbye SCARD" - and I hope that I'm mistaken in understanding your comment. I hope, then, that you're not speaking for your site's joint owners, as well. If we can't enjoy the benefit of your contributions, I fervently hope that we can continue to enjoy the benefit of their experience, research, and well-considered comments.
I also noted your comment that "I take my 'time-out'" before bidding SCARD farewell (if that's actually what you intended at the last).
If you took umbrage at my post title, Mr. Bock - namely, "Time Out - What's THIS About?", the "time out" to which I referred was not in the perjorative sense as my five-year-old granddaughter sometimes understands it, being sent to ponder her misdeeds in pre-school while standing in the corner (she's learned lately how to spit, and they frown upon that, even in terbacker-chawin' east Texas - at least among four- and five-year-olds). It wasn't intended for you to take it that way - for pity's sake, sir, you're a grown man, and even had I the authority to send someone to a corner, real or imagined, that's not my way of doing business. I always try to work things out with other adults. But I have no such authority, nor do I pretend to.
I do believe in discipline - both formative and corrective - just as the Scriptures direct us, sir. The Scriptures tell us that those who refuse correction are fools. If you understood my reference to suggest in ANY way that I was advocating your "correction", then - that you be "disciplined" by the little child's discipline of pressing your nose into a corner - then you totally, absolutely, unequivocally misapprehend my meaning and I can understand why you might be offended at my comment, leaping to the Biblical conclusion then that you might be a fool if you refused that correction. I never said or suggested that, Mr. Bock - I respect you too much to even think that, and you may not reasonably infer from what I did write that I EVER thought such a thing.
The "time out" to which I referred, Mr. Bock, was that form of temporary cessation of action that takes place on the playing field in a sport such as football. I was calling an on-field "Time Out". (See my hands making a "T"?...lol)
I was asking that we take a moment to consider what was going on with the curious exchanges and the evident hostility that were being expressed toward a forum member, without evident provocation or cause, and in not too gentlemanly a way, on Saturday. It was certainly never intended to demean you and stand as an accusation of juvenile, even childish behavior on your part, sir. I never wrote such a thing and that may not be reasonably inferred from what I wrote. I'm afraid you totally mistook my meaning. I don't know how, but evidently you did. As I said, it only meant that I was asking that we stop and take inventory of what was going on (and hopefully, to stop it and return to the business of this forum, which we have yet to do).
All that being said, here are the two things that I would ask: first, that you would, "at the request of some SCARD members" (being Mr. Mathers and myself) re-establish the link to SCARD that evidently had been satisfactory to you - since you've not said otherwise - until "at the request of some [other] SCARD members", you took it down; and that you not leave the forum and the fellowship of folks interested in Signal Corps reenacting, if that indeed was intended by your parting sentence in the last post.
As to the former, I recall that you said the reciprocal link was removed initially at the request of your site's joint owners. Given their level of participation here, and the evident pleasantness of their recption and their favorable, gentlemanly conduct and information interchanges here, I can scarcely imagine that they would ahve an objection any longer to having a reciprocal link. They are grown men, of course, and can and must speak for themselves, but I'd be shocked - yes, shocked - if they were unwilling to re-establish the convivial relationship and link to the SCARD site that formerly existed. Again, I must leave it to them to speak for themselves, and would applaud their decision to work together with SCARD and within SCARD for the benefit of our little community of reenactors and researchers, evidenced by the re-linking of the two.
Mr. Bock, I don't know that we can establish the basis for a true friendship through the medium of an online forum (though some have formed fast friendships starting that way, and even married through having met on the Internet; but you live a long way away, and I'm married - happily so, and you're the wrong gender, so... lol), but I sure think we can be friendly; and perhaps eventually friends through this electronic medium. We hold a strong common interest here, at least, and I appreciate you - your candor, bluntness, wealth of information, and obvious, conspicuous dedication to the betterment of all who love the Signal Corps. I'd like to remain friendly with you, and become your friend if possible. That can't happen if you leave.
"Can't we all just get along?"
At least "for the good of the unit"?
Chuck "Rodney King" Lee