Accrington Pals Commemorative Ale

[Morecambe Ex Pat]

Originally Posted by Retlaw

All I can say to that is *******. If you look in Bill Turners book on the Pals, page 212 you will see the start of a list of names and numbers of those who served in the 11th East Lancs, supplied to Bill by Fergus Read, that original hand written list, was given to me by Fergus over 20 years ago and is now in a file box under my desk. Look on a certain web site and you will see a list of names and numbers of men in the same regiment. When I showed that to Bill some years ago he went ballistic, and gave the owner a right going over. So how did he get those names & numbers when I have the original, and Fergus never showed it to any one else. Now that Bills dead he claims its all his own work, and has threatened me with legal action.
He doesn't come on here often, but now I've posted this he will be back, one of his spies will inform him.
Him and those two clowns in Chorley plus a couple more so called experts in Acc, are the reasons I will wipe my discs clean before I will boost their ego's.
By the way copy right laws are amongst the most difficult cases to prove. You can find most of what you want on the internet these days, any number of sites showing the same info, (different authors) so whose work is it.

I am sorry, I don't understand why anyone would dedicate a lot of time and resources researching a subject thoroughly and then throw that research away. It seems such a shame that all that time and effort would be wasted. If you publish a definitive version with your name on it, anyone claiming the information to be their own can be pointed at the actual source and author.

[Retlaw]

Originally Posted by Morecambe Ex Pat

I am sorry, I don't understand why anyone would dedicate a lot of time and resources researching a subject thoroughly and then throw that research away. It seems such a shame that all that time and effort would be wasted. If you publish a definitive version with your name on it, anyone claiming the information to be their own can be pointed at the actual source and author.

Have you looked at the web site I mentioned and compared what I quoted. My work identifies the sources of information on any man, I am not a wordsmith, I have no idea of correct grammar or where all those twiddly bits go ::;;''',,.. etc. so it would make it very easy for some of those clowns to change a few words around put the twiddly bits where ther should be and then start singing.
I served my apprenticeship as a Pattern Maker, worked at it for 12 years, you spent hours to make things perfect, then handed it to the gaffer for the next stage. Sometimes they would come back into the pattershop broken, because some clown had droped a moulding box on it, or somat as equally daft. After a time you gave over bothering and just got on with the next job, so you just wiped your mind clean, just like I can now wipe discs clean, and get on with sumat else.

[Gordon Booth]

When you think about it all written history is based on what people remember or going back further on what other people have written whether on stone tablets, parchment, vellum or paper. Later historians have only had this to work on. Some may have plagiarized it, some use it fairly.
Without those written records the worlds history would go back no further than our memories or perhaps, becoming more and more inaccurate, on those of our parents.
If all those people had said 'It's my research, my work, I'm not sharing it and when I go it goes' that's all we'd have- the last 50 to 100 years of human history.
I see all accurate and responsible research into history as being something that should be shared with future generations for their benefit.
Obviously others think differently.
As for the ale row, Less posted what he did based on a brief report he read in a very poor paper. Others followed him using the same poor reporting which said more about your MP and his ancestor than it did about the project.
A full, calm clarification of the actual position was all that was needed.
Those involved in the project deserve credit. I think they would have got it in full measure.

[Barrie Yates]

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

When you think about it all written history is based on what people remember or going back further on what other people have written whether on stone tablets, parchment, vellum or paper. Later historians have only had this to work on. Some may have plagiarized it, some use it fairly.
Without those written records the worlds history would go back no further than our memories or perhaps, becoming more and more inaccurate, on those of our parents.
If all those people had said 'It's my research, my work, I'm not sharing it and when I go it goes' that's all we'd have- the last 50 to 100 years of human history.
I see all accurate and responsible research into history as being something that should be shared with future generations for their benefit.
Obviously others think differently.
As for the ale row, Less posted what he did based on a brief report he read in a very poor paper. Others followed him using the same poor reporting which said more about your MP and his ancestor than it did about the project.
A full, calm clarification of the actual position was all that was needed.
Those involved in the project deserve credit. I think they would have got it in full measure.

Well said Gordon, common sense prevails at last - I hope.