History and objectivity

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
45
#1
Greetings Civil War Talk members.

I'm a new member to your group. What prompted me to join was a thread that I came across a couple of days ago (posted on April 8, 2018 by Bee) regarding an article that I wrote entitled "Undeniably Serendipitous Grant." Not being familiar with this site, I jumped to a couple of conclusions that I now know to have been entirely wrong (presumably everyone can still read my original post.) My sincere apologies to both Bee and the group. Best regards, Moe Daoust
 
Last edited:

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
5,448
Location
Hoover, Alabama
#3
Welcome to the forum from Alabama, opinions are like noses, everyone has one and one of the great things about this group is that the vast majority welcome dissenting opinions even if they don't necessarily agree with them.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2009
Messages
9,059
Location
on the long winding road
#5
Greetings Civil War Talk members.

I'm a new member to your group. What prompted me to join was a thread that I came across a couple of days ago (posted on April 8, 2018 by Bee) regarding an article that I wrote entitled "Undeniably Serendipitous Grant."

What I was struck by was the outright derision and contempt expressed at the notion that Ulysses S. Grant might be anything other than what the popular histories would have us believe. "Yawn. More claptrap. This sort of diatribe gets tedious," wrote "Contestedground." On April 9th, Contestedground suggested to Bee that she should "be more careful next time. You've inadvertently started another time-waster." To this Bee replied that she was "investigating how I could make this all go away....." Apparently, Bee figured out how to do this. That very same day, the thread status was changed to "Not open for further replies."

I'll be the first one to admit that much of my Civil War writings are controversial and I accept that there will always be resistance to what I am putting forth. What shocked me regarding Bee's post is how the subject was virtually swept under the rug. "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" is the adage that came to my mind. I don't get the impression that Bee even read the article.

It is for this reason that I thought it might worthwhile re-posting my article. If anyone wishes to contest the piece, by all means do so. All I ask is that you refrain from using blanket statements to make your case. There are many aspects to what I've proposed in the piece. Individually, these prove nothing but combined, they tend to confirm that Grant was, indeed, abnormally lucky during the American Civil War. If you wish to refute the piece, please do so on a point by point basis (these are clearly set out in the piece.) On that note, I trust all will understand if I don't respond to generalizations and the like.

http://www.grantunderfire.com/882/undeniably-serendipitous-grant-by-maurice-daoust/
Welcome. There are some who are deeply invested in the resurrection of Grant’s image. It is what it is.
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
Messages
8,657
Location
Illinois
#10
What shocked me regarding Bee's post is how the subject was virtually swept under the rug by her locking the thread.
Dang, I missed this the first time around ~ forum members are not allowed to lock threads (though that would be awesome). Only a Moderator can do this.
Welcome, not everyone has a Broom.
I have one, but I use it for transportation. :tongue:
 

Bee

Captain
Asst. Regtl. Quartermaster Gettysburg 2017
Joined
Dec 21, 2015
Messages
6,227
#11
." To this Bee replied that she was "investigating how I could make this all go away....." Apparently, Bee figured out how to do this. That very same day, the thread status was changed to "Not open for further replies."
I'll be the first one to admit that much of my Civil War writings are controversial and I fully accept that there will always be resistance to what I am putting forth. What shocked me regarding Bee's post is how the subject was virtually swept under the rug by her locking the thread. "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" is the adage that came to my mind. I don't get the impression that Bee even read the article.
Sour grapes make for the most excellent whine :wink:

Your first bit of edification regarding the forum: members do not have the power to lock threads

Hint number two: add a @ in front of @Bee or @contestedground so that we can fully appreciate your content

Reminder: I fully disclosed in the OP of the thread that I initially had not read the article , thus I was looking for others' opinion. (eventually I did read it)

Welcome to the forum. I hope this little introduction has proven cathartic
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
45
#16
Sour grapes make for the most excellent whine :wink:

Your first bit of edification regarding the forum: members do not have the power to lock threads

Hint number two: add a @ in front of @Bee or @contestedground so that we can fully appreciate your content

Reminder: I fully disclosed in the OP of the thread that I initially had not read the article , thus I was looking for others' opinion. (eventually I did read it)

Welcome to the forum. I hope this little introduction has proven cathartic
My sincere apologies Bee. Not being familiar with this site, I completely missed the fact there were eight more pages of posts. Then again, your comment re "investigating how I could make this all go away....." led to believe that you had been the one responsible for shutting the thread down. I now see that it was, in fact, the Moderator who closed it down when things got a bit heated on page 9. I hope you can forgive my rash to judgement. Best regards, Moe Daoust
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top