16-08-2012, 05:30 AM
(This post was last modified: 16-08-2012, 11:28 AM by Seamus Coogan.)
Talk about egos outta control lads. Pipe down sheesh I found both articles are very enjoyable very informative and I see no better or worse. Both have good content and a good message. So you both like your own pieces...fuck me so do I.
Sure, Mark CD's manner can be very curt to say the least! But in fairness he's been on the scene for a bloody long time, he's got some great stuff out there (if and when you can find it...check out the Fourth Decade back issues I've had a lot more luck there). He is also one of the co-founders of this forum which is a very, very good one. I'm sure you now know all of this Mark.
But whinge as I might or complain as you have. It's out of CD's and others pockets, time and energy that we get to express our POV's here. I'd much rather encounter CD being a tosser (occasionally) than some shitty little no-name, insane, jerk off, Fetzer or McAdams clone as an admin any day. If a shit head is hassling you, guaranteed he'll boot them. After all he does have your back believe it or not, even if he has attempted to rip your throat out.....its a Sicilian thing. Thus I think your letter to him was a little jumpy and you should have thought it through and tried to find out more of what CD has done. Equally jumpy was CD's idea to publish the email. In light of that excellent post awhile back by Greg about the putting up private correspondence. I don't think it was cool either. CD you are smart and canny enough to reference comments in such a manner to make the misguided comments in the misguided letter look misguided anyway.
So let's bury the hatchet from here (not in each others skulls) please. I can see CD (bless him) sort of has in his own way.
I think you both have important and good work to do for the 50th and after. In saying that CD (as I have said before mate) I really do hope you can get some articles out this year. I'm all ears and well I guess eyes as many of us are. I think part of the problem for people like Mark CD is that unless you know where to look, your work isn't as visible as it could/should be.
Sure, Mark CD's manner can be very curt to say the least! But in fairness he's been on the scene for a bloody long time, he's got some great stuff out there (if and when you can find it...check out the Fourth Decade back issues I've had a lot more luck there). He is also one of the co-founders of this forum which is a very, very good one. I'm sure you now know all of this Mark.
But whinge as I might or complain as you have. It's out of CD's and others pockets, time and energy that we get to express our POV's here. I'd much rather encounter CD being a tosser (occasionally) than some shitty little no-name, insane, jerk off, Fetzer or McAdams clone as an admin any day. If a shit head is hassling you, guaranteed he'll boot them. After all he does have your back believe it or not, even if he has attempted to rip your throat out.....its a Sicilian thing. Thus I think your letter to him was a little jumpy and you should have thought it through and tried to find out more of what CD has done. Equally jumpy was CD's idea to publish the email. In light of that excellent post awhile back by Greg about the putting up private correspondence. I don't think it was cool either. CD you are smart and canny enough to reference comments in such a manner to make the misguided comments in the misguided letter look misguided anyway.
So let's bury the hatchet from here (not in each others skulls) please. I can see CD (bless him) sort of has in his own way.
I think you both have important and good work to do for the 50th and after. In saying that CD (as I have said before mate) I really do hope you can get some articles out this year. I'm all ears and well I guess eyes as many of us are. I think part of the problem for people like Mark CD is that unless you know where to look, your work isn't as visible as it could/should be.
"In the Kennedy assassination we must be careful of running off into the ether of our own imaginations." Carl Ogelsby circa 1992