Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 82

Thread: H.P. Albarelli has passed away.

  1. Default

    Richard - I’d heard about Wendy’s troubles with her book, possibly from a blog post she may have written about the situation. Talk about frustrating. I hope things go better with her next book, as the introduction to the first volume mentioned that she may be writing one.

    Amazon Createspace - now called Kindle Direct Publishing - is a good alternative if it’s required. Their paperbacks appear on Amazon immediately, they print exactly what you give them, the quality is very good - as good or better than Trine Day, for example - and in many circumstances authors get a higher monetary return than elsewhere. I know a number of film writers that happily use the service.

  2. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Thorne View Post
    Richard - I’d heard about Wendy’s troubles with her book, possibly from a blog post she may have written about the situation. Talk about frustrating. I hope things go better with her next book, as the introduction to the first volume mentioned that she may be writing one.

    Amazon Createspace - now called Kindle Direct Publishing - is a good alternative if it’s required. Their paperbacks appear on Amazon immediately, they print exactly what you give them, the quality is very good - as good or better than Trine Day, for example - and in many circumstances authors get a higher monetary return than elsewhere. I know a number of film writers that happily use the service.

    She has enough material to produce another book, that's for sure. I hope she does.
    email: rbooth@protonmail.com
    “The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.”
    —Winston Churchil

  3. #73

    Default Hank Albarelli In Memorium

    My 550 page book The Three Barons, published by TrineDay went through 7 iterations of the manuscript until it was final. That ran from August 2017 to December 2017.

    If Wendy had 100 errors in her book, then IMHO that was on her, not TrineDay. After all, the person who wrote the manuscript can proof it ten times faster than another person.

    The only error of which I am aware in The Three Barons is the changing of Wernher von Braun to Werner von Braun, which was done without my involvement.

    As for Coup in Dallas, I saw something (from Hank) that the delay was due to legal issues. And you have the strange "divorce" between Albarelli and Ganis. Mr. Ganis' book, The Skorzeny Papers, was published by "Hot Books" but sold by Simon and Schuster. Not published by Skyhorse.

    I believe that JFK authors are essentially investigative journalists. As such, they usually want to beat their competitors to the "scoop" and be the first to publish "hot" information. I have not heard of anything that would justify the lengthy delays for "Coup in Dallas". Even self-publishers on CreateSpace get their books done promptly and they are not a branch of a major corporation as is Skyhorse.

    Skyhorse was mentioned on Fox News by Alan Dershowitz because it published The Mueller Report. So you have Skyhorse fobbing off The Skorzeny Papers to "Hot Books" but proudly publishing The Mueller Report. IMHO The Mueller Report is Deep State Propaganda at its worst. Fake news. That's incompatible IMHO with JFK "truth telling".

    I still hope to be pleasantly surprised by "Coup in Dallas" finally being released. I received a Barnes and Noble gift card in November, 2017 for my birthday from family in order to buy the Albarelli/Ganis book. I'm not holding my breath. Fortunately, I made use of the gift card to buy The Skorzeny Papers, so all was not lost.

    James Lateer

  4. Default

    James,

    No, the mistakes Trine Day made are not "on her" or somehow Wendy's fault.

    She sent them a correct document which included the footnotes and the paragraphs and page(s) that TrineDay saw fit to omit arbitrarily.

    What she sent them was in fact edited and correct.

    What they saw fit to produce was filled with mistakes not present in the original manuscript.

    That isn't on her, that is due to TrineDay's incompetence. You're speaking of something here you don't know anything about really.

    I'm not saying that there were over 100 mistakes found that Dr. Painting had made. What I am saying is that the printed book had, for example, an entire section of footnotes arbitrarily omitted, a missing paragraph on another page, and I believe--it's been a couple years--a missing page. She started a tally comparing the manuscript that was sent to what was printed in the book.

    Some people speculated that perhaps the person doing the editing was on drugs or otherwise mentally unfit, which if I am to judge the soundness of mind of their editors based on some of their writers, that's probably an accurate guess.

    --Richard
    email: rbooth@protonmail.com
    “The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.”
    —Winston Churchil

  5. #75

    Default H P Albarelli In Memorium

    Mr. Booth: There must be some miscommunication on this issue.

    When I got my book, The Three Barons published by TrineDay, I, too sent them an initial manuscript. But, apparently, an author can't just send a manuscript to TrineDay and expect them to fix any problems with it.

    In my experience, I re-read and posted corrections to the (then) current version of the text. I wound up going through the entire text seven times total, before I signed off that it was ready to publish.

    In terms of my experience, your description of the TrineDay process doesn't make any sense. You seem to be suggesting that Wendy signed off on a perfected version of the manuscript, sent it to TrineDay and that they then basically vandalized it.

    Based on my experience with Mr. Kris Millegan, the publisher of TrineDay, he could run mental rings around (not just me) but anybody who I have ever seen posting here on this site without exception.

    As Abe Lincoln famously said about Ulysses S. Grant "If he's always drinking whisky, then let's send some of that whiskey to my other generals."

    If the TrineDay people are on drugs, then it must be a drug that induces courage. Because they are bold enough to print any kind of true and necessary information for the benefit of readers like myself.

    Actually, I'm pretty sure they are not on any drugs, whiskey, chemicals, etc. etc. Maybe some Kryptonite from time to time.

    James Lateer

    (p.s. Bonus factoid: Just now on CNN, former CIA man Phil Mudd said on air on CNN that the CIA is a "brotherhood" and that somebody (implicitly from the CIA brotherhood) is likely to "stick a knife" into Rudy Guliani. I'm not making this up.)

    JL

  6. Default

    I don't think you're really paying attention. TrineDay published a book in which, during the editing process, they:

    1) Left out a paragraph on a page---something that was not missing in what was sent to them
    2) Left out an entire section of end notes--something that was not missing in what was sent to them
    3) Left out an entire page--something that was not missing in what was sent to them

    Make as many excuses as you want, and blow your own horn over your own book as much as you want, it makes little difference to the bottom line. And that bottom line is that the publisher made egregious unprofessional mistakes in which there are no excuses for.

    Which, by the way, the publisher--unlike yourself--acknowledged these issues. Additionally, I would add to TrineDay's credit that these sorts of mistakes don't happen with every book that they publish, which is about the only credible thing to have been said about TrineDay in their defense. It is my understanding that the person who did the editing on that book was let go.

    But keep defending the indefensible, I'm sure it will let the objective observer know a thing or two about your judgement.

    I'm not going to comment to you any further on this issue. It's a waste of my time, and based on what I see in your responses it appears you just want to argue, and to talk about your own book.

    --Richard
    email: rbooth@protonmail.com
    “The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.”
    —Winston Churchil

  7. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Booth View Post
    I don't think you're really paying attention. TrineDay published a book in which, during the editing process, they:

    1) Left out a paragraph on a page---something that was not missing in what was sent to them
    2) Left out an entire section of end notes--something that was not missing in what was sent to them
    3) Left out an entire page--something that was not missing in what was sent to them

    Make as many excuses as you want, and blow your own horn over your own book as much as you want, it makes little difference to the bottom line. And that bottom line is that the publisher made egregious unprofessional mistakes in which there are no excuses for.

    Which, by the way, the publisher--unlike yourself--acknowledged these issues. Additionally, I would add to TrineDay's credit that these sorts of mistakes don't happen with every book that they publish, which is about the only credible thing to have been said about TrineDay in their defense. It is my understanding that the person who did the editing on that book was let go.

    But keep defending the indefensible, I'm sure it will let the objective observer know a thing or two about your judgement.

    I'm not going to comment to you any further on this issue. It's a waste of my time, and based on what I see in your responses it appears you just want to argue, and to talk about your own book.

    --Richard
    Speaking of Trine Day......... how many years have they been running the Judyth Vary Baker con? Or Halsam's? Beyond the pale.

  8. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark A. O'Blazney View Post
    Speaking of Trine Day......... how many years have they been running the Judyth Vary Baker con? Or Halsam's? Beyond the pale.
    I haven't read Haslam's books, so can't comment on them. I am only vaguely familiar with the things he writes about (Mary Sherman, Alton Ochsner), recognizing the names but not knowing enough of the key facts I'd need to know to render an informed opinion.

    However, when it comes to Judyth Vary Baker I do have enough knowledge about the central figure in her fable--Lee Harvey Oswald--to render an informed judgement about her book and what she's about: nutter trash of the worst sort.

    I put Baker's story in the same category that I put James Files, or the theory that 'Greer Shot JFK,' or 'JFK was killed because he was going to tell the Russians the truth about UFOs.' All of it unfounded rubbish based on questionable sources that are uncorroborated and not supported by the facts.

    I'm shocked that so many people seem to buy into the 'Me and Lee' story, and that Baker has somehow managed to secure a place within the research community where we find her running conventions and getting endorsements from people who really should know better. And I guess one of these recent conventions featured a stage play of 'Me and Lee'. It boggles my mind to see what I really believe is a delusion (in every clinical sense of the word) and a work of fiction uncritically accepted. If someone had appeared in the 1970s and claimed 'I was Lee Harvey Oswald's girlfriend' they would have been relegated to the tabloids, and many a psychiatrist would undoubtedly have come to similar conclusions about the mental state of a person claiming that.

    In my opinion it only takes but listening to Judyth Baker speak, and reading some of what she writes (especially the bizarre all-caps rants found in her online posts) to conclude that she is either (1) mentally ill or (2) a con... and in my opinion she is both.

    It's sad that so few people seem to realize this--even when there are plenty of examples to prove various things she's said are patently false, and in some cases just bizarre. I guess this is why we find that Walt Brown wrote a book debunking Baker's assertions--which is a sad state of affairs. It's like having to write a book debunking the notion that the Driver Shot JFK. You shouldn't have to do that.

    I tend to avoid things I know are total crap so I rarely talk about this but wanted to add my .02 since you mentioned it.
    email: rbooth@protonmail.com
    “The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.”
    —Winston Churchil

  9. #79

    Default Hank Albarelli In Memorium

    Since writing my book, I have been on the inside looking out at the "lone gunman" theorists.

    It's amazing to me that people confidently dismiss my theories about the JFK murder when they really don't have any real familiarity with the facts and the various theories.

    The JFK fact-deniers fall into two categories:

    1. Fans and cheerleaders for the National Security State and

    2. People who think they know stuff (or pretend that they know stuff) that they really don't have any in-depth knowledge about--just so they don't have to admit their ignorance on the subject (or any subject).

    It's very similar to the arguments I get into with people about NATO (and Trump's policy on NATO). Having read at least five books on NATO, (and dozens more in central European history), I can tell you that not even one person in 500 really knows the real problems with NATO vis a vis the US.

    Yet these people are certain in their minds that they know NATO is a terrific organization. They mostly couldn't pass a 20 question test on NATO, but they think they could.

    When you think about it, it's like people swearing up and down that they know Santa Claus lives at the North Pole. Or that babies come from the stork. Sadly, it's not a lot different IMHO.

    Sorry, but IMHO, people actually look and sound smarter when the admit what they don't know and also what they actually know and they are careful to make that distinction.

    And for stuff they don't know, they actually always want more information about it.

    AND THEY DON'T CLAIM TO KNOW EVERYTHING!!!


    James Lateer

  10. #80

    Default

    Can we please start a new thread about other people's books and publishers as this thread is about Hank Albarelli.
    "I think it would be a good idea." Mahatma Gandhi, when asked what he thought of Western civilization.

    The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
    Karl Marx.

    "Well, he would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies, 1963, replied Ms Rice Davies when the prosecuting counsel pointed out that Lord Astor denied an affair or having even met her.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •