GEN-MEDIEVAL-L ArchivesArchiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2007-08 > 1187351833
From: Rosie Bevan <>
Subject: Re: Peter Stewart's Ancestry
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 04:57:13 -0700
Not having had the time to frequent the newsgroup lately, I'm
disgusted to return and find yet another attack on the integrity on
Peter by Mr Hines, whose attempts to discredit him in any way he
imagines feasible, only expose his own sick, envious and dessicated
soul for what it is. As far as Peter is concerned there is no-one
whose honesty and values I respect more, and I would consider myself
extremely blessed to have anything approaching his finely honed
intellect. Peter generously shares his deep knowledge and passion for
European medieval genealogy with this community nearly every day.
Shame on Hines and his camp followers - the peevish Brandon, and the
Andrra/Fayette/Whittaker brigade who have contributed next to nothing
to this medieval forum in comparison. And Bravo to the stout-hearted
Leo and others for standing up for him.
Take comfort from the ratings, Peter. They show that Mr Hines has only
succeeded in highlighting your value to this newsgroup.
On Aug 17, 12:20 pm, Peter Stewart <> wrote:
> On Aug 17, 8:47 am, John Brandon <> wrote:
> > > Not discouraged, but rather disgusted with the unreciprocal consumerism of
> > > people I have defended in the past.
> > > If I leave the newsgroup again, for the same reason as before, my
> > > communication on matters raised in SGM can continue off-list to the people I
> > > wish to remain in touch with, as before.
> > > I am not under any obligaton to provide help, corrections or warnings to SGM
> > > readers.
> > > Then see how happy and civil the forum will become, with Richardson,
> > > Brandon, Hines and Marco/Jack/Adrian/Steven untrammelled by the discipline
> > > of having their inanities countered and their lies pointed out, especially
> > > to inattentive or new readers like Dolores C. Phifer.
> > > Peter Stewart
> > Pout ... sulk ... pout.-
> Yes, I agree it would be not entirely unfair to characterise it like
> However, there is a certain compact implicit in daily communication
> with a group of people who are personally unknown to each other. If
> one of them - myself at present - comes to the conclusion that he is
> making a long and time-consuming effort for the benefit of a kind of
> moral blancmange, an indeterminate number of people who prefer to
> remain nameless and uncounted when I am being subjected to sustained
> slander and idiotic abuse, then that person is surely entitled to feel
> some disenchantment, even dudgeon.
> All the members of SGM who have been sitting on their hands during
> this turmoil are no doubt thinking that discretion = dignified silence
> = the better part of valour. Chivalry lives.....I don't agree with
> them, I don't resepct the view, and don't know if I wish to go on
> taking part in a forum with a collection of people who hold it.
> Peter Stewart- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -