GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2007-12 > 1197756631


From: "Leo van de Pas" <>
Subject: Fw: Fw: The personal attacks in this group
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 09:10:31 +1100


Dear Wanda,
What you describe would be ideal. When there is a difference of opinion,
fors and againsts should be aired. A grandstanding "You are wrong again,
Renia" without explanation does not fill the bill. She maintained that
Robertson was a Scottish family name, and Robinson English.
I quoted one of those wonderful flamboyant genealogists Sir Iain Moncreiffe
of That Ilk who has produced a great book on Scottish clans and there no
Robinson is to be found. And so when Richardson maintains that both Renia
and (by implication) Sir Iain Moncreiffe are wrong, he should have a good
reason. "I will ask Andrew McEwen" does not fill that bill either.
With best wishes
Leo van de Pas,
Canberra, Australia

----- Original Message -----
From: "Wanda Thacker" <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 8:56 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: The personal attacks in this group


> I'm going to make it a point not to make a genealogical statement. I do
> not want to have to defend myself.I am not qualified. I'm sticking to
> questions and comments. LOL
>
> One question I have is this: is the need to dispute and defend a direct
> result of some of the members/subscribers being scholars? I understand
> that in scholarly journals and things it is quite common.
>
> I'm just here for an exchange of thoughts; a think tank, if you will.
> I've always found that environment more conducive to accomplishing goals.
> I suppose it is more of a scientific/experimental way of thinking, without
> preconceived notions. But it is just how my mind works.
>
> What would be the problem in stating that one source says X and another
> source states Y and that a definitive source has not yet been identified?
> Or that one person believes A and another believes B and that there a
> valid points to both sides? It is called being conservative, taking the
> middle ground and erring on the side of reason. Or you could just say
> being gracious.
>
> Wanda Thacker
>
> Leo van de Pas <> wrote:. but a requirement is
> that you answer requests in regard of
> genealogical statements you (Richardson) make. If you cannot defend a
> genealogical statement, you (Richardson) should not make them..
>
>
>
>
>
> Use what talents you possess; the woods would be verysilent if no birds
> sang except those that sang best.
> - Henry Van Dyke, 1852 - 1933
>
>
>
>
> Birds sing after a storm; why shouldn&#39;t people feel asfree to delight
> in whatever sunlight remains to them?
> - Rose FitzgeraldKennedy, 1890 - 1995
>
>
>
>
> Be as a bird perched on a frail branch that she feelsbending beneath her,
> still she sings away all the same,knowing she has wings.
> - Victor Hugo, 1802 - 1885
>
>
> My Scrap Journaling Blog: http://lascorpia64.wordpress.com/ Check it out
> for journaling prompts RECENTLY UPDATED, A LOT OF QUOTES
> MY LAYOUT BLOG http://introspectivescrapping.blogspot.com/
> http://wandasscrappingfreebies.blogspot.com/
> POLITICAL OPINIONShttp://www.myspace.com/politicallyincorrectrants
>
>
> -------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
> with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
> quotes in the subject and the body of the message


This thread: