Uriah B. Owen's response to Peter Stewart

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
Douglas Richardson royala

Uriah B. Owen's response to Peter Stewart

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 22 jul 2005 06:34:25

Dear Newsgroup ~

Uriah N. Owen contacted me today and asked me to post the following
response to Peter Stewart. Mr. Owen's words speak for themselves.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


Reply:

Stewart, you are behaving as an old git. You post wrongly accusing Mr.
Richardson of really being "Uriah Owen" without a shred of evidence AND
you want others to do your detective work for you! -Hoisted by your own
petard - or shall I say blather!

It is so easy to sit, in what the Americans call the "peanut gallery"
and cast stones, but so far the only evidence that I have that either
of you are real persons, is that Mr. Richardson has published many
articles and books on genealogy. (BTW, I have been pouring over Mr.
Richardson's book, "Plantagenet Ancestry" and want to compliment him on
such a scholarly work).

In fairness, I wish I could say the same of your published works,
Stewart, but alas, I could not find a scrap of anything noteable which
bore your name.

Would you be so kind as to point out at least one of your recent
pblished books similar in scholarship to that of Mr. Richardson, or can
I assume that you only exude bumf as exhibited in this thread.

Cheers Uriah

Peter Stewart

Re: Uriah B. Owen's response to Peter Stewart

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 22 jul 2005 08:57:35

Richardson can't even remember his sock-puppet's second initial, changed
from the subject line to the text of his message.

Obviously "Mr. Owen's words" can't be verified when Ricahrdson posted these
himself.

Whether or not there is a person suspiciously called "Uriah" and having
"UNO" for his initials, the point I made is that Richardson wrote his posts
for him. And now he does it again, having lost the e-mail connection that he
formerly used.

The language sounds as convincing as a Bronx actor trying out a Cockney
accent.

I wonder what liquid substance he has been "pouring" over Richardson's book.

And this is presented as evidence!

As I have said many times before, I have not published in the field of
medieval genealogy. This can have nothing to do with any debate in this
forum or with my right to criticise anyone else. I have worked in the field,
and readers can judge for themselves if I know what I am talking about. I
have never announced that I am an expert, or that I have any kind of "elite
training" as Richardson has claimed for himself. I am not a professional
researcher and have no earnings or desire for reward from my interest in the
medieval era.

Peter Stewart




<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1122010465.372594.316330@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Dear Newsgroup ~

Uriah N. Owen contacted me today and asked me to post the following
response to Peter Stewart. Mr. Owen's words speak for themselves.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


Reply:

Stewart, you are behaving as an old git. You post wrongly accusing Mr.
Richardson of really being "Uriah Owen" without a shred of evidence AND
you want others to do your detective work for you! -Hoisted by your own
petard - or shall I say blather!

It is so easy to sit, in what the Americans call the "peanut gallery"
and cast stones, but so far the only evidence that I have that either
of you are real persons, is that Mr. Richardson has published many
articles and books on genealogy. (BTW, I have been pouring over Mr.
Richardson's book, "Plantagenet Ancestry" and want to compliment him on
such a scholarly work).

In fairness, I wish I could say the same of your published works,
Stewart, but alas, I could not find a scrap of anything noteable which
bore your name.

Would you be so kind as to point out at least one of your recent
pblished books similar in scholarship to that of Mr. Richardson, or can
I assume that you only exude bumf as exhibited in this thread.

Cheers Uriah

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: Uriah N. Owen's response to Peter Stewart

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 22 jul 2005 10:32:57

My comments are interspersed below. I'm sure Mr. Owen will answer for
himself more fully later. DR

Peter Stewart wrote:

Obviously "Mr. Owen's words" can't be verified when Ricahrdson posted these
himself.

I posted Mr. Owen's message at his request.

Whether or not there is a person suspiciously called "Uriah" and having
"UNO" for his initials, the point I made is that Richardson wrote his posts
for him. And now he does it again, having lost the e-mail connection that he
formerly used.

Mr. Owen hardly needs me to write his posts for him.

<I have worked in the field, and readers can judge for themselves if I
know
< what I am talking about. I have never announced that I am an expert,
or that
< I have any kind of "elite training" as Richardson has claimed for
himself. I < am not a professional researcher and have no earnings or
desire for reward
< from my interest in the medieval era.

Where have you worked in the field? Name the institution. Do you have
degrees? Where from? If you are bonafide, you can provide this
information. If you are a fraud, you can not. Pure and simple.

Peter Stewart

Best always, Douglas Richardson

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

Peter Stewart

Re: Uriah N. Owen's response to Peter Stewart

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 22 jul 2005 11:02:42

<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1122024777.831462.318330@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
My comments are interspersed below. I'm sure Mr. Owen will answer for
himself more fully later. DR

I am sure he will, just as soon as you can arrange it.

Peter Stewart wrote:

Obviously "Mr. Owen's words" can't be verified when Ricahrdson posted
these
himself.

I posted Mr. Owen's message at his request.

Ventriloquism, or talking to yourself?

Whether or not there is a person suspiciously called "Uriah" and having
"UNO" for his initials, the point I made is that Richardson wrote his
posts
for him. And now he does it again, having lost the e-mail connection that
he
formerly used.

Mr. Owen hardly needs me to write his posts for him.

I have worked in the field, and readers can judge for themselves if I
know
what I am talking about. I have never announced that I am an expert,
or that
I have any kind of "elite training" as Richardson has claimed for
himself. I < am not a professional researcher and have no earnings or
desire for reward
from my interest in the medieval era.

Where have you worked in the field? Name the institution. Do you have
degrees? Where from? If you are bonafide, you can provide this
information. If you are a fraud, you can not. Pure and simple.

Who said I had worked in an institution? Certainly not me. If I have done
so, this is irrelevant to the discussion. The field in question is medieval
genealogy, not a college faculty. Do you think my posts to SGM on medieval
subjects just formed themselves in my head spontantously, with no research?
You once absurdly called a result of this "awesome", because you had no idea
how I could look for something in the right place and come up with it
quickly. Do you think this is just a knack that comes without long study and
effort?

The rest of your unbalanced questions have nothing to do with anything I
have ever stated, or with anything that could make a diference to the work I
said I have done and consistently demonstrate I have done.

Peter Stewart

Peter Stewart



Peter Stewart

Best always, Douglas Richardson

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net

Douglas Richardson royala

Re: Uriah N. Owen's response to Peter Stewart

Legg inn av Douglas Richardson royala » 22 jul 2005 11:23:36

Dear Peter ~

My questions to you are quite in order. If you are bonafide, you can
readily provide the information. If you are a fraud, you can not.
Pure and simple.

I predict you will dodge the questions. Then we will know once and for
all that you are a total and complete fraud.

Best always, Douglas Richardson, Salt Lake City, Utah

Website: http://www.royalancestry.net


Peter Stewart wrote:
< Who said I had worked in an institution? Certainly not me. If I have
done
< so, this is irrelevant to the discussion. The field in question is
medieval
< genealogy, not a college faculty. Do you think my posts to SGM on
medieval
< subjects just formed themselves in my head spontantously, with no
research?
<
< The rest of your unbalanced questions have nothing to do with
anything I
< have ever stated, or with anything that could make a diference to the
work I
< said I have done and consistently demonstrate I have done.

< Peter Stewart

Peter Stewart

Re: Uriah N. Owen's response to Peter Stewart

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 22 jul 2005 11:34:55

<royalancestry@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1122027816.906500.41740@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Dear Peter ~

My questions to you are quite in order. If you are bonafide, you can
readily provide the information. If you are a fraud, you can not.
Pure and simple.

I predict you will dodge the questions. Then we will know once and for
all that you are a total and complete fraud.

I am not dodging anything - I have never said that I have worked in an
institution or claimed to have degrees, so that there can be no question of
fraud or bad faith one way or the other. Pure and simple.

You can't project your own silly reverence for academic qualifications onto
me. Degrees are only as good as the people who hold them. Some are
outstanding, of course, and most of them would have been so as auto-didacts.
Some are ignorant and stupid beyond belief. Even higher degrees can be
awarded capriciously, interestedly, undeservedly. Pure and simple.

You show no respect at all for the "credentials" of this kind that you know
to be held by people who criticise you. Why is that?

Peter Stewart

Peter Stewart

Re: Qualifications etc

Legg inn av Peter Stewart » 22 jul 2005 12:43:06

""fairthorne"" <fairthorne@breathe.com> wrote in message
news:005801c58eb0$6d7ca240$0600000a@oemcomputer...
Come on gang - let's have an end to all this

I have a degree and have worked for 30+ in a University (King's College -
London - not the provincial one)
but they are completely irrelevant to this conference since they are
Mathematics and Computer Science

As I said before it is the quality of the postings and the reasoned
responses to postings that matter
I don't care whether Douglas, Leo, Peter (named in alphabetic order) or
any
others have degrees or not
Since subscribing 6 months ago I've now got a good idea as to whose
postings
to trust and whose to be cautious over

Are we now going to have to submit CVs before being allowed to contribute?

An unapologetic lurker

There's no need to apologise for lurking, and your post is full of good
sense.

It doesn't make any difference to the content of posts what name anyone uses
(though multiple identities are excepted) and it doesn't matter what anyone
has done or not done outside this forum.

If Shakespeare, Churchill, Lincoln or Melville came to SGM, all that would
be of consequence is what they had to offer here. How many of the four held
degrees? Who cares? Would such qualifications have made any of them a jot
better in life or in their fields of work? Hardly so.

The precedent that would be set by answering questions about these things
could only be unfortunate, just as complying with requests about off-list
activities or responding to attempted smears about sexuality would be:
before long, others would face the same demands and these would intensify
with every answer given more than with every refusal to answer.

Peter Stewart

fairthorne

Qualifications etc

Legg inn av fairthorne » 22 jul 2005 13:21:02

Come on gang - let's have an end to all this

I have a degree and have worked for 30+ in a University (King's College -
London - not the provincial one)
but they are completely irrelevant to this conference since they are
Mathematics and Computer Science

As I said before it is the quality of the postings and the reasoned
responses to postings that matter
I don't care whether Douglas, Leo, Peter (named in alphabetic order) or any
others have degrees or not
Since subscribing 6 months ago I've now got a good idea as to whose postings
to trust and whose to be cautious over

Are we now going to have to submit CVs before being allowed to contribute?

An unapologetic lurker

cheers

Simon

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»