someone is avoiding giving an answer, especially as it is done frequently
and to a pattern of counter-questions or abuse. If it is made obvious that
this is not appreciated and if said often enough, it might sink in and
Richardson might realise that giving an answer will speed things up and
improve the quality of the messages instead of the quantity. This has
nothing to do with being a "trained" historian or genealogist nor with the
knowledge of Latin. But all to do with deception and the avoidance of
answers.
If the behaviour of Richardson is condoned, because we want a nice group
never mind the quality of the messages, soon Richardson will be left with
his friends Hines, Brandon and Welch and a group of people willing to be
duped by Richardson because "we are here to make friends". I still believe
that at times _remaining silent is approving_.
Best wishes
Leo van de Pas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Edward Crabtree" <familyhistorian@kc.rr.com
To: <GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 7:01 AM
Subject: Re: Evidence re. the identity of Alan Fitz Roland'as first wife,
_____ de Lacy
I am sorry, but as a semi-retired salesman I do NOT have the wherewithal
to argue genealogical/historical facts. My silence is not an agreement -
it is more to suppress my ignorance of the topic discussed.
Ed Crabtree - Missouri, USA
familyhistorian@kc.rr.com
All outgoing messages checked by McAfee VirusScan