MvR's DVII

[Rowan Broadbent]

"And to those shallow enough to think this has anything to do with the events of a previous thread, it doesn't. I regard this as far more important, fundamental even, than the outcome of some essentially trivial debate about what colour a short-lived fighter's wings were. I would post a response like this, no matter who the poster was."

I suppose that makes me shallow, then.

Funny that you don't react this way to von Richthofen enthusiasts on the WWI list. I look forward to reading some more self-congratulatory garbage there about how you "went over to the 'drome and told them like it is".

Stop picking fights, it wil all end in tears, you know.

I've never liked to see people using motherhood and apple pie arguments to advance their own petty agendas, it somehow lacks imagination.

Rowan

[NeilE]

Originally Posted by Rowan Broadbent

"And to those shallow enough to think this has anything to do with the events of a previous thread, it doesn't. I regard this as far more important, fundamental even, than the outcome of some essentially trivial debate about what colour a short-lived fighter's wings were. I would post a response like this, no matter who the poster was."

I suppose that makes me shallow, then.

Funny that you don't react this way to von Richthofen enthusiasts on the WWI list. I look forward to reading some more self-congratulatory garbage there about how you "went over to the 'drome and told them like it is".

Stop picking fights, it wil all end in tears, you know.

I've never liked to see people using motherhood and apple pie arguments to advance their own petty agendas, it somehow lacks imagination.

Rowan

Rowan;

Funny thing is, the WW1 Modelling Listees would seem to have the good sense to know that wishing for your favourite ace to have inflicted more casualties than he did is insensitive and in appalling taste.

In fact, when someone brought up MVR's birthday, most Listee's made light of it.

Also I suggest you scuttle off and check thoroughly the WW1 List archives. Do so and you will see that the only occasion I have posted there about doings on this site was the E-V thread when I felt they were being needlessly flamed by posters here.

You have absolutely no idea what my motivations were for pointing out the insensitivity in that post and until you do, I suggest you put a sock in it. It seems convenient to attempt to smear me and deflect from the truth of what I posted by attempting to link it to the E-V thread.

As for my agenda, that relates to attempting to knock a bloody great hole in the naive hagiography surrounding MVR and many other aces here that totally obscures the real business of air combat, and indeed all combat in World War One. Notions of "chivalry in the air" is just escapism. I chose to reply to Dan's post because it was the most extreme and tasteless.

Dan has made it quite clear that he doesn't give a rat's backside about who he offends in that post and thus deserves all he gets. As for who I offend by pointing out the uncomfortable truth contained in his post, I don't give a rat's either.

Neil

[Rowan Broadbent]

"Sponsored by Theatre of The Absurd"

Seems appropriate.

[NeilE]

Originally Posted by Rowan Broadbent

"Sponsored by Theatre of The Absurd"

Seems appropriate.

Since all you've set out to do in your posts is attack me personally, I think we can assume you have nothing real to contribute here. I suggest you go and warm yourself in the collective afterglow of "MVR Day".

Neil

[redalb2253]

Neil all I asked for was an opinion on aircraft color Dan San's comment was a little off color while your's in my OPINION was way off topic!

[CWatson]

Originally Posted by Neil_E

And to those shallow enough to think this has anything to do with the events of a previous thread, it doesn't. I regard this as far more important, fundamental even, than the outcome of some essentially trivial debate about what colour a short-lived fighter's wings were. I would post a response like this, no matter who the poster was.

BS,

After your thinly veiled attempt to bait Dan San in the E.V. thread failed you posted on this thread to snipe at his response. The shallowness in this thread belongs to you and you only. This has nothing to do with the WWI mailing list, MVR , Dan San' cult of personality or anything else to do with WWI aviation or it's pilots and their families it is you trollling for trouble and nothing else, hell you can't even quote Dan San correctly even though we can see what he posted. He did not say he did not say " he did not give a rats behind who he offends" he clearly stated he did not care what YOU were offended by ,so when you cross post between the site here and the list that most here are members of too please get it right.Remember when carring tales carry the correct ones.

[CWatson]

Originally Posted by redalb2253

Neil all I asked for was an opinion on aircraft color Dan San's comment was a little off color while your's in my OPINION was way off topic!

redal2253,

Sorry, I had orginally planned to respond to your question when I clicked on this thread. I built a Monogram kit as what I thought MVR's would look like if he had made it farther along during the war. I did it with red wheels,struts,top of upper wing, metal engine panels and from the front of the fuselage cross back red also. This includes the horizontal stabilizer. The areas that were not red were covered in lozenge decals.

CWatson

[Langdon]

Hello Dave Watts,

Sorry it has taken me so long to respond to your questions, work has been hectic recently and the reason for my poor response above was that I should not have replied immediately after having driven 1000 miles that day. I had not read the start of the thread and thought that you were considering this subject as something that may have happened rather than what might have been.

My mistake I withdraw the comments although I don't really see the point in the discussion, maybe MvR could have been killed in an all red E.V after a wing failure Sorry if this remark causes offence.

Langdon

[NeilE]

Originally Posted by CWatson

BS,

After your thinly veiled attempt to bait Dan San in the E.V. thread failed you posted on this thread to snipe at his response. The shallowness in this thread belongs to you and you only. This has nothing to do with the WWI mailing list, MVR , Dan San' cult of personality or anything else to do with WWI aviation or it's pilots and their families it is you trollling for trouble and nothing else, hell you can't even quote Dan San correctly even though we can see what he posted. He did not say he did not say " he did not give a rats behind who he offends" he clearly stated he did not care what YOU were offended by ,so when you cross post between the site here and the list that most here are members of too please get it right.Remember when carring tales carry the correct ones.

CWatson

This is like debating with four year olds...

I shall spell out this out just one more time (maybe I should use big letters and colours too, that might help I suspect).

1) I have only once referred to posts here on the World War One Modelling List. That was the Fokker E-V thread. Why? Because that List was being unfairly flamed over here. I have been a member of that List since about 2002. I do not "carry tales" between the two forums at all. As I said to Rowan Broadbent, go through their archives, the answers are there and they prove what I say. To say that I "carry tales" is just an infantile smear. Is that clear to you now?

2) This has nothing to do with the Fokker E-V thread. If you had bothered to read it properly, which I suspect you didn't, you would have seen that by and large, I was agreeing with Dan. What I was more interested in was in regard to testing the levels of proof that were being put forward in regard to that position. Dan and Langdon provided what I was looking for and I was satisfied with that. End of story. Obviously the whole thing has been blown out of proportion somewhere.

3) In regard to Dan saying to me that "Life is tough" in reply to my comments about his insensitive posting. If anyone else who was offended by them read that, they would have to assume that the comments also applied to them. He in no way expressed any regret or anything else that suggested that he felt he had overstepped the mark by what he had said originally. Thus my comment. Now, are you still following me or should I cut down the number of syllables for you?

4) One thing I find interesting in all this brouhaha, so far its been all about how nasty I am for criticising Dan San Abbott. Never mind that the points I raised were quite valid. It all been about "How dare you criticise Dan!!" I suggest you and others of like mind should take a good long hard look at yourselves. Your (and others) uncritical and at times sycophantic cheer squadding of Dan does nothing to promote objectivity on this Forum. Instead it actively diminishes it. It also does nothing to assist Dan to objectively evaluate his own positions if all he hears is a mostly mindless cheer squad. Think about that (though I truly doubt whether you'll spend more than 10 seconds on it).

There. Is that all clear for you now? If not, then to paraphrase Dan, "Life is tough".

Redalb2253: I'm sorry of you think this thread has been hijacked. My original intention was to post once on Dan's comments. Frankly, I thought he would have seen that his remarks were a bit off and qualified them. I didn't account for the idiot fringe. As far as I am concerned I have said what needs to be said and that's an end to it. Please resume normal broadcasting

Neil

[Langdon]

Hey guys calm it down a bit. I agree with Neil_E that Dan-San's comment was insensitive but having said that I don't for a minute believe that he meant it literally. Who in their right mind - given hindsight - would support the senseless slaughter that was the First World War?

Frankly the idea of "God willing" in WWI is ridiculous.