We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Sunday, March 6. 2011
Remembering Henry Hudson
Almost finished putting the Christmas stuff away, and amusing myself by refreshing my memory about Henry Hudson's voyages.
Given what a careful exploration he did, I am surprised he never ventured up the St. Lawrence, which Cartier had discovered in 1535 and which Champlain was exploring at the same time as Hudson's trip. Also, I am reminded that the English Jamestown settlement existed a couple of years before his Dutch-sponsored 1609 trip, and that the West Indies, South America, and even Peru had been settled by Spanish long before, in the 1500s.
The Spanish knew where the gold was, and it wasn't in New England.
Posted by Bird Dog in History, Our Essays at 12:07 | Comments (11) | Trackbacks (0)
Trackback specific URI for this entry
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Henry Hudson is a good man.
I like Giovanni Caboto too.
I'm going to go a bit OT BD, probably for the last time mainly because I like to beat a dead horse.
I apologise to the other bloggers for being excessive and redundant on this subject, and I don't want to anger or irritate people anymore. There is still a 800lb gorilla at this site and it has been handle in a less than professional way.
I have said many times on this site "that it is an Honor to sit at this table" somehow this table has got a terrible stain on it.
BD, it is your responsibility to bring closure to this matter, so I am going to ask you for the last time why was Meta banned? Why was Luther banned?
Is KRW and Barret banned? If so why?
These people have been pillars to this site.
All have given much to add to the discussions of the topic matter.
I can understand your decision to ban the H- Man, but I disagree with it . He added a lot to the site, and I miss the crazy jar head. At least he had multiple warnings. With Meta and Luther they had none. So I think an explanation is forthcoming from you. If you want to do this off site you have my E- mail, and I have left my name and town I live in several times. You don't have to be a rocket Scientist to figure the rest out.
Dr Mercury asked if he could e-mail me. I never received anything.
I have often called you a momma's boy, always noting that I'm probably a bigger one. One thing I can definitely tell you is that I never hid behind my momma's skirt.
Here's my name and address again.
Jim Papa Dover, N.H
The truth does matter and it is important to this site.
I'll leave you with what Diogenes said to Garry on 12/25 19:56.
" I don't need you to explain anything to me. If you know the truth, tell it This is not a private site. AS readers we expect the same civility we would expect in any public place that enjoys our repeated patronage"
That person said more in 4 sentence's then I did in my above rant. BD the volley is still with YOU!
BD: Don't know if you might have already read these, but Nathaniel Philbrick's "Sea of Glory" is a great book about the US Navy's exploration of the South Sea and Antarctica. His "In the Heart of The Sea" is also a great book. If you haven't, I think you would enjoy them.
I'm sure those people who have been banned or have left Maggie's Farm because of BD's teenage-girl behavior appreciate the character you have displayed in your quest for the truth about how the editors have so poorly handled banning loyal readers. Each time they do this, the action itself is exacerbated by the blog's lack of guts in manning-up. Find a new blog. The news is old on this site, and there is a shrink whose posts will make you wonder how the APA allows her a license. Their bow-tied solicitor is living in the 1950's and apparently has no desire to ante up an acquaintance with the new century. As for the editor, he has short, fat, pinkened fingers that spend a lot of time up his nose when they're not down his pants. He likes to use the blog as a personal scrapbook when he's not spinning in circles because he's still trying to get people to like him. With that kind of insecurity, he is serially incapable of facing any challenge, so you might as well give it up. The new names you see on the blog are fakes by the blog's very own Dr. Mercury whose current job is to drop in a charming comment saying how much 'SusaninSeattle' or 'DickinDesmoines' loves Maggie's Farm. Last but not least, Jappy, you win. I hope you know that. In a face-to-face between two men, the one who walks away still a man is always the winner. If Garry tries for a smackdown, give yourself a laugh: Garry is one of Dr. Mercury's many sockpuppets.
I think BD's and Barrister's "she who must be obeyeds" demanded Meta's removal from the blog. I've read here for a few years and notice that the female species does not thrive here. It also explains why BD doesn't have the cojones to admit why he banned one of MF's best commenters. "My wife made me do it" just smacks of wimp.
We never blocked Barrett. Why would we?
We only chastise those who offend or attack us personally, or use uncivilized language. We do not mind disagreement, but we do mind disagreeable. This is meant to be a family-friendly and friendly site.
The H- man antics were worse and he was given several chances. The people in question were not.
The F bomb was regrettable , not worth banning.
I love the gut totty is that family friendly?
Being disagreeable gives us debate.
Pride comes before the fall BD.
Write or drop me an e-mail.
The truth would be very much appreciated!
As I previously stated, what I recall of the "dialogue"- which will have to suffice as it has been deleted from the pubic record- the acrimony went two-way.
Which also makes me wonder if those who made the decision to ban had seen a partial or a complete record. Dunno.
Gringo, the denouement between Dr. Mercury and Meta took place at 2A.M. Mercury threatened Meta with her personal information - which he got off this site, and she responded without rancor but with assurety that what he'd done was a threat and against the promise of the blog. I watched those comments vanish within minutes, and a short time later, all of Meta's comments, and all of Mercury's self-incriminating comments vanished. Meta implored BD the following morning, was ignored for several hours until Mercury answered her plea for justice by mocking her and by finally deleting the entire thread - which was substantial in Meta's reckoning of the previous night's thread's events. It is my belief from watching weeks ahead of that particular night and following day that Meta was baited continuously by the hosts on topics which they knew she felt strongly about: education and PTSD. In the three years I have read, I have never seen Gwynnie make a post other than one of his fine photographs, but even he made a post about education and joined the comment thread in order to challenge Meta. If you notice, the hosts on this site never join the commentary. BD's three-word sentences do not count. It is my belief they lay in wait for her to slip up, and that happened on Mercury's post about Dr. Hasan where Meta, in response to Mercury patronizing her, used the 'F' word. You may not have been around, but Mercury's first time on the blog saw several nasty fights between Mercury and a few commenters, Meta being one. From my reader's perspective, while Mercury started the fights, he underestimated those he chose for victims.
What BD calls 'disagreeable' other blogs call fun. What BD calls 'family-friendly' is delusion on his part. If he thinks posting 25 naked women standing in front of a hay wagon on the front page is 'family-friendly', you know he is delusional. To address your thoughts, Meta was set up, given no warning, and all her words were deleted before anyone saw them. I have to agree with whoever said the wives demanded she be banned as she spoke plainly, and her words were not always the agreeable "Yassahs!" the hosts like. It is worth noting the fact that she was never challenged by those hosts; they took the easy way out of debating her and banned her for her opinions. Censorship writ large. It was not the use of 'f*ck'. Do a search on MF's archives for 'f*ck' and you will find it aplenty.
What rule did she break? Her personal information was gotten from the site - against all blog rules and no one addressed that. It looks to me as if MF's rules statement means nothing. They should write, "Your email address is not safe as we will use it to find out about you; if you are feisty and disagree with us, we will ban you. The least BD could do as he is unable to speak the truth, is to rewrite the rules so they are at least honest.
I read a fair amount of the "dialogue" between Dr. M. and Meta. I definitely recall reading about the e-mail issue, and also read some or a lot ( all- who remembers?) before the e-mail issue came up. Well before the e-mail issue came up, I recall Meta making some definitive statement, as is her wont, and Dr. M. replying back in a very confrontational mode. It seemed to me that as a blogmeister, he would have been advised to be a a little more neutral in his statements.
It takes two to tango, and Meta was not the only one in a confrontational mode. In that case, it seems absurd to ban Meta when her counterpart was dishing it out.
The whole operation left a sour taste in my mouth.
I don't know the cause of the ruckus here, but want to say that Maggies Farm is a great site. Just today I recommended it to two people. It has a little bit of everything. Keep up the good work.
Wow. Just, wow. Did I somehow mistype maggiesfarm's address and end up at a soap opera site?
Hang tough, guys and gal. This too shall pass.