Over on Szabo's forum, there's a thread about the 150th. cycle of events. It went to 110 posts in about three days. Of those 110 posts, maybe ten actually had anything to do with the 150th. cycle of events.

Is this the kind of stuff you want to see here? I'm wondering, since we are getting damn little in the way of action these days. Do people just want to see the train wrecks?

Not much has changed in the last 10 years; has it? OZ seems to be the place where events get trashed before, during and after they happen. Only the names of the "trashers" have changed. Goodness, if an event doesn't have what you want in your hobby; just don't go.

Heck no, I should hope not.  No one wants to see that except the handful of folks who actually enjoy online savagery, and they seldom get out to events to face the people they argue with.

I mean, I face people I argue with all the time , but 40 of those posts must have been from the same guy taking on Terre, Wickett, and Watson, as well as Anders and yours truly.

But the lack of action here is reflected on the other forums as well.  I think Charles -- for everything else that might be said for or against him -- had a decided knack for stimulating discussion.

His epigones sadly lack that talent.  It's everyone's loss.

I'm with Michael, I'd rather have fewer posts but quality ones. I only go over to OZ about once or twice a week these days and the AC even less. What we need to do is find a way to promote this forum, any ideas?

I mention it to people as an alternative, well-balanced venue, and I post AARs here with links on the other boards -- that might be one way:  linking the good stuff.

On the other hand, all board traffic is down, and you don't want traffic here to pick up to the point where policing becomes a chore.

Bill,

I would like to applaud your post condemning the “150th Cycle Event Plans Underway” thread on the Szabo forum. After reading through that word storm I am hesitant to post my thoughts on any forum. Maybe I am too middle of the road. Maybe I missed the point. Maybe I have this totally unsubstantiated notion that Civil War fora serve more purposes than we think.

It’s sad when a well intentioned thread turns into a keyboard campaign of bitter rhetoric. Outside of ruffling feathers by personal effrontery, was anything of value accomplished? Like it or not, how many people see Civil War fora strictly as a source of entertainment? It may be surprising the number of people who enjoy these on-line quarrels. They enjoy them so much their contributions are designed to keep a squabble going or to stir up the next one. Their forte is the argument, the more passionate and strident the better. The argument is more important than the issue.

Most of the participants of the thread in question are known, but not all of them. When you are safely concealed behind a fictitious user name it is easier to be more assertive, sarcastic, judgmental, or acrimonious than you would dare be face to face. If people want to remain anonymous a forum easily accommodates that wish.

Known or unknown,could there be more narcissistic people out there than we dare imagine? They simply love seeing their names appear on their own screen. They read, reread, and reread again what they have written. This makes them feel good. Adding to this feeling is seeing the number of times their posts have been read. This is powerful stuff for some members of the congregation.

In our own way we Civil War reenactors could probably keep a brigade of therapist fully employed with our collective idiosyncrasies of dwelling in or either trying to bring the past to the present.   Some of the contingent are more vocal than others.  This, no doubt, brings them a measure of satisfaction, while raising the eye brows of those not involved with this hobby.

To bring this to a point, outside of Dave Towsen's daily “Looking Back To Today,“ there have been days recently with no other posts on the Common Ground. That is probably a concern for Ken Cornett and you moderators. In the Curtis Makamson manner of looking at things that is not all bad. Paramount among the good things is there is none of the on-going foolishness like the aforementioned thread dripping with accusations and acidic allegations. No doubt it would be good to have a thread with 114 posts, but look at the substance of the one already mentioned. Outside of hurt feelings and a buffet of insults was anything accomplished? Were any pertinent questions answered? Did anything positive result from screen after screen of spite? Maybe the silence of Common Ground speaks more eloquently than the virulence and vindictiveness of the on-going Szabo’s spat.

This forum is great. When events, items etc are posted it is  99.99% of the time, information that is worthwhile, a good question, interesting photos, nice to read good AAR or news concerning events that are of interest to this forum's members.

Curtis is correct and from all my years of being on the internet many people hide behind a screen name.

The Common Ground Forum is fine just the way it is.

I enjoy the slower pace of this board.  The topics are usually well thought out and have some nice pleasant discussion.

I don't check the szabo forum because of all the other stuff.  And the AC, I typically read the subject lines for the threads to see if I want to go any further.

As for the 150th cycle of events, I think I would like to see some of the not so big name battles or such.

I am looking forward to the 150th McDowell, just because I like going to McDowell.  I would like to see someone do a nice Appamattox event when it gets to that time.  Something with a parade and a parole.

I figure there will be a Gettysburg and an Antietam, am I would like to see those but more for my nephew who is new to the hobby and hasn't had a chance to expierience some of the larger events.

Bill and Dave and others, I think you guys are doing a great job keeping this forum regulated.  And Michael, you are correct about Charles, he had a way to spark a conversation and it is missed.

I'm with Greg on the slower pace..  Some of the other forums are so crammed with "stuff" that I don't go to them all that often and post very rarely.

I guess there are a couple of old adages that are quite fitting.

"If you don't have anything to say...don't say anything."

"Better to be thought of as a fool that to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

"Be sure brain is engaged before putting mouth into gear."

Bill

I went and looked at the threads you referenced on the Szabo and AC forum.  And the one thing that stood out to me was the repeated use of EBUFU.

I have been in this hobby since 1998.  Not as long as some but long enough to have seen some things.  When I started doing this, there were the for-profit events and I will admit I attended some of them.  Got burned out on them by the 140th Antietam event.

I also remember seeing an increase of talk about EBUFU which I understood to mean: Events By Us For Us.  

I understood this to mean that the events would be organized and run by reenactors or people who had been reenactors.  That the events would not have the focus on the almighty dollar from the spectator but on raising awareness or preservation funds.  That these events would be a little more history heavy than the standard BBB event.

That the events would be created to offer the participant a more realistic experience and so this could be a very broad definition of an event.  It could be something as being on original ground and recreating a part of a battle (McDowell, Shenandoah 62) to immersion events (Bummers, Rich Mountain).  That these events fall under the bubble of EBUFU because they were not designed to line someones pockets but to help preservation or give the reenactor a better event than what had been.

Has this changed? Does it mean something else now?  Does EBUFU only mean week long immersion events?

I bring this question here because we have such a diverse group and it can be handled in a civilized manner.

Thanks

Not trying to be simplistic, but taking Greg’s question from a slightly different perspective, if spectators and fund raising are eliminated does that qualify an event to fall under the EBUFU umbrella as long as it is hosted by personnel involved in the hobby?

I understand EBUFU to mean exactly as you defined. An event by reenactors or living historians if you prefer for the same. I do not think that an EBUFU event should be limited to a week long immersion in the woods or on a battlefied. I feel that would seriously limit the availability of EBUFU events for citizens. Not all citizens during the CW were refugees. By maintaining the EBUFU definition as "by us for us" additional opportunities for better events for citizens as well as preservation of non-battlefield sites will be presented.

Well, yes, EBUFU means events put on by reenactors for reenactors (even if what the reenactors want is to talk to the public), as compared to events put on by for-profit entities with the reenactors' needs as a secondary consideration.

Problem is, going by that definition, EBUFU really doesn't refer to a particular result. If the most inaccurate group imaginable puts on an event on the town square so they can spend the weekend drunk in polyester uniforms and fire coehorn mortars to delight the crowd, they can legitimately call it an EBUFU event, because it is of course an event put on by them, for them, that's "better" (for them) than other events. Reenactors would like to think they're all more interested in focusing on history than the average for-profit organizer, but that's not necessarily true.

So really, I think the term is meaningless unless the "us" is defined. If you're part of the "us" that's being referred to, you'll probably like the EBUFU event, whatever it is. If you're not, you won't.

The kind of reenactors who tend to use the term most often sorta by default get to define who the typical "us" is understood to be by most reenactors, but really, it could refer to any group.

Hank Trent
hanktrent@gmail.com

Then perhaps, EBUFU History Heavy should be used for the events geared more toward authenticity?

I've pretty much dropped off reading the AC, since it appears to be more about the snobbery, that perfection is the goal. EBUFU seems to translate to, in my myopic eyes, week-long emersion events. Granted, I've heard from any number of wonderful members of the AC that will tell you it's more about the journey towards authenticity, that none will be barred for having something less than a completely and perfectly defarbed gun. I believe them. However, the rhetoric certainly implies otherwise. Those guys might just be keyboard campaigners and monday morning soldiers but it begins to wear on you. I would love nothing more than to be at the level some of those guys have attained, and "Bummers" sounds like it would be an absolute blast. Those things don't wash away the bad taste though.

Szabo has some really good posters too, but the vitriol gets thick. I stopped reading them when I came across a number of guys DEFENDING slavery. I don't need to associate with that sort.

Bill and all:

I've been away from the hobby and the forums since June due to some serious medical issues with my lovely bride.  But, when I do check in, I come here first. The "other forum", of which I used to be a frequent poster, has, indeed, turned into a train wreck.

You may not get 500+ post threads here, but what you do get is a damn sight better than others. Certainly we get disagreements here, but it doesn't turn into "animal house".

My vote:  Keep up the good work and stay on this course.

Mark

No worries...I've been ex-communicated from every facet of this hobby including my own social circles and you won't be seeing me on your forums or at your events.  Now you can relish in my destruction.

Take good care and happy history'n!!!

You should think in terms of a preemptive ban here in the spirt of proactiveness.

Christopher Rideout
Tampa, Florida  

--Last edited by oldkingcrow on 2009-09-12 11:30:15 --

Greg, there is nothing wrong with your meaning of EBUFU. To me, it's pretty much on target.  I've always taken it to mean events put on by reenactors or have some of them involved in the production of the event, they are usually private, and fund raising is an option. Fundraising sometimes helps draw in the numbers, but it shows that the organizers truly want to save what is quickly disappearning.  It's dear to our/their hearts.

Rich Mountain and Bummers have come out of my camp.  Being the registration guy, I have received monies for preservation towards both events from folks who never planned to attend. Our own version of the CWPT you could say.

Was EBUFU "taken" by the authentic movement?  Maybe.  Did it replace the word "hardcore"? Again, maybe to some.  Mel, I see what you see on the AC.  I know most folks there personally.  Some of them do take it to mean "hardcore", but the vast majority play it off and do organize very good EBUFU events. EBUFU events normally contain strong guidelines.  You read them, you decide if you can meet them, you sign on. One last thing I disagree with is length determines an EBUFU event.  A one day living history or a week long immersion event can fall under this term.  It depends on what is going on at the event.  

--Last edited by Ken Cornett on 2009-09-13 10:59:44 --

Mr Rideout, seems to me you announced your leaving this forum last year (maybe longer).  I never banned you or told you to leave.  You have slowly ventured back and have participated again.  We never questioned you and are welcome here, but if you want me to ban you, send me a PM.  I'm sure there are some members here that don't even know what Mel is referring to. Up to you.

Ken I meant no harm..... I dont need or want any more enemies.