CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

[Charles Heath]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

My Bovine Fecal Matter Meter just redlined.

To add something positive to this, I was surprised to see CCG still has a website:

Camp Chase Gazette

Perhaps useful comments could be directed there.

[Rob Murray]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

I strongly advise against this course of action. Apparently any correspondence with Mr. Berry is regarded by him to be a "letter to the editor", since he considers himself an editor, and thus, according to him, any message he receives is fair game to be edited and published in that rag. More likely your answer in writing will be an answer in print, not just in writing.

I think this answers ALL questions.

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

Here is Craig Barry's reply to me via email,

Hank,

Well, posting that reply is some electrons the forum won't ever get back. Mr. Barry's reply that CCG is run by "professional journalists" is utterly hilarious given their abysmal editing, exceedingly poor content, distain for annotations and documented facts, and complete lack of professional ethics and common manners. These folks are plagarists who will not resolve a dispute and instead hide in the hopes it will go away--how much more unprofessional is it possible for a periodical and its publishers to get?

Lakeway Publishing and their associated and affiliated periodicals should be shunned by the reenactor community as if they were lepers of old. The less one has to do with them and their incredibly unprofessional and fantastic behavior the better it is for us as individuals and as a hobby.

[AZReenactor]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

Kevin, I agree wholeheartedly. Compared to the plagiarism (read: outright unapologetic theft of intellectual property) they've perpetrated on you and others, this petty personal attack on me and attempt to cast dispersions on the AC forum through it is almost laughable and nary compares to their other abuses.

Interestingly, after the discussion last year, all this seems to do is demonstrate what a good pair the Dawg and Lakeway publishing actually make. "...so a fool returneth to his folly."

[Matt Caldwell]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

"Camp Chase Gazette is not run on a gentlemen's agreement like The Watchdog, and the A-C Forum, it is a widely circulated magazine which calls itself The Voice of Civil War Reenacting. In other words, the Camp Chase Gazette is part of "the media," the free press or whatever you choose to call it. And like other media outlets, it is run by professional journalists, not Civil War hobbyists."

This was pretty funny, thanks for topping off a good evening.

[Phil McBride]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

My goodness,

I spend the weekend marching in a parade and recruiting for our mainstream unit at a local festival with the funniest name ever - The Helotes Cornyval. I come home to read a bunch of messages from a few indignant people who seem to be stretching to have a reason to be so stirred up.

I suggest a re-reading of Craig Berry's message to Hank Trent with some thoughtful reflection of what Craig was most likely trying to convey in a restrained manner, instead of displaying a knee jerk reaction to an editing decision by the editor of the CCG. I repeat what I suggested in an earlier post: If you actually read the CCG in question, and are upset by what was printed, write a letter to the editor, or as Doug did, cancel your subscription..

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, as well as just old, but folks build up a stack of chips with me based on their prior contributions to the hobby. Unless the Craig Berry who is the attention of these messages is a different Craig Berry than the guy who has been and continues to write and publish article after article of well-researched information relating to our hobby, I'm way perplexed at the tenor of the messages being posted.

I'm a different sort of cat. I'm a hack who has been writing for the CCG for 8 years because it's the venue that has welcomed my articles about our hobby, and I love writing about our hobby. Craig, on the other hand, joined the CCG to keep his scholarly work about the Civil War material culture and our hobby in print. If Craig also has a quick and caustic pen in defense of his views, so what? Why the whining by a few guys who disagree and who most likely don't even read the magazine in question?

Kevin O'Bierne has a serious and justfiable complaint with the CCG, but all this new stuff to Craig is just gas from a few guys. When writers with Craig's track record start complaining, then I'll listen.

Phil McBride
The Alamo Rifles
Contributer to the Camp Chase Gazette

[JimKindred]

Again, Phil, I ask the question - Who provided the editors of the CCG copies of private correspondence from the AC Forum that later was turned into a “Letter to the Editor”? Who accepts responsibility for that?

Are PM's sent to you on this forum considered fair game for publication elsewhere?

"If you actually read the CCG in question, and are upset by what was printed, write a letter to the editor, or as Doug did, cancel your subscription."

Some of us can take that one step further and cancel our advertising. Is that what you want?

Jim Kindred

Ordnung muß sein!

[Canebrake Rifle Guards]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

It seems like the CCG is suffering from "delusions of grandeur."

Greg Starbuck

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

Phil,

Mr. Barry's behavior on this forum in the not-too-distant past is not forgotten. Before chastising folks here for knee-jerk reactions, talk to Mr. Barry about his knee-jerk reactions.

Those on this thread who have asked, "Just how did the editor of CCG get hold of the private messages between Mr. Barry and Mr. Groves?" have a legitimate question who's answer is rooted in the ethics of the folks and periodical being discussed. These are important issues worthy of public discussion.

As I view it, the past few years, Lakeway Publishing and its periiodicals have shown a consistant lack of professionalism and ethics, among other things that could be even worse. Yes, I used the word, "consistent" in that statement. In my job, when I encounter a person or firm that does stuff less onerous on a construction project than Lakeway and its people are doing to the Civil War reenactor community, I often say, "If this is a reflection of how you and your firm do business, I'm surprised you're still in business." I imagine that the only reason Lakeway is still in the reenactor periodical business is that, so far, they have done a good job at hushing up their ethics (and other) problems with many members of the community. When I was a kid, I was taught to deal straight with people and face my problems, not hide from them--good words of advice that I still believe in.

[Rick Keating]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

You must not forget the Lakeway Publishing's main business is newspapers. That alone should be a tipoff to their approach to their recently acquired magazine publications.

I feel they approach them with the same mentality as they do to slamming out their daily or weekly papers.

I had given up on CCG a few years ago after it was sold to Lakeway.

Sadly, I see CWH in decline as far as it relates to our hobby. When you run eight pages with many photos to show how to make coffee it makes me think they don't have much in the way of stories waiting to be printed.

Even Coach McCoach didn't need eight pages to make coffee.

Rick Keating
former publisher of Reenactor's Journal

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

Even Coach McCoach didn't need eight pages to make coffee.

God rest his soul. Reenacting is a lesser place without Coach.

[JimKindred]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

Those on this thread who have asked, "Just how did the editor of CCG get hold of the private messages between Mr. Barry and Mr. Groves?" have a legitimate question who's answer is rooted in the ethics of the folks and periodical being discussed. These are important issues worthy of public discussion.

Kevin,

I do not believe a direct answer to that question will be forth coming.

[paulcalloway]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

I tried to get to the bottom of this when we first got word of the Camp Gossip page - I had email exchanges with both Craig and Bill and went so far as to call Ed Hopper on the telephone.

I believe this all boils down to some hard-feelings Bill has toward the AC, resulting from that thread last fall announcing their merger... and toward me, resulting from some event about 5 years ago where some GHTI members offended Bill and/or his wife.

Both Craig and Bill blame the AC for not helping to sell more copies of the CRRC2 out of the gate - as I recall, they said they were counting on us to sell about 500 copies since "we have 5,000 members". Well of those 5,000 only 2,000 are actually active within the last 30 days and I think it was an unrealistic number - and would have told them that if they'd asked.

As a result, I believe Bill sees everything about the AC and me personally in the worst possible light. Trading emails with Craig Barry, it sounds as if Craig forwarded the private message from Troy to Bill and Bill decided to publish it. I'm not sure if the response in the CCG from the editor is actually from Craig or Bill.

Thats as close as I can get to what seems to have happened here. I've banned Bill because of his acerbic attitude towards all things AC. Craig requested his own ban and I'll lift it at his request.

They can paint themselves as the press if they want but their circulation isn't what it once was and the way that they went about this seems more like a National Enquirer approach than a Wall Street Journal approach.

Regarding Craig's statement that Troy was supposed to apologize - I'm not sure that this was ever the case. I sent Craig a reply via Private Messaging that basically said I'd talk to Troy, which I did - I didn't keep a copy of those private messages and that was months ago. Whether I actually said "Troy will apologize" is questionable and likely resulted from more recent correspondence when I was reflecting on the incident and may have added that as part of my recollection.

Craig did offer me a chance to respond in the CCG and I've declined.

[JimKindred]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

Paul,

Thank you for the background information on all of this. I was quite appalled that the private exchanged was used as a letter to the editor in the March issue of the CCG and it really made me stop to ask once again what sort of morals and ethics are used by those responsible at the CCG. To advertise in the CCG is strictly a business decision for me, I rarely read the articles but I do scan through on occasion to see if they robbed photos from my website again.

It was not so much what was said by either party that I found offensive, it was the fact that someone would be as juvenile as to publish private correspondence doctored to appear as a letter to the editor. I also have found it very much reprehensible that the individuals involved in this have denied any knowledge of who authorized it to be published let alone who doctored the material to appear as a letter to the editor.

The CCG should realize that not only are former subscribers reading this thread but current subscribers and advertisers are as well. Since this PM was published I have spoken to a number of other vendors who advertise in the CCG and they have the same opinion I do and that is that the CCG made a large mistake in printing that correspondence. It would serve the CCG well to acknowledge that printing the PM was a mistake. As an advertiser I know that in the future I will not correspond using the PM system or via email with anyone connected with the CCG if they consider as policy any correspondence as fare game to be published in the CCG.

And just to be absolutely clear on this, the above is my opinion and not that of the AC, its editorial board or anyone else connected with the operation of the AC Forum.

[Michael Comer]

Re: CCG's March Edition: Camp Gossip

I would venture to say that there was a good amount of support for CRRC2 from the members of this forum. Perhaps not the numbers they expected, but percentage wise I would think many of the active members purchased a copy. I know I did.