|
Post by rch on Jul 23, 2008 20:46:31 GMT -5
Mr Wittenberg,
If you had said on your blog that the press of business would keep you in Columbus, or that your recent absence from your family made it more important to stay home than to spend time in Maryland, I would have been able to understand your absence, and I would have respected you the more for it.
You made money the basis of you absence. I like people who like money. I like money myself. When it comes to money, I'm like the little boy who liked ginger bread in Lincoln's story - nobody likes money more nor gets less of it.
I also respect people who have a good opinion of their own worth.
You, on the other hand, once made a bid for LBHA Board membership. That represented a willingness on your part to make an out of the ordinary committment to the organization. I believe based on your reputation and work that place on the board is still within you grasp.
Had you been elected, would you have asked for that fee? and would you have paid it?
To me a "lack of guidance" adds up to an abundance of licence. You could have said Custer wasn't important at Antietem, let's talk abould Custer's relationship to Farnsworth and Merritt and their relationships to Pleasanton, Buford, Gregg, Kilpatrick and to the junior brigade commanders Devin, McIntosh, Gamble, J. I. Gregg, and Huey. You have just completed a book on the cavalry actions during the Confederate retreat from Gettysburg. Some of those actions were in the neighborhood of Hagerstown. The book includes a guide to those battles. Might that not have made for a better bus tour for the attendees? Might there have been something you could teach us?
rch
|
|
|
Post by ericwittenberg on Jul 23, 2008 22:06:21 GMT -5
Had you been elected, would you have asked for that fee? and would you have paid it? Absolutely. There should be consistency. Either pay all or pay none. [Moderator's Note: There is no inconsistency in LBHA policy regarding compensation for travel expenses for our speakers.]
Undoubtedly. But I was never asked to do a tour. I was asked to do a talk. I was told that the tour was of Antietam and the 1862 Maryland Campaign, and that someone else was leading it. Allow me to suggest that your pointing the finger at me on this particular issue is completely misdirected. I had NOTHING to do with the selection of the tours, the guide, or anything of the sort. All of that was decided before anyone asked me to be involved. Again, undoubtedly. But as long as there is no consistency in the determination of who gets paid, I don't work for free. The gist of your post seems to be that you expect me to do so. Okay, that's your opinion. Fine. I disagree. Eric [Moderator's Note: Eric has misunderstood LBHA policy. There is no inconsistency regarding compensation for travel expenses for our guest speakers. His travel expenses were never an issue.]
|
|
|
Post by ericwittenberg on Jul 23, 2008 22:08:22 GMT -5
[ Oh-h, and Mr. Wittenberg... I know you like to swing it around like a cudgel, but I for one am unimpressed with you being at attorney in Columbus, Ohio. It is sort of tantamount to being the strongest man in Connecticut... if you know what I mean: who gives a s**t?! Fred the Blabber Mouth My, you're a real class act, aren't you? And such intellectual, thoughtful prose. Good for you, chief. I'd rather be the strongest man in Connecticut than the biggest *asshole going, like you. For the record, I am most assuredly not the one who took this to an ad hominem level. I have made a point of not naming names and I definitely have made a point of launching personal attacks. I have pointed out problems with a policy, not with people. Our friend Fred here evidently feels that the appropriate response is to make anything he doesn't agree with personal. Fine. I decline to play. RCH, I definitely do appreciate the fact that you have kept it civil and respectful, and I will continue to do the same. Also for the record: I don't hate the LBHA, and I likewise don't hate anyone in it (although Fred is rapidly headed toward being the first to earn that honor with his personal attacks). It's the inconsistent application of a policy that I have a problem with. There is, of course, a subtle difference, but subtlety is certainly lost on our pal Freddie. Eric --------------- * The Moderator would like to point out that personal attacks are in violation of our forum regulations. He requests that the poster refrain from doing so in the future and make an effort to respect our forum rules. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by ericwittenberg on Jul 23, 2008 22:13:47 GMT -5
One last thought...
I am presently at a conference in Chambersburg. Tomorrow night, as a fundraiser for battlefield preservation, a personal tour for four people led by me--totally at my expense--of the battlefields at Kelly's Ford, Brandy Station, and Trevilian Station is being auctioned off. One hundred percent of the proceeds goes to battlefield preservation. I get absolutely nothing out of it but the satisfaction of knowing that I'm helping to preserve battlefields. And, I do so gladly and willingly. It was my idea.
So, let's be quite clear about this. My issue is with the inconsistent application of the policy. Either pay everyone or pay nobody.
Eric
[Moderator's Note: Eric has misunderstood LBHA policy regarding compensation for travel expenses. There is no inconsistency in this policy and his travel expenses were not an issue at our Conference.]
|
|
|
Post by Melani on Jul 24, 2008 0:32:49 GMT -5
One last thought... So, let's be quite clear about this. My issue is with the inconsistent application of the policy. Either pay everyone or pay nobody. Eric I must say I agree. I book lectures for the Maritime Library Friends, and we don't pay anybody--can't afford it. If they aren't willing to donate their time, we can't book them. We don't pay travel expenses because they all tend to be local, or were coming to the SF Bay Area anyway for some other reason. We do pay for their parking if they ask us to (usually about $8.00), and we offer them cheese and salami and sodas. Whether they are members of the Library Friends or not makes no difference. We ask for a $5.00 donation from the public, and $4.00 from members, but since it must be characterized as a donation, some people don't pay. We're happy if we break even on the cheese and salami, and ecstatic if we make a profit. When you've got an event as extensive (and expensive) as the LBHA conference, the least they could do is pay travel expenses. Or make it clear that no stipend is involved. But it certainly doesn't seem right to pay some people and not others. *Note: The LBHA does not have a policy of offering travel compensation to some and not to others. This allegation is entirely false and without foundation. The Moderator.That said, I'm still sorry I missed it. But after four weeks on the road, I had to get back home. Maybe Billings next year. And Fred, given the way most people relate to their relatives, "family" may not be that far off base. I've got some cousins that would curl your hair...not to mention my inlaws. Gentlemen, it would be really nice to be more polite when we insult each other.
|
|
|
Post by cookestown on Jul 24, 2008 7:23:32 GMT -5
One can't help but wonder why Mr. Wittenberg continues to post here considering his grievances with the LBHA. No time for the board, not paid, worn out by conferences. Life IS Hard.
How DOES he find the time to practice law, write, blog, and post? This is especially perplexing since solid word has reached us from those in the publishing industry that he is hard at work on his next book. It will be a writer's autobiography, entitled ONE CONTINUOUS WHINE and will include a detailed tour to the heart of his massive ego.
--------------
The Moderator would like to point out that personal attacks are in violation of our forum regulations. He requests that the poster refrain from doing so in the future and make an effort to respect our forum rules. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by conz on Jul 24, 2008 12:41:06 GMT -5
Hmmm...
Are some of us upset because Wittenburg wouldn't come and speak at LBHA without being reimbursed expenses? That doesn't seem to be a real issue...it is only his right not to do something for nothing should he so choose, and he shouldn't be criticized for this freedom.
Are we upset because he criticized the LBHA semi-publically on his blog? I didn't read it, and I'm not sure that many people that affect LBHA read it either, so how much damage was done? I'm sure the folks vested in LBHA didn't like being criticized for not paying a member to speak at their own conference, but this should be an issue of policy more than probity, I think.
I worry that the drama concerning Wittenburg's decision not to travel to speak to the group because it was a financial and time liability to him says more about the sensitivity of some LBHA members than it does about him, and that concerns me.
I'm just trying to study military history, and now I bounce between boards that used to be one, and now between members of the same board...it isn't very satisfying intellectually or morally.
I think that both offended parties should shrug their shoulders and recognize that if people don't feel that can make exertions for free neither the sponsor nor the speaker should consider it a big deal. It's only a matter of policy...
And that's my effort at being a lawyer...<BG>...or can I play judge?
ConZ
|
|
|
Post by keogh on Jul 24, 2008 14:03:56 GMT -5
Hmmm... Are some of us upset because Wittenburg wouldn't come and speak at LBHA without being reimbursed expenses? That doesn't seem to be a real issue...it is only his right not to do something for nothing should he so choose, and he shouldn't be criticized for this freedom. Clair, I don't believe any here criticized Eric for choosing not to participate in the LBHA Conference. That is his right, of course, but apparently the issue of whether or not he was offered travel compensation is matter of some dispute. Eric says he was not, others assure me that this was never an issue. Granted, not many of our membership would be reading his blog, however, after Eric posted a direct link to his blog and invited any and all to go there to read his comments on the LBHA would suggest that an effort was made to increase his readership at the expense of our organization. Why would you think that? No one in the LBHA addressed the matter at all until Eric publicly criticized the organization on his blog site for not acceding to his demands for a speakers fee. I would think the sensitivity issues lie more on the other side of the fence, than with members of our organization. I agree with you on this one, Clair. Its always a tragic state of affairs when politics rears its ugly head. Clair, the sponsor of the event did not consider this a big deal. To my knowledge, no one complained about Eric not showing up as our speaker and no one publicly criticized his decision not to participate until he complained about it publicly at his blog site. None of the speakers who attended the event were paid anything other than a small stipend for travel expenses, and several of our speakers---one of whom traveled from as far away as Hawaii---were paid nothing at all. They offered their time and talents to our organization 'pro bono'. For those who were paid a travel stipend, it did not amount to more than $200 total. No one, to my knowledge, was paid any kind of hefty speaking fee that Eric seems to be alluding to. And no one in the organization expected Eric to do anything at all. His decision not to participate was respected by all of our members, to my understanding. That is very diplomatic of you Clair. Personally, I think this is an unfortunate situation that has evolved due to a classic case of mutual misunderstanding. To my knowledge, the LBHA has no policy of treating speaking members vs. non-members any differently. Both are accorded travel expenses if asked for. Eric made a very serious allegation on his blog site that suggested his membership in our organization was offered to him back in 2006 based on a motive of deception, so as to avoid having to pay him a speakers fee in the future. I think this is a terribly unfair characterization made against our Richmond Conference Chairman David Harrington and our former Chairman Chuck Merkel. To suggest that either of these gentlemen offered Eric membership in our organization for such a sordid reason would truly be an unfair indictment against them unless there is a lot more evidence at hand to suggest otherwise. And as rch mentioned in his post above, Eric has made known his intentions to run on our Board of Directors, and was even a write-in candidate at our last election. To suggest that he was never interested in taking an active leadership role in the organization now is not being fair. This is really a tempest in a teapot that was totally unnecessary, in my view. Had Eric chosen to participate, I am sure he would have done quite well with the sale of his recent book on the retreat from Gettysburg, which I am sure would have compensated him to a large degree from the expected loss from his billable hours. Keogh
|
|
|
Post by conz on Jul 24, 2008 14:04:18 GMT -5
I can certainly understand that attitude, being a Soldier myself. <g>
But we're amateurs, and have a different expectation as to renumeration as professionals do. While Eric Wittenberg is only a part-time professional historian, he does make part of his living that way...it is not just a hobby for him as it is for the rest of us.
Do men like Bears and Longacre give talks without renumeration, or at least expenses covered? Not in the meetings I've attended.
Part of this argument is over a person's status in our history field...that of a professional, or of an amateur. Aspiring professionals want to be considered such...if they do things for free, they'll never be considered part of the elite professional group. This isn't only an ego issue...it is a professional issue. What kind of historian do you want to be?
We may be a bit spoiled, because our local hero and martyr, Brian Pohanka, lived in both worlds (several professional worlds, really)...he did many amateur historian activities without pay, he did engagements for pay, he certainly wrote books and articles to make his professional living as an historian, and he also had one foot in the "hollywood historian" sphere.
But let's not hold all of us to such expectations! There aren't many amateurs or professionals who can achieve that status.
I respect Eric Wittenberg's aspirations to be treated as a professional historian. Being relatively new to the field, and not coming out of academia, I'm sure he has to be more careful of professional expectations than others. Dividing his time between two professions is hard enough...trying to be a "paid professional" in both can't be easy.
Would we like Wittenberg to be one of the boys and trudge around everywhere at their own expense just to be part of the party? Sure we would...but he may have other aspirations for his "historian" experience.
I just want him to keep writing history for the rest of us! Personally, I don't want to devote nearly the time that he does in that endeavor, and for that I am grateful.
I don't want to discourage any historians, whether they do it for pay, or not! Hey, and if you can make that pay thing work for you...go for it. This is America. <g>
Now how can we get reenactors to be paid?
Clair
|
|
|
Post by keogh on Jul 24, 2008 14:45:56 GMT -5
I can certainly understand that attitude, being a Soldier myself. <g> But we're amateurs, and have a different expectation as to renumeration as professionals do. While Eric Wittenberg is only a part-time professional historian, he does make part of his living that way...it is not just a hobby for him as it is for the rest of us. No one would argue with that Clair. That is one reason why historians like Eric write and publish books. This is a source of income for them, and no one would begrudge them of it. And I do not believe that anyone is angry at Eric for demanding a hefty speaking fee for his time and expertise, nor should Eric be upset if his demands were not met, in this case. Travel expenses are always made available to our public speakers. I do not know what Bears and Longacre charge for speaking, but neither of them participated in our event. I wonder if either of these two historians would have publicly criticized our organization if they were not chosen to participate as speakers. Do you think they would? You make a good point here, Clair, but still, much of all the ado about it being "a professional issue" centers on ego, unfortunately. To me, a paid historian is not necessarily any better or worse than one who volunteers his time to a subject that he has a passion for. I have met very many unpaid historians who are every bit as good, if not better, than those who demand hefty prices for their services. I am not one to judge people's worth or professionalism on the value of a dollar. That speaks rather ill of our society at large that so many of us do, don't you think? You can say that again. Brian participated as a speaker at our Conferences on a number of occasions without any kind of controversy at all. And he did not mind rubbing elbows with the rest of us, or trudging around the battlefield with the boys, since his love of history extended far beyond financial remuneration for his time. Brian never demanded a hefty speaking fee for his participation at any of our events. He was one of us, both in body and spirit. Clair, Jeffrey Wert is regarded as one of the best Civil War historians out there. He attended the event, and was not paid a speaking fee. He was accorded a rather small travel expense allotment, as were any others who requested it. I don't believe his credentials as a professional historian were ever questioned because of his willingness to speak at our conference without a large fee. I truly don't believe it was an act of disrespect to Eric to do the same. Of course, no one would expect Eric to be another Brian Pohanka. And no one would begrudge Eric the right to have his travel costs compensated either. If Eric chooses not to participate for whatever reasons, I would respect his right to do so, for whatever reason. Unless you really have a true love for the subject matter, and enjoy the company of our members, I can understand well the reasons for seeking a hefty payout for your time, unless I had a book or something else to promote that would make it all worthwhile to me. And I echo that sentiment. Eric does a great job with his research and publications, and from what I understand, he does a very good job as a public speaker. LOL. I am afraid that reenactors make the mistake of loving their subject just a bit too much. Most of them would gladly share their knowledge just for the opportunity to do so. They are among the most humble and charitable people I have ever had the pleasure to associate with. And it has been my great honor to know so many of them over the years. Pohanka was at the top of my list....and still is. Keogh
|
|
|
Post by conz on Jul 24, 2008 14:55:18 GMT -5
Well said.
|
|
|
Post by nanaotameoxz on Jul 24, 2008 16:26:49 GMT -5
All the funnier because the "panel" members were able to keep straight faces throughout. I love the qualifications: Most of them would leave no significant others at home, and they have nicknames for each other. Dated? Maybe so. But Priceless nonetheless.
|
|
|
Post by ericwittenberg on Jul 24, 2008 19:17:36 GMT -5
I want to be clear about this.
I did not demand any sort of a large speaking fee. Never.
All I asked was that I either be paid something for my time or my travel expenses paid. And I was told that neither would happen. Unlike Brian, I'm not independently wealthy, and as I've said repeatedly, all I have ever asked for was some recognition that my coming was a sacrifice that might be accommodated by at least paying travel expenses. With the current cost of gas, I filled up twice to get to Chambersburg yesterday, for about $100. Multiple that by two for the return trip, and that's $200. And, you know what? Had somebody bothered to offer me that much, I probably would have come.
I don't think that's too much to ask.
Eric
|
|
|
Post by ericwittenberg on Jul 24, 2008 19:19:27 GMT -5
One can't help but wonder why Mr. Wittenberg continues to post here considering his grievances with the LBHA. No time for the board, not paid, worn out by conferences. Life IS Hard. How DOES he find the time to practice law, write, blog, and post? This is expecially perplexing since solid word has reached us from those in the publishing industry that he is hard at work on his next book. It will be a writer's autobiography, entitled ONE CONTINUOUS WHINE and will include a detailed tour to the heart of his massive ego. Dear Anonymous *Jerk: If I wanted your *moronic opinion, I would have asked for it. And, oddly enough, I have no recollection whatsoever of asking for it. Once again, I need to point out the fact that some anonymous *cretin has decided to launch personal attacks against me. Mr. Moderator, I'd like to know why these nasty personal attacks are permitted and tolerated. Mr. Moderator, I request that you take appropriate steps against this person for violating policy by launching ad hominem attacks against me. Show me that there is fairness in how policies are enforced...... Eric ------------ * The Moderator would like to point out that personal attacks are in violation of our forum regulations. He requests that the poster refrain from doing so in the future and make an effort to respect our forum rules. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by ericwittenberg on Jul 24, 2008 19:27:26 GMT -5
Clair, I don't believe any here criticized Eric for choosing not to participate in the LBHA Conference. That is his right, of course, but apparently the issue of whether or not he was offered travel compensation is matter of some dispute. Eric says he was not, others assure me that he was offered this compensation. Keogh, I can tell you with absolutely no hesitation and without any doubt whatsoever that I was never, ever offered any travel compensation and that Mr. Blake very specifically told me that none would be offered. I can probably even find the e-mail to that effect. Again, had I been made such an offer, we would not be having this discussion. Eric
|
|