Edward Thompson: Wartime C.M.E. Discussion

Please feel free to drop me a private message and I will share a copy of the spreadsheet with you.

 

Hi Simon. Congratulations on completing your Thompson project. I do hope that you find a publisher, as your text deserves to be disseminated more widely than just on Nat-Pres. Your research has uncovered additional information that was probably unknown to previous writers on the subject, while your stress on maintenance and availability means that your book is approaching from a different angle.

There will inevitably still be arguments and differing interpretations of the same facts. Thompson obviously did not always get things right, but nor did anyone else.

I would like if possible to see the complete availability spreadsheets. My particular interest is to see how the older pre-grouping types compared with each other and with the newer LNER standards. I will send you a private message about this.

Best wishes for your next project - whatever that turns out to be!

 

The rehabilitation of Beeching and Marples?

 

Congratulations on your fine achievement Simon! I really hope to see your book on my bookshelf - I do hope you are successful in finding a publisher.
Being hopeful, Lightmoor Press to produce some very fine books on more specialised subjects, and the quality of their finished product is second to none, they use a really good quality gloss photographic paper. But whoever publishes your work, it will be well worth the money, I can't wait to get hold of a copy!

Richard.

 

Oh lord, no. My tin hat is already a colander!

 

Dick Hardy tried that with Beeching. I’m not sure anyone would be brave enough to do that with Marples, who was after all the sort of politician that makes Trump look honest.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Decline and fall of LNWR after Webb

 

The only man in the whole of world history even more bent than Sepp Blatter!

 

Right. Oddest thing has happened today. Had an email claiming I’m lying about these statistics and that they don’t actually exist.

For clarity then. The national archives file number is 394-232. Anyone can read them for free and request them at their leisure. If you’d prefer not to go to Kew I do have a pdf of the original document and can share screenshots (!)

Here are some photographs of my ugly mug with the printed statistics today.









I know there’s “nowt as queer as folk” but I feel I’ve been open, honest, and consistent in sharing everything that I have found here. It’s utterly bizarre some of the stuff that gets said. Utterly bizarre.

There is no way I have the time, effort, or imagination to just make these statistics up - and why would I go to the hassle of showing statistics that, in the round, don’t show the best light on Thompson in some ways if the intention is solely to canonise him?

Bonkers!

 

Any chance you could show us the email?
In all seriousness Simon I wouldn’t worry about it too much, is it from one of us who believes the earth is flat?

 

I’m not sure I can do so publicly (GDPR? I got told off for sharing an unsolicited message on Facebook this week just gone!) but the general gist was that I was making up the stats.

 

GDPR doesn't apply to individuals carrying out personal business, so unless you're Simon AC Martin Plc you should be fine. Some folk might be a bit miffed that you publicised their stupidity though, but that's on them.

 

Please don’t worry if you can’t, it’s a grey bank holiday Sunday and I’m at a loose end and I need something to poke holes in!

 

There's no doubt that strange people do strange things. Think about the amount of effort put in by the guy who invented all the duff info that was sent to Peter Hands to stuff up his "What happened to Steam" project. I suppose a really determined faker would replace the original document in the NRM with one they had faked up themselves! But there's no point in getting wound up by fantasists. They're enjoying it and you're not.

 

The Peter Hands stuff is nuts and from the outside looking in, how awful for Peter to receive all that and ruin his project. Duff info given knowingly is an appalling waste of everyone’s time.

Was it done maliciously? No idea, maybe it wasn’t, but it wasn’t helpful there.

 

Absolutely pathetic, to put it politely. Some people really seem to have nothing better to do in life than rubbish the good work done by others... I'd throw the person a challenge - To come up with what they think are the correct facts, backed up by proven evidence. You probably won't hear from them again...

Richard.

 

Sorry to resurrect the dead as it were...!

I am in the process of sending the final manuscript of the book to the potential publisher.

This is therefore a plea to everyone who helped in the editing of the book and its figures, to get in touch with me to let me know how you would like your name that will go into the "Special Thanks" section of the book.

I will be putting in a reference in the same section to the whole of the National Preservation Forum - without whom, I wouldn't have got to this stage. Thanks to the mods, the members, well wishers, challengers and more.

Please get in touch with me ASAP - I don't want to miss anyone's names out nor get their names wrong when the book goes to publish.

 

Good luck with the publisher.
Am waiting in anticipation for its publication. I rarely buy books these days (mainly because my library is groaning at the seams) but this is one tome I will be investing in.
All the best.

 

I’ll agree with my friend @Mandator, nice one Simon and fair play to you for sticking with it as well, despite the brickbats that have come your way.
Sir, If I were wearing a hat, I’d doff it

 

Well done.

One serious point, when it comes to proofs - pay out of your own pocket for proofreading. You won’t believe how many errors creep in. Most publishers have out sourced it and what is done is of very poor quality. It is done as piece work so there is no consistency in quality and you have to go through the whole thing with a fine tooth comb, so you end up doing your own copy editing.

You don’t want to end up like Suzy Dent. Also, proofreading is the kind of low hanging fruit a lazy reviewer will pick off. Ie if Bloggs can’t be bothered to spell Thompson correctly, how can we trust his analysis.

On another note:

How many people called Edward Thompson ‘Ned’? There is a reference in the Steamindex entry for Sir Ronald Matthews, that Gresley and Thompson were regular guests at Matthews’ and apparently his daughter Prudence called them ‘Uncle Tim’ and ‘Uncle Ned’.