Value of Groups Like These
- I hope Shotgun will endulge me a moment.
I made a comment a few posts ago about my belief that the true value
of groups like these is that they *do* often bring together divergent
opinions about people and events, and provide a forum for their
Here, and in other groups, there are subjects about which I've
learned a ton that absent these forums, I'd probably never have the
detail or understanding I have today. Jim Epperson, for example, can
vouch for the professional and spirited arguments in the past on
Usenet regarding the Freedmen's Bureau, and the willingness of two
posters to slug it out, toe to toe, left me with a much broader
understanding than I ever walked in with.
I have two questions I'd like considered, insofar as you want to
1) Within this forum, what person or subject has been increased
dramatically since participating? It doesn't have to be because
another poster provided the details for you, but could also well be
that a discussion caused you to go out and do research you wouldn't
have otherwise have done.
2) Based on the discussions here (and elsewhere, if you will), what
person or subject's understanding has changed to a large extent based
on the discussions here? As a personal example, since I first
started dealing with these groups, my opinion of Joe Johnston's
personality and military abilities has shifted in an adverse
direction, Steven Newton and Wayne Bengston's efforts
Others that have shifted, to some degree, include US Grant, George
Thomas, Stonewall Jackson, and JB Hood.
Villa Hills, KY
Yes they did use a whistle in WWI.Radios were not invented or practcal until
the late 20s.One possible commo solution could be hand signals , but this
would limit to line of sight.They did have land lines in WWI. The tank was
the answer to auto weapon amd trench.I am surprised no one tried to use an
armored wagon or an attemot at one for a charge in the ACW..Especially the
North. After the horses get killed you advance from that point.Of course
maybe a horse was more valuable than a man on the field of battle.I enjoyed
Petes and your analysis.