A Runaway Train of Misinformation

[Tom Bradshaw]

Readers might wish to refresh their memory of the following topic provided by Bill Hatcher: http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum15/HTML/007693.html. Its title is "SGHOF-Julian Tharpe-never nominated?!?!?" With my post here, I wish to again explain some truths as well as point out the consequences of hopping on a "runaway train of misinformation."

Fred Shannon posted several times on this thread, beginning with "…I have personal knowledge that Julian has had a letter of nomination submitted since year 2000. fred." Bill Hatcher quickly responded with "Fred. Thanks for your input. I was told by one of the committee members that he had never been nominated."

I wasn't aware of this topic for 4 days. Once I saw the accumulating misinformation on it, I posted corrections to many of Hatcher's erroneous conclusions drawn from emails I had sent to him. All of those corrections were truths and remain truths. In short order, Shannon posted the text of a nomination letter dated 2-25-03 nominating Julian Tharpe for the SG Hall of Fame. At first glance one would believe it to be proof positive of Tharpe's nomination. Initially I thought I had erred in my claim to Bill Hatcher and in my Forum post that Julian had never been nominated. I couldn't recall ever seeing Julian's name in the Convention Board's annual agenda booklets. Those booklets contain all the nomination letters and correspondence that Scotty receives during the prior year. Scotty sends copies to all Board members about a month before the meeting held during the Convention in St. Louis.

I had not been physically present at the 2003 meeting, but was patched in by speakerphone from my home in California. Thinking back, I couldn't recall any discussion of Tharpe occurring at that meeting. I then searched for my own 2003 agenda booklet, but couldn't find it. I called Scotty's store and learned that he was in Japan and would not return until the following week. I then sent an email to the Board's secretary/recorder, Fred Layman, who held that post until this past year. Within hours I received a message back from him stating that no nomination of Tharpe was found in his 2003 booklet. He also advised that he had researched the Board minutes back to 1999 when he became a Board member. He found no mention of anything having to do with a nomination of Tharpe. I dropped a note to Herb Steiner and advised him of the situation. I asked him if he had any recollection of Tharpe being discussed at the 2003 meeting or was there a nomination letter in his agenda booklet. He had none.

I thought of emailing Shannon to advise him that his nomination letter could not be found. I saw several explanations regarding his letter: Fred didn't actually mail it; it got lost in the mail; Fred had put the wrong address for the envelope and hadn't included his own return address, and perhaps Scotty had simply lost it. I thought of asking him if he had received acknowledgement from Scotty that the nomination letter had been received (something Scotty most always sends to nominators). I then re-thought that idea, deciding that Fred would probably not believe these possibilities of his nomination letter not being seen by any member of the Board. I further concluded that this information would be more appropriate coming from Scotty, the Board's President.

Upon Scotty's return from Japan, he told me that he had no recollection of receiving a nomination letter from anyone for Julian in 2003 or in any previous years. Promptly Scotty attempted to email Fred. He sent three e-mails over about a week's time. None were delivered. Fred had changed his email address several times. Scotty phoned Fred and obtained his current email address. He sent the message again and asked for confirmation from Fred that he got it. Finally on 11-15-04, Fred confirmed to Scotty that he had received the email.

Now I want to get back to the "Runaway Train of Misinformation" and consequences of getting on board. This is a bit extensive, but I feel Forum members realize the impact of misinformation and how it accelerates and fuels point of view that feeds on itself.

Bill Hatcher began his post by stating:

"Cutting to the chase, Julian Tharpe has NO chance of ever being inducted into the Scotty HOF because of what certain board members hold against him for things he did in the past. That also goes true for Reese Anderson, but this thread deals with Tharpe, so I will let you give your explanation to the entire steel community. With this attitude, I stick by my statement that no matter how great a player, you can be denied your rightful place among your peers and among some who are not your peers simply due to other circumstances that have NOTHING to do with your musicianship. Is this a HOF of musicians or of monks or other people who are perfect according to members of the board." He followed that with, "Tom Bradshaw--you tell the rest of the steel community what Julian Tharpe would have to do before you would vote on him being admitted to the Scotty HOF if and when his name is FORMALLY submitted for nomination. You will have to give all the crap that is held against Tharpe, because I told the person on the Board that emailed me that I would keep our conversation confidential out of respect for him, whether or not I now think he deserves it or not. An honest person does this, not a dishonest person as you have accused me of being."

Jerry Hayes then posted, "I'm really down on this infamous "board" for their outright arrogance in some of these matters. It seems like a bunch of average players making judgements on the brilliant ones. Perhaps a little jealousy going on here, eh? Have a good 'un. . . . JH"

Myron Labelle continued with "Well it's nice to see that someone else can wade through the Bull$hit. I myself have read and agree with mr. Hatcher and I have nothing to gain or lose. I also personally believe there are honorable people on the board. And I truly respect most but its common knowlege not all. Scotty's hard work has pulled off the amazing financially succesful ISGC show that happens every year. I don't have to agree with choices that have been made for the HOf but damn it they are right on so far. Everyone inducted has been a good choice. However some have entered before some who should be enshrined. If it's up to the outside public to nominate then let the nominating public vote on the candidates. Otherwise it's just a bunch of guys doing whatever they choose in secret. The board does not reveal its nominated list so how can one be sure one has been nominated? This is suppose to be a venue to honor the very best players and pioneers of the instrument. Personal lives or lifestyles are not a criteria to enter any other qualified HOF unless the person bet on Steel Guitars. I think Mr. Bradshaw should resign his bias torkas and nominate b0b to take his place."

Myron continued to express his beliefs by supporting another poster: "Now thats from the trenches. My last word: If out side people have to do the nominating for deserving players then open up the voting to the public. If the committe can't have the forsight or does not know of the acomplishments these great players of the past, then why be on the committee? Why have a Committee? Jmh (coon a$$)o."

These posts, showing sentiments for those who had posted originally and subsequently, added fuel to the "train's" engine. Fred Shannon followed with, "And Tom I think that if everyone knew of your email to Richard Gonzales in years past, relative to the Julian Tharpe induction, that knowledge would probably heat this situation past the combustion point." This allegation is almost refreshing. Why can't Richard just post it himself? I don't mind. I don't mind anyone posting anything I say to them in a private email.

Jim Palenscar's post seemed to be directing his conclusions toward my having made mistakes when he made the following statement: "…Regardless of whether you are simply a steel player, a HOF nominee, or on the board judging nominees, who amoung us hasn't made mistakes or done something that we are not proud of? Let us not throw stones as all of our houses have some glass. Am I wrong here Tom?" Had Jim ask me that directly, I would have said "You are not wrong." I have said in the past and I will say again, "The measure of a man is not the sum of his mistakes, but the sum of the mistakes he corrects." Tell me a mistake I have made and I'll show I've corrected it, or, I will correct it. That seems quite simple to me.

Everyone is encouraged to read the identified Forum post in its entirety. Please note the suggestive, if not denigrating posts, by retcop88 (James R. Hall), Myron Labelle, Bill Hatcher, and Fred Shannon on November 5th, specifically. Andy Greatrix talked about grudges in his subsequent post. Many others directed derogatory remarks toward me, or toward the Convention Board members as a group.

A very significant disclosure was made by Fred Shannon's in his post of 11-8-04. There he said,

"I did have a conversation with the man Molberg mentions in Worthan Texas, but it's really not Wortham but Waxahachie, Texas. Hell, Jim You even got that wrong. This was the man that told me he had a "cancelled check" that proved he had not received his guitar from MSA. He also told me he had not received any stock as a good faith jesture and not for repayment of the funds, and in his next breath said, "My wife had the stock checked out with a broker and the damned stuff is worthless." Did he really say that? It's for certain he did, I have it on tape. Bad habit I have, you know."

I have to agree Fred's last sentence. It is a "Bad habit…". Fred should check out the civil exposure for recording other's private speech. He might have to prove that the recorded person knew he was being recorded. If the recorded person didn't know it, this is a privacy matter that could lead to legal consequences. Also, the recorded person should not be misquoted. In my State, secret recording of others brings severe civil sanctions.

Now think about this. All of the above posts were made before Shannon posted his archived copy of the nomination he submitted for Julian's HOF nomination. Something struck me as odd when I read it: there is no address listed on the letter. I truly believe that Fred wrote the letter. I still don't know if it was mailed, was mailed to the right place, if Scotty got it then lost it, or the letter was lost in transit via the Post Office. I suspect that Fred doesn't know either. Being an "investigative reporter" as Fred says he was in the past, it would seem reasonable that he too would have thought of those possibilities (just as he should have been thinking about the problems he might face if the person he recorded didn't know he was being recorded and/or was misquoted thereafter).

By now, the runaway train of misinformation had picked up considerable steam. It was on its way to "railroading" some innocent people. I suspect that b0b recognized all of this, so chose to lock the topic.

But, the subject took on new life on 11-9-04 with Dan Tyack's new topic, "The Steel Guitar HOF Board", http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum15/HTML/007768.html.

In his opening remarks, Dan suggested that all the Board members resign. Words used in referring to the Board included "tainted", "internal politics", "partisan players", "poisoning the HOF", "perceived bias", and several other pejorative remarks and aspersions. Such remarks were followed in other's postings that maligned the Board as well as pointed the finger at me, directly and by innuendo (and even using my initials). Bill Hatcher was very pointed in a subsequent post, by claiming that I was "out of bounds" by giving false information on the Forum. In his statement he said "a board that has members acting out their responsibilities predicated on a "grudge" is a "tainted board". I view this statement of his as "out of bounds," since he (and Fred Shannon) didn't try to verify anything I had said. Hatcher again had to emphasize his denigrating bent by posting

"The problem is that the HOF board is shown to be a group seemingly controlled by one person. Any time you have a situation where one person rules everything, then you are totally at the mercy of that one person. The moral/ethical/ spiritual climate of the board is controlled by that person." Am I, or anyone else who reads this post, to believe that the "someone," is someone other than Tom Bradshaw? Please Bill; tell me! Then, the runaway train picks up more speed by Dave Horner posting "Bill, your post above is yet another example of your informed and articulate writings and I applaud you for it. It is beginning to appear that the steel guitar community is finally fed up with the goings on to which you have referred. Well done! Dave"[unquote] Well informed? Maybe Dave should re-think that.

Doesn't this appear to begin to demonstrate a mob mentality, where back-slapping encouragement leads to character assassinations and, as in the old west, assembling a lynch mob?

Jim Phelps' post got close to calling someone a "bald-faced liar" when he posted the following, "BUT, the one thing that really bugs me is the adamant denial of Tharpe's nominiation, when it's clear he was nominated at least once. That seems to me an obvious lie. Rules and criteria are one thing, bald-faced lies are another."[unquote/]

When b0b locked that Forum topic on Nov. 10th at Dan's request, yet another emerged: http://steelguitarforum.com/Forum15/HTML/007763.html. It was titled "Julian Tharpe's Contributions." Bill Hatcher quickly posts the following:

"The "formal" nomination that Tom Bradshaw claims never happened seems to have happened. Even in the thread he makes he statement that Tharpe was never "formally" nominated. Fred Shannon post a copy of his "formal" nomination for Tharpe that he sent in to the HOF in 2003----anyone who read the thread can make up their mind as to the integrity of one of the actual board members of the Steel Guitar Hall of Fame. He denies the actual nomination occured, and then you get to read it! Go figure."

Can there be any doubt as to this being a slam at me? Did it ever occur to him to drop a note to any other Board member, including Scotty and ask, "Was Tharpe ever nominated?"

The negative posts finally ended on 11-28-04. Fred Shannon finally revealed the fact that he had been informed 2 weeks ago in an email from Scotty. There was no need to refer to it as confidential. He could have paraphrased its contents and explained away the fact that he had misled a lot of Forum members in his original post. But, he chose to say the following:

"Well hell, here we go again. Tom Bradshaw made a statement about as far as he knew there had been no nominations submitted for Julian Tharpe. I made the statement that I knew there had been, then you, b0b, asked me to post the nomination. I had the nomination on another older computer under a Corel Word Perfect document. I copied that to a txt file in order to put it on the Forum. No one bitched about it then. And if we're gonna' fan the flames I suggest someone get in touch with Scotty and have him send you the email he sent me, which I consider confidential, explaining what may have happened to that nomination. Just another example of blow outs that occur before people have done their homework."

Ten hours after posting the above statement, Fred posted the following:

"About my misplacing or losing your nomination form for Julian - I thought that you might have put that on the forum."

Is this a retraction? Is there an explanation? Did he do his homework? I have a copy of Scotty's email he sent to Fred. Why didn't Fred just ask Scotty if he objected to Fred posting it on the Forum? This post by Fred does prove that he had known the circumstances of his nomination letter, but chose to keep quiet about it. Read Bob Lee's post that prompted Fred to acknowledge the receipt of Scotty's message 2 weeks ago.

Here are some pertinent observations I wish to make:

Had I NOT told Bill Hatcher the complete truth as I stated it to be, I would have immediately apologized directly to him. I would have followed that with a Forum post, apologizing to everyone for my mistake. That isn't unprecedented of me. I have done that before on the Forum. I have no problem apologizing when I am wrong. What distresses me is apologizing when I know I'm right. And I've done that too, by referring Forum members to my own web site where I had posted a statement that had been prepared by others.

I ask all Forum readers here to contemplate the consequences and the potential for severe outcomes when not doing your "homework" (as Fred references above in his latest Forum post on this subject). The consequences of Fred's Forum postings accelerated the metaphor I use in the "runaway train" scenario used throughout this post. I'll discuss that here.

After Fred's post, I began receiving emails from friends, asking if the Forum post by Fred was true. I explained the situation and advised them that I was giving Scotty time to return from Japan for a decision on what should be posted on the Forum. I didn't ask any of those friends to keep our discussion confidential. I have no idea if any of them alerted Fred to what I wanted him to know. I also wanted to give Fred sufficient time to post a retraction or clarification once he learned the truth from Scotty. What was surprising when looking back now, is that no one who posted on any of the several identified threads took the initiative to send me an email asking for my explanation. Of particular significance however, is that Tommy White asked me a question directly on a Forum post of his. I answered him and he thanked me and seemed satisfied with the information I supplied him. Anyone else who did what Tommy did would have received an explanation too. No one did!

I did decide to contact one poster on my own. He had made reference to me as being responsible for something that I had no idea of what he was talking about. I didn't know him, didn't have his name in my 30,000+ database, nor could I find anything in my email records revealing that I had any prior contact with him. As it turned out, he had me confused with someone else, a notable steel guitarist I might add. Now think about that! The posts by Hatcher, Shannon, James Hall and several others led him to believe that I was the one responsible for a problem he had had with a person whose name was similar to mine. In fact he addressed me in his reply, using that other steel player's name. How many times might he have used that other steel player's name in corresponding with other steel players, when he was actually complaining about me? He would have alleged that the other person had created some perceived serious problem for him at sometime in his past. It took a couple of email exchanges to convince him that he was accusing the wrong person. Once he settled down and heard me out, he realized that not only had he mistakenly held me in contempt, but I was actually the one responsible for correcting the situation that he had always been wanting to see corrected. After reorienting himself and realizing that I had actually, AND UNKOWINGLY, solved the problem that was distressing him, he apologized. I'll not disclose his identity. If he wants to post a confirmation of all of this, he is welcome to do so. Once the confusion was removed, he immediately deleted 90% of his post.

I'm confident that Fred, Bill, James and others who posted denigrating remarks about the Board and me, never contemplated how far-reaching the consequences can be if you eagerly jump to conclusions. And what about casual readers of those Forum posts beginning about 3 weeks ago? Fred's flawed and incomplete information has surely been read by many who will not return to read this topic thread and learn that I had actually provided accurate information to Bill Hatcher when we corresponded by email. Those casual Forum readers may hold their negative assessment of the Board and me in their minds for all time.

After Scotty notified Fred Shannon of the fact that he had either not received Fred's nomination or had lost it, Scotty could have set the record straight himself and wanted to, but I told him I viewed it as a personal problem that wasn't his to solve.

Fred Shannon's desire to jump to conclusions prompted several to jump on his "runaway train" by posting on the threads identified previously. There are actually many past threads where he casts aspersions on my integrity and credibility. By Fred delaying a retraction or clarification here, I have no way of knowing how many people out there will forever view me as, at least a misinformed malcontent. That damage may also be assigned to the other members of the Convention Board, a group of people I have the utmost respect for. Were the tables turned, I would have been the first to apologize. I believe I have explained why I chose to wait out a reply until I had all the facts. Fred has posted over 2 dozen times since the 15th of this month, which was after he learned the truth about his nomination letter. That avoidance has surely allowed many Forum members to possess negative feelings that have festered in their minds since that time.

Therefore, I respectfully ask all Forum readers to inquire of me when they become irritated and/or incensed by something I say in my Forum posts. If others make claims about something I have said, before jumping on that runaway train, verify what my position is. It's easy. Just drop me an email and ask me any question you want. My email address can be accessed on any Forum post I make. Don't hold back; cuss me out, call me names, or just ask me to explain my position or alleged position you found distressing. After you hear my side of an issue, you are welcome to post anything you want. If I disagree with what you say, you will hear from me on the Forum and maybe via email. All Forumites can assess the differences in the explanations and make up their own minds as to who makes the most sense. Just don't take pot shots at me, then run away. If I can't defend myself, I'm probably wrong, I'll thank you for changing my mind, or will withhold judgment until I get more information. And, please don't misquote me, quote me out of context, or say something about me on the Forum and to others unless you verified with me that I said it. I will respect you as long as you respect my printed word. That is just another way of expressing the "Golden Rule."
<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Tom Bradshaw on 02 December 2004 at 02:18 AM.]</p></FONT>

[bob drawbaugh]

YADA YADA YADA.

[Roger Rettig]

Tom

Thanks for clarifying matters. Having been attacked on this Forum myself - unjustifiably, in my view - by one of those you mention, I can readily appreciate your frustration.

I accept that the SGHOF is, essentially, a private endeavour. I haven't always agreed with every choice they've made, but I enjoy the annual drama, and the way it plays out like a mini-series here on the Forum.

I'm amused at the suggestion that Herb is an 'average player'.

You have always conducted business in an honourable manner - I'm confident that you do the same in other arenas. I hope that all who have any interest in this affair will take the time to read your 'post' and gain a proper perspective.

RR

[Fred Shannon]

Bradshaw I just wish Scotty had taken the time to send you all the emails including two that he asked me to KEEP EVERY CONVERSATION via our emails "absolutely personal and confidential", a request I honored until I received this one this morning shortly after you made your tremendous post above. Maybe he did and maybe he didn't send them to you, I don't know or care. I know that I received two personal phone calls from Scotty and I made more than one to him. How many I'm not sure but in all the conversations, also via email, there was a mutual understanding that I would not post to the forum any more information I had relative to this subject. I honored every request he made. I did have his permission to use the extract I posted previously.

All the hoopla you've raised above is indicative of your tremendous use of wordology. Best Defense is Good Offense huh?

The time has come I guess. Here"s Scotty's post to me this AM and BTW I got this after your post timewise so I imagine you got a late night phone call after an email I sent to Scotty yesterday asking him to step in and clean this mess up to protect the HOF, and you really cleaned it up. You have just poured more gasoline on the flames.

"Hi Fred,

You have my permission to use this reply I sent to you regarding Julian and my apology.

I am the person that submits the names and bio's to the Steel Guitar Hall Of Fame nominating board members and I have checked the year of 2003 and do not see the form you submitted for Julian. It is highly possible that I have misplace it or lost it as there was another name up for submission for 2004 and it never made it either. (Jummy Porter-was one of, it not the first, steel player for Hank Williams) The person that did that nominating has since resubmitted his induction information form.

Tom Bradshaw used only the information that he received both from me and our secretary. Our secretary at that time was Fred Layman. As I failed to to enter Julian that year, of course, Fred would not have a record of it. I would like for you to please resubmit that request to me again and I will personally see that it gets to the nominating committee at our next meeting. I apologize to you for this oversight and promise that it will not be misplaced again. Please submit it to by parcel post.

Best regards and thanks for your interest in the Steel Guitar Hall Of Fame.

DeWitt Scott, Sr. President

(Post this this as soon as you can please.)"

Bradshaw you know I accepted Scotty's explanation about what happened to the nomination I submitted for Julian. Why can't you? You want to keep the fire going just say the word.

For your information Harrington certainly knew I was taping his conversation because I asked him 2 times if he had any objections. His reply was negative. Yeh Bradshaw that comes from experience even though the state of Texas has no personal recording statute about "dual notification". A point of interest might also be that MSA paid Mr. Harrington in the restitution process even after they had been made aware of Harrington's conversation with me.

BTW while you're in your writing mood why don't you post the Tharpe Email to Gonzales so the folks can see what really transpired. There's a couple of legal actions you might want to explain also. Your choice. I guess it's down the tubes for people, nominated for the HOF, who have past personal problems, but it's ok for the people who choose them for the HOF to have serious questions raised about past actions.

IMHO your "runaway train" was really a "subway" you and some folks have been riding since 1983 when MSA went under financially. Must have been "sub" because all the work was certainly underground until a letter from you in 1993 to Dr. Phelps became public knowledge in 1999. Post that letter also in conjunction with the Tharpe Email to Gonzales. You now have the chance to "put the train back on the track". You won't do it because you know the wheels will come off and a wreck ensues, when the forumites get them.

"Investigative Reporter", Bradshaw I would bet a toy you know damned well I did that job for 30 years. You and probably every member of the board have copies of my credentials that I sent to Scotty over 2 years ago. Yep that's what I was, it can certainly be verified, and you don't have to continue with your snide implications. I'm damned proud of my work there.

Let me make this absolutely clear to everyone. This post does not reflect my feelings or cast any aspersions on any of the SGHOF Board Members. It has to do only with one person on that board.

That's all I have to say about your "delicious explanation" at this time. Have a nice day. Tomorrow it might rain.

fred


------------------
The spirit be with you!
If it aint got a steel, it aint real

[Andy Greatrix]

I am totally resigned to the conclusion that Julian thorpe will never be inducted to your HOF. I can understand that if an unknown steel player, who played like Lenny Breau, but was unknown by the steel playing community, would have to be nominated and documents would have to be produced to prove this person's credibility. Such is not the case with Julian Thorpe. Buddy Emmons, Jimmy Day, and Paul Franklin, to name a few, certainly know of his skill on our favorite instrument. It gives me the impression that maybe their standards are lower than the board. In any case no one is going to tell members of the board what to do. They are far too important. The sad thing is that their choice to pretend that Julian thorpe never existed, only diminishes the credibility the board.

[smike]

andy -

it's traditionally pretty easy to take pot shots at a board of directors. without having to review and follow by-laws at each meeting, without being able to participate in years of discussions... or, for that matter, wthout having known and/or done business with julian and reese way back when, when they were just musicians (with all that that implies)... it's easy to see why you (and others) can't imagine that the sghof bod members might actually have legitimate concerns about inducting some folks into the hof.

what is apparently not so easy for you (and those others) to see is that your opinions are subjective, and relatively un-informed... fred shannon's investigative reporting aside. whichever side of this thing you're on, you have to admit that the hof bod has done an admirable job of not talking out of school... they have kept discussions and bod business confidential... as they should.

no disrespect to anyone... but we all owe scotty, winnie, jeff, tom, fred, and the other bod members gratitude and respect for their contributions... defining steel instruction, making strings, books, tapes, cds, photos, newsletters, articles and magazines available, the conventions, recordings, etc.

the rest of us really only get a voice because bobby has given us a forum... and 'submit' buttons... in which to do so.

bradshaw's last paragraph is worth re-reading... it would be a different discussion if everybody followed his lead:

<BLOCKQUOTE>
<FONT SIZE="-1">Therefore, I respectfully ask all Forum readers to inquire of me when they become irritated and/or incensed by something I say in my Forum posts. If others make claims about something I have said, before jumping on that runaway train, verify what my position is. It's easy. Just drop me an email and ask me any question you want. My email address can be accessed on any Forum post I make. Don't hold back; cuss me out, call me names, or just ask me to explain my position or alleged position you found distressing. After you hear my side of an issue, you are welcome to post anything you want. If I disagree with what you say, you will hear from me on the Forum and maybe via email. All Forumites can assess the differences in the explanations and make up their own minds as to who makes the most sense. Just don't take pot shots at me, then run away. If I can't defend myself, I'm probably wrong, I'll thank you for changing my mind, or will withhold judgment until I get more information. And, please don't misquote me, quote me out of context, or say something about me on the Forum and to others unless you verified with me that I said it. I will respect you as long as you respect my printed word. That is just another way of expressing the "Golden Rule."</FONT>
</BLOCKQUOTE>

bruce

[smike]

fred -

just re-read your response to bradshaw, including scotty's mesage.

aren't you (and scotty) confirming that the board has to date not yet logged any kind of official or confirmed nomination for julian?

what am i missing?

bruce

[Smiley Roberts]

Awww geez. Well,I guess this shoots down MY chances of ever gettin' in. ( )

------------------
<font face="monospace" size="3"><pre> ~ ~
©¿© It don't mean a thang,
mm if it ain't got that twang.
www.ntsga.com</pre></font>

<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Smiley Roberts on 29 November 2004 at 09:27 AM.]</p></FONT>

[b0b]

That's what I read from it too, Bruce. Tom Bradshaw originally said that Julian Tharpe had never been formally nominated. Fred Shannon said that he had, and uploaded a copy of his nomination as proof.

Now Scotty has confirmed that the nomination was never brought to the Board. Nobody knows what actually happened to the document that Fred mailed.

Sounds like it was a simple misunderstanding to me. Something lost in the mail? Hey, it happens!

------------------
<img align=left src="http://b0b.com/b0bxicon.gif" border="0"><small>               Bobby Lee</small>
-b0b-   <small> quasar@b0b.com </small>
 System Administrator<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by b0b on 29 November 2004 at 09:32 AM.]</p></FONT>

[Andy Greatrix]

Julian Tharpe played his butt off, he was original, and he was well known by all the top steel players. What is the need for endless secret discussions? How many bi-laws and secret handshakes do you need to arrive at a suitable conclussion? To quote Don Herron (Charley Farquison on He-haw)
"If the Hebrews had formed a committee, they would never have got across the Red Sea."

I don't want to disrespect the committee. I think that this is a chance for them to step forward, put their pride aside, and show an example of kindness and charity. What have they got to lose? If anything they will gain.

PS thanks for the spelling correction Greg!
<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Andy Greatrix on 29 November 2004 at 10:13 AM.]</p></FONT><FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Andy Greatrix on 29 November 2004 at 10:53 AM.]</p></FONT>

[Greg Simmons]

Well, I'm pretty sure Julian Thorpe won't get in the SGHOF, but some day Julian Tharpe might...in the mean time, if you're jonesin' for some Hall of Fame action, there's always Jim Thorpe

------------------
<size=-1>Greg Simmons
Former custodian of the Unofficial Sho~Bud Pedal Steel Guitar Website </size>

<FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Greg Simmons on 29 November 2004 at 10:27 AM.]</p></FONT>

[Fred Shannon]

Misunderstanding? Certainly it could have been. Read my post above and you see this:

"---you know I accepted Scotty's explanation about what happened to the nomination I submitted for Julian. Why can't you?"

I don't have any problem with that. What I have a problem with is someone implying that my nomination was in essence a "figment of someone's imagination" typed on a remote computer.

One of the other things that is extremely bothersome is the fact that because I didn't see fit to post Scotty's email messages to me on the forum, after he had personally requested not once but many times that our conversations and communications were to be kept private and confidential, questions and statements were made that I could have posted what Scotty said to me immediately and cleared the entire mess up. I simply honored his requests and am still doing so on several items which he discussed with me.

If Scotty wanted to release that information, I know he can type and post on this forum as well as I. I will tell you I've sent him an email this AM, subsequent to the Bradshaw Novel, asking him to do just that.

Too, whoever said Herb Steiner was mediocre or whatever, doesn't know the man or the player. He's been a role model of mine for along time and I'd trust his judgement anytime that he's provided all the information.

The members of the SGHOF are not under attack from this quarter, you can bet on it. I don't like some of the rules and regulations such as the nomination procedures because instances just like this can happen, but that's not any of my business. It is a privately operated organization with established rules and regulations and they can run it anyway they want to, but it is representative of the Steel Guitar Community of which I'm a member, and I will voice my opinion here until another privately owned forum owner tells me to quit.

I complied with every rule and regulation in submitting several nomination letters. It's not that hard to do. Also I've supported this forum since the day I came on it buying products, which I just did, and sent donations when I could afford to do so.

And Bruce, it did not start out as a "subjective investigation". It started as an "objective research" for a magazine article I contracted for and I thought it would be nice to include the SGHOF into the article for the Hall to get some free publicity. It became "subjective" when that research turned up some nasty happenings for which I'm thankful.
The article was trashed and the contract mutually annulled because of one gentleman's request not to do it. I honored that request also.

Half truths, innuendos, and unsubstantiated rumors denigrating one's reputation, along with "muddy" character assassinations are just not acceptable to this old horned frog, and from my email pile this AM some other folks don't care for it either. Take it or leave it.

Seems like I read an offer on the table to "put up or shut up". Any takers? Kinda' like "involved" and "committed". Bacon and egg breakfast. The chicken who laid the egg was "involved", but the Hog that provided the bacon was darn well "committed".

fred



------------------
The spirit be with you!
If it aint got a steel, it aint real

[Dave Horner]

Tom,

You suggest that I rethink my post to Bill Hatcher wherein I said that his posts are informative and articulate; and, further, that it is beginning to appear that the steel guitar community is finally fed up with certain matters to which Bill referred.
Those comments stand.

It is the height of hubris for you to suppose that I would reconsider anything on the basis of your self-serving, turgid, mind-numbing written meanderings.

Although they are frequently the source of some amusement- such as your admonition to Texan Fred Shannon as to the necessity for him to follow California law in his phone conversations with people in Texas- they generally appear to be mountains of conjecture constructed from assumed facts, and, other than gaining the benefits of humor and further insight into the workings and mindset of your committee, I must say that I have read enough of them to know to summarily dismiss them.

Dave

[b0b]

<SMALL>I don't have any problem with that. What I have a problem with is someone implying that my nomination was in essence a "figment of someone's imagination" typed on a remote computer.</SMALL>

I think that a large part of the problem here is that people imply things that aren't written. I never said that your nomination was imaginary, and your computer is remote from where I sit here in Cloverdale.

------------------
<img align=left src="http://b0b.com/b0bxicon.gif" border="0"><small>               Bobby Lee</small>
-b0b-   <small> quasar@b0b.com </small>
 System Administrator

[Fred Shannon]

b0b, thanks for the explanation and if you made the post in that context I can certainly live with that. Had I been the only person to interpret it differently than that it would have been understandable to me, but emails saying "boy he really stuck it in your A$$" and other words to that effect, in different messages seem to be bothersome to me. I abided by the rules and regulations of the SGHOF and implications to the contrary are not warranted. I think Scotty's email to me which I've already posted could possibly clear up some of the misunderstandings but it points out a "soft spot" in the nomination procedure, Don't you think? Just a thought.


fred

------------------
The spirit be with you!
If it aint got a steel, it aint real

[b0b]

Fred, you are correct. There's a bit of a problem with the process if a nomination can get lost.

I know that Scotty mails a confirmation letter on the official SGHOF stationary whenever he receives a nomination. But it's sort of like the problem I have with people joining the Forum. If they don't receive the email with their password, how would they know if I received their application or not?

My solution to the lost email problem was to announce the new members publicly in the "Forum News". Not perfect, I know, but it has helped. I don't know if publicly announcing SGHOF nominations would be a good idea, though. That's something for the Board to deal with.

My apologies to you for the misunderstanding, and to all for poking my nose into this matter. It's unseemly for a moderator to express an opinion on a volatile topic. I'll try to keep a little more distance in the future.

------------------
<img align=left src="http://b0b.com/b0bxicon.gif" border="0"><small>               Bobby Lee</small>
-b0b-   <small> quasar@b0b.com </small>
 System Administrator

[Fred Shannon]

b0b, no apologies necessary, check your email.


fred

------------------
The spirit be with you!
If it aint got a steel, it aint real

[Dan Tyack]

Tom said

<SMALL>In his opening remarks, Dan suggested that all the Board members resign. Words used in referring to the Board included "tainted", "internal politics", "partisan players", "poisoning the HOF", "perceived bias", and several other pejorative remarks and aspersions.</SMALL>

I said later in that thread that suggesting the board member all resign was a boneheaded idea, and I apologize for the suggestion.

But Tom, you completely misstated my remarks regarding the HOF. I said that there was a perception held by many in the steel community that there are one or more members of the board who are biased against certain nominees, to the point where they are partisan players with disputes against nominees. That's an objective fact, nothing perjoritive about it. I never said that those perceptions were real, but it is obvious to anybody reading these threads regarding the HOF that this is a controversial subject, and that some in the communitee see bias in the proceedings of the HOF. I went on to say that this perception has had the effect for many players of tainting (or poisoning) the good work of the HOF. While this is my opinion, it is no way perjoritive.

I have never made any aspersions on the honesty or intentions of the board members. What I did suggest is that it isn't good for the HOF to have board member be viewed as being biased against nominees. The one example I have seen of this was a lengthy letter that you sent me regarding alleged bad business behavior by Reece Anderson. I'm not going to comment about the merits of the issues raised, but I will say that that any reasonable person would come away from reading that letter with the opinion that you are not neutral regarding Maureece Anderson, and could be seen as an active participant in making a case regarding his business dealings with steel players.

To me, it just isn't appropriate for you to participate in any vote regarding Reece, simply because of the perception that you are a player in the argument against him. Let me note that I have not, nor will I make any comment on the merits of the argument, nor do I make any aspersions on your character. It just seems like the right thing to do.

For example, if a lawyer files a 'friend of the court' brief in a case, then gets appointed Judge, he of course would recuse himself to pass judgement on it. <FONT SIZE=1 COLOR="#8e236b"><p align=CENTER>[This message was edited by Dan Tyack on 29 November 2004 at 02:31 PM.]</p></FONT>

[Stephen Gambrell]

SO, you guys tune straight up, or what??
Seriously, I've read "Hall of Fame" stuff about these two dudes, and derogatory stuff about this "Board," till I've got it running out my ears, as, I'm sure, have a whole lot of other folks on here. I don't CARE who gets in ANY halls of fame---if I like 'em, they're already in mine.
I've had personal email contact with Winnie, and Herb, about non-steel related stuff, and they're good guys. I imagine the rest of this board are pretty good guys. But come on---Unless based on some statistic, like a pitcher winning 300 games, then a Hall of Fame award is like an honorary doctorate. Looks good on a wall, but is based on popularity and politics as much as actual accomplishment. The IBMA, International Bluegrass Music Association, calls theirs the "Hall of Honor," or some such nonsense. Of course, Bill Monroe was the first inductee, and rightfully so. Flatt and Scruggs followed, but will greats like Red Allen, Porter Church, Frank Wakefield---or in our own sub-genre, Mike Auldridge--ever get in? Doubtful, at best. Didn't have the record sales, weren't cute enough, whatever.
But that doesn't stop anybody from liking 'em, enjoying their music, or being influenced by them. Shoot, I feel like I'm a member of a MORE exclusive group of fans, when MY favorites don't quite fit the HOF mold.
So why not let this stuff die a graceful death? Julian Tharpe's gone, so he doesn't care, and I haven't seen Reece posting on here, petitioning the brethren for membership. If it doesn't matter to them, what difference does it make to the rest of us?

[b0b]

As someone who runs a mail order business, I can testify that things do get lost in the mail. It happens to me 2 or 3 times a year.

Things get lost on my desk, too. Important things. It happens. And I swear the dryer eats my socks.

Come on, folks. Let's not make a federal case out of a lost piece of paper!

[Lonnie Portwood]

A wise man once said, "it's better to be silent and considered a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt". There are a few people on this forum who would be better musicians if they spent half the time on their instruments as such discussions as these. It seems differences such as these could be between the parties involved, and not dragged over and over on a public forum where I suspect most of us are not interested. Lonnie P.

[Bobbe Seymour]

Notice how silent I am on this subject now? Shows you how smart I really am! Ha!

bobbe