If the errors at the Yonge page were made in 1993, how come they weren't corrected in the 2001 or 2002 article placed on the Internet, and, may I add, published under your name.
Additionally, if there were errors at the Marvel roster, who, may I ask, claimed credit for these, and kept on boasting about having provided Marvel with all this?
I know that there are quite a number of errors at the Marvel roster, and I have already started to compile a separate roster of the CSS ALABAMA crew from various unpublished and obscure sources that I have managed to locate so far, and others which I am obtaining through Kew, etc., (e.g. Edgar Fripp's Royal Navy file and his death certificate, the addition of the names of Bowers and Bowse, Simpson (yes, Simpson!) etc.)
If you want to refer to childishness, then go to the web site, where you have falsely accused me of plagiarism (and once again, I repeat for the thousandth time, I have always correctly and properly cited the sources I have used - check up the proper meaning of the word "plagiarism"), and also why do you state, in messages to some of your correspondents that I am riding on the back of Michael Mars (I do not, as yet, have more interest in Michael Mars than I do in all the other CSN sailors; Michael Mars has no more interest to me than all the other CSN sailors, and I research them equally, although some more than others, and Michael Mars is currently not one of them), and that we (you also refer to a couple or more other researchers) are stupid and egomaniacs. If you want to place such statements on the Internet, and send such messages to your correspondents, you have to make sure that they do not get back to us.
As for the Yonge article, it includes so many errors, just within the first ten paragraphs that I checked, that it gives a misleading bio of him. You yourself stated, and I quote your very own words: "Even I can make mistakes, but at least I haven't published my work and will only do so when I've crossed checked everything first."
You will have to be careful with what you place on the Internet, as there are other errors at another page which has your name put to it. I am now in the process of checking these further, through additional documentation which I am awaiting. You claim to know everything about these sailors, yet these errors point to the absurdity of this statement. In time I will reveal these. It will probably take a lot of time as I have numerous other projects on my plate. Remember, once again, your statement quoted above. It pays not to go around bragging and boasting so much.
Remember your statement that MOST of the documentation from the CSS ALABAMA was saved? The ORN certainly refutes this. Remember your statement that Risien did not serve (first you stated that he had served on the OTHER CSS ALABAMA, but there was no other - refer to my previous answer to this)? I am still awaiting your documentary proof that he did not serve. You know full well that none of the CSN rosters are 100% complete, yet you make such statements which cannot be fully confirmed.
I am no expert on any of these subjects, but I thoroughly enjoy the research involved, and I do not claim, unlike others, to know everything on a particular subject or person, least of all any particular person of the CSN, as so much has gone missing through the years. I know that there are errors at some or all of my sites, but, if you read some of the introductory notes, you will realise that I do not claim they are perfect, and that amendments will be made, in due course. Remember, you are not the only one to have access to the information from the archival and other sources in the U.S., the U.K., South Africa, France, etc. You know, you are not the only one who holds copies of the affidavits of Kernot, Yeoman, etc., and as I indicated, I am slowly compiling a separate roster of the CSS ALABAMA. I don't claim it will be complete, as no roster can ever be complete (Refer to Secretary of the Navy Mallory's own statement, written in 1867)
Finally, I have to state that I would have preferred to have had this exchange of messages in private, through our e-mail addresses, but you have constantly denied receiving all my previous messages sent privately to your e-mail link shown at this site, and I have also provided you with my own e-mail address, in one of the previous messages at this board, but you still refuse to answer in private, preferring to bring all this out in the open. I have made my points above, and if you wish to continue this on the message board, then the prerogative is yours.
An elderly gentleman, whom I believe to be rather wise, once told me never to claim to be an expert on anything, because an expert can always be stumped by just one question. I have never, ever, claimed to be an expert, and I don't intend to.
Finally, another quote of your very own, to ponder: "I think it's wrong to be so quick in publishing material on the Internet for the so called 'sharing of information.'"