GDG- RE: Wright's Brigade

[Chet Diestel]

 Esteemed GDG Member Jim Cameron Contributes:

I'll second that.  Chuck did present his 'evidence' in a fair and balanced 
manner - for those who attended and in previous postings.  I don't see why 
some members of the GDG have seem to made this a personal issue, but it 
certainly flies in the face of what I believe this forum to be.
     Craig

   That's fine for those who were there, and certainly generous of Chuck to 
do it,  but from what I've heard, that was only a dozen or so people. 
Wouldn't   it be good for the rest of the membership to also know what it's 
about?  A  few of us here are familiar with it from other forums where Chuck 
has  discussed it in detail, but it's never, as I recall, been done here. 
And as Mike Nugent has pointed out, this is, after all, an Internet forum. 
It  would be a shame of only those members able to devote the time and 
expense  of travelling to Gettysburg are able to share in discussions.
   Jim Cameron

   Jim,
   I agreee with you entirely about the necessity to fill in the rest of the 
group about what this debate is all about so as to give some recognizable 
boundaries and perspectives to it.
  I feel like the guy who has walked into the middle of an annimated and 
interesting discussion, but can only pick up bits and pieces of what it's 
all about in its entirely and why it has grown so verbally heated.
  As you pointed out, Jim, the vast majority of this group's members were 
not on site when this discussion originated and do need to be filled in so 
as to be able to pitch in with their thoughts, knowledge and expertise on 
what seems, on the outer edges at least, to be a very interesting new take 
on just what Wright's Brigade did on July 2.
  Incidently, during discussions with members over various subjects I have 
been handily challenged on some of my interpretations of events ---- I 
remember a prolonged discussion on just what Stuart's mission on July 3 
actually was in particular --- and never felt that the challenges were 
personal but were pointed in a way to get me to rethink my premise and in 
the end to better defend it if I felt the information offered was not 
persuasive enough to change my thought process.
   With regards,
     Chet