RJ Daley,
A LOT of people whose opinions I respect have been urging me to step away from this discussion for a few weeks now.
When Bryan, Jeff, Jim, and I were making progress in a very helpful, civil way, despite an occassional green-inked attempt at deflection from Patrick, this was actually beginning to get enjoyable, as we were trying together to solve some of the mysteries.
However, much as anyone thinks I'm biased, and I am, yesterday's return of David and Tom Mac, much as I enjoy the latter's research if not always his analysis and conclusions, made very clear to me that this would go on forever. I'm convinced that a routing map signed by Hugh Wilson could be found and we'd be told by David and TMac that Macdonald and/or Barker and/or Francis and/or ANYBODY but Hugh Wilson had their fingerprints all over it. Then thrown in pages full of green-ink stained deflections from Patrick every third day or so and it's simply a trainwreck needing to be cleaned from the tracks.
Yesterday, I asked David why if he knew all along that the 1910 Land Plan didn't measure out to the 117 acres it was purported to be, and if he knew that the "triangle" of land on that plan didn't measure out to remotely what Richard Francis told us they needed, why wasn't this pointed out to his reader as it was the only real piece of physical evidence from the club he presented? How could this information not be relevant??
You would have thought I'd accused him of stealing babies.
So, we're at an impasse here, and before we go deeper into the abyss of name-calling, vitriol, and embarrassing ourselves, I'm pulling the plug.
I have no ill will towards anyone here, but this conversation has lost focus, relevance, and once again, civility, and it's time to draw the line.