turbine engined chargers that never were..

[TUFCAT]

2.) As someone who has personally worked in automotive product planning at a major car company AND.. who has actually developed and even designed things that actually got made and are out there in the real world–right now, this does not mean that people automatically know who I am–or what I have done. Even people who worked for the same companies as me did not always know what I did or even who I was. Being the head of product planning just means he was the head of product planning. Period.

Thank you very much for making that point.  There are a few individuals around here that believe their awareness (or lack) of Automotive History is THE validating point for its accuracy.  Here is what Pete Estes of General Motors said about a similar subject matter:

Of course, all of this prototype work was done on the sly without the knowledge of either Chevrolet Division or the GM Corporate hierarchy.  I never told anyone anything if I could help it when I was running Pontiac.  And that wasn't the only thing they didn't know.  At the time we had a pretty good budget for advanced engineering, we built a lot of experimental cars and engines every year and we didn't tell a soul anything.

[Ghoste]

Wow Leedy, I'm not even gonna bother reading all of that rant.  You put yourself in the position not me.  Bowkamp isn't a member here, no one on this forum ascribed your words to  him, the link was posted from somewhere else, you corrected it while minimizing in your own fashion the person it was mistakenly attributed to, your reply minimized any role the actual person may have played in Dodge Charger development while happily name dropping Bill Brownlie (interestingly he didn't actually put much pen to paper on Chargers, just approved a lot of things as the guy in charge).  You don't apparently own a Charger (or at least you forgot to mention it) so your only real purpose was to take credit for your work.
I acknowledged that and congratulated you for it.  So now what?  You corrected it and it is here on record for the world, the facts of the story (which is the part most of the people here care about) don't change.  Thanks again for writing the article whether it was something you researched or something you just already knew about.  Thanks for all of your hard hard work as an automotive product planner.  Unless you approved the interior on the early 2000 Taurus, that really sucked.
Note that at NO time did I ever accuse you about lying and that I always acknowledged your correction to who wrote the article.  I merely tried to point out who the man was the was mistakenly given credit but that seemed to get your crusty old dander up.  Whatever.
Thank you again for writing the article dude, have a great day doing whatever you do.

[moparnation74]

Wow Leedy, I'm not even gonna bother reading all of that rant.  You put yourself in the position not me.  Bowkamp isn't a member here, no one on this forum ascribed your words to  him, the link was posted from somewhere else, you corrected it while minimizing in your own fashion the person it was mistakenly attributed to, your reply minimized any role the actual person may have played in Dodge Charger development while happily name dropping Bill Brownlie (interestingly he didn't actually put much pen to paper on Chargers, just approved a lot of things as the guy in charge).  You don't apparently own a Charger (or at least you forgot to mention it) so your only real purpose was to take credit for your work.
I acknowledged that and congratulated you for it.  So now what?  You corrected it and it is here on record for the world, the facts of the story (which is the part most of the people here care about) don't change.  Thanks again for writing the article whether it was something you researched or something you just already knew about.  Thanks for all of your hard hard work as an automotive product planner.  Unless you approved the interior on the early 2000 Taurus, that really sucked.
Note that at NO time did I ever accuse you about lying and that I always acknowledged your correction to who wrote the article.  I merely tried to point out who the man was the was mistakenly given credit but that seemed to get your crusty old dander up.  Whatever.
Thank you again for writing the article dude, have a great day doing whatever you do.

Ghoste, I think most of us here were biting our keys perse on the last response Leedy posted.  What an unfortunate persona he displayed him self as from that"rant."

I was awaiting your response and not that you need it

[ECS]

I think most of us here.....

What exactly do "most" of you contribute to the Hobby other than working on your own Cars and posting on this Forum?  There's a "fraternity" of individuals who take exception towards ANY "outsider" that they think is well known or has a reputable status in the Industry.  It doesn't matter what position they take!  Someone always has a contrary stance regardless of their comments and/or position.  If this happened to a respected DC Member and their work was plagiarized, you guys would be saying the exact OPPOSITE about what you are critiquing Leeedy for.  You would be supportive and express your anger over the "injustice" that had occurred to your DC brethren.  

It appears that it's more important WHO is conveying the message than the message that's actually being conveyed.

[Ghoste]

Dave, NO ONE here has taken exception to the plagiarizing or defended it.  Carefully reread everything and you'll find that Mr. Dixons enormous contributions to the hobby in the form of the magazine article in question have been acknowledged.  Unfortunately it became a twisted defense of the reputation of another individual for some reason.  And all based on a comment that I was surprised he didn't know who the man was.  Lee seemed to feel that meant I was calling him a liar even though I at no time said or implied such a thing and stated in certain terms that Lee Dixon wrote it.
As for our contributions to the hobby, dave, we ARE the hobby.  If all of our nothing contributions were taken away in an instant there would be no reason for ECS to exist and no hungry masses for your great contributions.  Nor those of the authors, the reproduction mfg's, the Dante's, the forums, the historians, not even the mail clerks who saw cars no one else did.
To belittle us for not making contributions to the hobby because all we do is work on our Chargers is ludicrous.  We care every bit as much as the guys who make whatever the contributions are by your definition.

[Ghoste]

The first time I saw Leedy's article misquoted as being the words of Burt Bowkamp, it was posted on Allpar... more than a couple of years ago.  If no one here is guilty of plagiarizing it or misquoting it or whatever the hell the crime is, then why are we the bad guys?  Yes, it was horribly wrong that Mr. Dixon didn't get the proper credit for his work.  This injustice has been righted to anyone reading this thread.  Not being the ones who incorrectly identified the author, there seems little we can do about it now except to acknowledge it here, which has happened.

[Ghoste]

This has really spun off into something non productive so why don't we get it back on track?
Lee, thank you for writing your article and welcome to the group.  Why don't you tell us about your Charger and share some photos?

[TUFCAT]

^^^  like he said.  

[dyslexic teddybear]

As for our contributions to the hobby, dave, we ARE the hobby.  If all of our nothing contributions were taken away in an instant there would be no reason for ECS to exist and no hungry masses for your great contributions.  Nor those of the authors, the reproduction mfg's, the Dante's, the forums, the historians, not even the mail clerks who saw cars no one else did.
To belittle us for not making contributions to the hobby because all we do is work on our Chargers is ludicrous.  We care every bit as much as the guys who make whatever the contributions are by your definition.

^^^  like he said.  

Very well put Ghoste.......ALL of your posts relating to this matter.

Thank you for a polite response to arrogance from self-deluded "betters".

Your a class act Ghoste!

[moparnation74]

I think most of us here.....

What exactly do "most" of you contribute to the Hobby other than working on your own Cars and posting on this Forum?  There's a "fraternity" of individuals who take exception towards ANY "outsider" that they think is well known or has a reputable status in the Industry.  It doesn't matter what position they take!  Someone always has a contrary stance regardless of their comments and/or position.  If this happened to a respected DC Member and their work was plagiarized, you guys would be saying the exact OPPOSITE about what you are critiquing Leeedy for.  You would be supportive and express your anger over the "injustice" that had occurred to your DC brethren.  

It appears that it's more important WHO is conveying the message than the message that's actually being conveyed.

ECS, Dave, or whatever..........

Frankly speaking, if it was not for us(collectors, hobbiest, etc)  There would be NO hobby.

[ECS]

As for our contributions to the hobby, dave, we ARE the hobby.  If all of our nothing contributions were taken away in an instant there would be no reason for ECS to exist and no hungry masses for your great contributions. 

I can assure you that my comments were not intended to disparage those who constitute this "Hobby".  I can also say that the "Hobby" aspect of ECS is not the part that supports our existence.  THAT part of the Company is my passion and a loss leader for MANY of the products we offer.  I was simply making the point that there is no need to constantly take issue with those who say something out of emotion or if they hold a different view than ours. 

We all claim to be part of this "Hobby" but it seems like some are intent on attacking others to feel better about themselves.  Why does everything have to be scrutinized under a micro-scope or everything that someone says be ripped to shreds?  And for what?  Is anything really being accomplished by telling guys like Mr. Dixon how arrogant they sound or how full of themselves they are?  I empathize and feel bad for the guy.  His "reputation" or perceived "greatness" in the Industry doesn't take anything away from anyone else.............does it?!? 

My intention was never to minimize the contribution or part that anyone plays in this Hobby.  I do apologize if my comments were taken out of context.   

[TUFCAT]

I can assure you that my comments were not intended to disparage those who constitute this "Hobby".  I can also say that the "Hobby" aspect of ECS is not the part that supports our existence.  THAT part of the Company is my passion and a loss leader for MANY of the products we offer.  I was simply making the point that there is no need to constantly take issue with those who say something out of emotion or if they hold a different view than ours.  

We all claim to be part of this "Hobby" but it seems like some are intent on attacking others to feel better about themselves.  Why does everything have to be scrutinized under a micro-scope or everything that someone says be ripped to shreds?  And for what?  Is anything really being accomplished by telling guys like Mr. Dixon how arrogant they sound or how full of themselves they are?  I empathize and feel bad for the guy.  His "reputation" or perceived "greatness" in the Industry doesn't take anything away from anyone else.............does it?!?  

My intention was never to minimize the contribution or part that anyone plays in this Hobby.  I do apologize if my comments were taken out of context.  

What exactly do "most" of you contribute to the Hobby other than working on your own Cars and posting on this Forum?  There's a "fraternity" of individuals who take exception towards ANY "outsider" that they think is well known or has a reputable status in the Industry.  It doesn't matter what position they take!  Someone always has a contrary stance regardless of their comments and/or position.  If this happened to a respected DC Member and their work was plagiarized, you guys would be saying the exact OPPOSITE about what you are critiquing Leeedy for.  You would be supportive and express your anger over the "injustice" that had occurred to your DC brethren.  

It appears that it's more important WHO is conveying the message than the message that's actually being conveyed.

[ws23rt]

I can assure you that my comments were not intended to disparage those who constitute this "Hobby".  I can also say that the "Hobby" aspect of ECS is not the part that supports our existence.  THAT part of the Company is my passion and a loss leader for MANY of the products we offer.  I was simply making the point that there is no need to constantly take issue with those who say something out of emotion or if they hold a different view than ours.  

We all claim to be part of this "Hobby" but it seems like some are intent on attacking others to feel better about themselves.  Why does everything have to be scrutinized under a micro-scope or everything that someone says be ripped to shreds?  And for what?  Is anything really being accomplished by telling guys like Mr. Dixon how arrogant they sound or how full of themselves they are?  I empathize and feel bad for the guy.  His "reputation" or perceived "greatness" in the Industry doesn't take anything away from anyone else.............does it?!?  

My intention was never to minimize the contribution or part that anyone plays in this Hobby.  I do apologize if my comments were taken out of context.  

What exactly do "most" of you contribute to the Hobby other than working on your own Cars and posting on this Forum?  There's a "fraternity" of individuals who take exception towards ANY "outsider" that they think is well known or has a reputable status in the Industry.  It doesn't matter what position they take!  Someone always has a contrary stance regardless of their comments and/or position.  If this happened to a respected DC Member and their work was plagiarized, you guys would be saying the exact OPPOSITE about what you are critiquing Leeedy for.  You would be supportive and express your anger over the "injustice" that had occurred to your DC brethren.  

It appears that it's more important WHO is conveying the message than the message that's actually being conveyed.

Thanks for bringing these two quotes together Tuffy.  It helps give clarity to his thinking 

[ECS]

Thanks for bringing these two quotes together Tuffy.  It helps give clarity to his thinking  

Yes indeed!  Thank you so much for explaining what I was trying to say.  It is always better to have the unbiased "DC fraternity club" to explain and clarify my intent.  Thank goodness we have the intellect & expertise of a select few Members here who can translate what other people actually meant with their statements.    

And you guys think that I'M the arrogant one?!?  

[TUFCAT]

Yes indeed!  Thank you so much for explaining what I was trying to say.  It is always better to have the unbiased "DC fraternity club" to explain and clarify my intent.  Thank goodness we have the intellect & expertise of a select few Members here who can translate what other people actually meant with their statements.    

And you guys think that I'M the arrogant one?!?  

Nothing taken out of context.

[ECS]

Nothing taken out of context.

I'll be the one to determine the "context" for what I mean.  If you don't like what I say or do..........then shove it!  I have no problem telling anyone what I think.  You're not happy unless you're stirring the pot or trying to twist what someone says.  

Do you fully understand what I've just said or do you need further clarification?  

[moparnation74]

Nothing taken out of context.

I'll be the one to determine the "context" for what I mean.  If you don't like what I say or do..........then shove it!  I have no problem telling anyone what I think.  You're not happy unless you're stirring the pot or trying to twist what someone says.  

Do you fully understand what I've just said or do you need further clarification?  

I think we all do understand......... I will tell you:  you are an arrongant little troglodyte

[ECS]

I think we all do understand......... I will tell you:  you are an arrongant little troglodyte

I'm not sure what "arrongant" means but I'll take it as a compliment.  Thank you for your support! 

[moparnation74]

I think we all do understand......... I will tell you:  you are an arrongant little troglodyte

I'm not sure what "arrongant" means but I'll take it as a compliment.  Thank you for your support!  

I thought you would point that out.  That's why I did that little man. That's about the best thing you noticed in this whole thread.  You spelled the word correctly that best describes you.  I had all faith you would come through with that.

[ws23rt]

Is it just me that notices when someone points out a misspelled word it's always when they have just had their feathers ruffled?
We see all the time ttypos as well as spillover from texting habits. Not to mention those that are new to the English language.
This is a place where we communicate and that happens well without everything being proper with the language and punctuation.
When someone responds to a flaw in a post and points it out as somehow representing the posters level of intelligence it reminds me of stuff like and is all a part of wanting to be seen as superior and having the last word --so there--nana nana.
I also find it amusing that this happens in a place like this where what they say is seen by most as good entertainment and they perhaps forget (or don't care) how big the audience is.  (this is the play ground they still live on).

Something else just came to mind along these same lines.  We hear the term "smartest man in the room" lately.  Their is always a smartest one in any room but the collective of those others in that room usually trumps that one.  

[TUFCAT]

Something else just came to mind along these same lines.  We hear the term "smartest man in the room" lately.  Their is always a smartest one in any room but the collective of those others usually trumps that one.  

Hey wait...that's being mean and arrongant!  

[ws23rt]

We as a group are not arrogante

[JB400]

Must be winter time.

[ECS]

That's why I did that......

Sure you did.    Many adolescents deflect and claim the same thing once their ignorance has been exposed.

[moparnation74]

That's why I did that......

Sure you did.    Many adolescents deflect and claim the same thing once their ignorance has been exposed.

Please, keep posting!  The more you type your verbiage on our forum.  Simply, exposes your psychosocial behavior.