A thin line between love and hate

This is the first post that was deleted by Yahoo, which tells me it hit a major nerve over at history poseur central. In this post, we examined the strained, rather bitchy relationship between Solomon and Doc that shows up occasionally on HH.

In these exchanges, Solomon calls out Doc for his repetitive postings, over reliance on secondary sources, lack of original thought, and finally, failing to take responsibility for a rather provocative charge he makes against Odyssey but then quickly recants.

Solomon: "Doc, Thank you for providing all those online references. It appears to be the same list as you posted earlier to this thread. Anyway, I prefer to go to the original sources, than rely on opinion, no matter how distinguished. Do you know if any of these contain such source material? You are right, I think, to point out that on the web are two different stories for the Merchant Royal. In one, the emphasis is on her captain and his personal wealth, and it hints at pirated treasure. I do not accept the integrity of this tale and suspect that it was planted, much as some try to manipulate the stock market with gossip. I would look further into it, except that I do not believe that the Merchant Royal is relevant to anything current. That may change as we move into summer.

Gossip manipulating the stock market? Now whatever could he be talking about here? Odyssey?
Doc: "Solomon, I agree, as you suggest we should perhaps wait for the moment until the Merchant Royal comes to the front of the class."

Solomon: "Doc, You may misunderstand me: I have no reason to believe that the Merchant Royal has been found - do you? On that basis, waiting is not the issue, but rather if it is found at some future point."

Doc: "Solomon, I quite agree that the Merchant Royal hasn't been found. I do however object to the corruption of History."

Yes, the corruption of history, something HH knows all about. See how Solomon baits and then turns the fangs on Doc? Interesting dynamic, no?

On another day:

Solomon: "Doc, the recovered ingots will have their identifying marks. Regarding the piece you quoted, the part that matters, I think, is just this: 'in November 2006 Odyssey offered direct participation in the recovery of the treasure' ... How does OMR invite Spain to join this venture without also mentioning the target and location?"

Doc: "Solomon, I have not the faintest clue but to the best of my knowledge Spain refused and has specifically stated that none of their ships could be salvaged without their permission."

Now Solomon clearly becomes annoyed:

Solomon: "Doc, there is no 'but', for these are two separate issues. The one I was addressing, to which you have not the faintest clue, was this quote posted by you: 'in November 2006 Odyssey offered direct participation in the recovery of the treasure.' You surely posted this for a reason and therefore do have some clue as to its import. You have my interpretation."

Well now! I believe someone just got a dressing down. Doc?

Doc: "Solomon, Sorry if I replied too quickly. Yes, two separate issues. What I intended to say was that I have no idea why Odyssey would approach Spain in view of Spain's stated position with regards the recovery of any of her lost vessels. After all the friction with Spain over the Sussex, I question why the offer would even have been made unless Spain had some vested interest in this "project". The Spanish position was made crystal clear by her Counsel, James Goold, after the Juno and La Galga episode and it has been stated since in the public record as well.I have no knowledge of what was discussed by Odyssey and Spain with regards Stemm's offer of participation."

Backtrack and change the topic, a Doc speciality (as we'll see in greater depth when we later profile him).

So, all you Yahoo readers who are tired of Doc's endless non sequiturs and mindless repetitiveness, we're not the only ones who get annoyed!