Mr. Ross, on behalf of the "staff" of _The Vintage Triumph_ and the
National Board of the Vintage Triumph Register, I am responding to
your e-mail note. I won't make a lot of excuses, but I will
apologize for the typographical errors in the article as printed in
issue #65 of _The Vintage Triumph_. All of us share in the blame
for not proofreading more carefully prior to publication. Since
your name appears as author, I understand your anger and
frustration.
That said, there are a number of points I would offer for your
consideration. First and foremost, VTR is an organization whose
"staff" is comprised entirely of volunteers. We all put a great
deal of effort into all aspects of running an organization of
nearly 3,000 members spread across a very large area.
In the effort to meet a deadline for a quarterly publication,
sometimes mistakes are made. This happens in the best and most
professional publications: Time, The New Yorker, Road & Track. It
happens not only in editorial content, but in advertising copy
as well. I remember a Ford Motor Company national magazine ad some
years ago proudly extolling the virtues of the car's "four-wheel
independent rear suspension"! Certainly the copy writer did not
mean to imply that the car actually had six wheels, and the ad was
quickly revised.
Regarding the "lost" materials, this appears not to have been the
case at any time. Upon receipt, the article and pictures were
forwarded to Editor Chris Hansel, and the membership application
and check were forwarded to Membership Secretary Bill Lynn. It
appears to have been a data entry error that caused acknowledgment
of your membership to be delayed. Again, we apologize for that
inconvenience.
Meanwhile, Chris reviewed your material and saw the possibility for
a very interesting feature on a subject we don't get to see
discussed very often. As there are relatively few of the early
post-World-War-II Triumphs extant in this country, little is known
of them by the majority of our members. Given that, we welcome
material on such cars.
Again, I am sorry that your initiation into the Vintage Triumph
Register has left a somewhat bitter taste. However, I urge you to
reconsider the possibility of submitting more information on the
continuing restoration and upgrading of "Cecily." We always welcome
such information; as an all-volunteer organization dedicated to
preservation of ALL models of Triumph, we rely greatly on our
membership to share their experiences in both restoration and in
every-day maintenance of their cars.
Be assured that, in the future, we will increase our efforts in
editing and proofreading. We will also endeavor to work more
closely with the authors at all stages of the production process.
With the widespread availability of both fax transmission and
e-mail capacity, we will be able to accomplish this more easily and
quickly.
Please also note that it is policy of the Vintage Triumph Register
to extend the membership for at least four issues of the magazine
as compensation for technical and/or historical articles printed in
the magazine. We are happy to do that for you.
Again, let me extend a hearty "welcome" to the Vintage Triumph
Register. Do not hesitate to contact our "Roadster/Renown" Vehicle
Consultant Marty Lodawer, who likely can answer almost any
technical question you might have about your 2000, or even
"pre-1940" Vehicle Consultant Paul Barton. As the 2000 shares a
number of construction and engineering features of pre-War cars,
Paul would be a valuable source of restoration information. Both addresses
appear on the inside front cover of _The Vintage Triumph_.
Please feel free to contact me directly if you have any further
questions or comments, or if you would like to contact other VTR
members with cars similar to yours (there are a few others out
there).
Sincerely,
--Andy
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Andrew Mace, President and *
* 10/Herald/Vitesse (Sports 6) Consultant *
* Vintage Triumph Register *
* amace@unix2.nysed.gov *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
=====================================================================
On Mon, 23 Jun 1997, you wrote:
> Since there appears to be no direct connection via Email listed
> on your net page to editor Hansel, I guess you can relay this, if
> you would, Ms. Waters: I'm Gordon Ross, the "author" of the
> "article" you ran about my Razoredge in issue #65. In actuality,
> you ran a query letter Vintage Triumph Register officials said
> they never received back when sent in November. However, I knew
> someone got at least part of it, as the enclosed membership check
> had been cashed.
>
> As production manager, and as editor, I don't see how you two
> could place the piece in the magazine without, one, checking back
> with me before running it...i.e.: the references to my
> willingness to write articles for you (hence the query), and two:
> without proof reading or editing the damn thing. Your Golden
> Quill awards must be based on your layout skills and processing
> of photographs.
>
> The typos and left-out portions of sentences make all of us look
> like fools. Examples: 2nd graph: "Cecily, sadly, was as
> advertised." Obviously, if you read further, it should have
> read: "Cecily, sadly, was NOT as advertised." Changes the whole
> meaning of the piece. You can't type "welding" (4th graph)
> separate "(ithad" and "byowner" (paragraph 5), supply the missing
> words between "car" and "orthe" (paragraph 5, top of next next
> page), tell the difference between "Through" and "Though"
> (paragraph 6), spell "necessity" (you have "necissity"), separate
> "optfor" (same paragraph). Etc.
>
> Were you in a hurry? Was it cold in the office when you did
> this? Were you distracted? As a journalist for 36 years, I'm
> appalled at your apparent lack of professionalism in handling
> "Razoredge Rebuild." I must give you an "A" on layout, however.
> That was nice.
>
> I am, quite frankly, mystified it appeared at all, as my letter,
> the sketch and pictures weren't supposed to exist. I am also
> surprised I haven't been contacted as to whether or not you
> wanted any real restoration articles...as that is what the letter
> was about, or even be told the material was going to run. Since
> such a sloppy job of proofreading and handling the letter was
> done, consider my offer to write anything for you rescinded. As
> if you seemed to care.
>
> And please don't consider this Email as something further for
> publication (though I doubt you ever would).
>
> I'm certain the next issue will be handled a little more
> carefully.
>
> Gordon Ross
|