Reality - Cancer won.

Nobody posts more spam than you. You took a post about an amusing Bugs Bunny in the cab story to spew an unrelated and overtly partisan trope and whatever unresolved childhood issues you have; Grow up. Your post tells us a lot about your character or more precisely the lack thereof-especially because it isn't the first time you've done it.

Is there is anybody on this board that hasn't heard "four-eyes", "buck-teeth", "carrot-top", "fatso". And as for racial slurs, "cr*cker" is freely said and public officials are excusing obvious racial physical attacks. Now tell us how the girl in the jeans commercial is racist.

We're all legal adults here who can form our own judgments about things people say and what that reveals about their character. We don't need SJW vigilantes brandishing Fatwas for wrongspeak.

STFU until you deal with it. There are few people I wish to gain direct, personal experience with C-but anybody that makes a statement like that really, really need to experience waiting for biopsies, blood tests and CT scans.

A friend just lost his brother to pancreatic cancer. When this former college football player was diagnosed-he knew he had a death sentence-the only victory was lasting long enough to see his son get drafted into the NFL. Now the same friend's sister is battling the thing-AGAIN and she's losing.

Here's a comforting thought-you are one misfired cell division from gaining that direct personal knowledge and as your cells get older and the telomeres get shorter, the likelihood that you will get it grows. Of course, they don't make telomeres like they used to-gastroenterologists are now debating whether to lower the age of the first colonoscopy to 40, so that might not be as far in your future as you think.

This is coming from someone who was fired FIRED as a VOLUNTEER at Steamtown because you couldn't get along with anyone. You apparently volunteered there to sh*ttalk Steamtown, in front of employees, visitors, and even the superintendent and local dignitaries. I am told that you always had a better way of running the park, even though it was not permissible with government regulations. That you never listened to suggestions to shut up or find another place to volunteer, and that as such you were told in no uncertain terms that your services were no longer needed at the park. And now you are repeating that experience here. This statement



which claims that a person calling out a racist (in this direct copy and paste of the racist's words viewtopic.php?p=351803#p351803) is worse than the racist is completely offensive, and what animated me today. If I were the moderators you would never post here again.

Let me desperately TRY to bring this discussion back on topic.

I was made aware of a volunteer--a docent, train crew, whatever, I'm obscuring the place for good reason--who was a long-standing volunteer of one organization, going back to its earliest days.

As he aged, his opinions grew more traditionally "conservative," as commonly happens with older people. (For example, think of the deliberately obnoxious older character Archie Bunker, a character created by the liberal Norman Lear to in part take such "conservatives" down several notches by exposing and exaggerating their worst tendencies--not that such characters didn't and don't exist.)

As this guy got older, he began to speak extemporaneously and "off the script" if and when such subjects as changes in the industry, labor relations, "Jim Crow," etc. arose--and some of those "off the script" remarks were what we may call "politically incorrect" opinions (but probably still accurate, to some extent). This was in an area with increasing racial tensions and increasing minority residents and concurrent "white flight." The operation took pains to properly address such issues when relevant, but tended to stay neutral. This volunteer apparently didn't.

When a couple of "mystery shopper" types recruited by the officers of the group reported back on his racist-leaning spiels, he was swiftly demoted to ticket-office and shop duty to get him away from public earshot. Last I heard, he was still there, but thoroughly disgruntled and apparently hadn't learned his lesson.

Another place I went to as a sort of inside guest, I noticed prominently on the employee/volunteer notice bulletin board a prominent, laminated notice saying (as memory serves), "THOU SHALT NOT TALK DISPARINGLY OF OTHER RAILROADS, MUSEUMS, AND/OR EXCURSION LINES, EVER! No Matter How Much They May Deserve It!" When my host and I were away from the public, I asked about that sign. It appeared some loose-lipped "trash talk" in the crew/ticket office about the local major railroad, unknowingly in the presence of an official of the railroad visiting with his family, had cost said museum/operation a major donation of goods/services.............

Ross Rowland was guilty, and guilty as all get-out, of speaking without a filter. This is a common trait in older "geezers" for a variety of reasons--senility, being tired of the filter, not giving a darn anymore, etc. He brought up a topic for which he apparently had no formal training, totally outside any field of his expertise.

There are actually legitimate questions revolving around the socio-political and socio-economic problems of some African countries, and there is apparently no way to legitimately raise those questions without instant accusations of "racism," when in fact the issues could be cultural, historical (the "colonial" thing mentioned earlier), or even religious instead of racial. (I've been watching from half a world away the decline of both the South African Railways and the South African rail preservation movement, the latter at the mercy of lawlessness and an apathetic government, populace, and law enforcement that prompts volunteers and supporters to flee the country. And now I will get accused of "racism" for that last sentence.....)

There is one thing I find interesting, and perhaps a bit stupid, about this whole discussion: In common with a lot of high-ranking people, celebrities and politicians, they can ultimately be negative, toxic, or reprehensible people, as long as their transgressions are overly complex and difficult to understand. But should they make a mistake that can be explained in a sound bite or "late-night TV joke," suddenly everyone turns on him/her. (My classic example? Bill Clinton. "Whitewater" and "Vince Foster" took far too long to coherently explain. "Sex with an intern in the Oval Office"--that's what did him in in the court of public opinion, at least to more people than before.)

Rowland had some big negatives that were catching up to his "glory day" images. But it only took one "racist" sentence to throw himself off the gallows of public opinion. Not his old-geezer sexism, not his old-geezer other prejudices, not the alleged unpaid bills, not allegations of rules violations or intoxication at the throttle. Racism, the "magic bullet" guilty-until-proven-innocent accusation that will kill anyone, deservedly or not.

You aren't a moderator here either, fortunately. (Nor am I, also fortunately for the board). And it looks like none of the real moderators have visited for over a week, unless they came as guests.

Anyone else screenshotting this thread before it gets deleted?

I'll be honest. I find some of the comments in this thread to be far more offensive and morally reprehensible than anything Ross ever posted publicly. I guess I should screen shot all of this in order to re-hash whenever for some of you "cancer wins" and I unilaterally determine that "We didn't lose much."

Look, everyone is entitled to their opinions. If you have such strong opinions against someone that you are truly glad they are gone then that is your prerogative I guess. But is this really the time an place for this? The man is not here to defend himself. He has family, a wife, children and friends who are mourning right now. Going head to head with someone while they are alive is one thing (and still outside the scope of this forum), but to go on the attack in the very discussion that announced his passing and obituary is just incredibly bad taste.

That's my opinion and doesn't need to be anyone else's.

Like Button.

All this talk of Ross Rowland's passing brought back memories of some of the neat things I did with my late Dad when I was a boy and how my Dad took the time and tried to share my interests even though he had no real interest in them on his own. The two fondest boyhood memories I have with him were the day we spent at the Twin Towers (back when they let you up on the roof) and our day on the American Freedom Train when it was in our area.

Mr. Rowland’s years of work creating the moonshot of post-steam-era steam operations gave me the great memory of me and my Dad going on the Freedom Train. As a boy, I was aware of the disgrace of Watergate, the problems of the Vietnam War, and the growing economic strain of increasing gas prices but I was unaware of the larger negative impact on the American mindset that is nicely summarized in one of our favorite movies, "Miracle", about the 1980 Olympic Hockey Team. The only thing I knew that day is that my Dad was taking me to see a train. Oddly, my strongest memory of the hardware was the moving walkway which brought us through the displays, probably because the motive power was a diesel.

Besides giving me a memory of a time with my Dad that I will take to my grave, AFT helped cement my interest in all things rail, something I have generally enjoyed for my whole life and have passed on to one of my sons. For that, I will always be grateful.

His way of "defending" himself was to threaten people with unwarranted but bankrupting litigation.

So now "the gloves come off."

I think if you take a look at his post history, he has talked about his experience with cancer.

It appears a moderator did heed my suggestion, however--a couple of posts gone.

And one need not be a moderator to be able to appeal for civility and decorum--not just here, but everywhere in society.

Waiting for the padlock:



......................mld