Open letter to Paul Schmidt

[edblysard]

Mr Schmidt,
As I am certain you are aware, there has been quite a heated exchange between several fans, railroaders and others in regards to postings made by mikepapula. In the posting titled railroads concern for safety... he list three web sites, and repeatedly urges the fourm participants to go to said sites. Two of the sites are intenet advertisiments for a law firm, and the third is a basic primer on how to sue railroads. All of his postings and replys use inflamatory language, he has repeatedly accused railroads and railroaders, myself included, of being involved in negligent homicide, and in one posting call us murders. I was of the opinion that your site requested that participants refrain from advertising here, and you also requested that accusatorial statements, ie name calling be excluded. Mr mikepapula has ingnored these request, in the above mentioned post, you and your managing editor both had to persuade this person to leave it be. His posting, and replies , have contained wording very close to slander, he is using this forum to advertise for a attorney, he repeatedly uses insulting, rude, and pointedly inflamatory language to provoke responses that could, at some point in time, result in some of the participants becoming involved in litigation. He may be gather information to use in a class action lawsuit, or for personel gain. While I belive in the right to free speech, and the necessity of a free press, I also would like to point out that this web site and forum are also the property of you, and your sponsers such as Kalmbach publishing, and as such, he may be planning to use your site in court proceedings, or to involve you in a negitive ad campaign for political or personel purpose. I strongly advise you, or a member of your staff to contact this person, and advise him that he is reaching the borders of the right to express his opinion, and is transgressing into the realm of slander. As abhorent as it is for me to suggest this, I would also advise you to preview his posting, and edit if necessary any of the above mentioned examples. While I may not be a model of restraint myself, I have yet to call anyone here a murder, nor do I advertise for myself, or a attorney in this forum. While I have allowed this person to "get my goat" on occasion, I did notice his repeated reference to litigation, court proceedings, court rulings and such, along with his veiled threat that he works for some mysterious goverment agency. I find such references and threats a liability, both to you, and others here, railroaders and fans alike, and to myself personaly. I feel that allowing him to call me a murder twice was one time to many. I feel he has insulted almost every forum participent, and yourself, by inferring that we are somehow willing participants in negligent homicide.
I wish I could look forward to many years of enjoyment reading and responding to the messages here on this forum, but I feel that any further contributions I may have may be used to sue me, for what ever his personal injury lawyer can devise, and I have noticed many others who, in the course of the last few weeks, have also begun to refrain from participating here. Its a shame when one person is allowed to ruin this for personal gain, but I feel that I, and others, have no chioce but to become observers here, for fear that anything we may say will be used against us in a lawsuit.
My regards,
Ed Blysard

[Anonymous]

Ed,
For Heaven's sake, don't let this person win by default. My comments earlier were to alert everyone not to permit anyone to bait these posts to where an inappropriate response would be made. Obviously, this person is not going away and even if Trains could close his account, there's nothing to prevent him from signing back on from another site and another name. The best thing is to just ignore him, besides, I think this whole topic is about talked out.
Ed, you and I come from different career backgrounds and would have probably disagreed on many things. But, there are some common denominators, though. First, we both care about the railroad(s) and the efforts we make in their behalf, safety for all being paramount. Second, we all have pride in what we are doing or have done. Third, we love railroading. Fourth, and last for this list, anyway, I believe we have respect for each other.
Those who make rude and vile posts have none of these qualities so, in fact, at one level I have a degree of pity for them. Someone like that is very sad to witness. Whatever this person's motive, perhaps good psychological counselling would be of benefit. But, I would be loathe to suggest such a thing to that person. However, if they were to read something written to someone else in a public forum, well, O.K.
Hang in there, Ed. DLTBGYD
Regards and have a safe day. gdc

[Anonymous]

I concur with Ed. The magazine has the right to limit and censor anything on this site. The bozo has a constitional right to say anything he wants, but he does not have the right to use other peoples assets to do it.

As a practical matter the brotherhoods will steer their members to their favored lawyers, and the general public seems to have no trouble finding lawyers to sue the railroads on behalf of idiots who ignore crossings, even gated ones to kill and maim themselves.

Mac McCulloch

[Anonymous]

Hello Ed,

I'm forwarding your posting to Tom Chmielewski, editor of Trains.com, who possesses the authority to take any action he deems necessary.

I must confess I haven't read very far into the "Railroaders concern for public safety," thinking the unpleasantness of the earlier grade-crossing topic had been put to rest. Apparently it hasn't.

Thanks for bringing this matter to our attention.

Regards,

Paul Schmidt
Contributing Editor
Trains.com

[edblysard]

Thank You for your reply, am looking forward to some sort of resolution to this problem, and am open to any sugestion you may offer,
Regards,
Ed

[Anonymous]

How many times can one person bash us? If this is a open platform for debate then how can a Anti-rail person, who has directly assulted this publication (and many of us) be allowed to do so? I admit.. I no said angel, but this is getting way out of hand. I hope there can be a quick resolution to this issue.
Thanks
Icemanmike-Milwaukee

[Anonymous]

Mr. Schmidt,
I take issue with this ridiculous letter. I never called anyone a murderer and I challenge you to find one posting in which I have used profanity. There have been a lot of positive discussions about some of the issues at hand. If you would like to see what I have had to deal with just reread some of "Icemans" or Eds postings. I have done my best to turn the other cheek and continue to address some points brought up. That is why I have included those websites and the McDonalds info. This was done as a counter to some of the absurd statements made by these gentlemen. I know some railroads are better than others and I applaud the ones that take these issues with the seriousness required. I will not be silenced by these two and have not in any way slandered them. I thank you for the forum in which these issues can be broadcast, because as we have found out there is another side to the story. Not all people killed at crossings were suicidal or playing chicken as these two would have you believe.
Regards,
Mike Papula

[Anonymous]

Ok, I am finished. I have laughed hard enough for one morning. You may have the last word if you so desire. Anything I can do to help you make yourself feel good, I will. Have a good one.
Bud

[Anonymous]

To everyone:

I have rarely intervened in our forums, for the need just hasn't arisen. But the anger over this issue requires me to step in.

First off, Ed, I checked the postings in the original thread on rail crossing safety and haven't found any postings by Mike Papula where he called anyone a murderer. If you know of a specific posting, please e-mail me about it. His postings have certainly angered others, but Mike has a right to feel passionately about his views. Perhaps baited some to respond with incindiary language, but it was up to others to take the bait and they did.

In fact the language in some responses to Mike's postings prompted me to delete those, including a couple in this thread. I also edited Mike's resonse in this thread where he reprinted one such response. Enough's enough.

It might have helped this debate if someone noted that the Web site he made most references to dealth with the dangers of UNGATED AND UNSIGNALED crossings, those rural crossing just guarded by a crossbuck. If this was Mike's major concern, it could have greatly helped the tenor of this debate if we'd know that, since most of the responses blamed drivers who went around gates and ignored signals. Basically, the two sides appeared to have spent most of their time talking about two different things. Indeed, the Website angelsontrack.org. makes a point of saying how much operating signals reduce accident rates at crossings, and so is primarily a drive to put up more signaled crossings.

I haven't yet checked all postings, and if anyone has a specific comlaint, please e-mail me. Otherwise I encourage everyone to debate issues, get angry if called for, but keep it civil. If the debate gets tiresome, leave it for something else. If it gets offensive, please let me know directly.

Tom Chmielewski
Editor, Trains.com
[e-mail]

[edblysard]

Mr Chmielewski,
While I agree Mike has the right to feel any way he wishes, and the right to express his views in any manner on any fourm he wishes, how do you find the demarcation line between a passion for a cause and a penchant to provoke? I am aware, as are you, that I am not alone if feeling insulted, and accused of things bordering on crimes. I also admit I fell for the bait as you put it, in that I allowed my own passion and compassion for the survivors of grade crossing accidents to overun my usual sense of humor and common courtesy. In that light, I belive I will take you up on your suggestion that if the debate becomes tiresome, leave it for something else. May be the best advice posted so far.
If your read the posting I started, Railroaders ideas to improve grade crossings, you should note there were a lot of responses in regard to new technology. Got a stringer who like research and needs a story? I would be interested in hearing whats on the burner from both the railroads point of view and the makers of the devices point of too!

I thank you for both your time spent reading the postings, and the time you spent to respond to mine, and others concerns.
Stay Frosty,
Ed Blysard

[Anonymous]

First of all, another hats off for Trains to allow us to discuss railroad issues. I have promised Tom to renew my subscription. The wonderful marketing dept. sent me an offer I just can't refuse right after I signed up on the site. Secondly I never try to incite someone into being foul and abusive, my ex may disagree otherwise. I was just bringing up another side of these tragedies that needs to be addressed.

“There are approximately 160,000 public highway-railroad intersections, of which only 20% have gates. And even when there are audible warning devices, they may 'fail' to meet their objective of alerting motorists to an oncoming train because of highway vehicle design and environmental factors.” As a result, more than 90 percent of all rail-related fatalities involved either grade crossings or trespassers, and of these deaths approximately 60 percent occur at crossings with only passive warning devices.” (NTSB Safety Study, July 21, 1998)

This is very disturbing information indeed. I was never talking about the crazy road rage drivers who are to busy to wait. I know of numerous postings in which I clarified that, yet the crazies still were brought up. We can't do a whole lot for someone who will drive around gates with there kids in the car (do they still have the salt mines in Siberia?) but we can surely do a better job for those who are trying to see the train. Below is a form used in determining the situation of a crossing. I challenge Ed and all the railroad folks to take a close look at some of the crossings that they come in contact with and evaluate them from the Railroad-Highway crossing handbook Chapter III point of view. There is a sample form for the Assesment of Crossing Safety and Operation that seems to be pretty good at addressing most of the issues with a crossing.
Thanks,
Mike Papula