History of seven-string solidbodies

[Martin Stillion]

You yourself acknowledged the lack of context in which Alex Gregory engaged. It's surprising you forgot about that already, but that's your explanation for the confusion, propagated by Alex Gregory himself.

I haven't personally seen any posts made by Alex to this forum or any other where the claim is made out of context. I guess I'll have to take your word for it.

The Guitar World article was dealt with in this thread. He was actually only in a footnote to the article, with said footnote entitled "Where Are They Now?," in an obvious nod to Spinal Tap.

That is voxhumana's impression of the Web version of the Guitar World article, in which the layout is changed. Nobody at Wikipedia bothered to refer to the print version, in which the "Where Are They Now" section appears on p. 84 but the article continues for another 2 pages; there are 14 guitarists listed after Alex, so he's hardly a footnote. Not that anyone at Wikipedia seemed to care.

 

[BigBaldIan]

I haven't personally seen any posts made by Alex to this forum or any other where the claim is made out of context. I guess I'll have to take your word for it.

That is voxhumana's impression of the Web version of the Guitar World article, in which the layout is changed. Nobody at Wikipedia bothered to refer to the print version, in which the "Where Are They Now" section appears on p. 84 but the article continues for another 2 pages; there are 14 guitarists listed after Alex, so he's hardly a footnote. Not that anyone at Wikipedia seemed to care.

However as you've pointed out earlier, as far as you were aware the original wikipedia edits were made by Gregory himself and were not in context. Surely then it stands to reason that you have seen evidence of this behaviour? I'm sorry Martin but it seems that you're contradicting yourself every time you post.

As to the second point, wikipedia uses a body of evidence to establish whether someone is noteworthy. After all the self-referential evidence (and I use the term evidence very loosely) was pared back, the sole verifiable article that anyone could find was a passing mention in Guitar World. The layout or the fact other guitarists were after him is an irrelevancy, his claims about his life could not be independently verified. You simply cannot have a Wiki article that states:

"Alex Gregory, rock guitarist and mandolin player who appeared in Guitar World's "Where Are They Now?" section." Please look at the larger picture and not focus on minutiae.

 

[Martin Stillion]

However as you've pointed out earlier, as far as you were aware the original wikipedia edits were made by Gregory himself and were not in context. Surely then it stands to reason that you have seen evidence of this behaviour? I'm sorry Martin but it seems that you're contradicting yourself every time you post.

I didn't see what Alex submitted to Wikipedia until it had been through several iterations of editing. I have no idea what it originally said. So allow me once more to state that I personally have not witnessed an instance of Alex making what could be reasonably interpreted as a categorical claim about inventing 7-string guitars. Not to say that it didn't happen, but I haven't seen it. All I've seen is you and voxhumana quoting a statement from Alex's Web site out of context in a way that makes it seem categorical.

As to the second point, wikipedia uses a body of evidence to establish whether someone is noteworthy. After all the self-referential evidence (and I use the term evidence very loosely) was pared back, the sole verifiable article that anyone could find was a passing mention in Guitar World.

The patents exist and can be verified. The recordings exist and can be verified. The Pentasystem instruments, other electric mandolins, and guitars exist and can be verified.

The layout or the fact other guitarists were after him is an irrelevancy,

It's relevant if you're trying to determine whether the term "footnote" is accurate, which it isn't. Sidebar perhaps, footnote no. IIRC voxhumana wanted to claim that Alex wasn't even supposed to be considered one of the "50 Fastest Guitarists" listed in the article. That's semi-plausible if you only look at the lousy Web layout, but ridiculous if you look at the print layout.

 

[Explorer]

I see.

So, you originally signed up to ensure we didn’t mistakenly attribute anything to your good name. I can agree with that.

However… you seem to really be invested in making sure we were meticulous in examing contexts, while apparently not asking for the same diligence on the part of Alex Gregory.

To give you an example of why you’re coming across a bit oddly, you were presented with just three examples of where Alex Gregory was untruthful, to a greater extent than any other person in this situation of Gregory’s making. You keep making it about others, rather than Gregory.

There’s the delightful tale of the Boy Who Cried Wolf. Most people interpret it as dealing with the dangers of telling falsehoods. Your approach seems to cast the tale as a lesson in the importance of constant vigilance, in case an accidental truth should appear among falsehood. I’m not sure that approach is very fruitful.

I’m sorry that Alex Gregory’s actions have resulted in consequences, including his having damaged his credibility so badly. I would imagine that he is greatly heartened by having a close friend who is so invested in restoring his image, although that’s a small distance from your initial stated concerns. I would suggest, if you are as invested as you seem in the situation, that you ask Alex Gregory to set the record straight, and to possibly apologize for using falsehood for the purposes of self aggrandizement. Manning up and doing the right thing will have more effect than his friends berating us for smelling the bullshit.

You may not realize it, but you’re engaging in behavior which is often attributed to a sock puppet. That’s probably why the accusation seems so reasonable to those who don’t know you from the eMando connection. I know that Martin Stillion is an independent person from Alex Gregory, and I can understand why Martin would want to be sure he wasn’t being misrepresented. However, there is also a huge amount of concern and effort being directed at making sure this website knows that, although he lied about quite a few things, Alex Gregory should still be taken at face value for anything not *proven* to be a lie.

And that’s just crap. The burden of proof is now on Gregory, and anyone who argues otherwise is likely to smear themselves with the same shit Gregory wound up smearing on himself.

Is that what you want for your own credibility? I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure your appeals on behalf of Gregory won’t gain much traction.

Cheers!

 

[Martin Stillion]

I see.

So, you originally signed up to ensure we didn’t mistakenly attribute anything to your good name. I can agree with that.

However… you seem to really be invested in making sure we were meticulous in examing contexts, while apparently not asking for the same diligence on the part of Alex Gregory.

Or, I could just be trying to ensure that your crap detectors aren't on a setting that detects everyone's crap but your own.

Alex isn't participating in this conversation. I wish Alex would present himself in a way that lets his talent speak for itself. I agree that the hyperbole and self-aggrandizement has done him a lot of harm. Untruth on Alex's part, however, does not excuse untruth on anyone else's part.

However, there is also a huge amount of concern and effort being directed at making sure this website knows that, although he lied about quite a few things, Alex Gregory should still be taken at face value for anything not *proven* to be a lie.

No, I never said that. I said I was here to answer questions; people asked what I knew about Alex's education and what I thought of the Wikipedia debacle, and I answered the questions as best I could. Sorry if you don't like the answers. As a mandolinist who's played a few of the Pentasystem instruments, I'd say Alex deserves recognition for an excellent design, irrespective of anything else he might have done or not done. I realize his own behavior makes it unlikely that he'll get that recognition, at least on Wikipedia.

 

[BigBaldIan]

I didn't see what Alex submitted to Wikipedia until it had been through several iterations of editing. I have no idea what it originally said. So allow me once more to state that I personally have not witnessed an instance of Alex making what could be reasonably interpreted as a categorical claim about inventing 7-string guitars. Not to say that it didn't happen, but I haven't seen it. All I've seen is you and voxhumana quoting a statement from Alex's Web site out of context in a way that makes it seem categorical.

Whilst I initially looked at the statement out of context, it has been discussed thoroughly at length and ad nauseam in subsequent posts. If you would care to actually go back and do me the common courtesy of reading my posts afterwards, I discuss the context of his statement in grim and grisly detail (post #122 I'll make it easy for you). That is to say I discuss the statement in relation to the invention of the 7-string electo-accoustic guitar, solid body electric guitar and solid body tuned from E to A. No matter how finely you define the statement, what can actually be asserted to be true i.e. emperically proved is so far from the original statement as to be risable.

I'm sorry your argument is about as fireproof as The Hindenburg

The patents exist and can be verified. The recordings exist and can be verified. The Pentasystem instruments, other electric mandolins, and guitars exist and can be verified.

Again, it's a body of evidence, so now the article would read:

"Alex Gregory, rock guitarist and mandolin player, holder of several patents regarding musical instruments (list of patents) who appeared in Guitar World's "Where Are They Now?"

So by that argument, all I need to do to is to have a few a patents and I'm automatically noteworthy for wikipedia? Quick to the patent office! All sarcasm aside for a moment, you won't find a wiki article for Kevan J. Geier. Who? Inventer of the tremol-no and deep c, has patents, has articles in magazines and online. Patents does not necessarily or automatically mean noteworthy, case closed. Q.E.D.

There are dare I say it hundreds of people possibly on this very forum who have released their own records who are likewise not on wikipedia and wouldn't pass the same criteria.

It's relevant if you're trying to determine whether the term "footnote" is accurate, which it isn't. Sidebar perhaps, footnote no. IIRC voxhumana wanted to claim that Alex wasn't even supposed to be considered one of the "50 Fastest Guitarists" listed in the article. That's semi-plausible if you only look at the lousy Web layout, but ridiculous if you look at the print layout.

Again, you're focusing on semantic minutiae, no-one is interested in whether Gregory is a "footnote" or "sidebar" based on an article. What wikipedia is interested in, is whether there is a body of evidence big enough to warrant his inclusion.

Untruth on Alex's part, however, does not excuse untruth on anyone else's part.

Unless the meaning of truth has changed dramatically over the past few minutes, I believe that's what this entire thread has been about. Trying to discern any truth behind Gregoary's claims, hence opening them up to scrutiny and finding evidence.

 

[Martin Stillion]

I'm sorry your argument is about as fireproof as The Hindenburg

My argument is merely that the claim is not a categorical claim, i.e., it is not meant to apply to all types of 7-string guitars. This is clear from the context. By "context" I mean the 5 paragraphs of text surrounding the claim where it is made on Alex's site. What you wrote in post 122 is discussion, not context.

I do not assert that the claim is accurate. I do not assert that the claim is not misleading. I merely assert that, read in context, it is not categorical.

Again, it's a body of evidence, so now the article would read:

"Alex Gregory, rock guitarist and mandolin player, holder of several patents regarding musical instruments (list of patents) who appeared in Guitar World's "Where Are They Now?"

I'm not asking you to write the article. Hypothetically, an article might have been written that focused on Alex's actual achievements, without all the hype, and such an article might have had a shot at being deemed "noteworthy" by the wiki-gods ... but we'll never know, will we?

All sarcasm aside for a moment, you won't find a wiki article for Kevan J. Geier. Who? Inventer of the tremol-no and deep c, has patents, has articles in magazines and online. Patents does not necessarily or automatically mean noteworthy, case closed. Q.E.D.

Poor Kevan, maybe you should submit a Wikipedia article about him. It's worth a try.

Again, you're focusing on semantic minutiae, no-one is interested in whether Gregory is a "footnote" or "sidebar" based on an article.

That's right, misrepresentations don't matter unless they're made by someone you don't like.

Unless the meaning of truth has changed dramatically over the past few minutes, I believe that's what this entire thread has been about. Trying to discern any truth behind Gregoary's claims, hence opening them up to scrutiny and finding evidence.

Which is all fine if you can manage to do it without contributing your own misrepresentations in the process.

 

[eaeolian]

Wow, you guys should get a room and just beat on each other. Drop it.