Oops, looks like I upset some people! Sorry about that, it was not my
intention. Maybe I should use a slightly more relaxed style...
Most of the NAMHO newsletter was indeed both interesting and well written.
However, I do feel quite strongly that when incorrect information is
disseminated as fact, it's worth correcting. Particularly as NAMHO is seen
as a responsible body. As a general comment, how much published work over
the years has been wrong because people believe and trust secondary sources?
The UK press has been particularly inaccurate in its recent coverage of the
UK coal industry and again, to just repeat these articles without
qualifiying them is misleading. For my sins, I'm one of the three or four
Mining Analysts in London who actually cover RJB as an investment, so I have
a reasonable insight into what has actually been happening.
In addition, the note about the deepest single hoist was just plain wrong
and, because it is one of those interesting "facts" that tend to spread, is
worth stamping on at the outset. However, a small apology, because my
correction was also wrong. The deepest single hoist of all is indeed
Anglogold's Moab Khotsong shaft, but it was formerly known as Vaal Reefs 11,
not 8 shaft.
And finally, as they say, I'm not currently a member of any of the clubs and
so cannot comment using that mechanism - I was a member of NMRS for about 15
years but gave up after receiving a particularly dire British Mining (No.56
Weardale). There's a good book to be written on Weardale, this wasn't it. A
shame, because some of the other BM's were very good - Berehaven in
particular stood out.
So, apologies to those who took my comments the wrong way.
However, there is still a serious question to be answered: Should
significant errors in items posted in this forum be pointed out or not? My
view is clear, what do others think??
Best regards,
Martin Potts
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|