ranking Dornier ace

[Nick Hector]

Originally Posted by PMoz99

Hector, I think you have some serious psychological issues which need to be addressed and treated.
Why do you feel the need to become involved in threads you have admitted you have negative attitudes towards, then bombard the thread with views and data which take it way off the intended course, and then insult other members to boot.
This uncontrollable urge you have to spew forth whatever comes to your mind because you mistakenly believe we want to read it needs to be curbed.
Surely it can't be that hard for you to just stay out of it.
And Nick Beale, perhaps another Super Moderator should become involved here. In my opinion Hector has crossed the line more than once in various threads and you are further encouraging it by your failure to recognise that and act.
I can't believe you want this sort of stuff on this forum. It needs to end.
Peter

Peter,
Your posts defending Knusel are the equivalent of somebody who walks into an argument halfway through, picks a side and runs with it.

In his earliest posts, Knusel:
1) Attacked the Moderator and got clever
Quote: "Some of the world's most brilliant researchers... ...and a guy called Nick Beale.

Peter... ...It's less of a miracle that I am still here and more of a mystery that Knusel is after that early post of his. It's less of a mystery why I am critical of Knusel's posts and more of a mystery as to why he continues to fail to take the hints, suggestions and advice he is being given. Seriously, Peter have you not noticed these two points:

1) As mentioned earlier in the thread, the Moderator does not always take my point of view. He NEVER takes Knusel's point of view. I am handing Knusel the gun, you are inserting the bullets, the gun goes off and it's Knusel's foot that gets shot (metaphor for the thread getting closed down...) The Moderator also makes comments that back up what I am saying (put your bloody glasses on, Peter...!)

2) Have you not noticed that others are starting view Knusel's "inquiries" and threads the same way? Questioning their validity, asking why he's all questions and no answers to anyone else...?

The things you seem to "not want to hear"
1) Yourself and Knusel are continuing to quote dubious sources. Wikipedia. Wikibloodypedia, Peter...
2) Knusel's listings are POINTLESS in the light of current research. Current research has it that Barkhorn and even Rall likely shot down more enemy aircraft than Hartmann (and so it likely goes for the best Fw 190 aces, the best Me 110 aces etc etc etc...)
By your argument and Knusel's, we are supposed to gormless gawp at
Hartmann - 352 - wow!
Barkhorn - 301 - gosh!
Rall - 275 - wicked!

...as if it is the cold war. (And because cold-war era sources keep getting quoted over and over and over in these pointless lists, along with John Weal, whom I pointed out was long ago discredited by a far better author, on this very forum)

There are but two members whom I have "insulted" yourself and Knusel.
The reasons should be clear by now. If not, I say again:
This forum is as close to "Peer Review" as what a researcher gets.

Knusel fails the "Peer Review" test - even the moderator seems to strongly agree with that. On what grounds are you defending him? - On the grounds of your own limited knowledge and same poor sources.

Hint: We don't need to hear your opinion of archival sources (German and Russian records being incomplete or riddled with censorship and propaganda) until we see some actual bloody evidence that you have even seen so much as a single TsAMO, NAA or BA-MA folio.