The history was of what the attendees perceived and of the complaints and counter-complaints that were made; not of which side was "correct". I presented both, noting which was gossip or believed, and which was verified. The fact that there were public arguments acknowledges that one side was "inaccurate". And you were publicly blamed, whether fairly or unfairly. That's news, not character assassination.
I got my information from as many convention reports as I could find. Also my own attendance, although that was obviously limited.
The history was of what the attendees perceived and of the complaints and counter-complaints that were made; not of which side was "correct". I presented both, noting which was gossip or believed, and which was verified. The fact that there were public arguments acknowledges that one side was "inaccurate". And you were publicly blamed, whether fairly or unfairly. That's news, not character assassination.
I got my information from as many convention reports as I could find. Also my own attendance, although that was obviously limited.
Fred Patten