I see where the editor of another hobby publication is bragging up his own "rag" and putting down everyone else for having worse writing, worse photos and covering foreign cars. He says he's making "Brooklyn straight talk," but where I come from (across the bridge in Staten Island) "straight talk" means telling it like it is. Now this editor claims his magazine is the absolute tops in its category and it is very good, but I can go to any big newstand and pick out a few others (including one British magazine) that have even better overall quality. And when it comes to writing skills, even our "old bird cage liner" is right up there with the best of them. Old Cars Weekly editors Angelo Van Bogart, Keith Mathiowetz and Ron Kowalke knock themselves out to deliver quality verbage on a regular basis and they do this every week! OCW is so much better than it was back in the old days when I put it together, that you subscribers are getting a great bargain today. The "straight-talking" editor complains about other magazines using car show pictures instead of gorgeous "set-up" photography, but the very issue his editorial appears in has coverage of a car show with pictures of Plymouths that have signs in the window and their hood raised! Am I missing something? Personally, I think car show photos are fine, but why complain about them and then feature them? The editor also makes a big deal about having no "foreign cars" in his publication. Meanwhile, in another publication he edits, he is running a story about restoring his Triumph Spitfire! In my old-fashioned world, "straight talk" equates to "the "facts, just the facts!" Somehow, I think the facts got twisted in this case.