I'm just gonna pipe up here because I think that Dudley is quite right
to bring up how you respond to posts in a personal manner. For example,
you attack not the credibility of the topic under discussion, but rather
you make a personal attack by saying things like;

"What I do know is that you are welcome to your opinion (an most here in the
group want to hear it - it's what we are here for) but it really doesn't
mean squat."

and

" But wait, that doesn't count if your an AC student according to
you, Dudley."

It would be hard not to see that as personal whether you "typed it that
way" or not. Posters would do well to remember that the internet doesnt
record your emotions whilst typing. Your post quite clearly conveys a
personal reply rather than an objective reply to the subject in hand.

Telling someone their opinion "doesnt mean squat" is not constructive
criticism, is inflamatory, shows lack of respect and demonstrates
aggressive assertiveness which is not a quality of good leadership; with
obvious implications for the captains of aircraft.

I only have 4 hours flying experience total but I hope you will consider
and respect my opinion.

Many thanks,

Paul

Jim Fisher wrote:

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message

There's a little more to the educational end of the flying equation than
the "high wing, low wing" thing Jim.


Naw, not really. Your stance on accelerated anything is about as
supportable and demonstrable as my stance on high versus low wing.


I'll be glad to discuss any opposing opinion you might have as a non
CFI; only try a repost will you....this time without all the veiled
personal stuff and assumptions please.


Read it again, Dudley. There was no "veiled" anything in my post. Anything
"personal" was interpreted that way by you and not typed that way by me.
You've gone off the deep end misinterpreting posts before here in these
groups. You've done it again with mine.


Just pass on things like how many students you think I might or might
not have dealt with, and whether or not my opinion "means or doesn't
mean squat".......


I was never in the military so pulling rank won't get anything but a smirk
on a good day and a big, hairy moon on a bad one.

You were wrong on the acellerated IFR subject and you might be (but probably
are not) wrong about this acellerated Private thing. Until somebody pipes
up with some quantifyable data, you're opinion means squat. Sad but true.

I am of the opinion that accelerated courses, when done properly, have merit
and can produce good results. That opinion is supported by the successful
accelerated IFR programs. I don't know (and neither do you) if that is the
case with Private programs.

--
Jim Fisher