![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pilot Courses | John Stevens | Piloting | 1 | April 30th 04 09:11 PM |
Best GA Pilot Continuing Education Courses | O. Sami Saydjari | Instrument Flight Rules | 7 | January 2nd 04 07:54 PM |
instrument courses | Tony Woolner | Piloting | 0 | November 9th 03 12:31 AM |
instrument courses | ArtP | Piloting | 0 | November 8th 03 01:02 PM |
Wanted: Experienced CFIIs to Teach 10-day IFR Rating Courses near Pittsburgh | Richard Kaplan | Instrument Flight Rules | 2 | October 1st 03 01:50 AM |