![]() |
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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2 Oct 2006 20:51:41 -0700, "Jay Honeck" wrote
in . com: Your noble attempt to champion the timid reflects your view of what Usenet should be: a place to kibitz with friends. Although many newsgroups have degenerated to that level, thankfully this one hasn't yet. That's what makes it attractive and useful. When it becomes a bunch of grandmas chatting over the back fence, you will not see me posting any longer. What you fail to see is that your harsh criticism of anything you find less than worthy is keeping many educated, experienced airmen from posting. First, you'll have to provide a few examples of what you find objectionable about what it is I said before I will accept your "harsh criticism" assertion. Further, you make me laugh when you assert that I have the power to prevent "many educated, experienced airmen" from participating in the newsgroup. That is absurd on face. I'm afraid I'm completely unworthy of the power with which you endow me, as are we all. Usenet has always been open to all who choose to avail themselves of participation. And, beyond that, why isn't it the vulgar and insipid posts that prevent folks from wanting to be counted among the rec.aviation.piloting readership? What are you suggesting exactly, that all us who you deem "harsh critics" silence ourselves or self-censor our comments to suit the silent ones? Are you able to be explicit about exactly what it is you want? Your verbal barbs, meant to be smart bombs, are actually closer to carpet bombing in their effect. Again, without examples of what you characterize as "verbal barbs," your allegations are meaningless. And the resulting collateral damage is killing our allies as well as the enemy. Oh please! I was raised in a family that enjoyed long and sometimes heated political debates whenever they got together. Pilots are often a rather direct and terse in their conversation, but that is not a bad thing in my opinion; it's just different. The way I see it, if civility is maintained, and denigration, libel, and profanity are avoided, there is no valid reason for complaint. Some folks see argument, debate, and discussion as hostile, but you've got to admit they are the domain of Congress and thinking people everywhere. So if that's what frightens the "many educated, experienced airmen" you champion, I'm unswayed. Please, let's not welcome those comments that would cause the lay public to think we airmen are a bunch of vulgar simpletons and Philistines who lack critical thinking skills. First you do everything you can to keep people -- especially the lay public -- from posting here. Now that is a completely unfounded accusation. Perhaps you'll see that in the morning. In the next breath you're worried about what they might think of us? I'm not worried about anything. I just prefer not to see our fellow airmen publicly embarrass themselves and reflect badly on us all generally in an archived, worldwide forum. I'm sure you appreciate the fact that the articles we post to Usenet are not ephemeral. Obviously we are at opposite ends of the spectrum on this issue. I have history on my side. I, unlike you, enjoy posts of all sorts in this group, I guess I'm just a little more discriminating than you are. but (in case you haven't noticed) the posting group has recently shrunk to historically low numbers. There seems to be about 20 regular posters left here, which is down considerably from past years. So now you're implying, that my articles are not only prohibiting "many educated, experienced airmen from posting," but they are reducing the number of regular contributors? Ridiculous. I attribute this to a number of things, but one major reason is the harsh slap-downs that many new posters have received when they stuck their toe in the rec.aviation waters... Well, you are certainly free to reach any conclusions you please. But I haven't seen anyone leave for that reason. Perhaps you'll be good enough to provide reference to some articles that support your unfounded notion. There are certainly other reasons folks cease to participate in Usenet. But regardless of how you see it, you've got to admit there is a wealth of information posted in this newsgroup and a lot of experienced pilots and mechanics who generously share their knowledge here. Take my fellow Californian, Mr. Weir. He is often less than cordial, but he is also often a fountain of information. Or Mr. Duniho's often deliberately abrasive manner. People like these are the true educated, experienced airmen you should be thankful for. Are you suggesting that they change their demeanor too, or just me? So tell your fawning "educated, experienced airmen" to quit wining, and join in the discussion. Who knows, their fragile psyches may toughen up, and they may grow a little, but they will surely benefit from the experience, as you have. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
Air Force One Had to Intercept Some Inadvertent Flyers / How? | Rick Umali | Piloting | 29 | February 15th 06 04:40 AM |
Nearly had my life terminated today | Michelle P | Piloting | 11 | September 3rd 05 02:37 AM |
Logging approaches | Ron Garrison | Instrument Flight Rules | 109 | March 2nd 04 05:54 PM |