PSA: Don't be rude on the radio

I have looked over your posting as well as my responses and the responses of
others to you and find that I have, along with others, supplied you with
more than sufficient information to satisfy the requests involved with this
post from you. I feel no need to delve into a micro rehash when the macro
has already been discussed.
Suffice to say that on the subject of flight instruction as you have
presented it on these newsgroups, my opinion of you based on these posts is
that I personally have strong issues with what you have presented
here....period.
As you say, it's the information that's important. Rather than engage you
with some kind of back and forth dialog where you begin by telling me to
"get over myself", I think what I'd rather do is pass on this type of post
and instead deal directly with any and all information dealing with flight
instruction ONLY that you post as a CFI on these newsgroups in the future.
Dudley Henriques


"buttman" wrote in message
oups.com...
On May 11, 6:59 am, "Dudley Henriques" wrote:
"buttman" wrote in message

oups.com...

And following Dudley's train of thought - can you prove you're a CFI?

And what would my CFI number add to the discussion? Why does it even
matter? If you don't believe I really have a CFI then you can go right
on ahead and believe that. It doesn't change what I wrote one bit. You
should judge me by my words, not my credentials.

Quite to the contrary, it's your "words" that make some pilots on these
groups question your "credentials".

What are some of these 'words' that makes you think i'm one of the
worlds worst instructors? Just give me an example. I've made less than
100 posts on this group since I started using usenet back in 2005, and
I've made a whopping 5 posts on r.a.s, so finding one shouldn't be
hard.

Although its a fact that you don't have to post your real name on these
groups, its also a fact that many new student pilots frequent these
groups.
For that reason, most of the pilots and instructors who post here are
very
careful with the information they present. Although ALL information
presented on Usenet should be checked for accuracy, there is always a
potential flight safety factor in play here, especially when someone
posts
using a CFI format.

I'm not following you. How does my CFI number have anything to do with
new students reading this group?

I've read your posts and I have serious questions about you. Basically
I'm
concerned not so much about the statements you have made but rather the
questions you have asked.

What questions should a CFI be asking, and what questions shouldn't be
asked? Or do you think CFI's should not ask questions at all? If
you're referring to the fuel valve incident, I thought it was a valid
question. You have 2 miles of runway which was 150 feet wide, a low
horsepower engine (so no huge yaw), and me on board who can take over
if the student locks up. I admit it's pushing some safety boundaries,
but so does completely shutting down one engine in a twin, or a
simulated engine failure (via the throttle) in the traffic pattern...
Hell, TAKING OFF in even a perfectly airworthy airplane is pushing
certain safety boundaries.

In my opinion, if you are indeed a CFI as you have
stated on these groups, you should already know the answers to the
questions
you are asking.
So I have a double problem with you. Your questions are suspect to me,
and
your overall reasoning is suspect as well.
You are correct when you say that credentials on Usenet are not as
important
as the information posted. The pilots here have been reading each other
as
well as newbies for many years. Our opinions on the validity of a post is
based on years of actual experience reading what an individual poster has
to
say.

With this in mind, and based only on the information you have posted to
these groups, I have to tell you that in my opinion you are either posing
as
a flight instructor or a completely ill prepared CFI.
As I have said before, I personally will give you a great deal more
lattitude on the piloting group than I will on the student group. As
someone
who has invested a great deal of time and effort in the instruction
business, I naturally have an aversion to bad information and will say so
when presented with same.

Get over yourself.

This has nothing at all to do with being a "Usenet
Bully".

I never called you or anyone a usenet bully. "Internet tough guy" is
someone who feels the need to act like a tough guy over the internet
over something they wouldn't dare do in real life. It's like me saying
if my piano teacher played a wrong note I'm going to get up and yell
into her face "YOU'RE FIRED". In the real world its a cumulation of
small things, or one big thing that causes someone to get tired.
Accidentally pulling in front of a straight in is not something a sane
person would fire their CFI over. It's just ridiculous.

Again, your reasoning and deduction is suspect.
If you will notice, hardly anyone on these groups stresses credentials.

Are you kidding? Just about everyone has their real name / location /
certificates held in their signature. I've been using internet
discussion forums since the early 2000's, and I've never been part of
a group that does that. I've even been part of professional groups,
with doctors post
about medical matters, lawyers post about legal matters, pilots post
about aviation matters; none of them do that.

I've spoke with real life CFI's, including examiners, very high time
instructors, ex-FAA inspectors, and they all have treated me with
respect. This is the only group that feels the need to jump down my
throat.

In the other thread I made a
few weeks ago in r.a.s it was the same way. People just came in and
said "I've been an instructor for thirty years and I say its unsafe,
END OF DISCUSSION" without providing any real arguments.

Actually its longer than that, and you received precise and direct
argument
stating exactly why as a CFI you don't turn off the fuel on takeoff.

People compared what I was doing with shutting down one engine in a
twin (which I completely agree is unsafe during takeoff regardless of
the runway length). They posted accident reports where someone stalled/
spun on takeoff and the plane was found to have the fuel valve turned
off; not the same situation.

Everyone just kneejerk reacted to me challenging their already held
beliefs. Instead of acknowledging I had some points, they just all
made me out to be a crazy madman. It's easier to do that, than it is
to change your way of thinking.

Again, your powers of deductive reasoning are in my opinion, suspect.
It is not the purpose of these groups to "argue and debate". The purpose
of
these groups is to SHARE useful and accurate data and information about
flying and aviation.

And what on earth is the difference?