![]() |
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 Sep 21, 6:23*am, BeechSundowner wrote:
Not sure how you feel about instructors saying "becauese I am an instructor" being an answer to a request for source of information, You have taken my words completely out of context. His response to me was very insulting especially when I provide a FAA reference and he had nothing tangible to support his position.. Awfer... are you saying I didn't quote sources? Why, McNicoll corrected one of them. How'd he do that if I offered "nothing tangible"? What in hell is going on out here? I am not a CFI but that kind of response "because I am instructor" doesn't cut it when a student challenges his or her position. * What I said was: Because I'm an instructor and I brought it up on the student forum I feel obliged to "reciprocate" and clarify for other readers. I don't see how you could interpret that as "I'm right because I am an instructor." My point was that as an instructor I feel obligated to clarify in a case where I say something and somebody challenges it or asks for clarification. If I say something incorrect or, in reply, you say something in correct, I feel obligated to sort it out rather than have one fallacy or another (mine or yours) ending the discussion. Previously and otherwise, I'd have simply told a few people out here to go **** up a rope. The next thing I said was: "Apparently, telling you what I saw happen has no value to you so clearly you don't respect my word." To clarify, that means there's no regulation or official definition that says I heard an FBO consultant tell me that tower said there were two runway incursions reported that day. I can't provide anything "tangible" without divulging people's information in the internet who may not appreciate it. I'm starting to think that if I saw a C-172 accident, somebody would take issue with me. (Some people insist it's a CE-172, when I'll I'm saying is, I saw the goddam plane crash.) Our competitor just had their third R22 accident in about a month yesterday. Unfortunately, the last one crashed and burned with the student and instructor onboard. Let's keep things in perspective here. I have more important things to worry about in my job than what somebody on the usenet thinks of me, having never met me, and I have lots of better things to do than rifle through the internet looking for "taxiway incursion" definitions or trying to make sure that somebody isn't seeming to look for ways to take my words out of context. Guys...everybody. Stop picking fights where there are none. If you disagree with something somebody says, say so and ask for clarification or find a constructive way to disagree. It's perfectly okay to say "I think you're wrong, and here's why," but, you don't have to be a dick about it. Otherwise, the forum will continue to devolve into flamewars and spam as it has for the last years. -c |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ILS Runway 1, Visual approach runway 4 KMEI - Video | A Lieberma[_2_] | Owning | 0 | July 4th 09 06:13 PM |
Runway Red Lights to cut down on incursions. | Gig 601XL Builder[_2_] | Piloting | 23 | March 3rd 08 08:28 PM |
Runway incursions | James Robinson | Piloting | 6 | November 10th 07 06:29 PM |
Rwy incursions | Hankal | Piloting | 10 | November 16th 03 02:33 AM |
Talk about runway incursions... | Dave Russell | Piloting | 7 | August 13th 03 02:09 AM |