![]() |
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 |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...
"Snowbird" wrote in message om... [...] Any idea why it contains 3 Lynne Millers -- a student pilot, a mechanic, and someone with "no certificates" ?? Maybe her legal name is something else. Sure, anything is possible. Look, Peter, you can judge for yourself. No one is taking that right away from you. Go For It. Hit http://www.groups.google.com and look up Lynne Miller's posting history on these groups. There's not that much, read it all. But those who don't have the time or inclination but who contribute a great deal to these groups deserve, IMO, not to have their time wasted by someone who has a 2 1/2 yr posting history which sure makes her appear to be a Troll. She first posted on 5/29/01, about getting her PPL and getting a tattoo on her ankle to celebrate. Two months later she's advising someone how to fly into an obstructed airport: "get some balls and be an aviator." Three months later, in August 01, she's calling Mike Rappoport an "MU-2 moron" and posting about "her" CE-500 type rating and "her" $4.6 million dollar "Citation Bravo" N550B. When someone points out that N550B is a A35 Bonanza, she claims she bought it from the owner so she could use the tail number. Two years later, N550B is still a Bonanza and Lynne Miller is still at it. Is it possible to go from a PPL to a Citation type rating in 3 months? Sure, it's possible. Likely, given the content and context she posted? Well, you want to judge for yourself.... Now Lynne Miller is posting about a Gulfstream and a set of King DVDs (retail $179) she'll sell for $499. Someone points out the outrageous markup: "I'll include an autographed picture and a personal note" See a pattern here? Except that she seems to have gotten more subtle and figured out that she can't just waltz in and start out by calling respected posters "stupid" "morons" "idiotic" and "knucklehead". She needs to build some credibility first by making some plausible, inoffensive posts. OK, Peter, now you judge for yourself. I admire you for it. Kudos. Very admirable. Take everything posted here with a grain of salt. Good for you. But people like Richard Kaplan (whom she scammed by pretending an interest in C210 training and wasting time on his schedule) http://tinyurl.com/x76u or for tinyurl haters http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Ly...aNews &rnum=1 deserve not to have their time wasted or to be abused IMO. And others who may be more credulous deserve IMO not to be misled by posts about "throw out that checklist" and "there are no challenging instrument approaches" yadda yadda by someone who purports to be an aviator of experience flying jets all over the world -- but who started making that claim 3 months after posting about her PPL checkride. Your milage may vary. You may disapprove of me and these posts instead. I have no problem with that. Cheers, Sydney |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Snowbird" wrote in message
m... Your milage may vary. You may disapprove of me and these posts instead. I have no problem with that. I'm not sure I understand your vehemence. My point was simply that you have no way of knowing who the person is or is not, and that's true for every single person that posts here. Even if you had found the person's name in the FAA database and they appeared to hold the appropriate ratings, that would mean nothing. The person posting could have simply borrowed someone else's identity. For example, how do you know for sure that my real name is "Peter Duniho"? And even if it's not, why would you care? The answer to both questions is "you don't". If anything, Richard Kaplan's experience (whatever it was) is a cautionary tale. A person should not take statements from anonymous people at face value, especially on Usenet where it is *known* to be a sizable group of people who do nothing but try to gum up the works with a variety of tactics, including fraud. As far as the posts made under the name of "Lynne Miller" go, I've never paid much attention to them. They've been inconsistent and uninformative, and that alone is reason enough to ignore her. I'm not defending her, I'm just pointing out that a) your research has proved nothing regarding her actual identify, positive or negative and b) it doesn't really matter who she is, since the "proof is in the pudding", so to speak. Her posts provide sufficient reason to blow her off...we don't need an FAA database to do that. I guess if there's a point at all to what I'm saying here is that if one is going to participate in the Usenet environment, one needs to bring a healthy sense of skepticism. I don't see why you're singling out Lynne Miller's posts; there's been any number of other posts here that are similarly content-free. What got stuck in your craw this time? Pete |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...
"Snowbird" wrote in message m... Your milage may vary. You may disapprove of me and these posts instead. I have no problem with that. I'm not sure I understand your vehemence. I'm not sure you understand at all, but in fact I don't see any particular vehemence of mine. I simply stated facts available to anyone who cares to search a publically accessible database and publically accessible news archives, along with a brief explanation of my personal reasons for so doing (that I don't feel recent arrivals and long-term contributors who lack time for such research should be imposed on). My point was simply that you have no way of knowing who the person is or is not I disagree. We have no way of knowing for sure who a person is. But at times, we can know with reasonable certainty who (or what) a person is not. It appears to me to be a rather important distinction. You, on the other hand, appeared to have a rather vehement additional point. You appeared to object rather strongly to my post. If that's not the case, it puzzles me to know why you responded at all, much less at such length. For example, how do you know for sure that my real name is "Peter Duniho"? And even if it's not, why would you care? The answer to both questions is "you don't". That depends, actually, on what you're doing on the group. If you were making requests of people which cross over into their lives or work (say, asking Jay to reserve 3 suites for you for a week, you'd be paying cash. or asking Chip to clear your Citation Bravo direct), and I had reason to believe you weren't as you presented yourself, I would undoubtedly state my reasons for so believing. You, of course, could refute them if you chose. If you're simply posting factual responses or personal experiences, you're right, I don't care who you are, only whether your responses are indeed factual. If anything, Richard Kaplan's experience (whatever it was) is a cautionary tale. A person should not take statements from anonymous people at face value, especially on Usenet where it is *known* to be a sizable group of people who do nothing but try to gum up the works with a variety of tactics, including fraud. Well, perhaps it's idealistic, but IMO there is a certain sense of community here in the piloting newsgroups. I gather you don't feel it, but I think others do. I've certainly benefitted tangibly from that sense of community. But with community comes responsibility (in my idealistic mind at least). As far as the posts made under the name of "Lynne Miller" go, I've never paid much attention to them. Peter, I mean no offense here, but I'm really not concerned with your personal reactions. As far as I'm concerned, you're welcome to react as you choose and believe as you choose. I don't see why you're singling out Lynne Miller's posts; there's been any number of other posts here that are similarly content-free. Yes, I gather that you don't see. I lack faith in my ability to explain any better. I thought it was already quite clear that the issue isn't content or the lack thereof. Cheers, Sydney |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Snowbird wrote:
"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ... I'm not sure I understand your vehemence. I'm not sure you understand at all, but in fact I don't see any particular vehemence of mine. I have to say that I don't get this either. Sydney clearly believes that Lynne Miller is a troll and posted some data in support of that belief. It's generally useful in a news group to know who the trolls are -- that is, it's not just some random fact, but rather helps keep discussions on track. Sydney's post didn't seem particularly "vehement". It mostly seemed helpful. -- David Rind |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
62526 Mining the Web: Jacobian Matrix Constructs with eigenVectorSearching 62526 | Web Science | Home Built | 0 | November 16th 04 10:01 PM |
20385 Mining the Web :Searches with Kriging, Inverse DistanceWeighting, eigenVectors and Cross-Pollination 20385 | Web Science | Owning | 0 | November 16th 04 10:01 PM |
MiG-17 Still Missing After Nightlong Search - New Mexico | Rusty B | Military Aviation | 0 | March 26th 04 08:29 PM |
List your website with the only Aviation related pay per click search engine!!! | Justin Case | General Aviation | 0 | August 2nd 03 12:02 PM |
Vietnam search to continue to find remains of Waterford pilot | Otis Willie | Military Aviation | 0 | July 2nd 03 10:30 PM |