Why airplanes fly

"Jay Honeck" wrote in news:TCQqj.20663$9j6.9318
@attbi_s22:

Speaking of missing regulars, what's up with Montblack? Is he taking a
break, or does anyone know what became of him?

We just celebrated his birthday last weekend, and I asked him the same
question.

Bottom line: Same thing you're saying. The trolls are winning.

You wouldn't know what a troll was if it bit you in the ass you halfwit.


Bertie

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:36:44 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in MkHqj.19887$yE1.4959@attbi_s21:

but when a
small-but-determined group of trolls with (seemingly endless) time on their
hands takes a hankering to a group, it's obvious that they can destroy it
pretty easily.

That appears to be their stated agenda:

http://www.gwu.edu/~trivia/meow.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meow_Wars

but when a
small-but-determined group of trolls with (seemingly endless) time on
their
hands takes a hankering to a group, it's obvious that they can destroy it
pretty easily.

That appears to be their stated agenda:

http://www.gwu.edu/~trivia/meow.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meow_Wars

Interesting history. Sad to see this sort of thing has happened many times.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 04:13:33 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in NFQqj.20667$9j6.17497@attbi_s22:


Interesting history. Sad to see this sort of thing has happened many times.

Well, adolescent children are programmed to oppose parental
constraints in order to establish their independence as adult
individuals. It's inevitable; it's (probably) in our genes. We all
did it, and future generations will likely continue to challenge
authority in an attempt to establish their independence and announce
their adulthood. Much to the consternation of more mature adults, its
fundamental to the maturation process of transitioning from dependence
on parental oversight to becoming an autonomous person.

What is disappointing is the breakdown of the traditional method of
controlling rogue Usenet nodes that inject into the newsstream
inappropriate, off-topic, and articles clearly intended to be
disruptive. In the past, if a downstream node gatewayed abusive
content into Usenet, its upstream nodes would cut off its access to
the network through their systems until the news administrator of the
rogue site got his users back in line. Today there are at least two
reasons that method is breaking down.

First, there are news administrators who actually condone abusive
articles thinly guised in the name of free speech. While I am a firm
believer in free speech, I'm at a loss to understand their true
motivation. Any thinking adult accepts the constraints of order on
freedom. If Usenet lacked order and structure, there would only be
one newsgroup that contained the sum of all Usenet content. Clearly
that wouldn't be very useful.

But more importantly is the immunity granted Common Carriers (such as
the phone company) against liability for the content they carry. If a
news administrator can be shown to be censoring content, he is in
danger of losing that immunity. Rather than taking responsibility for
the quality of the content emanating from their nodes, these meek news
administrators abdicate that responsibility out of fear, laziness and
indifference. They are as much to blame for the decline in the
quality of Usenet content as the abusive posters whom they tolerate.

So aside from reporting articles that violate the Usenet provider's
Acceptable Use Policy to their abuse department, about the only other
acceptable course of action to stem the tide of noise is to lobby the
news administrator of the abusive node's upstream feed to disconnect
the abusive node. The identity of that site is usually discernable
from the article's 'Path:' header field.

There is also, what I would characterize as a feeble and largely
self-defeating course of action against intentionally disruptive
posters: peer pressure. Publicly admonishing them, while providing
the admonisher with a certain amount of satisfaction in venting his
frustration, in reality only contributes to reducing the newsgroup's
signal to noise ratio. But worse than that, public admonishment can
be a construed as a reward by the abuser, as it validates the abuser's
ability to affect the newsgroup's readership, and it opens a line of
communication for further off-topic articles. If one cannot resist
responding to abusive articles, he should respond to it via private
e-mail, so that the abuser is denied a public forum to spew additional
disruptive content.

As I have said before (with the exceptions above), there are only two
clear choices responsible Usenet participants are able to exercise:

1. Choosing what they read, and
2. Choosing to post or not.

That's it. Simple.

Jay Honeck writes:

Interesting history. Sad to see this sort of thing has happened many times.

Boys will be boys, and the same bullies who make life difficult for others on
the playground make it nearly as difficult in cyberspace.

On 8 Feb, 04:13, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
but when a
small-but-determined group of trolls with (seemingly endless) time on
their
hands takes a hankering to a group, it's obvious that they can destroy it
pretty easily.

That appears to be their stated agenda:

* *http://www.gwu.edu/~trivia/meow.html
* *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meow_Wars

Interesting history. *Sad to see this sort of thing has happened many time

You ****ing moron. you have no idea what you are talking about, as
usual. If the meow army was involved here you would know it.

Would you like me to introduce you?




Bertie

Achtung!!!

Censorship Comrade
It is the only way!!


Jay Honeck wrote:
The quality of the discussions here has diminished by a factor of
ten. So have the quantity of people with real experiences to give
input to the discussions.

I agree 100% Jim. But I have a simple solution.

1. Use a newsreader like "Windows Mail" or "Outlook Express". As much
as I liked the search powers of Google Groups, their lack of any sort of
filtering reduced this newsgroup to chaos. I have therefore abandoned GGs.

2. With three keystrokes, you can create a killfile that utterly
eliminates every post by anyone you so designate as persona non grata.

I was two steps out the door from this group before rediscovering
newsreaders. Now, I only see the "good stuff" again, and the trolls can
do their continual verbal circle-jerk in complete anonymity, for all I
care.

Of course, the sad part is that this has all become necessary.
Killfiles weren't necessary for the first 9 years I was on this group,
but when a small-but-determined group of trolls with (seemingly endless)
time on their hands takes a hankering to a group, it's obvious that they
can destroy it pretty easily.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:MkHqj.19887$yE1.4959@attbi_s21:

The quality of the discussions here has diminished by a factor of
ten. So have the quantity of people with real experiences to give
input to the discussions.

I agree 100% Jim. But I have a simple solution.

1. Use a newsreader like "Windows Mail" or "Outlook Express". As
much as I liked the search powers of Google Groups, their lack of any
sort of filtering reduced this newsgroup to chaos. I have therefore
abandoned GGs.

2. With three keystrokes, you can create a killfile that utterly
eliminates every post by anyone you so designate as persona non grata.

I was two steps out the door from this group before rediscovering
newsreaders. Now, I only see the "good stuff" again, and the trolls
can do their continual verbal circle-jerk in complete anonymity, for
all I care.

Of course, the sad part is that this has all become necessary.
Killfiles weren't necessary for the first 9 years I was on this group,
but when a small-but-determined group of trolls with (seemingly
endless) time on their hands takes a hankering to a group, it's
obvious that they can destroy it pretty easily.



Excelent suggestion d00d

Jaybo

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:MkHqj.19887$yE1.4959@attbi_s21:

The quality of the discussions here has diminished by a factor of
ten. So have the quantity of people with real experiences to give
input to the discussions.

I agree 100% Jim. But I have a simple solution.

1. Use a newsreader like "Windows Mail" or "Outlook Express". As
much as I liked the search powers of Google Groups, their lack of any
sort of filtering reduced this newsgroup to chaos. I have therefore
abandoned GGs.



Yeh, big step up there fjukkwit.



Betrei.

Simply put, this is a place for people to talk about flying, and aspects of
aviation. *The current crop of loons are not interested in serious
discussion of such. *Neither are the people that egg them on. *There should
be no place for that, here.

Like it or not there are loons and trolls on the Internet.

The Internet has no law enforcement, not much content enforcement --
and I LIKE it that way. If there's a brawl, so be it. It's not like
you can't ignore that. There are plenty of tools to help you filter
out anything you don't want to see.

If you know so much about aviation and flying already that you can't
learn anything here, there're a few very simple solutions.

I come here because there ARE people who I think have a high level of
experience with piloting and I like asking them questions. I listen to
what they say and I learn from it. I don't have many opinions, usually
just questions.

But I'm sticking to this opinion: I get an occasional laugh out of
Mx's postulating and theorizing.