I give up, after many, many years!

In rec.aviation.student gatt wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
gatt writes:

The ones that are ignored are different sensations and typically have to
do with equilibrium and the inner ear. Examples are somatogravic and
coriolis and inversion illusions. If your ass leaves the seat or
compresses into it, however, it's not something you ignore.

Yes, it is, because it is no more reliable than any other sensation.

DON'T CONTRADICT ME. I FLY PLANES AND YOU PLAY VIDEO GAMES.

Congratulations, now you look like an arrogant asshole.

Of course so does MX, but at least he's an *entertaining* arrogant
asshole.

I find it to be tremendously ironic that these recent monster threads
revolving around MX have led me to killfile several people who respond to
him but not to killfile him. His stuff is frequently worth reading, if
only for the entertainment value, whereas the responses are frequently
acidic and worthless.

If you get to the point where you're typing in all caps, or having to wave
your certificates in his face, take a moment to step back and think about
whether your reply adds any value to the group. MX's destructiveness comes
only from the kind of replies he is able to make people post. If we could
all avoid posting that kind of reply, his destructiveness will recede to
"merely" being an obnoxious poster.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

Michael Ash wrote in
:

In rec.aviation.student gatt wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
gatt writes:

The ones that are ignored are different sensations and typically
have to do with equilibrium and the inner ear. Examples are
somatogravic and coriolis and inversion illusions. If your ass
leaves the seat or compresses into it, however, it's not something
you ignore.

Yes, it is, because it is no more reliable than any other sensation.

DON'T CONTRADICT ME. I FLY PLANES AND YOU PLAY VIDEO GAMES.

Congratulations, now you look like an arrogant asshole.

Of course so does MX, but at least he's an *entertaining* arrogant
asshole.

I find it to be tremendously ironic that these recent monster threads
revolving around MX have led me to killfile several people who respond
to him but not to killfile him. His stuff is frequently worth reading,
if only for the entertainment value, whereas the responses are
frequently acidic and worthless.

If you get to the point where you're typing in all caps, or having to
wave your certificates in his face, take a moment to step back and
think about whether your reply adds any value to the group. MX's
destructiveness comes only from the kind of replies he is able to make
people post. If we could all avoid posting that kind of reply, his
destructiveness will recede to "merely" being an obnoxious poster.


If you could get everyone to stop posting to him it'd be a usenet first.



Bertie

Michael Ash wrote:
In rec.aviation.student gatt wrote:

Congratulations, now you look like an arrogant asshole.

Of course so does MX, but at least he's an *entertaining* arrogant
asshole.

Sometimes you have to speak their language. My purpose wasn't to
entertain people. If you want, however, I'll tell you some knock-knock
jokes. I'm sure everybody appreciates your encouragement of his
behavior, by the way. Nice job, Ash.

I find it to be tremendously ironic that these recent monster threads
revolving around MX have led me to killfile several people who respond to
him but not to killfile him.

That's your choice. Different people come to the forum for different
reasons. I'm here to share my experience and learn from the experience
of others, and I read a whole lot more than I post.

If you get to the point where you're typing in all caps, or having to wave
your certificates in his face, take a moment to step back and think about
whether your reply adds any value to the group.

He came out here, asked the pilots a question then proceeded to refute
every single thing they said. Not just me ASEL pilots like me, but just
about everybody.

I answered his question initially because the question had value to the
student pilots in the student group. His utter nonsense that followed
merely adds misinformation and, perhaps, satisfies your entertainment
needs.

As to whether "waving certificates" in people's faces adds value, it's
not much different than sourcing an official or authoritative reference,
is it? If we were talking about combat it would be relevant for the
readers to understand that the people in the discussion are a video game
geek versus a combat veteran.

-c
Arrogant Asshole

In rec.aviation.student gatt wrote:
Michael Ash wrote:
In rec.aviation.student gatt wrote:

Congratulations, now you look like an arrogant asshole.

Of course so does MX, but at least he's an *entertaining* arrogant
asshole.

Sometimes you have to speak their language.

I've seen no evidence that "his language" consists of all-caps yelling
about piloting. Quite the opposite, actually.

My purpose wasn't to
entertain people. If you want, however, I'll tell you some knock-knock
jokes.

I don't think your purpose *should* be to entertain people. Obviously
that's not why this group is here, at least not primarily. But at least
it's a redeeming feature of his posts, something that many of the
responses don't have.

I'm sure everybody appreciates your encouragement of his
behavior, by the way. Nice job, Ash.

Oh please. If he hasn't responded to years of strong, frequently abusive
*dis*couragement of his behavior, what makes you think he'll respond to
*en*couragement? It should be blindingly obvious that he'll do what he
wishes and will not change his habits just because of what someone says.

I find it to be tremendously ironic that these recent monster threads
revolving around MX have led me to killfile several people who respond to
him but not to killfile him.

That's your choice. Different people come to the forum for different
reasons. I'm here to share my experience and learn from the experience
of others, and I read a whole lot more than I post.

Same here.

If you get to the point where you're typing in all caps, or having to wave
your certificates in his face, take a moment to step back and think about
whether your reply adds any value to the group.

He came out here, asked the pilots a question then proceeded to refute
every single thing they said. Not just me ASEL pilots like me, but just
about everybody.

I answered his question initially because the question had value to the
student pilots in the student group. His utter nonsense that followed
merely adds misinformation and, perhaps, satisfies your entertainment
needs.

As to whether "waving certificates" in people's faces adds value, it's
not much different than sourcing an official or authoritative reference,
is it? If we were talking about combat it would be relevant for the
readers to understand that the people in the discussion are a video game
geek versus a combat veteran.

It's relevant to the discussion, sure, when you present it as backing for
your opinion or for facts. But when you come straight out and shout
someone dow, saying that they're not allowed to disagree with you because
you have credentials and they don't, that's just bad taste.

Please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying all this because I think you're
worse than MX. Quite the contrary. MX is beyond hope, and thus isn't worth
trying to correct. The rest of you, however, ought to be able to modify
your behavior to make things better.

MX is a troll. Whether he is this way because he intends to be or simply
because his personality causes him to be this way is irrelevant. Trolls
destroy groups by spawning massive threads that drown out all the useful
bits of the group. And of course it takes two to tango; a troll works by
getting people to reply to him. If nobody replied to MX he would merely be
obnoxious, not group-destroying.

It's tough, and annoying, but to stop a troll you *must* be willing to let
him have the last word.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

Michael Ash wrote:

As to whether "waving certificates" in people's faces adds value, it's
not much different than sourcing an official or authoritative reference,
is it? If we were talking about combat it would be relevant for the
readers to understand that the people in the discussion are a video game
geek versus a combat veteran.

It's relevant to the discussion, sure, when you present it as backing for
your opinion or for facts. But when you come straight out and shout
someone dow, saying that they're not allowed to disagree with you because
you have credentials and they don't, that's just bad taste.


Please tell me at what point I "came straight out and shouted somebody
down," and, more importantly, where I've EVER said they're "not allowed
to disagree" because I have credentials and they don't.

It's fine to disagree right up to the point where you're disagreeing
with virtually everybody from private pilots to airline pilots.

If this were rec.surgery.brain and some philosophy student was arguing
with brain surgeons all day, every day, and then admonishing them for
their answers, I wouldn't for a second expect the surgeons not to remind
the student they're they're doctors and that he's not qualified to
contradict literally ALL of them. (Not to mention ignoring their
authoritative references and dodging any challenge to cite sources for
him own information.)

But I never said anybody "wasn't allowed" to disagree with me simply
because of my credentials.

-c

In rec.aviation.student gatt wrote:
Michael Ash wrote:

As to whether "waving certificates" in people's faces adds value, it's
not much different than sourcing an official or authoritative reference,
is it? If we were talking about combat it would be relevant for the
readers to understand that the people in the discussion are a video game
geek versus a combat veteran.

It's relevant to the discussion, sure, when you present it as backing for
your opinion or for facts. But when you come straight out and shout
someone dow, saying that they're not allowed to disagree with you because
you have credentials and they don't, that's just bad taste.

Please tell me at what point I "came straight out and shouted somebody
down," and, more importantly, where I've EVER said they're "not allowed
to disagree" because I have credentials and they don't.

There was the bit which prompted my first message, where you said "DON'T
CONTRADICT ME. I FLY PLANES AND YOU PLAY VIDEO GAMES."

It's fine to disagree right up to the point where you're disagreeing
with virtually everybody from private pilots to airline pilots.

If this were rec.surgery.brain and some philosophy student was arguing
with brain surgeons all day, every day, and then admonishing them for
their answers, I wouldn't for a second expect the surgeons not to remind
the student they're they're doctors and that he's not qualified to
contradict literally ALL of them. (Not to mention ignoring their
authoritative references and dodging any challenge to cite sources for
him own information.)

I have no problem with occasionally reminding people of their
qualifications. But on the other hand, novices can be right and experts
can be wrong, so it's much better to argue based on the facts. If this
doesn't work because the person you're talking to is a flaming moron,
telling him to shut up and listen because you have experience or
credentials isn't likely to help.

But I never said anybody "wasn't allowed" to disagree with me simply
because of my credentials.

Well, you told him not to, same effect in the end.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

Michael Ash wrote:


There was the bit which prompted my first message, where you said "DON'T
CONTRADICT ME. I FLY PLANES AND YOU PLAY VIDEO GAMES."

That's has to do with the fact that he asked a valid question, I and
several other people answered it somewhat uniformly, and then he
proceeded to refute that answer in a different thread. (I'm not going to
look it up.)


But I never said anybody "wasn't allowed" to disagree with me simply
because of my credentials.

Well, you told him not to, same effect in the end.

Apparently not. He's still posting here, isn't he? I simply threw him
back into the killfile and will not answer any further questions he asks
unless he pays me for ground instruction.

If there's a problem with that, too bad, I guess. Choosing to ignore
all further questions he asks is entirely my decision. If he chooses to
spout bull**** in a student forum as if he was some sort of authority on
the matter, it's equally my right to illuminate the fact that he's a
fraud and that I'm not.

-c

In rec.aviation.student gatt wrote:
Michael Ash wrote:

There was the bit which prompted my first message, where you said "DON'T
CONTRADICT ME. I FLY PLANES AND YOU PLAY VIDEO GAMES."

That's has to do with the fact that he asked a valid question, I and
several other people answered it somewhat uniformly, and then he
proceeded to refute that answer in a different thread. (I'm not going to
look it up.)

I understand the context (and the sentiment behind it; really!) but I just
think that when it gets to this level it ends up being counterproductive.

But I never said anybody "wasn't allowed" to disagree with me simply
because of my credentials.

Well, you told him not to, same effect in the end.

Apparently not. He's still posting here, isn't he? I simply threw him
back into the killfile and will not answer any further questions he asks
unless he pays me for ground instruction.

If there's a problem with that, too bad, I guess. Choosing to ignore
all further questions he asks is entirely my decision. If he chooses to
spout bull**** in a student forum as if he was some sort of authority on
the matter, it's equally my right to illuminate the fact that he's a
fraud and that I'm not.

I think this is a good decision. Refuting him *can* be useful, but in my
opinion only until it reaches the point where he's obviously being
ridiculous, at which point you just have to let him be, because otherwise
you'll never reach the end of it. Killfiling him is a fine alternative,
though.

There's a great comic on this subject: http://xkcd.com/386/

Ultimately you have to just give up and let the troll be wrong.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

On May 22, 10:16*am, gatt wrote:
If this were rec.surgery.brain and some philosophy student was arguing
with brain surgeons all day, every day, and then admonishing them for
their answers, I wouldn't for a second expect the surgeons not to remind
the student they're they're doctors and that he's not qualified to
contradict literally ALL of them. * (Not to mention ignoring their
authoritative references and dodging any challenge to cite sources for
him own information.)

But I never said anybody "wasn't allowed" to disagree with me simply
because of my credentials.

Hmm..point of view is valid except for one important fact:

Many of the pilots in this group have not spoken with the same
objectivity that one would expect from an expert who expects his
opinion to supersede that of a novice.

I am reading a parallel thread in which someone claims that the theory
of lift often exists incorrectly in the minds of those who think they
understand it.

When I, as a novice, made this same statement a few months ago when I
joined the group, most of the responding pilots said, "It is
understood. You are the one who does not understand." When I showed
examples of actual experts (university professors in aero/astro, books
by pilots with 20,000+ hours, respected educators in aviation, the
NASA link given by Jim Logajan, etc.", the pilots still said, "You are
still wrong."

Note that it was not a few obstinate pilots making these claims, but
most of them.

When pilots take this position, refuting people whom one would imagine
has even greater understanding of the subject, it becomes difficult to
lend credibility simply because they have a pilot's license.

-Le Chaud Lapin-

Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
When pilots take this position, refuting people whom one would imagine
has even greater understanding of the subject, it becomes difficult to
lend credibility simply because they have a pilot's license.

I do not know about you, but given a choice between riding in an airplane
piloted by a certificated pilot who has an incorrect grasp of aerodynamics
and an aerodynamics engineer who has no piloting experience, I'd go with
the certificated pilot. ;-)