An Open Post To The Management Counsel

RotorAndWing said:
Uh, no. :no:

I know of post in the past that several members have reported and nothing happens, again, it depends upon who made the post, not what it says.
Click to expand...
Not all reported posts are acted upon for obvious reasons. We often get reports which we do not think rise to the level of action. We also get frivolous reports from members who are obviously ****ed that we took action against them and not someone else. Not to mention the fact that the other poster may have gotten a warning which does not show up under their username.
 
Last edited:
So Tim, are you going to delete that post which is an obvious attempt to bypass the obscenity filter or are we going to do it for you after we get the votes?
 
RotorAndWing said:
Uh, no. :no:

I know of post in the past that several members have reported and nothing happens, again, it depends upon who made the post, not what it says.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I have seen some inconsistency in moderation as well. SZ threads on the front page for several days ( using "new posts" ) . Some people seem to get a ' bye' over others, but it's like that in real life too.
 
Hey, shouldn't this thread be in the spin zone?
 
Everskyward said:
Not all reported posts are acted upon for obvious reasons. We often get reports which we do not think rise to the level of action. We also get frivolous reports from members who are obviously ****ed that we took action against them and not someone else.
Click to expand...

You can try to explain it away any way you wish, but it's become very obvious (by many members, btw) that certain posters are immune to actions from the MC and are free to post whatever while others are censored for something innocuous.
 
The SZ cant have rules AND be unmoderated. Thats been my only complaint about it. Either there are rules to be followed (no personal attacks like it says) or there are not. Pick. It's easy.
 
RotorAndWing said:
You can try to explain it away any way you wish, but it's become very obvious (by many members, btw) that certain posters are immune to actions from the MC and are free to post whatever while others are censored for something innocuous.
Click to expand...

Never on purpose, and it's not as if the MC is comprised of a bunch of clones. you might be surprised, but we often disagree with each other, too.
 
wsuffa said:
Do you know the story behind Babes and Planes?

RIP Moxie.
Click to expand...


I read her threads. I never understood that portion of the forum but I heard she was hosting that section for some reason.

I looked her up on here awhile back and read and read and read and even having not met her, it was really sad.

Still not sure the story on that particular group of POA though.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
I read her threads. I never understood that portion of the forum but I heard she was hosting that section for some reason.

I looked her up on here awhile back and read and read and read and even having not met her, it was really sad.

Still not sure the story on that particular group of POA though.
Click to expand...

Babes and Airplanes had a separate website with a forum. I recall that there was some technical glitch with the website so the management at POA (long before I was part of the MC) allowed her to host her forum on POA. I came to POA through Babes and Airplanes. I still keep in touch with some of the people I met there, and a number of them are here.

In case anyone is wondering, you didn't need to be female to be a Babe. There were plenty of male members.
 
Last edited:
Everskyward said:
Babes and Airplanes had a separate website with a forum. I recall that there was some technical glitch with the website so the management at POA (long before I was part of the MC) allowed her to host her forum on POA. I came to POA through Babes and Airplanes. I still keep in touch with some of the people I met there, and a number of them are here.

In case anyone is wondering, you didn't need to be female to be a Babe. There were plenty of male members.
Click to expand...

Frogs... ;)

Mari hit the important points. When the Babes forum went down, we offered her a subforum here. Moxie had administrative privileges, and members had to be folks that joined Babes.
 
Could the Babes sub forum come back, as a tribute to Moxie, or is their main website back up and operational?
 
TangoWhiskey said:
Could the Babes sub forum come back, as a tribute to Moxie, or is their main website back up and operational?
Click to expand...
I don't think that's necessary Troy. I believe the forum on the website is back but I think most of the Babes keep in contact through a members-only page on Facebook.

Frankly I think many of the original Babes left because the tone of this forum is much harsher than the Babes forum was. Moxie kept the members in line. ;)
 
Captain said:
The SZ cant have rules AND be unmoderated. Thats been my only complaint about it. Either there are rules to be followed (no personal attacks like it says) or there are not. Pick. It's easy.
Click to expand...

No...not quite so easy. Look at these cases:

1. Someone responds to a post and says that the OP is a jerk.

2. Someone responds to a post and says that the OP does not have the qualifications (experience, ratings, etc.) to make the statements he made.

3. Someone responds to a post with the claim that the OP manufactured a statistic or claimed a fact that wasn't true (e.g., that Politician "X" made such-and-such a statement).

4. Someone responds to a post by casting doubt on qualifications the OP claims to have (e.g., 1000 hours in a P-51, etc.).

The OP is likely to consider all four cases are "Personal Attacks." Most folks would agree that #1 would be out of line. But... two through four? If someone claims to be type-rated in a Gulfstream, and poster who *is* notices a wide span of inaccuracies in the OP's pronouncements, are they NOT allowed to question the OP's qualifications?

Sure, a lot depends how it's done; how it's worded. But if you take the broad definition of "No Personal Attacks," we might as well assume that every participant is a retired F-16 pilot and an ATP and rated in the 707, 717, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, 787, and every model of Airbus, and a former world aerobatics champion besides.

Ron Wanttaja
who ain't none of these
 
wanttaja said:
No...not quite so easy. Look at these cases:

1. Someone responds to a post and says that the OP is a jerk.

2. Someone responds to a post and says that the OP does not have the qualifications (experience, ratings, etc.) to make the statements he made.

3. Someone responds to a post with the claim that the OP manufactured a statistic or claimed a fact that wasn't true (e.g., that Politician "X" made such-and-such a statement).

4. Someone responds to a post by casting doubt on qualifications the OP claims to have (e.g., 1000 hours in a P-51, etc.).

The OP is likely to consider all four cases are "Personal Attacks." Most folks would agree that #1 would be out of line. But... two through four? If someone claims to be type-rated in a Gulfstream, and poster who *is* notices a wide span of inaccuracies in the OP's pronouncements, are they NOT allowed to question the OP's qualifications?

Sure, a lot depends how it's done; how it's worded. But if you take the broad definition of "No Personal Attacks," we might as well assume that every participant is a retired F-16 pilot and an ATP and rated in the 707, 717, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, 787, and every model of Airbus, and a former world aerobatics champion besides.

Ron Wanttaja
who ain't none of these
Click to expand...

I think the only one that is a personal attack is number one, a pretty weak one at that, the other three don't even get close to a personal attack.

Personally I think it's kind of funny and feel a little sad for the person when someone gets unhinged and calls me a moron, or d-bag or idiot or whatever over an internet post. Some take it very personally when you challenge their supposed infinite wisdom, too bad. We're supposed to be grownups here and should have stopped running to mommy to fix things by the time we hit age 10.

The MC has clearly delineated the rules of SZ and stated that it is unmoderated, I really like the idea of disconnecting the chronic complainers from SZ. I think it would really calm it down. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
 
PaulS said:
The MC has clearly delineated the rules of SZ and stated that it is unmoderated, I really like the idea of disconnecting the chronic complainers from SZ. I think it would really calm it down. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
Click to expand...


It's really the only "fair" solution. It makes people think twice about complaining if they value anything else in the unmoderated area.

It shouldn't even be necessary really. Just turn off the upderated area and have a happy life if stuff that gets said in an unmoderated area gets your goat.

It's a choice to allow your goat to be "got" anyway. But if you're weak in this regard, someone can turn it off for you.
 
RotorAndWing said:
There have been plenty of meme's that have contained vulgar language, and the MC has done nothing. It just depends on who is posting them, not what they say.
Click to expand...
EXACTLY. And many reported, yet MC is selective about which ones are addressed. I fully believe Spike is correct. MC members often disagree, and I suspect that is because some play favorites more than others.
 
PaulS said:
I think the only one that is a personal attack is number one, a pretty weak one at that, the other three don't even get close to a personal attack.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, it really depends on context and tone. "Sir, I doubt your claim to have 1,000 hours in a P-51" is one thing. "No way you've got a thousand hours in a Mustang, that's a downright, scurrilous lie." is another. Both say the same thing, and if the OP *doesn't* have a thousand hours in a P-51, both are perfectly true. Both question the OP's veracity, which the OP is likely to consider a personal attack. Others might consider the second version a personal attack. But if it's true....?

I doubt one could *define* reasonable, easy-to-understand logic for defining "Personal Attacks." The hard-over ones are easy; it's the grey areas as above that's the problem. And the logic behind my objection to Captain's claiming such a policy would be "easy."

PaulS said:
The MC has clearly delineated the rules of SZ and stated that it is unmoderated, I really like the idea of disconnecting the chronic complainers from SZ. I think it would really calm it down. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
Click to expand...

But it wouldn't do a blessed thing for the non-SZ section. Denied an outlet in the spin zone, they'd just continue the fight on the forums they still have access to.

It's like a biker bar and a church social in adjacent buildings. The bikers may throw an idiot out the door, but he'll come over the church social and shout curses from their window.

If you're going to ban, *ban*. If a person participates in the spin zone and doesn't understand the rules there, then obviously, he or she can't follow instructions and has no business in *either* location.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Last edited:
Fearless Tower said:
EXACTLY. And many reported, yet MC is selective about which ones are addressed. I fully believe Spike is correct. MC members often disagree, and I suspect that is because some play favorites more than others.
Click to expand...
Well...shoot, it's *their* forum (or at least they operate it on behalf of the forum owner). If you feel your membership dues are being used improperly, then stop paying dues.

Oh, you *aren't* paying dues? Then consider taking your custom to another forum, or starting your own. Or buy this forum from the owner.

There's an old Calvin and Hobbs cartoon, where the punchline is along the lines of, "I know the world is unfair, but why can't it be unfair in *my* direction...."

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
Well...shoot, it's *their* forum (or at least they operate it on behalf of the forum owner). If you feel your membership dues are being used improperly, then stop paying dues.
Click to expand...

But we just doubled the MC pay and the dues to help address these issues...
:yes::D
 
PaulS said:
Personally I think it's kind of funny and feel a little sad for the person when someone gets unhinged and calls me a moron, or d-bag or idiot or whatever over an internet post. Some take it very personally when you challenge their supposed infinite wisdom, too bad. We're supposed to be grownups here and should have stopped running to mommy to fix things by the time we hit age 10.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The people who complain about the SZ should be banned from the SZ for a month. They enter and then complain when they get their hats handed to them. :rolleyes:
 
I've modded a forum once. It's like herding cats. I believe the MC is doing a pretty good job even though I occasionally disagree with their actions (or inactions). Then again, I'm not a Spin Zoner.
 
TangoWhiskey said:
C'mon, man, we're friends! Don't make this personal. :no:
Click to expand...

It was a joke!

Sorry I didn't include a smiley, I try to avoid them. Jonathan Swift is rolling over in his grave due to the underuse of true unadulterated and unrevealed sarcasm on the Internet.

Sorry Troy...but...seriously, it was a joke...
 
Last edited:
I'll admit that I was one that was getting frustrated with some of the BS and personal insults in the SZ, and had asked the MC to do something about it. But reading this (thanks Geico), I have changed my mind. If I think someone is out of line in the SZ, I reserve the right to call them out on it. Of course, they can tell me to FO and/or ignore me. But as long as what is in the SZ stays in the SZ, then I request that the MCs just let us alone in our little arena. But sometimes, stuff from the SZ does spill out into the civilized areas, and the MC should crack down on that.
 
Everskyward said:
So Tim, are you going to delete that post which is an obvious attempt to bypass the obscenity filter or are we going to do it for you after we get the votes?
Click to expand...

Well, I would have' but I haven't been online all day and it's already gone. :redface:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top