Non-aviation Posts

What should PoA's policy on non-aviation content be?

  • Eliminate all non-aviation posts.

    Votes: 11 8.4%

  • Move all non-aviation posts to a new "Off the Airport" forum.

    Votes: 37 28.2%

  • Continue as is, allowing non-aviation posts in "Hangar Talk."

    Votes: 83 63.4%
  • Total voters
    131
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
tonycondon said:
i thought hangar talk was for non aviation posts?
Click to expand...
"Open forum for discussion of any topic you like, aviation related or otherwise. Virtually all topics in this forum are permitted - so long as they are discussed in a civil manner." [emphasis added]
 
Greebo said:
Well, its the view of the management council that really matters, but it would be a mistake to assume that the view is uniform.
Click to expand...
Just to show that lack of uniformity, I think that the view of the members of PoA, not just management, matters equally, since without you, there is (are?) no PoA. If our operational philosophy drives folks away, that's bad. If you're happy with it, that's good.
 
Ron Levy said:
"Open forum for discussion of any topic you like, aviation related or otherwise. Virtually all topics in this forum are permitted - so long as they are discussed in a civil manner." [emphasis added]
Click to expand...

ya, so the non aviation posts already have a home, right?
 
I voted for an "off-airport" forum, but what I'd like to see is politics, religion, etc. taken there. No other non-aviation topics are so controversial. OTOH, this board is really very civil, so I don't STRONGLY feel that we need a separate forum for politics. I've just seen that work well elsewhere, to the point where if a thread starts drifting in that direction, there is general agreement to continue the discussion "in the basement". That keeps the other forums civil, and allows people to vent (within reason) in the basement.

Judy
 
Ron Levy said:
Just to show that lack of uniformity, I think that the view of the members of PoA, not just management, matters equally, since without you, there is (are?) no PoA. If our operational philosophy drives folks away, that's bad. If you're happy with it, that's good.
Click to expand...
Actually we're absolutely agreed on that point, Ron. :)

I was responding to a question specifically targeted at "moderators" - and while all Management Council members are moderators, not all moderators are MC members.
 
Greebo said:
Each of us has our own different perspectives and opinions about how things should operate. Thats very important in operating a successful forum community.
Click to expand...

Important is that the service you provide is desired by those you seek to service.

Yoda
 
judypilot said:
I voted for an "off-airport" forum, but what I'd like to see is politics, religion, etc. taken there.
Click to expand...

To me it appears that the title of the post usually, accurately describes the content and I skip those that don't interest me. While I wouldn't object to a new forum I don't think there is a need.

I think the over all decorum of posts have been good and the moderation of posts has not been heavy handed here.

I voted to leave things as they are.

Len
 
Len Lanetti said:
Important is that the service you provide is desired by those you seek to service.

Yoda
Click to expand...

"By those you seek to service??!!" Sounds like Dr Phil's dating advice :D
 
Len Lanetti said:
Important is that the service you provide is desired by those you seek to service.

Yoda
Click to expand...
Indeed. And it's the diversity in the management team that helps keep us focused on what's best for the forum and the needs of the forum community and keeps us steered clear of being a one-person show.
 
Ken Ibold said:
I've been meaning to ask. What headset should I buy? Should I rent or own? Anyone flown with kids?

Oops. Nevermind. I'm just being a smartalec :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


my favorite of all time, "which is better? high-wing or low-wing?". heaven help me. tc
 
tom clark said:
my favorite of all time, "which is better? high-wing or low-wing?". heaven help me. tc
Click to expand...

High wing, if you are flying a Cessna.

Low wing, in most other cases.

There are exceptions, but much of the time, if this isn't the case you might want to preflight a little more carefully. Remember, the wheels aren't supposed to be pointed up!! :rofl:
 
smigaldi said:
any low wing helos out there?
Click to expand...

Here's one Scott. :D

s30j9g.jpg
 
Ken Ibold said:
I've been meaning to ask. What headset should I buy? Should I rent or own? Anyone flown with kids?

Oops. Nevermind. I'm just being a smartalec :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You forgot "How do I figure out if I'm IFR current?" or "Does a safety pilot have to have a headset/medical/glasses?"
 
U guys R 2 much!

I kinda liked a recent thread titled something like: how much does it cost to buy and maintain a used airplane.

Hummm.....very thought provolking!

Dave
 
Hmmm...

Eliminate all non-aviation posts.
I'd have to say no to that. Part of hanging around the airport is yakking to your friends about whatever comes up. Eliminate that and you lose too much of the human interaction side and when it comes to it, that's what life is really about. Besides major off topic stuff here tends to be lawn chair in the grass kind of thing, not knifing each other.

Move all non-aviation posts to a new "Off the Airport" forum.
I can see the point of doing that. It makes sense actually. Occasionally I've thought it would be a good thing to do. The question is whether or not it would turn into the stinky dumpster out behind the hangar.

Continue as is, allowing non-aviation posts in "Hangar Talk."
This seems to have worked fairly well for the last year or so. There's usually only a handful of topics going at any given time that are annoying or completely uninteresting. (Nothing particularly bad, just not interesting in the least here so I skip right over it) It works as is but has room for improvement.


One point: 95%+ of the time I just hit "new posts" and read from there. Many times I don't even know what forum a message is in other than by the content and already knowing what the general groups are. To me, a new forum or 50 new forums would just be a message filing system, not a filtering tool. It would still show up. Splitting things up is useful in it's own way but mostly transparent on the typical day to day look see.

#1 No.
#2 or #3. Yes. I'm not sure which just yet. I'll sleep on it tonight and select one of them tomorrow.
 
I have similar thoughts - one reason Hangar Talk is so civil(ized) is that aviation and non-aviation posts are intermixed, and "we" all are on our best behavior in fear of unintentionally offending someone who isn't interested in reading non-aviation posts. Put people back in a Soapbox and you end up with the stinky dumpster out back like you said.

And for those of you that think establishing a new forum will satisfy those members who don't want to be offended or bothered with non-aviation posts...it didn't stop them from ****ing and moaning about it on the red board even though they were free not to visit that particular forum. It was almost amusing.

Keep it like it is.
 
Hangar Talk ain't broke, so don't fix it.

If anything, it's already been over censored or over moderated. While a potentially inflamatory or controversial comment may be disturbing to some at a certain given moment, the way they handle their response to a touchy post speaks volumes about themselves and their ability to handle a situation and also provides much of the interest in real conversation.
 
With the group that is here, I do not see a problem. I like it the way it is, you post what is on your mind or what you want input from others about and you get a civil response.
 
Ron Levy said:
...We on the Management Council would like to know what you think.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking "Oh no! not here too." Dang, and I finally broke down and registered.

Red is now boring, boring, boring!

BTW - My David Clarks are six years old now. They work just fine but, should I up grade to ENR?
 
No change needed. If any of my friends here try to hurt some of my other friends here, a posse of us will show up at their cyber-doorstep with chains and bats, and work 'em over.

It is good to be able to share non-av thoughts and events with my trusted av-friends, and if someone's occasional exuberance (or the odd cold one) sends a post over the line, well, we have moderators to nip it in the bud.

Having met a good number of y'all, I have yet to meet any jerks.
 
Dart said:
BTW - My David Clarks are six years old now. They work just fine but, should I up grade to ENR?
Click to expand...

Dart, i am gonna try out the Headsets, Inc. ANR upgrade in one of my sets of DCs. Sounds like a good deal to me.
 
I voted to keep it as is. There is some minor trolling IMO, but not too bad and not too agressive. The petty nastiness that was a part of the Red Board is not present here and I thank the moderators for that. I do enjoy the discourse of differing opinions.

BTW, I've heard of people slipping a 172 with full flaps, but the POH prohibits it!!! Should I report them to the FAA?
 
SCCutler said:
Dart, i am gonna try out the Headsets, Inc. ANR upgrade in one of my sets of DCs. Sounds like a good deal to me.
Click to expand...

I'd be very interested in hearing your feedback. Serious, no jokes. I have very good hearing for a 49 yearold (comprehension is a different story). I would like to keep it good. I wear passive DC's to mow the yard! But, new ANR's are a big budget bite for the small amount of hobby flying I do.
 
NC Pilot said:
I voted to keep it as is. There is some minor trolling IMO, but not too bad and not too agressive. The petty nastiness that was a part of the Red Board is not present here and I thank the moderators for that. I do enjoy the discourse of differing opinions.
Click to expand...

The nastiness was limited to few who could have been dealt with once moderation began. The 'nuclear option' left me with a foul taste. So foul I'm debating my renewal this April. Was it KP that was going to research AOPA's congressional effectiveness vis a vis other groups such as EAA? What came of that? Oh yeah, it's "non-Av" and therefore beyond debate.

NC Pilot said:
BTW, I've heard of people slipping a 172 with full flaps, but the POH prohibits it!!! Should I report them to the FAA?
Click to expand...

NO! The POH only recommends against them, and not all models even. So "whoa! there pardner" :D
 
NC Pilot said:
I voted to keep it as is. There is some minor trolling IMO, but not too bad and not too agressive. The petty nastiness that was a part of the Red Board is not present here and I thank the moderators for that. I do enjoy the discourse of differing opinions.
Click to expand...
I also sincerely thank the moderators. I think the big issue here is whether the moderation effort is worth it. On the red board it seems everyone posting in the litter box was begging for baby sitters. IMHO the problem with the unfettered non-aviation topics is that someone has to read all of it. As I see it, the moderators here are aviation experts that do not get involved in the off topic stuff.

As long as there are people willing to moderate the off topic ..uh.. stuff God bless them it's fine with me.

Joe
 
smigaldi said:
Several people have voted to create a new forum for 'off airport' stuff. I would really like to hear their opinoins on why that is a good idea, so far the comments seem one sided.
Click to expand...

I voted that way but I'm fairly ambivilous about it due to the current low bandwidth in HT. That makes it easy to pick out the nuggets amidst the chaff. I think the choice I was really looking for was "Leave it as is for as long as the political threads don't dominate HT and if that starts to happen create a separate forum for politics vs non-aviation/non-political subjects (like motorcycles, boats, kids, sports etc).
 
Ron Levy said:
Thanks for the thought, but please vote!
Click to expand...

Well I would have but there was no poll when I posted!
I voted for separate forums.
I blame both my compulsion to have 'everything in their little compartment', and my thought that 'aviation is all that really matters' to explain my radical stance on this.
:D
 
My real vote is to NOT eliminate non-aviation chat. Sure, I like to read aviation conversations; I also want to feel like it's OK to ask a normal off-the-wall question as one might do while standing around drinking coffee in the FBO.

Jim
 
I voted to leave it alone as I enjoy reading peoples opinions on many different subjects in addition to flying even if I don't agree. My favorite part of the newspaper is the editorials and opinions section.

Limiting the subjects to aviation would becomg boring, at least in my opinion. BTW, how should I log the time spent at POA?
 
Dart said:
I'm thinking "Oh no! not here too." Dang, and I finally broke down and registered.

Red is now boring, boring, boring!

BTW - My David Clarks are six years old now. They work just fine but, should I up grade to ENR?
Click to expand...
LOL! I got it at least ;)

You only have to do that on the red board, and it is no longer any guarantee...
 
Areeda said:
I also sincerely thank the moderators. I think the big issue here is whether the moderation effort is worth it. On the red board it seems everyone posting in the litter box was begging for baby sitters. IMHO the problem with the unfettered non-aviation topics is that someone has to read all of it. As I see it, the moderators here are aviation experts that do not get involved in the off topic stuff.

As long as there are people willing to moderate the off topic ..uh.. stuff God bless them it's fine with me.

Joe
Click to expand...

Nothing against the moderators I appreciate their service too, but I think they have little to do with the fact that this board is "civilized." I've seen very few examples of them having to do anything at all in this regard, except to rein in some long time posters here who rather unfairly jumped on new members switching from the red board after the fiasco over there. Which is why I find this discussion amusing.

I think you are painting former Soapboxers with an awfully broad brush and I don't appreciate it. Not enough to launch a strike on your rep points :D but still...

No one is clicking your mouse but yourself. Moving stuff around in different network folders on the server isn't going to matter much.
 
Voted to keep it like it is - as long as things are discussed civilly and with mutual respect (or at least the appearance of mutual respect!) then let it snow, let it snow, let it snow. It's when it gets nasty that I can't tolerate it. I'm willing to give anyone a chance to prove that they are non-toxic!
 
fgcason said:
Hmmm...

Move all non-aviation posts to a new "Off the Airport" forum.
I can see the point of doing that. It makes sense actually. Occasionally I've thought it would be a good thing to do. The question is whether or not it would turn into the stinky dumpster out behind the hangar.
Click to expand...
My concern with this is that it MIGHT turn into another soapbox. :no:
 
etsisk said:
My concern with this is that it MIGHT turn into another soapbox. :no:
Click to expand...
It would still be moderated and subject to the RoC. It would simply be another forum that could be ignored by those not interested in non-aviation posts. That's all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top