Ok to recommend?

[Roger Opar]

In general, is it OK to recommend an aviation product (that I have found
very helpful) in a newsgroup?



The product is free.

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Roger Opar" > said:
>In general, is it OK to recommend an aviation product (that I have found
>very helpful) in a newsgroup?

There is a rec.aviation.products newsgroup specifically for that purpose.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Consistently separating words by spaces became a general custom about
the tenth century A.D., and lasted until about 1957, when FORTRAN
abandoned the practice. -- Sun FORTRAN Reference Manual

[Jay Honeck]

>>In general, is it OK to recommend an aviation product (that I have found
>>very helpful) in a newsgroup?
>
> There is a rec.aviation.products newsgroup specifically for that purpose.

True, but it depends on the product. The .product group doesn't get a lot
of traffic, and -- if it's something we all could use -- why not bring it up
here?

Generally the best way to go about this in the .piloting group is to pose it
as a question, like "What do you guys think of 'x' product?"

If it sucks, you'll soon know it. And at some point you'll have a chance
to toss your two cents in...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Jay Honeck" > said:
>>>In general, is it OK to recommend an aviation product (that I have found
>>>very helpful) in a newsgroup?
>>
>> There is a rec.aviation.products newsgroup specifically for that purpose.
>
>True, but it depends on the product. The .product group doesn't get a lot
>of traffic, and -- if it's something we all could use -- why not bring it up
>here?

With that attitude, why have newsgroups at all? Why not just have one
called "misc" and have everybody post there? That way everybody will see
it.

>Generally the best way to go about this in the .piloting group is to pose it
>as a question, like "What do you guys think of 'x' product?"

Oh yeah, there's nothing I like better than some guy who coincidentally
has the same name as the president of a company posting from that
company's domain name saying "I just discovered <foo> and I think it's
great". Of all the dozens of newsgroups I read, the piloting groups are
the *most* prone to that sort of dishonesty, and I don't know why.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
If Alan Turing was alive today, the homosexuality
would be OK but he'd be in trouble for codebreaking.
-- Martin Bacon

[Gary G]

First - it's very polite and considerate of you to ask.

Second - I "personally" (just my opinion) would like to see it.
I mean, I don't check several hundred newsgroups, and this is the best
of the aviation newsgroups - it's the first I check.
And anyone who can't manually filter through stuff needs to improve their methods.

But - at the same time - there are people who like to have them in specific places.
We're trying to avoid blatant commercial posts, which due get tedious.
But well-intentioned people, responsible in this group, have made great contributions
to the group in ways that help many people - even though it doesn't help everyone . . .

I want to know - the world must know!

"Roger Opar" > wrote in message ...
> In general, is it OK to recommend an aviation product (that I have found very helpful) in a newsgroup?
>
>
>
> The product is free.
>
>

[Jay Honeck]

> Oh yeah, there's nothing I like better than some guy who coincidentally
> has the same name as the president of a company posting from that
> company's domain name saying "I just discovered <foo> and I think it's
> great". Of all the dozens of newsgroups I read, the piloting groups are
> the *most* prone to that sort of dishonesty, and I don't know why.

Well, I suppose if you're assuming that the guy is somehow attached to the
product, you have a point.

I wasn't assuming that from his original question.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[C J Campbell]

"Roger Opar" > wrote in message
...
> In general, is it OK to recommend an aviation product (that I have found
> very helpful) in a newsgroup?

There are varying opinions. Some people are so obsessed with
compartmentalizing everything that they think you should have asked this on
the alt.news.etiquette.isitspam group and that they should answer on the
alt.news.etiquette.yesitis group. These people often are those who are most
guilty of posting off topic themselves.

Others, of a more practical nature and who are interested in actually
communicating something useful, may say that it is all right if the product
is genuinely about piloting, is not being promoted by its manufacturer or a
reseller, and if discussion of the product does not interfere with the
ostensible purpose of the news group.

Still others note that people are constantly expressing their opinion on
various models of aircraft, weather services, ATC, oxygen bottles, and the
like as reviews and that many others find these useful. Some of these people
would find a departure from the usual discussion of national politics and
the personal habits and parentage of various participants in the group to be
singularly refreshing.

Thus, discussion of a free new weather service which would make flying safer
might be appropriate for a piloting news group. Discussion of plane wax
might be better on the owning news group.

[Dudley Henriques]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
> In a previous article, "Jay Honeck" > said:
>>>>In general, is it OK to recommend an aviation product (that I have
>>>>found
>>>>very helpful) in a newsgroup?
>>>
>>> There is a rec.aviation.products newsgroup specifically for that
>>> purpose.
>>
>>True, but it depends on the product. The .product group doesn't get
>>a lot
>>of traffic, and -- if it's something we all could use -- why not bring
>>it up
>>here?
>
> With that attitude, why have newsgroups at all? Why not just have one
> called "misc" and have everybody post there? That way everybody will
> see
> it.
>
>>Generally the best way to go about this in the .piloting group is to
>>pose it
>>as a question, like "What do you guys think of 'x' product?"
>
> Oh yeah, there's nothing I like better than some guy who
> coincidentally
> has the same name as the president of a company posting from that
> company's domain name saying "I just discovered <foo> and I think it's
> great". Of all the dozens of newsgroups I read, the piloting groups
> are
> the *most* prone to that sort of dishonesty, and I don't know why.

As long as there's Usenet there will be those who come aboard to push
product and/or agenda. It goes with the program as they say.
First of all, the post from this IP obviously isn't in that category at
all. This poster not only sent a post first asking the group if what he
wanted to do was protocol, he stated as well that the product was free.
Instead of taking this issue on here with this poster, I would actually
commend this IP's actions as exactly what Usenet needs to clean it
up......more posters just like this one!
It's fine if you want to tell the world how you personally feel about
people who use Usenet for commercial purposes. Just be advised that most
of us out here who have been on Usenet for any degree of time already
know how things work.
In the end, you won't stop commercial posters by telling the world how
you feel about it. You can't make up rules and regulations for Usenet
either. Usenet isn't organized enough for all that. Usenet is like a mob
with no leader that's comprised of every form of humanity imaginable.
The intellect out here runs the gamut from Mensa through complete moron.
Fortunately on the aviation groups, because of the high degree of
expertise and knowledge required to sustain one's self out here, we have
a large percentage of fairly intelligent people. I think they handle
commercial poster quite well really.
It's the group individually who must handle the commercial poster, and
no amount of bitching or preaching about protocols will do it.
In the end, those who post on aviation groups with a commercial agenda
are dealt with by the group. After a few posts, it becomes apparent
what's going on and people just leave that poster alone. He dies on the
vine as they say.
Bottom line on this issue;
You can't stop commercial posting up front with protocol. The people you
reach on Usenet by issuing protocol would already know it's bad form
through natural intelligence :-)
You stop it by ignoring it as it's recognized by the group for what it
is. It's THAT simple!
Just my rambling opinions on the matter of course :-)
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/CFI Retired
for private email; make necessary changes between ( )
dhenriques(at)(delete all this)earthlink(dot)net

[George Patterson]

Roger Opar wrote:
>
> In general, is it OK to recommend an aviation product (that I have found
> very helpful) in a newsgroup?
>
> The product is free.

I vote yes. Nice of you to ask.

George Patterson
He who tries to carry a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in
no other way.

[Peter Duniho]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> [...]
> Thus, discussion of a free new weather service which would make flying
> safer
> might be appropriate for a piloting news group. Discussion of plane wax
> might be better on the owning news group.

The most reasonable and comprehensive reply to the original question yet.
:)

Non-sponsored product mentions might be off-topic here, but frankly if it's
about a product that has any relevance to actually *piloting* an airplane,
it would be a breath of fresh air, WAY more on-topic than half the messages
that get posted here on a daily basis.

Thank you for asking, Roger.

Pete

[private]

Nicely said.


"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In a previous article, "Jay Honeck" > said:
> >>>>In general, is it OK to recommend an aviation product (that I have
> >>>>found
> >>>>very helpful) in a newsgroup?
> >>>
> >>> There is a rec.aviation.products newsgroup specifically for that
> >>> purpose.
> >>
> >>True, but it depends on the product. The .product group doesn't get
> >>a lot
> >>of traffic, and -- if it's something we all could use -- why not bring
> >>it up
> >>here?
> >
> > With that attitude, why have newsgroups at all? Why not just have one
> > called "misc" and have everybody post there? That way everybody will
> > see
> > it.
> >
> >>Generally the best way to go about this in the .piloting group is to
> >>pose it
> >>as a question, like "What do you guys think of 'x' product?"
> >
> > Oh yeah, there's nothing I like better than some guy who
> > coincidentally
> > has the same name as the president of a company posting from that
> > company's domain name saying "I just discovered <foo> and I think it's
> > great". Of all the dozens of newsgroups I read, the piloting groups
> > are
> > the *most* prone to that sort of dishonesty, and I don't know why.
>
> As long as there's Usenet there will be those who come aboard to push
> product and/or agenda. It goes with the program as they say.
> First of all, the post from this IP obviously isn't in that category at
> all. This poster not only sent a post first asking the group if what he
> wanted to do was protocol, he stated as well that the product was free.
> Instead of taking this issue on here with this poster, I would actually
> commend this IP's actions as exactly what Usenet needs to clean it
> up......more posters just like this one!
> It's fine if you want to tell the world how you personally feel about
> people who use Usenet for commercial purposes. Just be advised that most
> of us out here who have been on Usenet for any degree of time already
> know how things work.
> In the end, you won't stop commercial posters by telling the world how
> you feel about it. You can't make up rules and regulations for Usenet
> either. Usenet isn't organized enough for all that. Usenet is like a mob
> with no leader that's comprised of every form of humanity imaginable.
> The intellect out here runs the gamut from Mensa through complete moron.
> Fortunately on the aviation groups, because of the high degree of
> expertise and knowledge required to sustain one's self out here, we have
> a large percentage of fairly intelligent people. I think they handle
> commercial poster quite well really.
> It's the group individually who must handle the commercial poster, and
> no amount of bitching or preaching about protocols will do it.
> In the end, those who post on aviation groups with a commercial agenda
> are dealt with by the group. After a few posts, it becomes apparent
> what's going on and people just leave that poster alone. He dies on the
> vine as they say.
> Bottom line on this issue;
> You can't stop commercial posting up front with protocol. The people you
> reach on Usenet by issuing protocol would already know it's bad form
> through natural intelligence :-)
> You stop it by ignoring it as it's recognized by the group for what it
> is. It's THAT simple!
> Just my rambling opinions on the matter of course :-)
> Dudley Henriques
> International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
> Commercial Pilot/CFI Retired
> for private email; make necessary changes between ( )
> dhenriques(at)(delete all this)earthlink(dot)net
>
>

[Montblack]

("Peter Duniho" wrote)
<snip>
> Non-sponsored product mentions might be off-topic here, but frankly if
> it's about a product that has any relevance to actually *piloting* an
> airplane, it would be a breath of fresh air, WAY more on-topic than half
> the messages that get posted here on a daily basis.


Lately, most of the posts seem to be more on-topic than not. If a thread
does disolve into unreadable tripe I simply <click> Mark Conversation as
Read, and move on.

I think the signal to noise ratio has been excellent in 2005.

Now if we could just all ...please ...<SNIP> our posts down to size! (Not
you Peter, but there are some out there who drive me nuts with that.)


Montblack

[OtisWinslow]

> There is a rec.aviation.products newsgroup specifically for that purpose.
>

Gee .. I come here to learn interesting stuff about flying. I'd include
new products that might be of interest to me in that classification. I can
tell in about a heartbeat if it has any value. I don't really like reading
several newsgroups.

[Dave]

Same...

How else might we hear of a new product otherwise?

And have a PIREP on it as well?

Dave


On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 15:43:07 GMT, George Patterson
> wrote:

>
>
>Roger Opar wrote:

Snip
>
>I vote yes. Nice of you to ask.
>

[George Patterson]

Montblack wrote:
>
> Now if we could just all ...please ...<SNIP> our posts down to size! (Not
> you Peter, but there are some out there who drive me nuts with that.)

Yep. There's one in this thread that quotes the entirety of a multi-page post to
add a two word reply to it.

George Patterson
He who tries to carry a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in
no other way.

[mindenpilot]

"Roger Opar" > wrote in message
...
> In general, is it OK to recommend an aviation product (that I have found
> very helpful) in a newsgroup?
>
>
>
> The product is free.
>
>

So what is it already???

I guess you know where I stand.

Adam
N7966L
Beech Super III

[Morgans]

> >
> > Now if we could just all ...please ...<SNIP> our posts down to size!
(Not
> > you Peter, but there are some out there who drive me nuts with that.)
>
> Yep. There's one in this thread that quotes the entirety of a multi-page
post to
> add a two word reply to it.
>
> George Patterson

Nicely said! <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Jay Honeck]

>> In general, is it OK to recommend an aviation product (that I have found
>> very helpful) in a newsgroup?
>>
>> The product is free.
>
> So what is it already???

I think we scared the poor guy away!

:-(
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Matt Barrow]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:g58Td.48470$4q6.41032@attbi_s01...
> >> In general, is it OK to recommend an aviation product (that I have
found
> >> very helpful) in a newsgroup?
> >>
> >> The product is free.
> >
> > So what is it already???
>
> I think we scared the poor guy away!
>
> :-(

I wonder what he wanted to recommend?

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
"Matt Barrow" > wrote:

> > > So what is it already???
> >
> > I think we scared the poor guy away!
> >
> > :-(
>
> I wonder what he wanted to recommend?

maybe he posted it in the correct place (rec.aviation.product)

:-)

--
Bob Noel
looking for a sig the lawyers will like