AOPA shutting down their message board

[OtisWinslow]

They announced they were shutting it down on Monday. Supposedly it's going
to reopen in about "4 to 6" weeks. In the mean time they say they're going
to "upgrade" it but they haven't decided what software because their
lawyers are looking at ways to tighten up the rules and protect them. This
came about because they were unable (or unwilling) to control a couple rogue
members. (One of them no longer flies and has open contempt for those of us
who still do, and the other one was one of those who caused the demise
of AvWeb). So AOPA takes this resource away from ALL members
because it lacked the courage to deal with the trouble makers. Unbelievable.
I'm betting we never see it again.

[Jay Honeck]

> I'm betting we never see it again.

I never even knew it existed.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Matt Barrow]

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
> I took the trouble of logging into it once...my opinion was less than
> favorable and I never went back
> Jim

For what it's worth, AVSIG is much better.

[Jim Burns]

I took the trouble of logging into it once...my opinion was less than
favorable and I never went back
Jim

"OtisWinslow" > wrote in message
...
> They announced they were shutting it down on Monday. Supposedly it's going
> to reopen in about "4 to 6" weeks. In the mean time they say they're going
> to "upgrade" it but they haven't decided what software because their
> lawyers are looking at ways to tighten up the rules and protect them. This
> came about because they were unable (or unwilling) to control a couple
rogue
> members. (One of them no longer flies and has open contempt for those of
us
> who still do, and the other one was one of those who caused the demise
> of AvWeb). So AOPA takes this resource away from ALL members
> because it lacked the courage to deal with the trouble makers.
Unbelievable.
> I'm betting we never see it again.
>
>
>

[Bob Gardner]

The demise of Avweb? I log on every Monday and Thursday...how does what I
look at differ from what you refer to?

Bob Gardner

"OtisWinslow" > wrote in message
...
> They announced they were shutting it down on Monday. Supposedly it's going
> to reopen in about "4 to 6" weeks. In the mean time they say they're going
> to "upgrade" it but they haven't decided what software because their
> lawyers are looking at ways to tighten up the rules and protect them. This
> came about because they were unable (or unwilling) to control a couple
> rogue
> members. (One of them no longer flies and has open contempt for those of
> us
> who still do, and the other one was one of those who caused the demise
> of AvWeb). So AOPA takes this resource away from ALL members
> because it lacked the courage to deal with the trouble makers.
> Unbelievable.
> I'm betting we never see it again.
>
>
>

[Kyle Boatright]

"Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
...
> The demise of Avweb? I log on every Monday and Thursday...how does what I
> look at differ from what you refer to?
>
> Bob Gardner

My guess...

Until 5 (?) or so years ago, Avweb was informative and irreverant. There
was a chuckle in every issue. Then, there was a change of management and
the irreverance and humor disappeared in the first issue, never to return.

[Greg Esres]

<<For what it's worth, AVSIG is much better.>>

It was 5 years ago. Now there's zero training activity on that forum.

[Dave Stadt]

"Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
...
> The demise of Avweb? I log on every Monday and Thursday...how does what I
> look at differ from what you refer to?
>
> Bob Gardner

The current AvWeb is a mere shadow of what it was. The new owners made it
"better."

[Thomas Borchert]

Greg,

> <<For what it's worth, AVSIG is much better.>>
>
> It was 5 years ago. Now there's zero training activity on that forum.
>

It was - until they moved it to a web forum. I don't know what it is
people like about web forums, but coming from offline newsreaders I just
can't get the hang of them other than to do a quick look up of a support
problem.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Cub Driver]

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 19:26:11 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>> I'm betting we never see it again.
>
>I never even knew it existed.

I find the AOPA website very user-unfriendly. It insists that my
browser doesn't allow cookies, though it does, so every log-in is a
two-step process to find the alternative system for logging in without
a cookie.

I once complained to AOPA about this, and got an email suggesting that
I telephone and let the guy "walk you through" the process. I didn't
bother. The solution to unfriendly websites is not to use them.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Larry Dighera]

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 18:16:09 GMT, "OtisWinslow"
> wrote in
>::

>This
>came about because they were unable (or unwilling) to control a couple rogue
>members. (One of them no longer flies and has open contempt for those of us
>who still do, and the other one was one of those who caused the demise
>of AvWeb).

Who are those members? What sort of remarks did they post that were
so powerful as to shut down AOPA's message board? As destructive as
they may be, they must possess considerable literary talent to wield
such power.

[OtisWinslow]

It's not the same owners and steers way clear of anything controversial.


"Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
...
> The demise of Avweb? I log on every Monday and Thursday...how does what I
> look at differ from what you refer to?
>
> Bob Gardner
>
> "OtisWinslow" > wrote in message
> ...
>> They announced they were shutting it down on Monday. Supposedly it's
>> going
>> to reopen in about "4 to 6" weeks. In the mean time they say they're
>> going
>> to "upgrade" it but they haven't decided what software because their
>> lawyers are looking at ways to tighten up the rules and protect them.
>> This
>> came about because they were unable (or unwilling) to control a couple
>> rogue
>> members. (One of them no longer flies and has open contempt for those of
>> us
>> who still do, and the other one was one of those who caused the demise
>> of AvWeb). So AOPA takes this resource away from ALL members
>> because it lacked the courage to deal with the trouble makers.
>> Unbelievable.
>> I'm betting we never see it again.
>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Jay Honeck]

> I find the AOPA website very user-unfriendly. It insists that my
> browser doesn't allow cookies, though it does, so every log-in is a
> two-step process to find the alternative system for logging in without
> a cookie.

You're not alone.

Heck, as the Airport Support Network volunteer, I supposedly have access to
"special" parts of the AOPA website.

It took me FOREVER to successfully log on, and getting my password changed
to something I could remember (as opposed to a random series of letters and
numbers) was more difficult than it was worth.

Result: I never visit the site.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Paul kgyy]

Avweb used to have a lot more user input. There was some strong user
criticism of the lawyers involved in the Carnahan case, and maybe
others. The lawyers sued Avweb (what else is new?) and ever since
there has been an active avoidance of anything controversial.

[John T Lowry]

"OtisWinslow" > wrote in message
...
> They announced they were shutting it down on Monday. Supposedly it's
> going
> to reopen in about "4 to 6" weeks. In the mean time they say they're
> going
> to "upgrade" it but they haven't decided what software because their
> lawyers are looking at ways to tighten up the rules and protect them.
> This
> came about because they were unable (or unwilling) to control a couple
> rogue
> members. (One of them no longer flies and has open contempt for those
> of us
> who still do, and the other one was one of those who caused the demise
> of AvWeb). So AOPA takes this resource away from ALL members
> because it lacked the courage to deal with the trouble makers.
> Unbelievable.
> I'm betting we never see it again.
>
>
>
There seems to be a lot of that "Cowardly Lion" syndrome going around.
Maybe wimps are attracted to organizations.

John Lowry
Flight Physics

[George Patterson]

Cub Driver wrote:
>
> I find the AOPA website very user-unfriendly. It insists that my
> browser doesn't allow cookies, though it does, so every log-in is a
> two-step process to find the alternative system for logging in without
> a cookie.
>
> I once complained to AOPA about this, and got an email suggesting that
> I telephone and let the guy "walk you through" the process. I didn't
> bother.

I would've been a waste of time. The last two or three times I tried to login
there, they displayed a page that stated they had some sort of problem.
Apparently lots of people get the "cookies" message and can't log in at all. As
I recall, the page had a title that contained the question "Why am I here?" I
think they could use a good webmaster.

At least you got email back -- they haven't responded to the last two I sent.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

[Michael]

> Until 5 (?) or so years ago, Avweb was informative and irreverant.
There
> was a chuckle in every issue. Then, there was a change of management
and
> the irreverance and humor disappeared in the first issue, never to
return.

There's a bit more to the story. The short version is that someone
posted something quite critical of a particular aviation lawyer who
makes his living suing manufacturers, making life difficult (and
expensive) for all of us who fly. It's a pretty good living for him
though - good enough that he can go around crashing warbirds.

He sued AvWeb (since the poster wasn't worth suing) and AvWeb set up a
fund to pay the defense costs, and started asking for donations to fill
the fund. Many donated. Then, instead of carrying it forward as a
freedom of the press/common carrier issue, they caved and used the
donations to pay a settlement. At that point AvWeb became just another
Belvoir publication - same crap as their magazines.

Michael

[John Galban]

OtisWinslow wrote:
> They announced they were shutting it down on Monday. Supposedly it's
going
> to reopen in about "4 to 6" weeks.
<snip>

No great loss, IMHO. I was over there a couple of weeks ago and the
boards were dead. It looked like they were only averaging one or two
dozen post per week.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Peter Duniho]

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> [...] As destructive as
> they may be, they must possess considerable literary talent to wield
> such power.

The pen is mightier than the sword, don't forget. :)

[Larry Dighera]

On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:41:23 -0700, "Peter Duniho"
> wrote in
>::

>"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
>> [...] As destructive as
>> they may be, they must possess considerable literary talent to wield
>> such power.
>
>The pen is mightier than the sword, don't forget. :)
>

It would be nice to know who the two pilots, to whom the OP referred,
are, and specifically what they posted on AvWeb that precipitated the
legal action, as well as their specific comments that resulted in AOPA
closing their message board. I'd say they wield a mighty "sword"
indeed.

[OtisWinslow]

> It would be nice to know who the two pilots, to whom the OP referred,
> are, and specifically what they posted on AvWeb that precipitated the
> legal action, as well as their specific comments that resulted in AOPA
> closing their message board. I'd say they wield a mighty "sword"
> indeed.
>

Both shall remain nameless.

Only one of the AOPA posters was involved in AvWeb's trouble. That
poster was one of those sued by the aviation attorney for his attacks
on said attorney. The other AOPA poster no longer flies and has a general
contempt for anyone who does. He was tossed from another board.

They both have a pattern of right wing extremist politics and personal
attacks on other board members whom they may deem undesirable
for whatever reason.

[Darrel Toepfer]

OtisWinslow wrote:

> They both have a pattern of right wing extremist politics and personal
> attacks on other board members whom they may deem undesirable
> for whatever reason.

Seems to match what I've seen on Usenet Newsgroups...

[Larry Dighera]

On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 21:19:42 GMT, "OtisWinslow"
> wrote in
>::

>Both shall remain nameless.

Why?

[Greg Esres]

<<It was - until they moved it to a web forum. I don't know what it is
people like about web forums, but coming from offline newsreaders I
just can't get the hang of them other than to do a quick look up of a
support problem.
>>

The web forum has improved membership tremendously, but there still is
not much training discussion going on. The $15 per year probably
discourages student pilot sign ups. Sure, it's not much, but why
should they pay anything when you can get it for free elsewhere?

These newsgroups have a far greater participation than any web forum,
and, like you, I prefer offline reading.

[Jay Honeck]

>> They both have a pattern of right wing extremist politics and personal
>> attacks on other board members whom they may deem undesirable
>> for whatever reason.
>
> Seems to match what I've seen on Usenet Newsgroups...

That's funny -- I was thinking it seemed like just the opposite of the
usenet newsgroups.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Morgans]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote
>
> That's funny -- I was thinking it seemed like just the opposite of the
> usenet newsgroups.

Right. The correct (or popular) stance gets support, and the offending
weenie usually goes off running, with his tail between his legs. (or worse,
ignored, and laughed at) <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Greg Esres > wrote:

> The web forum has improved membership tremendously, but there still is
> not much training discussion going on. The $15 per year probably
> discourages student pilot sign ups. Sure, it's not much, but why
> should they pay anything when you can get it for free elsewhere?

huh? There is(was?) a web forum that charged $15/year? geez, talk
about stupid.

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

[Cub Driver]

On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 16:46:15 GMT, George Patterson
> wrote:

>At least you got email back -- they haven't responded to the last two I sent.

I hit Reply to the AOPA email newsletter that arrives once a week
(whenever). It had a paragraph about how brilliant the site was, so I
responded with my log-in story.

Evidently a human being is behind the email newsletter.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Matt Barrow]

"Darrel Toepfer" > wrote in message
. ..
> OtisWinslow wrote:
>
> > They both have a pattern of right wing extremist politics and personal
> > attacks on other board members whom they may deem undesirable
> > for whatever reason.
>
> Seems to match what I've seen on Usenet Newsgroups...

Hmmm...I've noticed the opposite.

[Matt Barrow]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:feH6e.7058$Bb3.3481@attbi_s22...
> >> They both have a pattern of right wing extremist politics and personal
> >> attacks on other board members whom they may deem undesirable
> >> for whatever reason.
> >
> > Seems to match what I've seen on Usenet Newsgroups...
>
> That's funny -- I was thinking it seemed like just the opposite of the
> usenet newsgroups.

As well, I can recall off the top of my head a couple of commercial BB's
that were shut down because of left wing crybaby/trolls that flooded the
boards causing the companies to have to shut them down. Two were "leisure"
related and two pertained to construction that were flooded by
EarthFirsters.

[George Patterson]

Cub Driver wrote:
>
> Evidently a human being is behind the email newsletter.

Good to know.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.

[Darrel Toepfer]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> That's funny -- I was thinking it seemed like just the opposite of the
> usenet newsgroups.

Not as a majority, every active newsgroup seems to have a couple of
misfits, a definite minority...

[Darrel Toepfer]

Matt Barrow wrote:

> Hmmm...I've noticed the opposite.

Depends on the newsgroup in question I suppose...

[Matt Barrow]

"Darrel Toepfer" > wrote in message
. ..
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>
> > Hmmm...I've noticed the opposite.
>
> Depends on the newsgroup in question I suppose...

The newsgroup, the board...

The term "Moonbats" come to mind.

[Greg Esres]

<<huh? There is(was?) a web forum that charged $15/year? geez, talk
about stupid.>>

They don't do advertising. How else to keep the lights on? The board
is heavily moderated; real names are required and flaming isn't
permitted.

Five years ago and earlier, it was worth the expensive per hour
connect fees charged by CompuServe. There are still some advantages
over the newsgroups. There are more controllers there and lots of
airline pilots.

In my view, student pilots should not have to pay. At that level in
their training, their commitment is low and there are too many free
alternatives.