At the risk of feeding the troll, what IS Skylune's beef?

[xerj]

As a relative latecomer to the group, I'm behind the curve on what his basic
argument is.

It's something to do with the relative risks of GA flying isn't it? He
claims that it's actually higher than is admitted or something like that?

TIA.

[JohnH]

xerj wrote:
> As a relative latecomer to the group, I'm behind the curve on what
> his basic argument is.
>
> It's something to do with the relative risks of GA flying isn't it? He
> claims that it's actually higher than is admitted or something like
> that?

"Skylune" - a self admitted troll and very likely another pilot - likes to
have fun with us by playing devil's advocate and pressing hot buttons.
There are those who haven't figured this out, or are pretty thin skinned or
close minded, and get all in a huff or plonk him.

Many things he says have a point if you allow them to.

[Peter Duniho]

"xerj" > wrote in message
...
> As a relative latecomer to the group, I'm behind the curve on what his
> basic argument is.

His "basic argument" is simply that he is looking for whatever criticism of
GA he can come up with. It's bad enough that he doesn't have his facts
straight, but for him to think that this newsgroup of all places is the
appropriate forum for his venting is offensive. Almost as offensive are all
of the folks willing to continue to engage this troll.

That said, if you want to know his thoughts, I'd recommend private email to
him, rather than starting a new thread on the subject. The only person who
can offer an accurate answer to your question (assuming one exists) is the
'loon himself.

[[email protected]]

Can't help but hypothesize that he's refusing to take the meds. Sad
case, really. Wonder if he is indeed a pilot (doesn't seem to quite
know the jargon but certainly tries hard) and whether he is able to
pass a physical? One speculates that he might be one of those poor
folks who so desperately wants to fly and either can't pass the medical
exam or just plain couldn't hack it in the airplane and thus
compensates by attacking those who can do what he can only contemplate
from afar. You see it from time to time and all you can feel is pity.
Often the type is observed at public hearings where they whine and
complain about the noise of a local airport, seeking to close it so as
to try and get rid of the reminder of their own impotence.

[RomeoMike]

Go deep into the thread entitled, "Bullying....as preacaution," to find
his beef.


xerj wrote:
> As a relative latecomer to the group, I'm behind the curve on what his basic
> argument is.
>
> It's something to do with the relative risks of GA flying isn't it? He
> claims that it's actually higher than is admitted or something like that?
>
> TIA.
>
>

[Morgans]

> wrote in message

> Can't help but hypothesize that he's refusing to take the meds. Sad
> case, really. Wonder if he is indeed a pilot (doesn't seem to quite
> know the jargon but certainly tries hard) and whether he is able to
> pass a physical?

> One speculates that he might be one of those poor
> folks who so desperately wants to fly and either can't pass the medical
> exam or just plain couldn't hack it in the airplane

DING DING DING! You win the prize. He started training, and coould not
imagine how anyone could be competent at flying one of those things.
--
Jim in NC

[Alan]

If you read through his threads you'll find that he never completed
his pilot training but is considering picking it up again. Seems that
he has some noise issues with an airport that is close to some land he
owns.



On Tue, 25 Oct 2005 19:08:48 -0400, "JohnH" >
wrote:

>xerj wrote:
>> As a relative latecomer to the group, I'm behind the curve on what
>> his basic argument is.
>>
>> It's something to do with the relative risks of GA flying isn't it? He
>> claims that it's actually higher than is admitted or something like
>> that?
>
>"Skylune" - a self admitted troll and very likely another pilot - likes to
>have fun with us by playing devil's advocate and pressing hot buttons.
>There are those who haven't figured this out, or are pretty thin skinned or
>close minded, and get all in a huff or plonk him.
>
>Many things he says have a point if you allow them to.
>

[Skylune]

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. Absolutely ludicrous.

[John Theune]

Skylune wrote:
> Wrong, wrong, and wrong. Absolutely ludicrous.
>
Your inability to say what you are responding to is what's truly ludicrous.

[Skylune]

by John Theune <JTheune@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Oct 26, 2005 at 05:45 PM


Skylune wrote:
>>Wrong, wrong, and wrong. Absolutely ludicrous.
>
>Your inability to say what you are responding >to is what's truly
>ludicrous.

As is your apparent inability to figure it out, especially on a thread
with only a few posts.

[Montblack]

("Skylune" wrote)
>>Your inability to say what you are responding >to is what's truly
>>ludicrous.

> As is your apparent inability to figure it out, especially on a thread
> with only a few posts.


Many times a post will show up independent of any supporting thread.


Montblack

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> by John Theune <JTheune@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Oct 26, 2005 at 05:45 PM
>
>
> Skylune wrote:
>>>Wrong, wrong, and wrong. Absolutely ludicrous.
>>
>>Your inability to say what you are responding >to is what's truly
>>ludicrous.
>
> As is your apparent inability to figure it out, especially on a thread
> with only a few posts.
>
Those of us that use real newsreaders instead of places like
talkaviation.com usually have our clients set to not show messages we have
already read.

[Newps]

Skylune wrote:
> Wrong, wrong, and wrong. Absolutely ludicrous.

What is? Absolutely no context.

[Skylune]

I access this site via talkaboutaviation.com. When I post a reply, I hit
the "Post a reply" button. I have no idea what "real newsreaders" are.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
>I access this site via talkaboutaviation.com. When I post a reply, I hit
> the "Post a reply" button. I have no idea what "real newsreaders" are.
>
>

First, this is not a "site" in the same way amazon.com or
talkaboutaviation.com is. It is a group messaging system called USENET. No
one computer or server controls it. USENET news servers scattered around the
internet share the messages posted to them by users such as yourself with
other news servers. Most ISPs have a news server and offer it to their users
for no cost. There are also public news server that you can subscribe to
most charge but there may still be a free one or two out there.

In the days before the WWW you had to use a newsreader to get these messages
and it is still probably the best way to do it. If you have Outlook Express
on your computer you have a "real" newsreader. While not the best it is easy
to use and everyone with Windows got it for free.

It has features that will allow things like posting the message you are
replying to be added to the message as it has posted your message above.

[Sylvain]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> It is a group messaging system called USENET. No
> one computer or server controls it. USENET news servers scattered around the
> internet share the messages posted to them by users such as yourself with
> other news servers

Skylune:

A thing to keep in mind is that messages on usenet do not appear in the
same order for everyone; i.e., I might very well see you reply before
the message you are replying to; so that's why it is very confusing
when one replies to a post without quoting the message he's replying
to... now, don't go overboard and quote the whole thing, which some
people do, and which is annoying to, just to add a line or two;
but you should quote enough so that who ever reads your post has
some kind of idea of what you are talking about.

(I am using Thunderbird for email and usenet; dunno if it is the 'best'
newsreader out there, but it runs on every platform I have access to)

--Sylvain

[Skylune]

Thanks for the explanation. I never did understand how all the

xxx said ...
>xxxx
>xxxx

got automatically posted. Wouldn't it be easier to simply use the
talkaboutaviation.com web site? It doesn't seem to complicated to follow a
thread if you hit Post a reply, as I'm doing now..

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> Thanks for the explanation. I never did understand how all the
>
> xxx said ...
>>xxxx
>>xxxx
>
> got automatically posted. Wouldn't it be easier to simply use the
> talkaboutaviation.com web site? It doesn't seem to complicated to follow a
> thread if you hit Post a reply, as I'm doing now..
>

This is a perfect example. I don't know if you are responding to my message
or the one that is up thread as far (as my news feed is concerned) that was
posted by Sylvain.

Also, if even a small percentage of those people that post and those that
just read the aviation newsgroups posted and read through talkaboutaviation
it would be overwhelmed. They couldn't pay for the bandwidth.

The web is great for things the web is great for newsgroups is not one of
those things.

[Sylvain]

Skylune wrote:
> Wouldn't it be easier to simply use the
> talkaboutaviation.com web site? It doesn't seem to complicated to follow a
> thread if you hit Post a reply, as I'm doing now..

The thing is that some of us also follow other newsgroups not
necessarily related to aviation, and it's kinda handy to rely
on only one interface for all of them.

Besides, relying on a web site like that 'serialize' newsgroup
posts, which might be neat, kind of defeat the purpose of
usenet (which is a decentralized thing), and it adds another
layer to something that has been working fine without it for a
long time (way before WWW came along) -- but may be that's just
me: I fly rental GA airplanes... i.e., love somewhat
older technologies, I still use slide rules, etc. :-) although
I am not a true purist, real men use emacs for their internet
browsing needs, but I have digressed completely here :-)

--Sylvain

[Jim Logajan]

"Skylune" > wrote:
> Wouldn't it be easier to simply use the
> talkaboutaviation.com web site? It doesn't seem to complicated to
> follow a thread if you hit Post a reply, as I'm doing now..

Take a look at Google Groups, which is another web-based interface to
Usenet newsgroups. Here's Google's interface URL for this group:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aviation.piloting

The advantage of Google groups (or any other Usenet access provider) over a
subject specific site like www.talkaboutaviation.com is that you can join
in discussions outside the aviation realm. For example, if you have a hobby
or other interests (photography, skiing, metal working, etc.) you can use a
single provider to access discussion groups on all those subjects, rather
than locating web sites that gateway a subset of Usenet discussion groups.

Here's a bunch of FAQs on Usenet itself:
http://www.faqs.org/usenet/

[Sylvain]

Jim Logajan wrote:
> The advantage of Google groups ...

another advantage is that you can search the history of these
newsgroups all the way back to 1981...

--Sylvain

[Andrew Gideon]

Sylvain wrote:

> Besides,Â*Â*relyingÂ*onÂ*aÂ*webÂ*siteÂ*likeÂ*that *'serialize'Â*newsgroup
> posts,Â*Â*whichÂ*mightÂ*beÂ*neat,Â*Â*kindÂ*ofÂ*def eatÂ*theÂ*purposeÂ*of
> usenet (which is a decentralized thing),

It's how we recommend people use email. They should get their POP/IMAP
accounts as "close" to their Internet connection as possible. It may take
a message however long it takes to reach their server, but nobody is
waiting for that. But the time from POP/IMAP server to client is while
someone is sitting before the computer and waiting. That's the path to
keep short and fast.

Web-based access has latency while someone waits for the web page. More,
it's centralized and therefore doesn't scale well. Put enough people on
the system, and it bogs down.

USENET consists of many servers on (and, in some cases, off) the Internet.
The load on my USENET server has no impact upon the performance of yours.
I love that feature <grin>.

That said, a good newsreader will serialize to the extent possible. Of
course, there's little it can do for a message that's not yet reached the
underlying server(s). But my reader will thread messages by the headers.
Messages that I've already read won't appear, but there's a set of "see
parents" links which permit me to view the parent, grandparent, etc.

I think a lot of news readers do this sort of thing.

Still, there's benefit in including text to which one is replying. Even if
the automation tells you the message to which another message is a reply,
including text permits finer grained referencing.

- Andrew

[Jay Honeck]

> Wouldn't it be easier to simply use the
> talkaboutaviation.com web site?

If you need an internet portal to Usenet (as I do when I'm posting from the
hotel, where I can't use a "real" newsreader), I recommend trying
GoogleGroups.

See:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aviation.piloting?lnk=gschg

It's not perfect, but it does keep threads "in line" pretty well.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[AJ]

In my neghborhood, he would be called a crank.

AJ

[alexy]

Jim Logajan > wrote:

>"Skylune" > wrote:
>> Wouldn't it be easier to simply use the
>> talkaboutaviation.com web site? It doesn't seem to complicated to
>> follow a thread if you hit Post a reply, as I'm doing now..
>
>Take a look at Google Groups, which is another web-based interface to
>Usenet newsgroups. Here's Google's interface URL for this group:

I thought I was witnessing a historic first--a user of Google Groups
that was properly quoting context for his post. But hitting "H" to
view headers shows that I was wrong--you are recommending
consideration of gg, but are not using it!

Still waiting for that first google groups user to quote context. ;-)
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[Jay Honeck]

> Still waiting for that first google groups user to quote context. ;-)

Although I'm not using it now, all of my posts from the inn are via Google
Groups.

And I *think* I quote context okay...

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

[alexy]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

>> Still waiting for that first google groups user to quote context. ;-)
>
>Although I'm not using it now, all of my posts from the inn are via Google
>Groups.
>
>And I *think* I quote context okay...
>
>:-)

Well, I grant you the prize--unverified, but I don't ever remember
seeing one of your posts that made me say "why can't this bozo quote
context?" and then look at the headers to find out it is another
google groupie. So I guess I can't paint them all with quite as broad
a brush! ;-)
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.