On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:20:52 -0800 (PST), Al Borowski
wrote in
:

On Jan 27, 8:24 am, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 09:38:17 -0800 (PST), wrote
in
:

And why on Earth would someone put my name in the thread?

Actually, you put your name is in the 'From:' field of the message you
originally posted yourself. If you have concerns about revealing your
identity, you should take steps to conceal it.

There is a huge difference between using an email address with a
partial name, as opposed to printing the entire name in full. Sure, a
pilot or interested person reading this thread could have figured it
out, but the average joe researching the OP wouldn't have found it.
But now you've put the name onto USENET for the search engines to pick
up.

Worst case: An employer, googling the name, will now find this thread.
They probably won't have an aviation background and will not have the
knowledge to evaluate the misake, so they'll probably assume the
worst.

In the event Mr. Faulkiner's is employed, and his possible employer
may have reason to research Mr. Faulkiner via a Google search, and the
possibility that Mr. Faulkiner's possible employer lacks the ability
or knowledge to correctly evaluate Mr. Faulkiner's passable pilot
deviation, exactly what do you think Mr. Faulkiner's possible employer
might assume?

If you felt like you HAD to name him, you could of at least obfuscated
his name slightly. J--N SM--H instead of JOHN SMITH or something.

Perhaps Mr. Faulkiner should have taken the responsibility to do the
obfuscating you suggest if revealing his identity were an issue for
him. I assure you, that I meant no enmity toward Mr. Faulkiner.

The OP did something stupid, and realised he made a mistake. He was
man enough to own up to it. Maybe you should do the same.

Al


I would characterize it as effective in grabbing Mr. Faulkiner's
attention and impressing him with the importance of assuming command
of his flights in the future, something his CFI failed to do
apparently. If you see it as stupid, we disagree.

Main Entry:1command
Pronunciation:k*-*mand
Function:verb
Etymology:Middle English comanden, from Middle French comander,
from (assumed) Vulgar Latin commandare, alteration of Latin
commendare to commit to one's charge more at COMMEND
Date:14th century

transitive senses
1 : to direct authoritatively : ORDER
2 : to exercise a dominating influence over : have command of: as
a : to have at one's immediate disposal
b : to demand or receive as one's due *commands a high fee*
c : to overlook or dominate from or as if from a strategic
position
d : to have military command of as senior officer
3 obsolete : to order or request to be given
intransitive senses
1 : to have or exercise direct authority : GOVERN
2 : to give orders
3 : to be commander
4 : to dominate as if from an elevated place
–commandable \-*man-d*-b*l\ adjective
synonyms COMMAND, ORDER, BID, ENJOIN, DIRECT, INSTRUCT, CHARGE
mean to issue orders. COMMAND and ORDER imply authority and
usually some degree of formality and impersonality. COMMAND
stresses official exercise of authority *a general commanding
troops*. ORDER may suggest peremptory or arbitrary exercise
*ordered his employees about like slaves*. BID suggests giving
orders peremptorily (as to children or servants) *she bade him be
seated*. ENJOIN implies giving an order or direction
authoritatively and urgently and often with admonition or
solicitude *a sign enjoining patrons to be quiet*. DIRECT and
INSTRUCT both connote expectation of obedience and usually concern
specific points of procedure or method, INSTRUCT sometimes
implying greater explicitness or formality *directed her assistant
to hold all calls* *the judge instructed the jury to ignore the
remark*. CHARGE adds to ENJOIN an implication of imposing as a
duty or responsibility *charged by the President with a secret
mission*.