On May 12, 11:29*am, Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
There are other groups, where the gap between what resident sages know
and what newbies know is much larger, say in sci.crypt and comp.dsp,
and the hostility is no where near what I have seen in this group.

I have the same experience with sci.engr.chem and a few others. In
fact, the climate there is so different that I have no need to post
anonymously. I also have a theory. It is precisely because the
difference between what the resident sages (sic!) and the newbies know
is so much smaller in this group that the hostility is so much
greater.

The truth of the matter is that in this forum, there is no opportunity
to demonstrate aviation skill - that requires an aircraft. There is
an opportunity to demonstrate aviation knowledge - but precious little
of that is required to earn any certificate or rating, be it private,
commercial, instrument, CFI, ATP, or A&P. Of course that's only my
opinion, but at least it's an informed one - since I've earned all of
the above and can compare that to the effort required to earn
corresponding credentials in some of the other groups, of which I
also . There is little comparison. Some have suggested that the ATP
and A&P combined might be considered the Ph.D. of aviation. As
someone who has also earned an actual Ph.D. I consider this
laughable. The associate degree seems more comparable - and that's at
the ATP/A&P level.

That's not to say there is not more to know - there is always more to
know, and it really does make a difference if you really want to get
the most out of your airplane - but the amount of knowledge required
to get the credentials is laughably small, something any bright person
might pick up in his spare time with relatively little effort.

This leads to an interesting disconnect. In this group, it is not
rare for a rank novice - a student pilot or even someone who has never
flown - to know more than the supposed experts. This makes the
'experts' uncomfortable - especially when the novice asks questions,
the experts answer, and then the novice proceeds to point out the
logical inconsistencies and factual errors in their answers and
refuses to accept them just because they have credentials and he does
not. In comp.dsp and sci.engr.chem, just to pick two examples I
happen to be familiar with, that doesn't happen much. The barrier to
entry is too high.

Michael