View Single Post
  #13  
Old January 7th 07, 01:26 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.student
Dudley Henriques
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 269
Default Moderating r.a.p and r.a.s. Was: Absolute lowest altitude you can fly (legally)


"Kev" wrote in message
oups.com...
Jim Logajan wrote:

Secondly, if the proposed moderated groups adopt charters similar in
scope
to those for r.a.p and r.a.s then IMHO most of the posts by mxsmanic
would
still be on topic, while a non-trivial number of the follow-up messages
others have posted in response appear to be off topic or inflammatory and
therefore subject to rejection. [...]


Indeed.

Twenty plus years ago I was a moderator on CompuServe. Before that,
one on a BBS. And yes, it's the few constantly non-informative and
derogatory writers here who would've been censored... not Mxsmanic, who
as you say at least posts on topic.

Google Groups has a useful option. You can easily click to see a
profile, which shows where else and what someone has posted. Often,
the insults to Mxsmanic come from people who are also nasty in other
groups, or from total newbies who (I assume) think they'll look cool if
they join in the insults.

Ironically, those who bash Mx the most about his lack of social skills,
are the same ones who just refuse to get that it's THEIR postings which
readers consider to be more annoying. They're told this over and over
again, from many sides, and yet they still don't get it. I am not
unsympathetic to their social ignorance, but I'm hoping they'll clue in
sometime soon.

Regards, Kev


Frankly I'm at a loss as to why so many of the regulars have chosen to take
this person on so directly. On one hand I understand completely that many
pilots take great pride in the knowledge and skills they have developed
through hard work and experience over time and don't take too kindly to
those who abuse them when this knowledge is offered in assistance and then
disputed or corrected on a more or less consistent basis.
On the other hand, one would think that people in such a group would be of
the type that are confident of their abilities to the point where
encountering a person entering their group with shall we say "an attitude of
sorts" wouldn't cause them the obvious issues we're seeing now on the
newsgroups.
Obviously, the simple answer for encountering such a person is to first
politely correct them and make an honest attempt to change them around to a
better method of projecting themselves on the group; then finding this
unworkable, just simply turning the offender completely off as some have
done.
My own opinion of this poster is that he simply has an attitude I dislike. I
therefore avoid him and pass on his posts.
I don't killfile him, as killfiling people is a waste of time on Usenet. You
simply avoid those you don't want to engage. It's as simple as that.
Personally, I feel a bit sorry for this individual. I get the feeling he's
truly interested in both real world aviation and in simulators. Either that
or he's the best damn troll I've seen yet on Usenet :-)
I have no idea what I personally might have had to offer him in the way of
assistance and friendly dialog, as I am active in both the real world and
simulator venues. But of course whatever opportunity that might have
presented itself to this was lost in my first (and last) encounter with him.
I have to laugh really, at all the fuss about this poster. I honestly
believe there has been more bandwidth spent talking about him (this post
included) than actually dealing with the "problem" all the posting is about
:-)
Anyway, if he's a troll, he's a damn good one and I applaud his work. He
seems to have completely taken over at least 2 newsgroups to the point where
a huge percentage of the posting is about him.
On the other hand, if he's NOT a troll, it's my sincere wish that he
possibly rethink his approach to Usenet and offer up not so much an apology,
but a simple "let's start all this over again and I'll make an attempt to
handle it a bit differently and see what happens"
I think I know the people on these groups well enough to know that they
would react positively to something like this.
Anyway......that's my read on all this :-))
Dudley Henriques