If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
A Google Groups alternative to rec.aviation.piloting?
On Aug 15, 2:43*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote: Dudley Henriques writes: You're so full of crap it's amazing. Your problem with me started the day we got into a discussion on you pulling mixture on a student and you've been a royal PIA ever since. Nothing in his post indicated to me that he had any problem with you. Retaliating against a personal attack makes a poor impression. *Retaliating when there was no attack in the first place makes an even worse impression. Go **** yourself! -- Dudley Henriques Thank you for proving my point. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
A Google Groups alternative to rec.aviation.piloting?
buttman wrote:
On Aug 15, 2:43 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote: Mxsmanic wrote: Dudley Henriques writes: You're so full of crap it's amazing. Your problem with me started the day we got into a discussion on you pulling mixture on a student and you've been a royal PIA ever since. Nothing in his post indicated to me that he had any problem with you. Retaliating against a personal attack makes a poor impression. Retaliating when there was no attack in the first place makes an even worse impression. Go **** yourself! -- Dudley Henriques Thank you for proving my point. Quite to the contrary, you have proved MY point. You will notice that the posts reacting to my answer to you are mixed, therefore your premise that I was being treated "specially" on this forum is as incorrect as my opinion that you are probably the worst instructor I've ever seen posting on these forums IS correct. -- Dudley Henriques |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
A Google Groups alternative to rec.aviation.piloting?
On Aug 15, 12:40*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:
buttman wrote: On Aug 14, 6:53 pm, Jim Logajan wrote: I note that some people who wish to migrate to a more controlled aviation forum have a couple issues with the alternatives such as AOPA and POA. The first being that they appear U.S. centric. The second that the layout is actually a backward step in user friendliness. While it isn't as good as some of the classic threaded newsreaders, it occurs to me that creating a "Google Groups only" (non-Usenet) forum might help a little toward addressing the two main issues (that I'm aware of, anyway.) This is Google's info on creating a group on their systems: http://groups.google.com/intl/en/goo.../overview.html The third issue is who would most people feel comfortable with as the PIC of such a group? That would be worse. The reason this group has degraded is because of ad-hominem arguments. Notice I didn't say ad-hominem attacks. In my opinion more damage has been done to this group by allowing "annointed" people free rides and giving "non-anointed" people attacks regardless of what they say. The way it should be is that if someone like Dudley says something stupid, he should get called out on it. If MX says something, he should get called out on it. If Dudley says something great he should be praised for it. If MX says something good, he should get praised for it. But thats not how its done here. No matter what MX says, he'll get ribbed. No matter what Dudley says, he'll get praised. If you have a group of people officially annointed as group moderators, this effect will only be magnified and the discussion will be even less useless. I see this sort of thing happen with moderated groups all the time. You have 4 or 5 people anointed as the "chosen ones", who then strut around the group with their chests puffed out. They no longer put any effort into their postings because why bother when you are already automatically revered by the whole group? If, for some reason you aren't revered by a member, you can just delete their messages or ban them from the group. You're so full of crap it's amazing. Your problem with me started the day we got into a discussion on you pulling mixture on a student and you've been a royal PIA ever since. Not that I mind, but take this post for example. You state something that is totally false as though it's accepted fact and think it will stand It won't! First of all, I am not now, nor have I ever been anything "special" on this forum, either in my own opinion or in that of others. You simply pull this crap out of your ass and post it I guess for your own amusement or for whatever damage you envision it doing. No big deal. Post away. I think most of the people who frequent this forum, or at least the ones who would matter anyway, know you have an agenda here. Now on to something else you said that reeks of false premise. I've been posting on these forums for over ten years. Go Google me and come up with something "stupid" I've posted on these groups and present it here for everyone to see will you please. I'd be very interested to read what that happened to be. -- Dudley Henriques Jeez, calm down. I was just using you as an example. I said " if someone like Dudley says something stupid", not "Dudley always says something stupid". And to be quite honest, 90% of you posts are neither great nor crappy. Usually you just end up either stating the obvious or posting something completely banal. The problem is with sycophants replying to your less than great posts with "OH WOW ANOTHER GREAT GREAT DUDLEY POST THANK YOU DUDLEY YOU ARE SO AWESOME" which gives you that sense of importance you have. But anyways, to illustrate the point I'm trying to make a little further, consider for a minute what would happen if I were to go back to 2002, find a well received Dudley post, and post it here right now under my name. Will it get the exact same response as it did under Dudley's name? *Should* that post get the same response? If it doesn't get the same warm response, why not? What if MX reposted it instead of me? That is what is wrong with this group right now. No one judges what your post contains, they only judge who you are, or worse, who they think you are. What I'm trying to say here is if this place truly needs *less of* is creating more celebrity-type personalities to further underminethe creation of true down-to-business aviation discussion. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
A Google Groups alternative to rec.aviation.piloting?
buttman wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:40 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote: buttman wrote: On Aug 14, 6:53 pm, Jim Logajan wrote: I note that some people who wish to migrate to a more controlled aviation forum have a couple issues with the alternatives such as AOPA and POA. The first being that they appear U.S. centric. The second that the layout is actually a backward step in user friendliness. While it isn't as good as some of the classic threaded newsreaders, it occurs to me that creating a "Google Groups only" (non-Usenet) forum might help a little toward addressing the two main issues (that I'm aware of, anyway.) This is Google's info on creating a group on their systems: http://groups.google.com/intl/en/goo.../overview.html The third issue is who would most people feel comfortable with as the PIC of such a group? That would be worse. The reason this group has degraded is because of ad-hominem arguments. Notice I didn't say ad-hominem attacks. In my opinion more damage has been done to this group by allowing "annointed" people free rides and giving "non-anointed" people attacks regardless of what they say. The way it should be is that if someone like Dudley says something stupid, he should get called out on it. If MX says something, he should get called out on it. If Dudley says something great he should be praised for it. If MX says something good, he should get praised for it. But thats not how its done here. No matter what MX says, he'll get ribbed. No matter what Dudley says, he'll get praised. If you have a group of people officially annointed as group moderators, this effect will only be magnified and the discussion will be even less useless. I see this sort of thing happen with moderated groups all the time. You have 4 or 5 people anointed as the "chosen ones", who then strut around the group with their chests puffed out. They no longer put any effort into their postings because why bother when you are already automatically revered by the whole group? If, for some reason you aren't revered by a member, you can just delete their messages or ban them from the group. You're so full of crap it's amazing. Your problem with me started the day we got into a discussion on you pulling mixture on a student and you've been a royal PIA ever since. Not that I mind, but take this post for example. You state something that is totally false as though it's accepted fact and think it will stand It won't! First of all, I am not now, nor have I ever been anything "special" on this forum, either in my own opinion or in that of others. You simply pull this crap out of your ass and post it I guess for your own amusement or for whatever damage you envision it doing. No big deal. Post away. I think most of the people who frequent this forum, or at least the ones who would matter anyway, know you have an agenda here. Now on to something else you said that reeks of false premise. I've been posting on these forums for over ten years. Go Google me and come up with something "stupid" I've posted on these groups and present it here for everyone to see will you please. I'd be very interested to read what that happened to be. -- Dudley Henriques Jeez, calm down. I was just using you as an example. I said " if someone like Dudley says something stupid", not "Dudley always says something stupid". And to be quite honest, 90% of you posts are neither great nor crappy. Usually you just end up either stating the obvious or posting something completely banal. The problem is with sycophants replying to your less than great posts with "OH WOW ANOTHER GREAT GREAT DUDLEY POST THANK YOU DUDLEY YOU ARE SO AWESOME" which gives you that sense of importance you have. But anyways, to illustrate the point I'm trying to make a little further, consider for a minute what would happen if I were to go back to 2002, find a well received Dudley post, and post it here right now under my name. Will it get the exact same response as it did under Dudley's name? *Should* that post get the same response? If it doesn't get the same warm response, why not? What if MX reposted it instead of me? That is what is wrong with this group right now. No one judges what your post contains, they only judge who you are, or worse, who they think you are. What I'm trying to say here is if this place truly needs *less of* is creating more celebrity-type personalities to further underminethe creation of true down-to-business aviation discussion. With me you have no point. You are possibly the worst CFI I have ever seen posting on these groups and I've said that on more than one occasion and will continue to use any credibility I own to advise students NOT to fly with you. I'll be glad to use every opportunity you give me by insisting to use my name in these ridiculous posts of yours to point students to the following thread started by you on the student group some time ago. Students reading this thread will note that the procedure you are asking about as being a good idea you had already done with a student before asking. They will as well note that several other CFI's besides myself engaged you on the issue. Your "mentioning" and "using" of my name in many posts you make has been based on my absolute and total lack of respect for you as a CFI. I accept that, and in fact would expect that from someone I have said public ally I would not fly with, nor recommend anyone else fly with. So for those who might need a "refresher" on exactly wht I'm talking about concerning you, I suggest reading the following thread; http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...d5ed01c0a5aac0 Thank you for the opportunity to present this again. I will continue doing this every time you post mentioning my name. Thank you -- Dudley Henriques |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
A Google Groups alternative to rec.aviation.piloting?
On Aug 15, 4:53*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Thank you for the opportunity to present this again. I will continue doing this every time you post mentioning my name. Thank you -- Dudley Henriques You're doing it again! You're just illustrating my point for me. This thread is not about me, its not about you, its not about pulling the fuel valve on takeoff. Its about how certain people's egos degrade discussion on this forum by bringing personalities into the picture. Your sole argument here is "this guy made a lot of dumb posts in the past, don't listen to anything he says, because by definition he is wrong" by bringing up completely unrelated posts I made a year ago. Instead of arguing against the argument, you rather argue against the person. And it's not just you, many others are guilty too. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
A Google Groups alternative to rec.aviation.piloting?
buttman wrote in
: On Aug 14, 6:53*pm, Jim Logajan wrote: I note that some people who wish to migrate to a more controlled aviation forum have a couple issues with the alternatives such as AOPA and POA. Th e first being that they appear U.S. centric. The second that the layout is actually a backward step in user friendliness. While it isn't as good as some of the classic threaded newsreaders, it occurs to me that creating a "Google Groups only" (non-Usenet) forum migh t help a little toward addressing the two main issues (that I'm aware of, anyway.) This is Google's info on creating a group on their systems: http://groups.google.com/intl/en/goo.../overview.html The third issue is who would most people feel comfortable with as the PIC of such a group? That would be worse. The reason this group has degraded is because of ad-hominem arguments. Notice I didn't say ad-hominem attacks. In my opinion more damage has been done to this group by allowing "annointed" people free rides and giving "non-anointed" people attacks regardless of what they say. The way it should be is that if someone like Dudley says something stupid, he should get called out on it. If MX says something, he should get called out on it. If Dudley says something great he should be praised for it. If MX says something good, he should get praised for it. But thats not how its done here. No matter what MX says, he'll get ribbed. No matter what Dudley says, he'll get praised. If you have a group of people officially annointed as group moderators, this effect will only be magnified and the discussion will be even less useless. Awww, Maxie... You feeling left out because you're an idiot? Bertie |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
A Google Groups alternative to rec.aviation.piloting?
Tony wrote in
: On Aug 15, 2:40 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote: buttman wrote: On Aug 14, 6:53 pm, Jim Logajan wrote: I note that some people who wish to migrate to a more controlled aviation forum have a couple issues with the alternatives such as AOPA and POA. The first being that they appear U.S. centric. The second that the layout is actually a backward step in user friendliness. While it isn't as good as some of the classic threaded newsreaders, it occurs to me that creating a "Google Groups only" (non-Usenet) forum might help a little toward addressing the two main issues (that I'm aware of, anyway.) This is Google's info on creating a group on their systems: http://groups.google.com/intl/en/goo.../overview.html The third issue is who would most people feel comfortable with as the PIC of such a group? That would be worse. The reason this group has degraded is because of ad-hominem arguments. Notice I didn't say ad-hominem attacks. In my opinion more damage has been done to this group by allowing "annointed" people free rides and giving "non-anointed" people attacks regardless of what they say. The way it should be is that if someone like Dudley says something stupid, he should get called out on it. If MX says something, he should get called out on it. If Dudley says something great he should be praised for it. If MX says something good, he should get praised for it. But thats not how its done here. No matter what MX says, he'll get ribbed. No matter what Dudley says, he'll get praised. If you have a group of people officially annointed as group moderators, this effect will only be magnified and the discussion will be even less useless. I see this sort of thing happen with moderated groups all the time. You have 4 or 5 people anointed as the "chosen ones", who then strut around the group with their chests puffed out. They no longer put any effort into their postings because why bother when you are already automatically revered by the whole group? If, for some reason you aren't revered by a member, you can just delete their messages or ban them from the group. You're so full of crap it's amazing. Your problem with me started the day we got into a discussion on you pulling mixture on a student and you've been a royal PIA ever since. Not that I mind, but take this post for example. You state something that is totally false as though it's accepted fact and think it will stand It won't! First of all, I am not now, nor have I ever been anything "special" on this forum, either in my own opinion or in that of others. You simply pull this crap out of your ass and post it I guess for your own amusement or for whatever damage you envision it doing. No big deal. Post away. I think most of the people who frequent this forum, or at least the ones who would matter anyway, know you have an agenda here. Now on to something else you said that reeks of false premise. I've been posting on these forums for over ten years. Go Google me and come up with something "stupid" I've posted on these groups and present it here for everyone to see will you please. I'd be very interested to read what that happened to be. -- Dudley Henriques Dud, the most stupid thing you might have done is to engage buttman in a dialog. Think of his posts as a gambit: it's sometimes best to decline them. One of the more popular chess openings in the Queen's Gambit, and in most circles the opening continues with Queen's Gambit Declined. I've resolved to treat Mx's posts as gambits and my preferred play for a while is going to be Mx gambit declined. He doesn't do Gambits. He just flails around like a goldfish on the floor. Pretty much just like he flies. Bertie |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
A Google Groups alternative to rec.aviation.piloting?
Mxsmanic wrote in
: Dudley Henriques writes: You're so full of crap it's amazing. Your problem with me started the day we got into a discussion on you pulling mixture on a student and you've been a royal PIA ever since. Nothing in his post indicated to me that he had any problem with you. you're an idiot. Bertie |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
A Google Groups alternative to rec.aviation.piloting?
buttman wrote in
: On Aug 15, 2:43*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote: Mxsmanic wrote: Dudley Henriques writes: You're so full of crap it's amazing. Your problem with me started the day we got into a discussion on you pulling mixture on a student and you've been a royal PIA ever since. Nothing in his post indicated to me that he had any problem with you. Retaliating against a personal attack makes a poor impression. *Retal iating when there was no attack in the first place makes an even worse impress ion. Go **** yourself! -- Dudley Henriques Thank you for proving my point. And how did he do that fjukktard? Bertie |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
A Google Groups alternative to rec.aviation.piloting?
buttman wrote in
: On Aug 15, 12:40*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote: buttman wrote: On Aug 14, 6:53 pm, Jim Logajan wrote: I note that some people who wish to migrate to a more controlled aviat ion forum have a couple issues with the alternatives such as AOPA and POA. The first being that they appear U.S. centric. The second that the layout is actually a backward step in user friendliness. While it isn't as good as some of the classic threaded newsreaders, it occurs to me that creating a "Google Groups only" (non-Usenet) forum m ight help a little toward addressing the two main issues (that I'm aware of , anyway.) This is Google's info on creating a group on their systems: http://groups.google.com/intl/en/goo.../overview.html The third issue is who would most people feel comfortable with as the PIC of such a group? That would be worse. The reason this group has degraded is because of ad-hominem arguments. Notice I didn't say ad-hominem attacks. In my opinion more damage has been done to this group by allowing "annointed" people free rides and giving "non-anointed" people attacks regardless of what they say. The way it should be is that if someone like Dudley says something stupid, he should get called out on it. If MX says something, he should get called out on it. If Dudley says something great he should be praised for it. If MX says something good, he should get praised for it. But thats not how its done here. No matter what MX says, he'll get ribbed. No matter what Dudley says, he'll get praised. If you have a group of people officially annointed as group moderators, this effect will only be magnified and the discussion will be even less useless. I see this sort of thing happen with moderated groups all the time. You have 4 or 5 people anointed as the "chosen ones", who then strut around the group with their chests puffed out. They no longer put any effort into their postings because why bother when you are already automatically revered by the whole group? If, for some reason you aren't revered by a member, you can just delete their messages or ban them from the group. You're so full of crap it's amazing. Your problem with me started the day we got into a discussion on you pulling mixture on a student and you've been a royal PIA ever since. Not that I mind, but take this post for example. You state something that is totally false as though it's accepted fact and think it will stand It won't! First of all, I am not now, nor have I ever been anything "special" on this forum, either in my own opinion or in that of others. You simply pull this crap out of your ass and post it I guess for your own amusement or for whatever damage you envision it doing. No big deal. Post away. I think most of the people who frequent this forum, or at least the ones who would matter anyway, know you have an agenda here. Now on to something else you said that reeks of false premise. I've been posting on these forums for over ten years. Go Google me and come up with something "stupid" I've posted on these groups and present it here for everyone to see will you please. I'd be very interested to read what that happened to be. -- Dudley Henriques Jeez, calm down. I was just using you as an example. I said " if someone like Dudley says something stupid", not "Dudley always says something stupid". And to be quite honest, 90% of you posts are neither great nor crappy. Usually you just end up either stating the obvious or posting something completely banal. The problem is with sycophants replying to your less than great posts with "OH WOW ANOTHER GREAT GREAT DUDLEY POST THANK YOU DUDLEY YOU ARE SO AWESOME" which gives you that sense of importance you have. But anyways, to illustrate the point I'm trying to make a little further, consider for a minute what would happen if I were to go back to 2002, find a well received Dudley post, and post it here right now under my name. Will it get the exact same response as it did under Dudley's name? Nope, because it would be patently obvious that you stole it since you're a fjukkkktard. Bertie |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Google Groups Beta | Steven P. McNicoll | Piloting | 27 | June 10th 05 02:33 PM |
Posting via Google Groups | jim rosinski | Piloting | 7 | February 4th 05 08:13 PM |
The New Google Groups Interface | [email protected] | Soaring | 2 | December 13th 04 06:29 AM |