Thrown out of an FBO...

Peter Duniho wrote:

"The Visitor" wrote in message
...
He has nowhere near enough data points to justify a comment describing
"all" charter pilots.

Do you not need more data points to dispute it?

No. To support a blanket generalization, one needs to survey the entire
population. To refute a blanket generalization, one need only survey a
single member of the population, so long as that member is a
counter-example.

If you had ever studied statistics, you would know that is not true. That is
why sample sizes are less than population sizes, and how confidence levels
are relevant.

Peter Duniho wrote:

"The Visitor" wrote in message
...
Well he didn't say charter pilots never fill the tank, only when the tank
isn't filled, it is charter pilots.

You can equivocate about the meaning of his comment if you like. However,
to me it was pretty clear: charter pilots never fill the tank, and all
charter pilots are poorly paid.

He has no basis for making either claim.

The only "never" and "all" I read about charter pilots are from your own
comments, Duniho.
In fact, Jay/Mary did clarify that they were referring to "some."

I always enjoy it when somebody has to twist somebody else's words to make
their attack.

Peter Duniho wrote:

"The Visitor" wrote in message
...
You are putting words in his mouth, to support your argument; because it
suits you.

Baloney. My interpretation of his statement is not only perfectly valid, it
is strongly supported by Jay's own description of how he communicated to the
other person.

The only interpretation that could change the underlying correctness of his
statements would be to think that Jay was speaking ONLY of the charter
pilots he had personally met, and not only talked to but also obtained
salary information from. There's absolutely no indication that was his
meaning...even Jay himself has not suggested his intent was to restrict his
statement to that group of people.

Except he wasn't the one who said "all pilots" or "never" in the context of
charter pilots or their pay. You were. Actually the words used by Jay/Mary
included "some." Go back to sleep.

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote:

Jose wrote:
What I am saying is that people should be able to express their
opinions freely without fearing negative reactions or reprimand from
others.

... like saying "in my experience, Jews are all cheap *******s"?

Does it even matter if, in your experience, it's true?

Oh, good God... now I've heard it all. Jews have a long history of being
discriminated against in every part of the world. Some Jews are even
discriminated against in Israel. To your knowledge, what charter pilot has had
to deal with that sort of discrimination? Is there a large portion of the
world's population dedicating themselves to the destruction of charter pilots?

What an incredibly .... words fail me.

I think you 'forgot' to read the little word 'IF' above.

mike regish wrote:

Good points. And I do think the FBO owner's reaction was a bit much...but I
wasn't there either. We only have Jay's version. Being from Mass. and having
voted for John Kerry in '04, I could instantly tell that I don't agree with
his politics-and that's putting it mildly. But as others have noticed, Mr.
Honeck has several "opinions" that encompass large groups with what appears
to be no exceptions for individuals within those groups.

That's bigotry. And Mr. Honeck has repeatedly demonstrated himself to be a
bigot.

Bigot? Umm, proof? Cite?

In my experience throughout my lifetime, I've found that those who preach
tolerance and acceptance are actually the least tolerant and the least accepting
themselves. It's real easy to toss insults around like calling others a bigot.

By the way, what does "being from mass" have to do with agreeing w/ someone's
politics??? A little over-generalizing, aren't we?

Bob Noel wrote:

In article . com,
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

Wow, first I "hate FBOs", and now I'm a "bigot"?

Remember that to some people "bigot" means anyone who
doesn't like that you don't buy into their agenda.

Right. When you know that there is no *rational* explanation to
justifiy yourself, it's real simple to just call someone a bigot,
racist, -phobe, whatever.

Peter Duniho wrote:

"Newps" wrote in message
...
Actually, the person at the FBO displayed an overt intolerance towards an
ignorant comment that he KNEW TO BE FALSE.

He couldn't know it to be false. He was a sample of one.

It only takes a sample of one to disprove a claim about "all".

Except Jay was claiming it was a "claim about 'all'." That was your claim to
make and attack against.

Larry Dighera wrote:

On Thu, 9 Nov 2006 11:53:49 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote in
:

I am amazed at the number of people defending Jay's insulting behavior. I
realize it's popular today to call any sort of consideration for other
people's feelings "politically correct", but really...you guys seem to be
making a sport out of the practice. It doesn't matter how polite or
"genteel" a person is, being ignorant and prejudiced is still a bad thing.
I've known plenty of well-mannered people who nevertheless didn't have a
clue when it came to avoiding insulting stereotypes.

You haven't spent much time in the mid west.

Thanks for another generalization, Larry.

Judah wrote:

(Ron Lee) wrote in news:45551f12.7993328
@news.pcisys.net:

Judah wrote:

(Ron Lee) wrote in news:4554e3a0.648968
:

No, it just means that many liberals are hypocrites in addition to
doing things (programs like welfare) that ruin lives and result in the
deaths of innocent Americans.

But liberals can't see what their failures have done.

Have you sampled a thousand random liberals to come to this conclusion?

Nope. I judge them by what they have done and continue to do.

You mean you have met ALL liberals?

Wow, I don't remember meeting you.

I think he meant liberal policies and their effects, not meeting all liberal
people.

Jay Honeck wrote:

[...] (b) it's always fun to watch the different (and utterly predictable)
reactions from certain members of this group.

Yikes, you mean you were trolling?!

Is it trolling when the reaction is always the same? If a tree falls
in the woods, and there's no one there to hear it...well, you know the
rest.

Sometimes I swear Mike, Pete and Jose are simply Usenet AI programs,
set up to respond
with three specific responses that are triggered by any given stimuli.
Google could easily set something like this up in order to keep the
newsgroups rolling along...

"Bigot! You never ___! You said ____! Bigot! You haven't spent time in the
midwes to hear that it's full of bigots!"