A Google Groups alternative to rec.aviation.piloting?

buttman wrote in news:ba683e60-73d5-45c4-b617-
:

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.

And yet nobody is listening to you.


go figger.


Bertie

buttman wrote:
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.

Yes, that's EXACTLY what I'm doing. In your case, it IS the person, NOT
the present subject.
You have used my name once more in a post in this thread to "make" your
"point". THAT is personal. I have responded to you making it perfectly
clear to anyone (who for whatever reason evades me) might be even
remotely interested in WHY you insist on using my name in this manner.
I say again and will continue to say that you represent everything I
have spent a lifetime in aviation attempting to correct.
Referencing that and nothing else, I again suggest that potential
students read the following thread that you began posted as a CFI and
make up their own minds about the why's of this discussion we're having.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...d5ed01c0a5aac0


--
Dudley Henriques

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.


Gee, Pilots of America and AOPA, an American pilots' group, are US centric.
Who'da thunk it?

On Aug 15, 5:24*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:
buttman wrote:
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.

Yes, that's EXACTLY what I'm doing. In your case, it IS the person, NOT
the present subject.
You have used my name once more in a post in this thread to "make" your
"point". THAT is personal. I have responded to you making it perfectly
clear to anyone (who for whatever reason evades me) might be even
remotely interested in WHY you insist on using my name in this manner.
I say again and will continue to say that you represent everything I
have spent a lifetime in aviation attempting to correct.
Referencing that and nothing else, I again suggest that potential
students read the following thread that you began posted as a CFI and
make up their own minds about the why's of this discussion we're having.


Well if you were deeply offended by me using your name in my post,
then I am truly sorry. I didn't do it to insult you. I thought I made
it clear what the point I was trying to make was. If I could edit
usenet posts, I'd go back and change it to someone else's name.


http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...wse_thread/thr...

--
Dudey Henriques

Also, just to put this out there, Dudley has, for months claimed me to
be "the worst CFI I've ever seen", "the type of person I've spent a
lifetime to try to correct", etc. But he has never elaborated on this,
ever. He just repeats these weasel phrases over and over again. If he
claims to be such an expert on CFI attitudes and aviation safety, then
why doesn't he make the case without resorting to smokescreen tactics
and weasel words? This is another example of people using their
sigfiles and reputation to do the arguing for them, which is exactly
what this group needs less of.

buttman wrote in
:

On Aug 15, 5:24*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:
buttman wrote:
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.

Yes, that's EXACTLY what I'm doing. In your case, it IS the person,
NOT the present subject.
You have used my name once more in a post in this thread to "make"
your "point". THAT is personal. I have responded to you making it
perfectly clear to anyone (who for whatever reason evades me) might
be even remotely interested in WHY you insist on using my name in
this manner. I say again and will continue to say that you represent
everything I have spent a lifetime in aviation attempting to correct.
Referencing that and nothing else, I again suggest that potential
students read the following thread that you began posted as a CFI and
make up their own minds about the why's of this discussion we're
having.


Well if you were deeply offended by me using your name in my post,
then I am truly sorry. I didn't do it to insult you. I thought I made
it clear what the point I was trying to make was. If I could edit
usenet posts, I'd go back and change it to someone else's name.



http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...wse_thread/thr
...

--
Dudey Henriques

Also, just to put this out there, Dudley has, for months claimed me to
be "the worst CFI I've ever seen", "the type of person I've spent a
lifetime to try to correct", etc. But he has never elaborated on this,
ever.

Yes, he has.

that makes you a liar!

Bertie

buttman wrote:
On Aug 15, 5:24 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:
buttman wrote:
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.
Yes, that's EXACTLY what I'm doing. In your case, it IS the person, NOT
the present subject.
You have used my name once more in a post in this thread to "make" your
"point". THAT is personal. I have responded to you making it perfectly
clear to anyone (who for whatever reason evades me) might be even
remotely interested in WHY you insist on using my name in this manner.
I say again and will continue to say that you represent everything I
have spent a lifetime in aviation attempting to correct.
Referencing that and nothing else, I again suggest that potential
students read the following thread that you began posted as a CFI and
make up their own minds about the why's of this discussion we're having.


Well if you were deeply offended by me using your name in my post,
then I am truly sorry. I didn't do it to insult you. I thought I made
it clear what the point I was trying to make was. If I could edit
usenet posts, I'd go back and change it to someone else's name.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...wse_thread/thr...
--
Dudey Henriques

Also, just to put this out there, Dudley has, for months claimed me to
be "the worst CFI I've ever seen", "the type of person I've spent a
lifetime to try to correct", etc. But he has never elaborated on this,
ever. He just repeats these weasel phrases over and over again. If he
claims to be such an expert on CFI attitudes and aviation safety, then
why doesn't he make the case without resorting to smokescreen tactics
and weasel words? This is another example of people using their
sigfiles and reputation to do the arguing for them, which is exactly
what this group needs less of.

Full of crap as usual I see.

Although I have elaborated on this several times before on these forums,
I'll be more than happy to do it again here and now so that there can be
absolutely no misunderstanding as to why I view you as incompetent as a CFI.

You posted AS a CFI on these forums asking if shutting down the fuel on
takeoff with a student was a "good idea". You did this by your own word
in your initial post on the issue AFTER you had already done it with at
least one student. So right off the bat, you, posting as a CFI, were
asking a forum of pilots whether or not something you had already done
with a student was a good idea. This in itself constitutes extremely
poor PIC/CFI judgment as it establishes that you performed a specific
procedure with a student in the aircraft that at the moment you
performed that procedure you were not sure was safe and correct to perform.
This alone would disqualify you with me as a potential CFI hire.

Now, on to the rest of it.

When the fallacy of what you did was pointed out to you not only by
myself, but several other CFI's, instead of accepting the fact that what
you did might have been unsafe, you instead have consistently and ever
since not only attempted to defend the procedure with statements about
the length of the runway etc, but have actively engaged in an open
attempt to portray me as a know it all with some kind of a superiority
complex.

In summation, what you did by shutting down the fuel on take off with a
student was bad enough, as it's not necessary to do this to stress a
point and/or demonstrate an engine failure on takeoff. The reason for
this is quite simple. NO good instructor EVER deliberately puts a
student in a situation that purposely reduces or alters the existing
flight safety options. By selecting the fuel selector valve to OFF on
the takeoff roll, you deliberately put the student in unnecessary danger
by altering the escape option if power was needed to extricate the
aircraft from any unsafe condition that might arise on that takeoff.

What you did was not only unnecessary, it was unsafe!

The fact that you have chosen to challenge rather than simply thank the
instructors who have attempted to set you straight is an indication of a
personality trait I find freightening in a CFI.

I hope this post has answered any questions both you and others might
have had concerning this issue.
As you can see, I have addressed it quite clearly.



--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques writes:

Go **** yourself!

I hope you keep a cooler head in the air.

buttman writes:

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?

I've already tried a similar experiment, copying and pasting statements from
very reliable sources about aviation here in this group, and watching the
reaction. Invariably, those statements are rejected when they are posted
under my name, proof that the principle you describe is at least partially at
work. I'm sure that if someone in the treehouse club had posted the same
thing, it would be gospel.

This is pretty typical of most public discussion venues, especially those
dominated by men. I've seen considerably worse than this newsgroup, but I've
also seen better.

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.

It's human nature, especially among people who don't know what they are
talking about, or are insecure about their knowledge. They don't understand
the concepts and/or cannot discuss them objectively, so they resort to a
discussion of personalities. They cannot validate statements on their own, so
they depend upon their subjective opinion of the person making the statement
for their evaluation (and are often hopelessly incorrect in consequence).

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.

Like all venues afflicted in this way, it needs to stop discussing people and
start discussion the nominal topic of the group (aviation).

Mxsmanic wrote:
Dudley Henriques writes:

Go **** yourself!

I hope you keep a cooler head in the air.

I seriously doubt that you ****ing yourself and my performance in the
air could even be remotely related.

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques writes:

Thank you for the opportunity to present this again. I will continue
doing this every time you post mentioning my name.

In between your tantrums, an objective discussion of aviation would be most
welcome. I'm sure you're capable of it, but you must have the will to do it.