I give up, after many, many years!

On May 11, 6:18 pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
I give up -- not flying -- but subscribing to this NG.

Sorry to see you go, Jay. I've enjoyed your posts, and hope you can make it
to OSH this year.

I still find some utility in this group, but no longer recommend it to new
or aspiring pilots. I find myself spending more and more time on moderated
groups that don't tolerate anonymous trolls.

Check back from time to time. This, too, shall pass.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Same here. I don't take seriously any posters who use handles instead
of their real names.

On Sun, 11 May 2008 15:53:27 -0700 (PDT), Andrew Sarangan
wrote:

Same here. I don't take seriously any posters who use handles instead
of their real names.


Or a handle that sounds like a real name?

Like "Barry Sarangan" or "Barry Dighera"? ;^)

Maybe with a free, throwaway email address that matches?

Think about it... Anybody can have a "real" name online. Once upon a
time, I used my whole real name.

I still post with my real first name, and there are plenty of folks
here who have met me in person. Some are from my home base, tied down
a few spots away. I'll gladly provide my real name in private
conversation where circumstances warrant, and when meeting other
"real" folks.

However, there are now enough nut jobs out there where it's often not
a good idea to use a real name, tail number, etc... on the open 'net.
I'm in the phone book, etc... as I LIKE being accessible to lost
friends, etc... But it isn't worth dealing with a nut case over a
USENET debate.

I base my treatment of posters on posting history as it lodges in my
memory.

---------------------------------------------
** http://www.bburke.com/woodworking.html **
---------------------------------------------

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
I don't take seriously any posters who use handles instead
of their real names.

That's a little extreme, IMO ... I don't think a person should have to
use their real name to be taken seriously. Some people aren't
comfortable using their real names, and in many instances, with just
cause. I think it's more important how people conduct themselves than
whether or not they use their real names ... but ... to each, his own.

Character, it's been said, is what you do when no one is watching.
These days on the 'net it's demonstrated in other ways. Oh well.

On May 11, 6:16 pm, Shirl wrote:
Andrew Sarangan wrote:
I don't take seriously any posters who use handles instead
of their real names.

That's a little extreme, IMO ... I don't think a person should have to
use their real name to be taken seriously. Some people aren't
comfortable using their real names, and in many instances, with just
cause. I think it's more important how people conduct themselves than
whether or not they use their real names ... but ... to each, his own.

Case in point? The people that got sued by Zoom for posting
on Usenet.
Lou

on 5/11/2008 6:58 PM Lou said the following:
On May 11, 6:16 pm, Shirl wrote:
Andrew Sarangan wrote:
I don't take seriously any posters who use handles instead
of their real names.
That's a little extreme, IMO ... I don't think a person should have to
use their real name to be taken seriously. Some people aren't
comfortable using their real names, and in many instances, with just
cause. I think it's more important how people conduct themselves than
whether or not they use their real names ... but ... to each, his own.

Case in point? The people that got sued by Zoom for posting
on Usenet.

Or had our local police turned loose on us in the middle of the night by
him. Or were threatened with violence in our workplace by a different
psycho poster living nearby.

On May 11, 7:16 pm, Shirl wrote:
Andrew Sarangan wrote:
I don't take seriously any posters who use handles instead
of their real names.

That's a little extreme, IMO ... I don't think a person should have to
use their real name to be taken seriously. Some people aren't
comfortable using their real names, and in many instances, with just
cause. I think it's more important how people conduct themselves than
whether or not they use their real names ... but ... to each, his own.

You do have a point because legitimate posts also come from anonymous
posters. But if you browse the topics, nearly all inflammatory posts
come from people whose names are fake, and people with real names have
rarely made such posts, although there are exceptions. Anonymity is
critical in some newsgroups, such as abuse, drugs etc.. In aviation
there might be an occasional need for anonymity, to discuss accidents
or similar things. But for just plain shooting the breeze, as we often
do in this group, I don't see anonymity as a basic requirement.

Shirl:
That's a little extreme, IMO ... I don't think a person should have to
use their real name to be taken seriously. Some people aren't
comfortable using their real names, and in many instances, with just
cause. I think it's more important how people conduct themselves than
whether or not they use their real names ... but ... to each, his own.

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
You do have a point because legitimate posts also come from anonymous
posters. But if you browse the topics, nearly all inflammatory posts
come from people whose names are fake, and people with real names have
rarely made such posts, although there are exceptions.

I agree with that.

Anonymity is
critical in some newsgroups, such as abuse, drugs etc.. In aviation
there might be an occasional need for anonymity, to discuss accidents
or similar things. But for just plain shooting the breeze, as we often
do in this group, I don't see anonymity as a basic requirement.

I don't see either as a "requirement", I just don't judge anyone's
credibility *or lack of credibility* solely on whether or not they use
their real name to post ,,, whether it's to shoot the breeze or to
discuss something substantial. But again, that's JMO.

Andrew Sarangan wrote in news:29a0740a-9fc5-43e7-
:

On May 11, 7:16 pm, Shirl wrote:
Andrew Sarangan wrote:
I don't take seriously any posters who use handles instead
of their real names.

That's a little extreme, IMO ... I don't think a person should have to
use their real name to be taken seriously. Some people aren't
comfortable using their real names, and in many instances, with just
cause. I think it's more important how people conduct themselves than
whether or not they use their real names ... but ... to each, his own.

You do have a point because legitimate posts also come from anonymous
posters. But if you browse the topics, nearly all inflammatory posts
come from people whose names are fake, and people with real names have
rarely made such posts, although there are exceptions. Anonymity is
critical in some newsgroups, such as abuse, drugs etc.. In aviation
there might be an occasional need for anonymity, to discuss accidents
or similar things. But for just plain shooting the breeze, as we often
do in this group, I don't see anonymity as a basic requirement.




It is if you **** off as many people as I do!


Bertie

Andrew Sarangan writes:

You do have a point because legitimate posts also come from anonymous
posters. But if you browse the topics, nearly all inflammatory posts
come from people whose names are fake, and people with real names have
rarely made such posts, although there are exceptions.

However, the converse is not true: not all anonymous posters make inflammatory
posts.

Anonymity is an unpleasant necessity in cyberspace today.

But for just plain shooting the breeze, as we often
do in this group, I don't see anonymity as a basic requirement.

No matter what you say, and no matter what your opinion, and no matter how
nicely you say it, there will be someone who doesn't like it, so beware.