MXSMANIC - The posts don't add up

Marc Adler wrote:
On Oct 13, 7:37 am, Emily wrote:

Well that explains it right there! What American would CHOOSE to live
in Paris? g

Sidney Bechet, Dexter Gordon, Miles Davis, Josephine Baker, George
Gershwin...

Not that you know who any of those people are.

Oh and Benjamin Franklin. There's a sliver of a chance you've heard of
him. After all, you appear to be at least semi-literate.

Marc

First, it was a joke. Notice that I ever put a g in. I don't assume
most of you people understand sarcasm.

Second, I already posted to Thomas explaining my feelings on Paris.

But plonk anyway. People like you bore me.

Sylvain wrote:
Emily wrote:

I'll rephrase. What non-Parisian would choose to live in Paris?

music to my ears! :-) someone who understands the difference :-)

Well, I've been to Paris. I'm sure the rest of France is very nice,
when you pretty much have to enter the country through CDG, well, let's
just say it's not a pleasant welcome.

On Oct 13, 9:05 pm, Emily wrote:

Notice that I ever put a g in.

I don't think anyone makes derogatory statements about France on the
internet these days without attempting some kind of facetious tone, so
don't blame me, blame the bigots.

Second, I already posted to Thomas explaining my feelings on Paris.

I'll be looking for the article in the Encyclopedia Britannica about
your feeling on Paris.

But plonk anyway. People like you bore me.

Well, I imagine one of the downsides of being perfect (well, typing
aside) is that a lot of people must bore you.

What a burden you shoulder. My heart goes out to you.

Marc

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 07:37:31 -0500, Emily
wrote:

Thomas Borchert wrote:
John,

He is an American living in PAris.

Well that explains it right there! What American would CHOOSE to live
in Paris? g

Well in the movie, Gene Kelly was a painter who mostly sings and
dances.

RK Henry

In article ,
says...




I'll rephrase. What non-Parisian would choose to live in Paris?



Personally, I've been to Paris, wasn't impressed, and couldn't imagine
choosing to live there.


What does it take to impress you?
Just say the word TEXAS and Parisians will be waiting for the punchline.
Yet you choose to live there...


I agree with you about CDG airport though - Operators like Air France
are aware of how bad it is, but so far the French in general have not
come to understand that their international gateway is a third-world
torture chamber!

GF

In article .com,
says...

I've been online in some form or
another for over 30 years, and he's one of the most polite and
forgiving posters I've seen (albeit extremely hard headed), considering
the bile thrown at him by some crabby old men and women here.


All that experience still hasn't made you very observant.
Many of us with much less experience have learned to recognize abuse when we
see it, and I regret to see well meaning people, with the desire to teach
and share knowledge being insulted and taken for a ride.

Bob Gardner (to cite only one) has been flying and instructing for decades,
and has made a lifelong passion of trying to translate and explain flying
concepts to beginners of all ages who desire to learn. Even MXSMANIAC could
afford one of Bob's books, and if he were to purchase it, read it in earnest
and try to learn everything in it, he would be a more knowledgable poster,
and less irksome to others. It would also be indicative of a positive
attitude, which is absolutely indispensable to being a pilot. The fact that
he will not do this, and feels free to take the author to task and insult
him over his ignorance is indicative of a non-constructive attitude, which
is why his contributions are (understandably) seen by many here as
manipulative and abusive.

Manipulation and abuse by vindictive posters are very destructive forces in
the "self-governed" world of usenet, and can destroy otherwise useful and
constructive forums. This is why many here are concerned - it is not with
any desire to chastise or punish an individual, even less, as you posit, to
prove some sort of superiority to him - the concern is a degradation of
the quality of discourse here, mixed with just enough insult and
manipulation, to make well-meaning contributors feel they are wasting their
time. They will leave and not come back. Some probably already have.

I hope I have been explicit enough to help you understand.

GF

Greg Farris wrote:
In article ,
says...


I'll rephrase. What non-Parisian would choose to live in Paris?


Personally, I've been to Paris, wasn't impressed, and couldn't imagine
choosing to live there.


What does it take to impress you?
Just say the word TEXAS and Parisians will be waiting for the punchline.
Yet you choose to live there...
My job is here.

Jon Kraus wrote:
She appears to have done quite a lot in her short 20-something years on
the Earth. She's a commercial pilot-CFI-A&P and now a world traveler to
boot.
Don't believe it? I really don't care. The FAA records show the truth,
as does my passport. I know quite a few commercial pilot-CFI-A&P's and
most of us have at least been out of out home country. I don't see this
as ANYTHING worth suspecting to be a lie.

And to top that off I hear she is now dating MXMANIC!!
Get lost. It makes you look sad and pathetic when you resort to saying
things like this.

A couple of things that have already been proven about this girl; she is
a liar and BS-artist.
I haven't lied about anything and I'm the worst BS'er in the world.

She appears to have done quite a lot in her short 20-something years on
the Earth. She's a commercial pilot-CFI-A&P and now a world traveler to
boot. And to top that off I hear she is now dating MXMANIC!! Wow... I
for one am impressed. And to think I thought a lot of 20-somethings were
angst-riddled complainers.. :-)

A couple of things that have already been proven about this girl; she is
a liar and BS-artist.

Jon Kraus
'79 Mooney 201
4443H @ UMP



Marc Adler wrote:

On Oct 13, 9:05 pm, Emily wrote:


Notice that I ever put a g in.


I don't think anyone makes derogatory statements about France on the
internet these days without attempting some kind of facetious tone, so
don't blame me, blame the bigots.


Second, I already posted to Thomas explaining my feelings on Paris.


I'll be looking for the article in the Encyclopedia Britannica about
your feeling on Paris.


But plonk anyway. People like you bore me.


Well, I imagine one of the downsides of being perfect (well, typing
aside) is that a lot of people must bore you.

What a burden you shoulder. My heart goes out to you.

Marc

"Kev" wrote in message
oups.com...
I've been online in some form or
another for over 30 years, and he's one of the most polite and
forgiving posters I've seen (albeit extremely hard headed), considering
the bile thrown at him by some crabby old men and women here.

Those latter people, who think they can dictate whom the rest of us
converse with, should be ashamed of themselves. I've lost a lot of
respect for some of the regulars here, because they've shown just how
full of themselves they are.

I think he's a good test of how well we can explain things. If we
can't convince someone like him, who's very interested in aviation, how
flying works... then what chance do we have with people who want a TFR
everywhere?

You're right that the schoolyard taunts directed at mxsmanic are an
embarrassment to this group (as is the credential-mongering that some people
have resorted to).

The problem, though, is that while much of mxsmanic's discussion is
reasonable (hence, my initial defense of his participation here), much of it
seems instead to be deliberately provocative (which still does not warrant
uncivil responses, but does explain some of the frustration that erupts).

Consider the following assertions he made in the recent "Flying patterns"
thread:

"In IFR, you don't have to look out the window for other aircraft. You
have help from controllers."

"By definition, if you are flying by instruments, you aren't looking
out the window. ATC provides separation."

" Most IFR flights are NOT in IMC.
But IFR means that they are conducted as if they were in IMC,
irrespective of actual conditions."

"You follow their instructions, therefore they are providing
separation."

"Show me where I said that you don't have to look out the window."

"A controller may ask if you have visual contact with traffic. If you
do, you can say so, and thereby assume responsibility for maintaining
separation with it. If you don't see it, you cannot maintain
separation, so you are not responsible for doing so."

"If you are flying IFR, by definition, you may or may not be able to
see other aircraft. If you can see aircraft, you can maintain visual
separation; otherwise you cannot."

"By definition, if you are flying IFR, you don't have to be able to see or
visually maintain separation from anything, unless you implicitly
agree to do so by acknowledging visual contact."

" Where are you getting your information?
I read it, but I don't remember where."

"If you are flying IFR in VMC, VFR traffic is required to see you, but
you are not required to see VFR traffic (or any other traffic)."

In response to his earliest posts above, many of us explained the reality of
IFR in VMC, and provided him with the relevant (free, online) references.
But his stream of obviously, dangerously false assertions continued
unabated. He never tried to cite any factual basis for his claims, but did
phrase them as (insistent, authoritative) statements of fact, which (many of
us felt) required us to keep rebutting him in order to preserve the
integrity of the aviation advice presented here.

He did not appear to be making an effort to engage in responsible,
good-faith discussion in this instance and others. In some threads, he
behaves more reasonably, which may give you a different impression of his
participation.

--Gary