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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Official word: Runway Incursion vs Surface Incident
On Oct 6, 11:28*am, Ross wrote:
Just the wrong sentence structure can have a totally different meaning from the writer to the reader. I wish this was true in Gattmans case, but I can't find it in the below reply to me from him in the other thread. The below simply is inexcuseably rude. Because I'm an instructor and I brought it up on the student forum I feel obliged to "reciprocate" and clarify for other readers. Apparently, telling you what I saw happen has no value to you so clearly you don't respect my word. I'm not out here to engage in some sort of penis-measuring contest with a couple of usenet know-it-alls, if that's what this is going to turn into. His reply above to me was a very poor representation of an instructor and I have never had anybody tell me either in person, email, postal mail or even Usenet the above. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Official word: Runway Incursion vs Surface Incident
On Oct 6, 10:38*am, Jeffrey Bloss wrote:
But I'm also sure they felt they were doing a service for the common good of all humanity ;-) I sent it and why not? It was for safety, common good, education and to point out this resource called Usenet to the FAA cyberdummies. All winkers ( from you aside, why didn't you? As I mentioned, I contacted them about three weeks prior, by phone and e-mail. Be careful of what? I missed ti, what exactly is there to be afraid of? That some psychotic cyber-stalker might take the dispute beyond usenet banner and potentially destroy people's careers. The people who criticized the FAA/FSDO in the course of the discussion might find themselves ramp-checked or contacted too. Fortunately, we're dealing with the FAA which I regard as the good guys, if not a necessary bureaucracy. I enjoyed talking to them. But, if people are going to start reporting anything that people say to each other on the internet, then who knows what kind of creepy behavior they're into. -c |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Official word: Runway Incursion vs Surface Incident
On Oct 6, 12:44*pm, BeechSundowner wrote:
On Oct 6, 11:28*am, Ross wrote: I wish this was true in Gattmans case, but I can't find it in the below reply to me from him in the other thread. *The below simply is inexcuseably rude. Because I'm an instructor and I brought it up on the student forum I feel obliged to "reciprocate" and clarify for other readers. The renewal of this discussion with me admitting I was in error is proof of what I already explained to you, which is that as an instructor who started the discussion on an internet forum, I feel obligated to clarify for readers if I have been erroneous or caused confusion. That is why I came back to this forum and offered the details of my discussion with the FAA. You will, of course, interpret my words however you wish. Clearly I cannot stop that. But I want everybody here to know exactly what I meant when I said the above, and I feel I have proven it through my actions. Apparently, telling you what I saw happen has no value to you so clearly you don't respect my word. I'm not out here to engage in some sort of penis-measuring contest with a couple of usenet know-it-alls if that's what this is going to turn into. His reply above to me was a very poor representation of an instructor and I have never had anybody tell me either in person, email, postal mail or even Usenet the above. I'm sorry if I've bruised your ego. Telling you what I saw happen or what I mean has no value to you so clearly you don't respect my word. I'm not here to engage in a contest with you, call you rude or otherwise insult you. Goodbye. -c |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Official word: Runway Incursion vs Surface Incident
On Oct 6, 10:30*am, Jeffrey Bloss wrote:
a wrote Seriously, when and why did they lock your Thorazine away? Wow. You JUST WROTE: "In Chris case, there was no doubt he was being an assclown with statements such as: " And then you start dropping snarky Thorazine insults. Odd. Mr. Bloss, your contribution to the discussion is not necessary or helpful, but it does illustrate what this newsgroup has become since I started reading it in 1998. Thank you for providing this clarity. -c |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Official word: Runway Incursion vs Surface Incident
On Oct 6, 9:12*pm, C Gattman wrote:
I'm sorry if I've bruised your ego. Telling you what I saw happen or what I mean has no value to you so clearly you don't respect my word. I'm not here to engage in a contest with you, call you rude or otherwise insult you. Goodbye. You didn't bruise my ego as I am not being defensive on what I typed out. You just can't take it that somebody questioned you to back up what you say. Luckily it's all in these these two threads that backs everything I have said. My question was can you provide an internet source for what you stated. Your response was: Because I'm an instructor and I brought it up on the student forum I feel obliged to "reciprocate" and clarify for other readers. Apparently, telling you what I saw happen has no value to you so clearly you don't respect my word. I'm not out here to engage in some sort of penis-measuring contest with a couple of usenet know-it-alls, if that's what this is going to turn into. I haven't been rude, just stating my opinion on what I perceive as your poor presentation of an instructor when you give a reply such as the above. There is nothing subject to interpretation. YOU TYPED it out. Your ego apparently has issues, not mine. If you call the above statement polite or an appropriate response BY AN INSTRUCTOR to a question to back up what you type, you really do have issues. I have not mis-stated one thing.nor even tried to interpret anything you said. If you plan to say what "I did", back it up linking it to the direct post I typed. Otherwise you still continue to blow smoke. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Official word: Runway Incursion vs Surface Incident
On Oct 6, 8:02*pm, BeechSundowner wrote:
On Oct 6, 9:12*pm, C Gattman wrote: I'm sorry if I've bruised your ego. Telling you what I saw happen or what I mean has no value to you so clearly you don't respect my word. I'm not here to engage in a contest with you, call you rude or otherwise insult you. Goodbye. You didn't bruise my ego as I am not being defensive on what I typed out. *You just can't take it that somebody questioned you to back up what you I said Goodbye. I don't care what you think of me or what you think I can't take. Get over it. -c |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Official word: Runway Incursion vs Surface Incident
On Oct 7, 4:31*am, C Gattman wrote:
I said Goodbye. I don't care what you think of me or what you think I can't take. Get over it. *-c You are now becoming my source of entertainment. :-) Apparently you do care on what I think (or even others) or you wouldn't be so obsessed on defending yourself by replying to me (or others). I don't have anything to "get over" since I didn't say or do anything wrong. I live with a clean concience in this thread and the other thread that you unprofessionally represent yourself as an instructor. I mean, after all, what is your justification for posting the following? You are being quoted in it's entirety so it's not a matter of subjective interpretation that you want everybody to believe. Because I'm an instructor and I brought it up on the student forum I feel obliged to "reciprocate" and clarify for other readers. Apparently, telling you what I saw happen has no value to you so clearly you don't respect my word. I'm not out here to engage in some sort of penis-measuring contest with a couple of usenet know-it-alls, if that's what this is going to turn into. The above wasn't a good sign of an instructor trying to portray a professional image in an aviation newsgroup. After all, as I see it, the CFI's are the role models for todays students. If you want your students to see how you really represent aviation, you need to clean up your act in the public forum as the above doesn't do you well for your image or even for other fellow CFI's to the new people stepping into these forums for the first time. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Official word: Runway Incursion vs Surface Incident
On Oct 6, 9:03*pm, C Gattman wrote:
On Oct 6, 10:38*am, Jeffrey Bloss wrote: But I'm also sure they felt they were doing a service for the common good of all humanity ;-) I sent it and why not? It was for safety, common good, education and to point out this resource called Usenet to the FAA cyberdummies. All winkers ( from you aside, why didn't you? As I mentioned, I contacted them about three weeks prior, by phone and e-mail. Your attention to detail must not be your forte. Jeffrey's question was directed to Mark Hansen not you. He was asking Mark why he didn't contact the FAA.. Be careful of what? I missed ti, what exactly is there to be afraid of? That some psychotic cyber-stalker might take the dispute beyond usenet banner and potentially destroy people's careers. Your attention to detail must not be your forte. Jeffry Bloss hasn't stalked you. I count only one direct response from Jeffrey to you in this thread, hardly a stalker in my eyes. Now if you sad cyber lurker, your sentence above would reflect the situation more accurately. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Official word: Runway Incursion vs Surface Incident
In article
, BeechSundowner wrote: On Oct 7, 4:31*am, C Gattman wrote: I said Goodbye. I don't care what you think of me or what you think I can't take. Get over it. *-c You are now becoming my source of entertainment. :-) Apparently you do care on what I think (or even others) or you wouldn't be so obsessed on defending yourself by replying to me (or others). I can't imagine that anybody in this thread cares very much what other people think, because you all look like a bunch of colossal ******s to me. Want to impress people? Be informative, post civilly, and don't rise to the bait when somebody else doesn't. Few people in this thread have managed all three of these. If this conversation had been carried out in a bar instead of on usenet you'd all have black eyes and broken noses by now. You wouldn't talk this way to the other guy's face, so don't talk that way here. -- Mike Ash Radio Free Earth Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Official word: Runway Incursion vs Surface Incident
On 10/07/09 09:47, Mike Ash wrote:
In article , BeechSundowner wrote: On Oct 7, 4:31�am, C Gattman wrote: I said Goodbye. I don't care what you think of me or what you think I can't take. Get over it. �-c You are now becoming my source of entertainment. :-) Apparently you do care on what I think (or even others) or you wouldn't be so obsessed on defending yourself by replying to me (or others). I can't imagine that anybody in this thread cares very much what other people think, because you all look like a bunch of colossal ******s to me. Want to impress people? Be informative, post civilly, and don't rise to the bait when somebody else doesn't. Few people in this thread have managed all three of these. If this conversation had been carried out in a bar instead of on usenet you'd all have black eyes and broken noses by now. You wouldn't talk this way to the other guy's face, so don't talk that way here. +1 -- Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot Cal Aggie Flying Farmers Sacramento, CA |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Runway Incursion-Near Miss In Florida | Hawkeye[_2_] | Piloting | 9 | July 16th 07 01:20 AM |
Ft Lauderdale runway incursion | GrtArtiste | Piloting | 0 | July 13th 07 12:50 AM |
Zebra Runway incursion | Save the Elephants | Piloting | 5 | October 30th 04 09:16 PM |
Runway Incursion and NASA form | Koopas Ly | Piloting | 16 | November 12th 03 01:37 AM |
Runway Incursion and NASA form | steve mew | Piloting | 0 | November 10th 03 05:37 AM |