Originally Posted by
Apple Tree Yard
Good grief Steve. You've spent years on this site being a sarcastic wind up merchant, and now you throw out the "ad-hominem" comment? The points that AP made were right on target. It's irrelevant what he is or is not doing personally. Doesn't take away from the cold hard truth he laid out. Seriously, thin skinned much?
OK, where do I start? I might be seen as a sarcastic wind up merchant by some but I like to think I often pose thought provoking questions. Not once did I imply that I thought Air Profit's points were invalid; I simply asked him what I felt to be a relevant question with regard to his statement about enjoyment of CX/HKG versus moving on to elsewhere. I agree, to some degree, that his own upcoming movements are irrelevant to his position but it would add credence to his argument if he were to state what is going on in his life vis-à-vis said position: he can't have it both ways, saying on one hand that people should seek employment elsewhere while at the same time 'enduring' his remaining time here - why not simply leave?
With respect to the ad hominem comment, he implied that he thinks that I'm apologist for the company when nothing in my post suggested anything of the sort. It seems that because I had the temerity to ask what I thought was a relevant question with respect to his position on this topic, rather than answering or debating he decided instead to label me as apologist for the company which, in my opinion, was a weak argument - in fact, a non-argument. To me, that would be the very definition of an ad hominem attack. Consequently, I don't agree (naturally) with your thin skinned assessment of my character.
For the record, I think that Air Profit makes some very valid points and I would certainly not encourage any of my children to join CX as it stands today. In fact I wouldn't encourage any of my children to follow a career in aviation because the halcyon days, that we all long for, are well and truly over.
STP