HOOSTEN
Do you actually have a pilot licence? I can hear you yelling at the screen.
There is no such thing as an active runway at a non controlled field. You have suggested the Pawnee was using the "non active" runway and hence has caused conflict with the jab on "the active". What makes the Jab's runway "the active"? If it was quiet, no other aircraft flying, and the Pawnee was going up and down for hours accepting a crosswind on 06 for convenience - (totally legal and allowable) , was 06 "the active" and he was being within guidelines, or despite him being the only one there, is the more into wind runway "the active" and he was being negligent?
If we further that - if he was using 06 with a cross or even tailwind for 3 hours and then the Jab taxis out for just one takeoff on 29, is all of a sudden 29 now "the active" and now all of a sudden the Pawnee pilot is a clown and negligent, unprofessional? No, of course he is not. There is a preferred runway for you, but not an active.
Its called airmanship mate. If the error has occurred because of the scenario posted earlier, the hold short issue, then consider this. I failed a guy on a check because we were on finals to one runway and a student on finals to a crossing runway. The student said she would land and hold short. My guy continued. I told him to go round and failed him. He was p!ssed off because he said it was all sorted. I then pointed out that nshe is a student, and like any pilot could, what if she flares late, bounces her landing, bounce, bounce, bounce, suddenly she is halfway down the runway and no braking has occured. Whoops, couldn't hold short. She can NOT guarantee a hold short or not going round.
Accepting someone else at a non controlled field saying they will hold short could get you in huge grief. Just because the lightie driver says he will hold short means nothing. Play it safe and wait until he HAS held short. YOU must be the professional who recognises and seperates the conflict. Do not blindly trust well intentioned inexperienced pilots.