Kaptin X, Kaptin M and their various seconds.
I've had enough of this.
It would be easy just to lock or delete this thread as the behaviour by some leaves something to be desired, but then the discussion would be lost for all.
First lets deal with some facts.
1989 happened; I think we can all agree on that.
The history thereof is well known to the actual participants.
The participants both local and those who came from overseas took a course of action, for whatever reason, which has led them all to where they are at this point in time.
Nothing can change that, nor mitigate the consequences of this or that course of action for any one of them.
The consequences for all including the general public were far reaching, in some cases devastating, but nonetheless inextricably intertwined in the history and aviation fabric of our nation. To suggest otherwise is nonsense.
There have been many casualties within the families of our profession, I would suspect on both sides of the divide equally. In any event, I think we are all much too professional to really want to compare body bags counts as a measure of who won.
The denouement, if indeed any is possible and to whatever result, is now being played out with the demise of Ansett and its mooted phoenix routine. For the record, Woomera does not nor will not have any comment to offer on that and is doing a crash course on the wisdom and workings of King Solomon's mind to that effect.
It is clear that there are varying degrees of comfort or discomfort in the manner in which this is taking place.
That is not going to change until there is a clear resolution in the hands of the creditors one way or another, the consequences of which will evolve in the fullness of time. It probably will not change in any event, as there are always two sides to an argument with all the shades of grey in between.
One way or the other, the world will continue to rotate on its axis in its endless orbit around the sun
Apart from the odd quibble does anybody have any argument with any of the above???
OK!
So lets get personal about Kaptin M's and X's '89, if I may be so bold.
In general terms.
Moderators will not be dictated to by members as to which is or is not a correct version of this issue or that piece of history.
Simply because, we do not have an opinion on any issues save that the threads or posts comply with the recently reiterated guidelines, each post therefore being as valid as the other.
We will not be party to nor are sufficiently clever to be abe to influence or encourage the writing or rewriting of history. Therefore moderation is simply applied to blatant eye gouging, personal and personality assasination and general misbehaviour, again as contained in the said guidelines.
We do not respond to threats of leaving these halls unless this or that is done or applied, beyond wishing you well and welcoming you back if you so desire, subject to the rules. That choice as ever is yours
We do not knowingly respond to intimidation by either side of a controversial issue in an effort to run whatever agenda, pro or anti.
In regard to Kaptin M et al, as long as they abide by the rules, they have as much right as any other member to be here and will be allowed to remain.
In regard to Kaptin X et al, as long as they abide by the rules, they have as much right as any other member to be here and will be allowed to remain.
In regard to Kaptin Ms many posts on the issues, that is his right as are the responses to them, again as long as they abide by the rules.
I can assure you Kaptin M is not afforded any more or less special attention than any other member. You can also be assured we keep a close eye on him and any others including Kaptin X who post in regard to ’89 issues.
Now for Kaptin X.
[quote] I make the assessment of Kaptin M because I AM a psychologist!!
It is, however, your ball, and if you choose to take it away, then I respect that decision, but you don't seem to apply the same vigour to Kaptin M's malicious posts.<hr></blockquote>
I remain unimpressed and IMHO it fails on several points.
1. Unsolicited assessments of an individual, easily identifiable by many, published on a publicly accessible forum by a "psychologist" would appear to be most
unprofessional behaviour and might well have difficult professional consequences.
I am reluctant to repost what I presume is your "professional assessment as a psychologist" deleted from your last post re Kaptin M, save to say that it was deleted because it may have been actionable. I would much prefer, if you were sufficiently concerned in your "professional capacity" that you email it directly to him. I still have a copy if you do not.
2. A small thing but if you respect my decision why is it necessary to point that out, it's an old debating trick, you know, code for "I really don't agree", that's fine you are entitled to that.
3. You then go on to suggest that in some way I favour Kaptin M. Fair enough, that is always a possibility if you are prepared to accept that I probably err as much on the 'other side' as well. But you stopped me with the word 'malicious' which I find hard to separate with your "because I AM a psychologist", routine. Most of the psychologists I know are less shall we say, aggressive, in their language and a reread of the posts on the thread did not show any malicious intent beyond a concern, misplaced maybe who knows, for the junior pilots employment prospects based on his own experience paradigm in that context.
Neither are [quote]stupidity, and I see much of that in KM's posts - illogical, ill conceived, malicious drivel.<hr></blockquote> the words I would expect of a trained psychologist attempting to resolve a troubled "patients" problems.
You have to agree that
[quote]
I think perhaps I should have a psychiatrist friend email him privately with an on line diagnosis, and recommendations for possible treatment.<hr></blockquote>
is, if not just gratuitously insulting it is highly unprofessional.
If you are indeed a psychologist then surely you have a duty to put aside any personal angst in dealing with someone you perceive to be in trouble, maybe you have, but the message is getting scrambled, either way it's up to you.
You would also understand that it takes two or more persons being actively aggressive to generate conflict and maintain its momentum. Might I suggest some reflection on that as a concept?
OK now its Kaptin M's turn.
I understand the strength of your feelings and frustration and that the lessons of the past are sometimes forgotten, swept aside or even used against individuals or groups.
I am prepared to accept that for many of you overseas it must be even more frustrating to observe the goings on in your country of birth or nationality, from afar and not be able to be completely in the loop on the evolution and resolution by others on issues in which you were pivotal and about which you feel strongly.
May I ask you to accept that whilst you may be right, or wrong, about this or that, if others want to make what you may perceive to be, or know are mistakes, then let them. You can by expressing your view
do all that you can for them; whether they choose to heed the advice or observation or not, the subsequent actions and consequences belong to them.
PPRuNe Towers and I have allowed considerable latitude in the robust and vigorous canvassing of '89 issues because we recognise unequivocally that it is a seminal event in the history of Australian aviation and industrial relations generally and that that history must be respected. It would be a great pity if it were marginalised in the minds of many by a well intentioned but intemperate few.
I ask you to heed the words of your peers; it may give you a wider more attentive audience.
TO ALL
As from right now though, there will be
ZERO tolerance for anything other than very civilised discussion on the '89 issues from then or how they affect others now.
Anyone who cannot for their own personal and private reasons find that they are able to conduct themselves thus, can make the choice to remain silent or not.
I am very sincere when I say that we would rather have you around than not.
But we would exhort you to moderate your responses, offering the hand of friendship where this is possible and experience to the less enlightened where this is necessary.
It will not have gone unnoticed that PPRuNe Towers and I have been tightening things up a fair bit around here.
We are determined to do so to maintain the professional integrity and respect that PPRuNe enjoys Internationally.
We will not hesitate to act when it goes off the rails.
We will try as hard as we can to be even-handed within the guidelines.
But to do all of this we need your help.J
I implore you to take this in the spirit in which it is offered, reflect and resolve, put egos away (at least turn the wick down a bit) and lets try to start the NEW YEAR 2002 on as positive a note as we can generate.
God knows we all need it
Now may I wish you ALL a Happy, Prosperous and Angst Free New Year.
[ 29 December 2001: Message edited by: Woomera ]</p>