Ok, I'll bite...
I'm reading the above posts of people threatening to leave the AOA if he is approved for membership. Really? Is this what we as a pilot group should feel? Now that the Company is slowly tightening the screws with our contracts, we are thinking of the segregation of a potential member or abandonment of the AOA from a standing member(s)? What have we become?
Why don't we all take a deep breath and try to find a solution in a rational manner rather than partake in a 'stone-the-heretic' view by what we've heard from other than the parties involved?
Michael Hunt mentioned about diversions and the response was "Two diversions ? Niiice. Needs his tech knowledge re-appraising then." Again, before we cast a decision, how about we obtain the facts? (Globocnik this is not a personal attack against you) - I'll apologise to you right now if I am incorrect; I don't read posts #35,#36 and #37 the way you do.
Regardless whether he was involved in one...two...ten per month diversions, the question raised by RugbyRugby is whether he should be allowed to join and whether there is "an abuse of membership." If there is a decision made that "yes, in fact, there was an abuse of membership," then the membership should decide what the consequence should be (from what 'round midnight's suggestion, post #52, to Tafalgar's suggestion, of NO membership, #53.
Before we allow tempers to flare, how about we possibly obtain and consider all the facts rather than go by speculation.
I feel there are lessons to be learnt in more ways than just ethical.
As Anotherday previously stated, "Flame away."