Does anyone actually take any notice of PPRUNE?
Thread Starter
Does anyone actually take any notice of PPRUNE?
Is there any evidence that a post on this forum has ever received any official reaction from a senior bod? I often see questions or requests for information and the user sometimes receives a reply of "check your PM`s".
But I wonder if there has ever been any official higher level reaction to a rant, confession, slipped secret etc? Sometimes the official reaction or response is reported or evident in the press. Examples being the low level video posted on the net, the RAF being utterly useless claim, the AT difficulties around the globe. All these have resulted in some form of official enquiry or reporting in the papers.
But there are many other threads that I wonder if, when read by a one star or above, results in some form of personal come-back or review of the rules. There is a thread running at present about the differance in rules in accom for AT v FJ for example.
So has anyone ever received a "visit" or phone call from a boss or desk officer as a result of posting a comment on here?
But I wonder if there has ever been any official higher level reaction to a rant, confession, slipped secret etc? Sometimes the official reaction or response is reported or evident in the press. Examples being the low level video posted on the net, the RAF being utterly useless claim, the AT difficulties around the globe. All these have resulted in some form of official enquiry or reporting in the papers.
But there are many other threads that I wonder if, when read by a one star or above, results in some form of personal come-back or review of the rules. There is a thread running at present about the differance in rules in accom for AT v FJ for example.
So has anyone ever received a "visit" or phone call from a boss or desk officer as a result of posting a comment on here?
It is required reading on the senior staff courses but, as far as I can gather, it is considered more light relief than an insight into the shop floor thinking. It is the very fact that we are anonymous that seems to add to the perceived 'lack' of credibility.
If you consider the current manpower of the RAF and the number of 'regular' posters on here it is really tiny as a representative forum.
More of a virtual crewroom.
If you consider the current manpower of the RAF and the number of 'regular' posters on here it is really tiny as a representative forum.
More of a virtual crewroom.
"So has anyone ever received a "visit" or phone call from a boss or desk officer as a result of posting a comment on here?"
Was contacted by a successor, three times removed, asking if he could pick my brains, as it was obvious from some (unclassified) comment I'd made that I knew something about a project. We didn't know each other. They'd lost all corporate knowledge before the embodiment phase could get under way. Judging by recent press photos, the a/c have been fitted so it worked out in the end.
As for bosses, while I'm sometimes outspoken they know I have written supporting evidence for everything I say, so I'm left alone. That, and not breaching SY keeps you on the right side. However, it is difficult these days knowing where the line is because of their inconsistent implementation of FOI. They happily hand out what I would consider Confidential (at least) material, while withholding stuff that is actually in the public domain. The other day I read information on a US website that I would never, hitherto, dare mention here. The recent NAO 2006 report on major projects (see other thread), when discussing this project, went to such lengths to avoid discussing this information that they actually made themselves look silly and toothless!
Was contacted by a successor, three times removed, asking if he could pick my brains, as it was obvious from some (unclassified) comment I'd made that I knew something about a project. We didn't know each other. They'd lost all corporate knowledge before the embodiment phase could get under way. Judging by recent press photos, the a/c have been fitted so it worked out in the end.
As for bosses, while I'm sometimes outspoken they know I have written supporting evidence for everything I say, so I'm left alone. That, and not breaching SY keeps you on the right side. However, it is difficult these days knowing where the line is because of their inconsistent implementation of FOI. They happily hand out what I would consider Confidential (at least) material, while withholding stuff that is actually in the public domain. The other day I read information on a US website that I would never, hitherto, dare mention here. The recent NAO 2006 report on major projects (see other thread), when discussing this project, went to such lengths to avoid discussing this information that they actually made themselves look silly and toothless!
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South of Penge
Age: 74
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The old Catch-22.
Be anonymous and therefore be ignored, since you obviously "don't have the courage of your convictions".
Stand up and be named and thus lose your career for choosing "an inappropriate means by which to express yourself".
I.e. The Air Force is always right.
I learnt that one as a Flight Cadet - before the "Tech" went comprehensive.
Be anonymous and therefore be ignored, since you obviously "don't have the courage of your convictions".
Stand up and be named and thus lose your career for choosing "an inappropriate means by which to express yourself".
I.e. The Air Force is always right.
I learnt that one as a Flight Cadet - before the "Tech" went comprehensive.
Last edited by RETDPI; 25th Nov 2006 at 12:01.
Come on guys and girls - any regular contributor to Prune isn't hard to identify, and I know of people who have had polite warnings in the past on this or other such newsgroups. We must have all thought 'ouch - that's a bit close to the mark' in terms of revealing things when reading posts, I certainly have.
PTT
"So it was you responsible for the Puma paint job!"
Yes, it was me. I deliberately wasted the money. Now that I've proven myself, and meet the appropriate standards, can I have CDP's job please?
"So it was you responsible for the Puma paint job!"
Yes, it was me. I deliberately wasted the money. Now that I've proven myself, and meet the appropriate standards, can I have CDP's job please?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: England
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nao Mpr
Re NAO 2006 MPR - the whole clearance process is run past senior MoD staffs many times (with a 2* MoD handling officer). Purpose of this is to ensure that only factual accuracies are reported and that no classified material is released inadvertantly.
Agreed, but my point was that, while accurate, the lack of detail left the reader asking "But why did that happen?" and "So when they (MoD) gave you that answer, did you not dig deeper?". I already knew the answer to the first from the US site I mentioned. As for the second, these committees don't normally dig deep, and MoD carefully select and brief interviewees, so the report is largely worthless in the context of an Audit designed to highlight deficiencies of process and procedure, or waste.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 58
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the main problems seems to be that so many 'rants' decay into slanging matches and some very good comment gets sullied in back stabbing and deviation. A good thing would be to have a non-judgmental 'open' forum within a work computing system. Attributable comments have more credence and usually stick to the point - I know I will be ridiculed for being open and claims of 'your for the high jump if they catch you'; comments inbound but BEN has a fantastic FS system/net and it does get points across. HF 'anonymous' returns (ACCORN etc...) are attributable and have hade some fantastic results. It’s the fear of retribution that worries most but in a justice based society, if you do a crime - do the time; if you see a problem that will save your mates life - SHOUT UP, no one will persecute you unless they have something to hide.
Believe me, certain inadequately testiculated ambitious thrusters will go to any length to find out who is behind a nom-de-PPRuNe.
Rather than defending the indefensible, or doing anything to remedy the cause of the comment, they will then use their powers of position (and vague all-encompassing QRs) to try to silence your comments on here. Onwards and upwards is their only goal - and they don't want anyone or anything to queer that pitch!
Or so I understand......
Rather than defending the indefensible, or doing anything to remedy the cause of the comment, they will then use their powers of position (and vague all-encompassing QRs) to try to silence your comments on here. Onwards and upwards is their only goal - and they don't want anyone or anything to queer that pitch!
Or so I understand......
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Close to the Arctic Circle
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some years ago I added an innocuous one-liner reply to a thread about engineering support to a particular FJ fleet. Minutes later I received a gypsy's warning by e-mail from another (possibly ex-serving current journalist) contributor who was a regular participant in the Chinook debate at the time.
Ever since then I have been in the 'observe, don't comment' camp, but have seen PPrune cited or quoted regularly where the posh nobs hang out!
Ever since then I have been in the 'observe, don't comment' camp, but have seen PPrune cited or quoted regularly where the posh nobs hang out!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: uk(occasionally)
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remember PPRuNe is only anonymous to the casual observer. If "they" really want to know who you are then they can find out. So stay the right side of classified stuff!
Totally agree with Gnd about all the chaff blocking a few good points.
We should try a forum with no slagging/I'm better than you/uninformed pontificating!
Totally agree with Gnd about all the chaff blocking a few good points.
We should try a forum with no slagging/I'm better than you/uninformed pontificating!
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Portsmouth
Age: 57
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I printed off a thread about the JPA debacle when it first went truly pear-shaped and there were huge problems. I passed it to my 2*, and it came back to me with green ink from a 3* with indications that a 4* had been briefed on the contents. I know of a change in policy from the Dark Blue side of things that was directly related to the contents of that print out.
You can write to me at HMP......
You can write to me at HMP......
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Gloucestershire
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now, now; any more of that and I'll have to visit you in my brown Volvo and demand beer for my silence!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Shrops
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are not anonymous
Wrong - we are all anonymous, it's just that some of us are more anonymous than others!!
Remember, just because you are paranoid it doesn't mean they are not out to get you!!
Remember, just because you are paranoid it doesn't mean they are not out to get you!!
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
As a serving member of HM Forces you have obligations and loyalties that our civilian or non-serving brethren do not. Whether commissioned or non-commissioned, your oath of allegiance requires you conduct yourself and your communications in a fairly restricted manner in which your opinion of Her Majesties' servants and officers, and their policies, are neither sought nor required. Should you find yourself puzzled or at variance with such orders or directives (as most of us are at some point) you are expected to demonstrate the leadership or initiative invested in you to resolve the matter using the means available to you. Whether you think Commanders' interviews or Redress of Grievance are effective or not is academic, those are the means by which you may adress your dissatisfaction with the Service.
All Junior NCO's will know that reasonable "whining" is a function of the command structure. Service personnel are encouraged to get things into the open to a reasonable degree, and complain to the local chain of command. What must be recognized and prevented is the more serious undermining of good conduct and military discipline. Every situation is different, but open and frequent remarks regarding the effectiveness of senior commanders or Service policy are examples that local commanders are expected to nip in the bud.
Dragging HM Forces into the twenty-first century, where every decision can be openly and publicly questioned on fora such as these changes nothing. The obligations and loyalties placed upon you require that you use the system. Nobody ever asked whether you thought the sytem was fair, or easy, or resolved anything, you gave up your right to reasoned debate when you signed your terms of service. This is not a democracy, it is the military. Obviously the number of PVR's shows that more and more people are realizing that fact, albeit after the event.
Comments on here that attempt to short circuit or avoid the chain of command can be viewed 2 ways - very brave, or very cowardly. If you have tried all the other ways and this is your last shot at bringing some grave injustice to the public's eye, good for you. If you are a barrack room lawyer who knows all of his/her rights, but cares nothing for the obligations placed upon you, freely reveals sensitive information to the public here, but lacks the moral fibre to use the chain of command, then your time would probably be better spent holding court in the Naafi bar while waiting for a discharge.
You signed up - nobody made you do it. Loyalty is not an obvious two-way street in the Military, you are exected to make the largest investment.
All Junior NCO's will know that reasonable "whining" is a function of the command structure. Service personnel are encouraged to get things into the open to a reasonable degree, and complain to the local chain of command. What must be recognized and prevented is the more serious undermining of good conduct and military discipline. Every situation is different, but open and frequent remarks regarding the effectiveness of senior commanders or Service policy are examples that local commanders are expected to nip in the bud.
Dragging HM Forces into the twenty-first century, where every decision can be openly and publicly questioned on fora such as these changes nothing. The obligations and loyalties placed upon you require that you use the system. Nobody ever asked whether you thought the sytem was fair, or easy, or resolved anything, you gave up your right to reasoned debate when you signed your terms of service. This is not a democracy, it is the military. Obviously the number of PVR's shows that more and more people are realizing that fact, albeit after the event.
Comments on here that attempt to short circuit or avoid the chain of command can be viewed 2 ways - very brave, or very cowardly. If you have tried all the other ways and this is your last shot at bringing some grave injustice to the public's eye, good for you. If you are a barrack room lawyer who knows all of his/her rights, but cares nothing for the obligations placed upon you, freely reveals sensitive information to the public here, but lacks the moral fibre to use the chain of command, then your time would probably be better spent holding court in the Naafi bar while waiting for a discharge.
You signed up - nobody made you do it. Loyalty is not an obvious two-way street in the Military, you are exected to make the largest investment.