MODERATION
 

When Capt PPRuNe first created the 'Military Pilots' forum, it was remarkable in being self-moderating. Some useful information has been posted for others to benefit from; the forum has also allowed Those in High Places to have a fly-on-the-wall insight into topics which affect morale in today's Armed Forces.

Recently, however, the forum seems to being debased by trivial mud-slinging and abuse. This seems to originate from a readily identifiable minority who seem hell-bent on causing unrest. This is a great pity as it will result in the whole forum being seen as worthless by those who used to appreciate its value. Alternatively it will be perhaps be moderated; this would probably attract criticism, being doubtless viewed by some as censorship to protect some perceived 'party line'.

So a plea for self-moderation please; there is a clear distinction between inter-Service rivalry and banter, which is fine, and blatant abuse and foul language which most certainly is not.

[This message has been edited by BEagle (edited 19 February 2001).]

Beagle,

A very welcome post. Perhaps the "Pause before transmit" culture taught to anyone who operates any form of comms equipment could find its way over to this neck of the woods. Sadly, I'm not so sure that all PPRuNes can make the clear distinction you refer to.

And yes, I have been guilty of falling for some of the more blatant bits of bait that have floated this way...

Floreat PPRuNe.

BEagle

So we come back to the old question of a moderator. Whilst not wishing to censor the site completely the ability to remove some threads may be handy. No offence to the RAFP but that particular thread has become nothing more than football terrace abuse (caused by both sides I hasten to add) and makes the Armed Forces look, frankly, pathetic.

I'm not saying we need to go down the line of a "members only" site as that may deter "free speech" [within NTK and OSA] but the ability to remove a thread that makes us as, the Military, look like childish tw@ts may be required. Some of the threads on retention perhaps?

Only a thought.

TL

Couldn't agree more chaps, been dipping in and out of the site for years under various names (never did have a good memory for passwords) and have noticed a recent inability to banter coming from various angles.

Don't think a moderator is the way to go , yet, but it would be a shame if we show ourselves unable to self-police. Ooops there's that P word slipping out unintentioned!

Agree with Tight and about some of the retention threads, yeah so we don't get paid much compared to the airlines but we ain't an airline. When it comes down to bonus' for us or bonus' for nurses no politician is ever gonna give it to the boys, simple hard fact.

So if you have a solid reasoned arguement that prehaps brings something new to the subject then post away. If however you just want to vent your spleen then go down the gym and knock cr@p out of a punch bag.

That's if you know where the gym is, we have one allegedly but I'm buggered if I've ever found it.

Stay frosty. http://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/s/owen/fett.gif

BEagle,

You have my wholehearted support.

It is quite apparent that many posts are openly abusive, hiding under the veneer of 'banter' as supposed justification. I, for one, am tiring of anti-aircrew rhetoric from non-aviators and the tediously persistent anti-RAF posts from people who are patently ill-informed and/or bigoted. To the former, I must point out that the forum is headed 'Military Pilots' and whilst I think it refreshing, if not essential, that relevant and appropriate views should be welcome from any quarter, the fundamental tenet that it is a pilot/aircrew forum should be respected; there is a ground ops forum for other topics. To the latter cadre, it is obvious that those that place posts that belittle the efforts of another aircrew cadre are embarrassingly ignorant of any working conditions, pressures and roles other than their own; I may fly FJ but have immense respect for my colleagues that fly rotary (of any Service) and multi because it does not require rocket science to realize that, currently, task divided by resources equals hard work across the board. It may seem immensely funny to that small-minded band of single Service bigots but it is potentially immensely damaging to the interests of all 3 Services to expose such rhetoric in a Public Forum.

Finally, am I alone in finding blatantly offensive posts, directed a senior officers, pathetic. Would those that find it acceptable to change one letter of an expletive directed to CAS, etc be so bold in a face-to-face environment? Quite apart from indicating a poor grasp of written expression it demonstrates an appalling disrespect for the history of a proud Service - I hope that the veterans of WWII do not log onto PPruNe.

Overall, it seems that some individuals cannot resist the opportunity to express anonymously what they do not have the morale courage to say openly in the bar to their aircrew colleagues or at work to their superiors. Nominally hypocrisy on my behalf I know but, were it not for the obvious security implications, I would happily submit all of my posts under my own name. Even though my views may not always accord with the 'party-line', my loyalty to the greater interests of the Service is assured. I am certainly happy to air them openly and my boss knows my PPruNe pseudonym.

Gentlemen/ladies, we are allegedly better educated and more disciplined than the vast majority of our country's population, let us demonstrate it!

The whole 'RAF Police' thread should be deleted asap. I shudder to think of the impression it creates in a PUBLIC forum of a supposedly professional service.

Shameful!

At last some sane and sage counsel! I had almost given up my antipodean viewing because of the style and type of comment made under guise of banter, which in fact was arrogance and ignorance in equal parts.Some of the more serious whinging is also misplaced. If the commenters really feel that way, then there are ways and means of making their feelings known.

If some are the comments were to be taken as an indication, then an assumption could be made that standards of officer and aircrew selection had seriously dropped.While I don't believe that, if wit and repartee are benchmarks, then they certainly have!

Beagle
I absolutely agree, some of the threads don't belong in this forum at all. A moderator can erase unsuitable threads. This is after all, a military Pilots Forum!!

I'm surprised it has taken so long for this idea to be posted. It is, however, an excellent plan and idividual posts should be removed, as well as entire threads if necessary.

Irrelevant threads cannot be removed without stiffling free speech, but could they be moved to a more suitable forum?

Hear, hear.

I am glad to see some sense appearing on these pages at last. This forum is an opportunity to air issues and make comment(constructive hopefully) that are of concern to military aircrew. Those that cannot or are not of the breteren should save their comments for the toilet door!

BEagle.

Nuff respect and can't argue with your overall sentiments.

I would add that, as an interloper on a 'military pilots' forum, I have seen posts that are misinformed and perhaps need a balancing view (IMHO of course), or are a general question which, regardless of whether you draw flying pay or not, one may be qualified to answer (ie, kids' education in a military environment). I would like to think that I have stayed out of the flying specific threads (apart from the fact that I knew 3 of the players on "Fighter Pilot"), and also feel that this years' pay award was so emotive that it effected everybody in uniform (it may not be acknowledged, but it is not only the FJJP/Ns who have a confidence (with the firm) problem). IMHO, the forum is balanced by relevant non-aircrew input - the trick is to make it relevant, of course. As an aside, if there were a separate 'Military Ground Ops' forum, how long would it be before the 'non-qualified' interjected? Divide and conquer works both ways.

However, as with the rest of the Net, it's all anarchy really and difficult to really control. I would hope that your initial post to this thread would cause some to think before engaging, and to use a bit of common. They say though that one of the first signs of low morale is in-fighting and indiscipline. It would seem clear then, as a barometer of overall morale and contentment, recent postings have certainly proved (I hope), to be useful to some.

It's been emotional.

------------------
....wasn't there, no one saw me!

Well done BEagle,

It was about time somebody suggested we voluntarily rein ourselves in. Most of the posts about retention were particularly disappointing. I was disgusted at the amount of abuse levelled at those who were not prepared to support the money grabbing antics of Thatchers children. The insults directed at CAS were unbelievable and, as has been mentioned, cowardly.
Hopefully, we can return to informed and constructive comment with resort to witty banter where necessary (ie when losing the argument!)

Moderation would get my vote; that's as long as the moderator in question is in a position to avoid being pressurised by the system itself when 'views other than those of the management' are expressed.

PP

BEAGLE

respect fella
I bet u dont drink lager
Charlie sends

One more in support! The fine line between forceful expression of thought and abuse is always a tricky one vis a few late evening Dining-In chest thumpings. This forum can allow a two way exchange where neither side has to take offence to save face as they would were they face to face and in public view.Mind you BEagle, where offence is concerned, I still hav'nt forgiven you for breaking my coffee cup.

Totally agree. Moderation should in theory be simple, just ignore the childish comments. After all, there are only a handful of these pathetic people and they can easily be bypassed.

Beagle, et al.

I am glad 'we' have seen the light. I only began to contribute when I started reading the retention scheme threads. The bitterness and discontent saddened me deeply and I felt I had to comment. I feel very strongly that the forum reached rock bottom in the golden jubilee medals thread. Frankly some of the comments posted there were not only direspectful to HM but beggared belief in their sheer rudeness.

Come on chaps, the profession we all joined is by no means perfect, but I do not know of one that is. Banter is a healthy sign, blatant rudeness and profanity is an indicator of boorishness and does not easily allow others to agree with the point.

Moderator is not required in my opinion, so long as all of us can approach these forums with the same calm professionalism we all undoubtedly employ in the workplace.

Had to get it off my chest. Keep the shiny side upwards,

JJ

Surely moderation is only required on a Friday night.

(That must be alliteration or onomatopeia or something).

CHEERS

Well said, BEagle (and Thud_and_Blunder). The old saying "before opening mouth, engage brain", has as much relevance to the e-mail 'send' button as it does to speaking on a radio. It was about time somebody spoke up for moderation.