AOPA "The Election" (merged)
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: WA
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dogmimed
snarek is correct, there are 74,600 (approx) licenced pilots in Australia. How many are current can't be determined.
Airservices have about 38,000 'map buyers' on their books, so that is a fair estimate, except I've never bought from Airservices, I get all my maps from the local pilots shop. So how many like me are there??? Of course some of those 'customers' would be non-pilots.
So I estimate perhaps 35-40,000 active pilots.
So, perhaps AOPA couldn't get 35,000, but 20,000 looks better than the 4,600 snarek has quoted!!!!
Pat
snarek is correct, there are 74,600 (approx) licenced pilots in Australia. How many are current can't be determined.
Airservices have about 38,000 'map buyers' on their books, so that is a fair estimate, except I've never bought from Airservices, I get all my maps from the local pilots shop. So how many like me are there??? Of course some of those 'customers' would be non-pilots.
So I estimate perhaps 35-40,000 active pilots.
So, perhaps AOPA couldn't get 35,000, but 20,000 looks better than the 4,600 snarek has quoted!!!!
Pat
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob Murphy
Just a point of clarification, the vote is not preferential, there is no 1,2,3 etc. Just a tick or cross needed for nine or less. You can vote for only candidate if you wish...
Your vote is your business but leaving out Pagani and Gaunt is a miscalculation as is including Hamilton.
Russell
My understanding is that the nbr of licenced pilots with current medicals is around 20,000.
AOPA membership is around 4,350.
9,000 AOPA members have pulled out since 1997.
Annual loss approx 10% from 1997-2001, 5% 2001-2003.
Russell
Just a point of clarification, the vote is not preferential, there is no 1,2,3 etc. Just a tick or cross needed for nine or less. You can vote for only candidate if you wish...
Your vote is your business but leaving out Pagani and Gaunt is a miscalculation as is including Hamilton.
Russell
My understanding is that the nbr of licenced pilots with current medicals is around 20,000.
AOPA membership is around 4,350.
9,000 AOPA members have pulled out since 1997.
Annual loss approx 10% from 1997-2001, 5% 2001-2003.
Russell
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a lot to answer for
20,000 GA pilots with current medicals. What about those who have gone to AUF???
It seems the answer lies at around the 30,000 mark and it also seems by Russell's figures that AOPA was tracking at 50%, BEFORE Smith, Munro, Hamilton.
So Bob Murphie, I agree with the postees before me, your choices won't make for an effective Board. I hope the other AOPA voters put a bit more thought into it.
My understanding is the SODIUM group are Hamilton, Lyon, Rudd and Mckeown who are absolutely incompatible with the Pagani, Kerans, Gaunt, Lawford WATER group. Put them together and you get instability.
In my mind only the new group offers an alternative to a dwindling member base and reduced credibility.
Chuck
It seems the answer lies at around the 30,000 mark and it also seems by Russell's figures that AOPA was tracking at 50%, BEFORE Smith, Munro, Hamilton.
So Bob Murphie, I agree with the postees before me, your choices won't make for an effective Board. I hope the other AOPA voters put a bit more thought into it.
My understanding is the SODIUM group are Hamilton, Lyon, Rudd and Mckeown who are absolutely incompatible with the Pagani, Kerans, Gaunt, Lawford WATER group. Put them together and you get instability.
In my mind only the new group offers an alternative to a dwindling member base and reduced credibility.
Chuck
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: middleofthehighway
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ulm
I agree that certain types cannot work with one another. Note: your SODIUM and WATER reference. But bear in mind that it looks poorly on the potential directors that are giving ultimatums to the members with the words "I will not work with..., this will not work with...." Maybe your right, or maybe your wrong, but there is only a select few candidates that are saying that. Potential to be burned down the road if they are put in that position. As well as the fact that bar 3 directors, everyone else is saying that they dont care who gets on, but they will make as much effort as possible to get along and make AOPA work.
Now as a paying member, I dont particually liked being pushed to vote for a "team" or nothing. It shows the weakness in the candidates. There are better ways of lobbying and also working together. I want a board that can work together for a common goal, not one that will throw the towel in if they don't get their way!
Dog
What happens if I vote the following.
PAGANI
MURPHIE
GAUNT
KERANS
MCKEOWN
BERTRAM
WILLIAMS
HAMILTON
ERREY
Am I throwing my votes away because half the board will resign if these candidates get in? Not impressed and I HATE ULTIMATUMS! Would rather vote other than vote for if the ultimatum is pushed.
<edited for afterthoughts>
<-- I have no idea what that icon is>
Now as a paying member, I dont particually liked being pushed to vote for a "team" or nothing. It shows the weakness in the candidates. There are better ways of lobbying and also working together. I want a board that can work together for a common goal, not one that will throw the towel in if they don't get their way!
Dog
What happens if I vote the following.
PAGANI
MURPHIE
GAUNT
KERANS
MCKEOWN
BERTRAM
WILLIAMS
HAMILTON
ERREY
Am I throwing my votes away because half the board will resign if these candidates get in? Not impressed and I HATE ULTIMATUMS! Would rather vote other than vote for if the ultimatum is pushed.
<edited for afterthoughts>
<-- I have no idea what that icon is>
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I finally got the AOPA today, it takes a little while to get across the Nullarbor.
So a good bottle of red and a bit of study tonight.
25, 35 or 75 thousand pilots it doesn't matter.
There is a reason why at least half of that number, at the very worst 10,000 aren't members.
We must work first on finding out the REAL reason and building some bridges back towards them.
I am making some progress over here, I think, it will not be easy, nor quick.
There is a big job in trust and integrity to be rebuilt and that is only achieved by REAL action, on the ground listening and bringing their concerns directly to the table, not talk, not bluster, not motherhood statements or motions, just plain simple honest hard work. AND LISTENING.
I've said it before, the definition of insanity "is continuing to do the same hing and expecting to get a different result"
It really doesn't matter now, who was responsible or why, other than that they just should not be allowed to continue.
We are just at the "critical mass" AOPA needs, to remain viable and relevant, any further reduction in membership will see that whoever "gets in" and does not understand that, will be driving the "Marie Celeste."
brianh
This time you will get an answer on the CASA thing that I promised you.
I do not share your feeling that CASA are being duplicitous in regard to the NAS, maybe I am naive, but anything that has Smith anywhere in the equation is rarely that simple.
Let me have some dinner, catch up with my dog Fido, our fourth child, have a read of the AOPA and I will be back.
The trick is going to be separating me mate Murphie and his Motion from the strolling travellers of no fixed percentage, who would accompany him.
So a good bottle of red and a bit of study tonight.
25, 35 or 75 thousand pilots it doesn't matter.
There is a reason why at least half of that number, at the very worst 10,000 aren't members.
We must work first on finding out the REAL reason and building some bridges back towards them.
I am making some progress over here, I think, it will not be easy, nor quick.
There is a big job in trust and integrity to be rebuilt and that is only achieved by REAL action, on the ground listening and bringing their concerns directly to the table, not talk, not bluster, not motherhood statements or motions, just plain simple honest hard work. AND LISTENING.
I've said it before, the definition of insanity "is continuing to do the same hing and expecting to get a different result"
It really doesn't matter now, who was responsible or why, other than that they just should not be allowed to continue.
We are just at the "critical mass" AOPA needs, to remain viable and relevant, any further reduction in membership will see that whoever "gets in" and does not understand that, will be driving the "Marie Celeste."
brianh
This time you will get an answer on the CASA thing that I promised you.
I do not share your feeling that CASA are being duplicitous in regard to the NAS, maybe I am naive, but anything that has Smith anywhere in the equation is rarely that simple.
Let me have some dinner, catch up with my dog Fido, our fourth child, have a read of the AOPA and I will be back.
The trick is going to be separating me mate Murphie and his Motion from the strolling travellers of no fixed percentage, who would accompany him.
Who not to vote for....
Well I think part of it is very easy. Anyone that supports Hamilton is not on my list Hamilton MUST go. AOPA can no longer indulge with his bumf.
Therefore Murphie will not get my vote as he seems to be well into Hamilton's back pocket. Sad, because his concept deserves someone to push it to where it may work. But Hamilton would not support it (removes his power base!) Cant work that one out Bob.
I will not be supporting Pike either as he has shown little leadership and in fact has obviously refused or been unable to pull Hamilton into line (work buddies?).
McKeown has lost me with his inference to censorship in the magazine. It is just not acceptable and cannot be condoned. It seems he may not be a supporter of the ladies either? Also not on these days.
Rudd and Kennedy have like Lyons had a go and done very little to advance the cause. Why should they be given another two years at such a critical time to prove they place AOPA first and have the ABILITY to make a difference. I have no confidence in Lyons and he must go at the first chance. Without Hamilton he will have no supporters and I am sure the Board will lose confidence in him in quick time. A strong leader will quickly show him the door.
By a process of elimination, my vote will therefore go to....(in ballot paper order)
GAUNT
ERREY
LAWFORD
KERANS
MACDONALD
BERTRAM
MAHLBERG
PAGANI
WILLIAMS
All else being equal, I strongly recommend everyone vote for PAGANI. She is the ONLY candidate that is capable of providing the leadership AOPA now not only need, but requires. She showed at the recent FLOT conference that she also has the respect of others in the industry. An ability that AOPA has not seen exhibited for many years.
Therefore Murphie will not get my vote as he seems to be well into Hamilton's back pocket. Sad, because his concept deserves someone to push it to where it may work. But Hamilton would not support it (removes his power base!) Cant work that one out Bob.
I will not be supporting Pike either as he has shown little leadership and in fact has obviously refused or been unable to pull Hamilton into line (work buddies?).
McKeown has lost me with his inference to censorship in the magazine. It is just not acceptable and cannot be condoned. It seems he may not be a supporter of the ladies either? Also not on these days.
Rudd and Kennedy have like Lyons had a go and done very little to advance the cause. Why should they be given another two years at such a critical time to prove they place AOPA first and have the ABILITY to make a difference. I have no confidence in Lyons and he must go at the first chance. Without Hamilton he will have no supporters and I am sure the Board will lose confidence in him in quick time. A strong leader will quickly show him the door.
By a process of elimination, my vote will therefore go to....(in ballot paper order)
GAUNT
ERREY
LAWFORD
KERANS
MACDONALD
BERTRAM
MAHLBERG
PAGANI
WILLIAMS
All else being equal, I strongly recommend everyone vote for PAGANI. She is the ONLY candidate that is capable of providing the leadership AOPA now not only need, but requires. She showed at the recent FLOT conference that she also has the respect of others in the industry. An ability that AOPA has not seen exhibited for many years.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dog
Again, youthfull misunderstanding. Do you really expect those who have reigned out of frustration with other directors to then 'openly' (stupidly???) lobby for them.
Face it, AOPA needs change, and a lot of it, now.
Chuck
Again, youthfull misunderstanding. Do you really expect those who have reigned out of frustration with other directors to then 'openly' (stupidly???) lobby for them.
Face it, AOPA needs change, and a lot of it, now.
Chuck
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dog
Yes. As you know, I have worked for politicians. To think that AOPA is anything but a political lobby group is naive.
You also know I have 'worked' with Bill Hamilton in the past. He painted himself into a corner over Part 47, and even when given an out, maintained his position. In the view of a lot of members who e-mailed me at the time, he was wrong.
The word for that is intransigent, or recalcitrant.
No wonder people like Russell and Andrew have said they don't want him back. How else are the members going to find out. You want then voting in a fog of no details.
I note you don't deny there is a problem, you just ask that those with a gripe 'be nice'. Well sorry mate, nice isn't going to change anything, and we need change now or there soon won't be an AOPA.
Yes. As you know, I have worked for politicians. To think that AOPA is anything but a political lobby group is naive.
You also know I have 'worked' with Bill Hamilton in the past. He painted himself into a corner over Part 47, and even when given an out, maintained his position. In the view of a lot of members who e-mailed me at the time, he was wrong.
The word for that is intransigent, or recalcitrant.
No wonder people like Russell and Andrew have said they don't want him back. How else are the members going to find out. You want then voting in a fog of no details.
I note you don't deny there is a problem, you just ask that those with a gripe 'be nice'. Well sorry mate, nice isn't going to change anything, and we need change now or there soon won't be an AOPA.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: middleofthehighway
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ulm
I agree there is a problem, PLEASE do I ever agree! However I think that the way it is being dealt with by a few, is wrong, not in the fact that you aren't being nice, but in the fact that you are probably p1ssing more people off and you will lose votes!
I dare say this election is going to get very dirty, considering the email that flew around yesterday lobbying unashamedly in an unfair arena. Better to get opposites to argue it out fairly than oneupmanship with the members.
So, tell me, am I throwing my votes away if I vote as above??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
cogwheel
I do agree that Lyons, Rudd and Kennedy should leave, as they havent performed the best + Pike
Dog
I dare say this election is going to get very dirty, considering the email that flew around yesterday lobbying unashamedly in an unfair arena. Better to get opposites to argue it out fairly than oneupmanship with the members.
So, tell me, am I throwing my votes away if I vote as above??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
cogwheel
I do agree that Lyons, Rudd and Kennedy should leave, as they havent performed the best + Pike
Dog
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now I have the magazine.
What a great mag!
President's Report, by Bill Pike.
Strict Liability absurdity
Bill is absolutely correct. The position of CASA is absurd - strict liability can only be for minor or administrative matters. We must insist that CASA looks more closely at this issue, perhaps by appointing another team of lawyers with a better understanding of the basic concepts.
Coalition of the unwilling?
So much for consultation.
As for flight time limitations, good point. The US rules for flight time limitations don't include private flights. The Dept. of Transport does not require long distance truck drivers to count time spent driving to work in their cars, or on their motorbikes (or tractors like Bill does, for 2 hours). The proposed regs about this weren't even part of the FLOP conference!
How can CASA reject out of hand the proposals about the use of oxygen - weren't they there to listen? The proposals have worked well in NZ and the USA - is the Oz air too thin, or what? Or is it just that the CASA exec's have skin that is too thin?
As for the 'fill-in' president -look at the blatant electioneering by him in the mag - what a farce! How come all the other candidates were only allowed to have 250 words, and McKeown comes in with a "president's" update - a full page of "I am, I did" etc.:
He forgot to mention all of the other people on the committee who did the hard yards on these things. What happened to electoral fairness? Good onya Bill - sorry to see you go - at least you were happy to let the people have their say in the mag - McKeown has just confirmed his almighty power, and promises to censor everything that he doesn't agree with! And he says that the committee asked him to be president - crap - he took the job by default - no-one else would take the job while him and Hamilton were on the board.
As to the "loud individuals" - do you mean those that don't go to lunch with CASA, and look to them for work (and a means of income). McKeown - aren't CASA your clients????? And what about the AOPA members who ring you up for advice - you charge enough for one letter to pay out my mortgage - service to the members? Bullsh*t.
Treasurer's Report
A fair and balanced report. It seems McKeown and Hamilton are responsible for this attempt to pull the wool over the members' eyes - how dumb do you think we are boys? What guarantee will you give me that my 5 year membership will be honoured? I'll be asking you some questions about this at the AGM - hope you've got the readies!
Code of Conduct
I'm pleased to see this - a bird tells me that Kelly and Pagani wrote this - but Hamilton and Lyon wouldn't support it as a motion going to the AGM for the Code to be included in the articles of association - Shame, shame!
Letters to the Editor
Bill Hamilton - You and McKeown obviously got together to rip off the other candidates - there's no place for your electioneering in the Letters section - what has your letter got to do with anything except you beating your tired old chest, to drum up a few (much needed) votes? You have both abused your privileged positions on the board to get an unfair advantage - the members will see through this - we are not as stupid as you seem to think.
The happiest part of the mag is on the back page, where we are able to welcome aboard 11 new members - just hope we can get a board together which will make them want to stay, and their mates to follow.
I see the ballot paper is only for nine people - McKeown and Hamilton I hear, knocked the other two off after the nominations have closed - hope you get knocked off for your trouble fellas. Seems there will be some challenges to this - I'll be interested to see your answers to this at the AGM - expect there to be lots of questions!
What a great mag!
President's Report, by Bill Pike.
Strict Liability absurdity
Bill is absolutely correct. The position of CASA is absurd - strict liability can only be for minor or administrative matters. We must insist that CASA looks more closely at this issue, perhaps by appointing another team of lawyers with a better understanding of the basic concepts.
Coalition of the unwilling?
So much for consultation.
As for flight time limitations, good point. The US rules for flight time limitations don't include private flights. The Dept. of Transport does not require long distance truck drivers to count time spent driving to work in their cars, or on their motorbikes (or tractors like Bill does, for 2 hours). The proposed regs about this weren't even part of the FLOP conference!
How can CASA reject out of hand the proposals about the use of oxygen - weren't they there to listen? The proposals have worked well in NZ and the USA - is the Oz air too thin, or what? Or is it just that the CASA exec's have skin that is too thin?
As for the 'fill-in' president -look at the blatant electioneering by him in the mag - what a farce! How come all the other candidates were only allowed to have 250 words, and McKeown comes in with a "president's" update - a full page of "I am, I did" etc.:
He forgot to mention all of the other people on the committee who did the hard yards on these things. What happened to electoral fairness? Good onya Bill - sorry to see you go - at least you were happy to let the people have their say in the mag - McKeown has just confirmed his almighty power, and promises to censor everything that he doesn't agree with! And he says that the committee asked him to be president - crap - he took the job by default - no-one else would take the job while him and Hamilton were on the board.As to the "loud individuals" - do you mean those that don't go to lunch with CASA, and look to them for work (and a means of income). McKeown - aren't CASA your clients????? And what about the AOPA members who ring you up for advice - you charge enough for one letter to pay out my mortgage - service to the members? Bullsh*t.
Treasurer's Report
A fair and balanced report. It seems McKeown and Hamilton are responsible for this attempt to pull the wool over the members' eyes - how dumb do you think we are boys? What guarantee will you give me that my 5 year membership will be honoured? I'll be asking you some questions about this at the AGM - hope you've got the readies!
Code of Conduct
I'm pleased to see this - a bird tells me that Kelly and Pagani wrote this - but Hamilton and Lyon wouldn't support it as a motion going to the AGM for the Code to be included in the articles of association - Shame, shame!
Letters to the Editor
Bill Hamilton - You and McKeown obviously got together to rip off the other candidates - there's no place for your electioneering in the Letters section - what has your letter got to do with anything except you beating your tired old chest, to drum up a few (much needed) votes? You have both abused your privileged positions on the board to get an unfair advantage - the members will see through this - we are not as stupid as you seem to think.
The happiest part of the mag is on the back page, where we are able to welcome aboard 11 new members - just hope we can get a board together which will make them want to stay, and their mates to follow.
I see the ballot paper is only for nine people - McKeown and Hamilton I hear, knocked the other two off after the nominations have closed - hope you get knocked off for your trouble fellas. Seems there will be some challenges to this - I'll be interested to see your answers to this at the AGM - expect there to be lots of questions!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
beware men of little truth
Dog
Would it help if you knew the e-mail list, used by Kerans, was compiled by me and updated by him over the last 3 years.
It was not, as suggested recently by McKeown, the property of anyone, especially AOPA (although it was given to Gregg Lucas in 2001 to update AOPA's rather thin address lists).
Compared with McKeown and Hamiltons use of the Magazine for self praise I think an e-mail to 1500 members is irrelavent, but a fair attempt to level a very rough playing field.
Careful who you believe in these interesting times
Oh, and why were you interested in where I live the other day, did someone ask????
J (ULM # 2)
Would it help if you knew the e-mail list, used by Kerans, was compiled by me and updated by him over the last 3 years.
It was not, as suggested recently by McKeown, the property of anyone, especially AOPA (although it was given to Gregg Lucas in 2001 to update AOPA's rather thin address lists).
Compared with McKeown and Hamiltons use of the Magazine for self praise I think an e-mail to 1500 members is irrelavent, but a fair attempt to level a very rough playing field.
Careful who you believe in these interesting times
Oh, and why were you interested in where I live the other day, did someone ask????
J (ULM # 2)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
YE GODS – and this man wants to be el presidento! This piece of crap accidentally fell off a truck into my grubby little hands in Melbourne this morning – thought you might all enjoy some enlightenment from the leader who-would-be.
(From Chris McKeown – September 2002):
All,
When someone become unfinancial I think they should drop off our list of members – ie no more e-mails! I reached the conclusion that Bill Pike’s mate out the back who complains about the fact that we send him an email with a Word attachment, can go and get lost in his world of depravation!
AOPA should not be looking after the interests of winging, dust eating, outback, out of touch, kite flyers who complains when the winds of progress financially reach their preserve of a humanity that perhaps existed before the compass!
Greg Lucas forwarded me an email from an ex member. The exmember complained about an attachment that he could not open – it was an MS Word document!
Bill Pike – stuff your bloody mate that just wants to fly around his little bit of the world! He (assuming it is a he) can get elcricricty. Whatever, AOPA should waste its time on these people – these people who will never come into town where there are no kite flyers, where they have to pay a fee, where they will have to work their radio, where they have to be accountable, accountable, good grief, do you mean keep to the left – no you mean keep to the right. – I cann’t do that – that’s why I will stay out the back and windge about you people who can.
I say – Tell them to look around and join the great outback. If you can’t be bothered to stay with developments in technology, in communications and aviation, then don’t waste AOPA’s time by it having to listen to your backward, dusty, achonistic view on life!
I think it’s time we change our preference of the type of member we service. Just because some loud mouth, illitrate, dust dweller, does not want to get a radio, or even talk on a radio, does not mean AOPA should bend over backwards to preserve his (God knows, a female would not be so dumb!) so called right to fly! They don’t need us, they’ll fly anyway!
These two bob hicks, hicks that make much boring noise, trying to drag us all down to their dark, insular, procial, deprived, benighted existence, and probably just because we have electrict and have a working knowledge of the alphabet! STUFF THEM – AOPA does not need to wast it precious resources on these miserable excuses for an aviator in the in the 21 Century!
He should have had MS Word.
( BTW, this is an exact copy – spelling mistakes, warts, and all! Nice of you to let us know your real thoughts Chris.)
(From Chris McKeown – September 2002):
All,
When someone become unfinancial I think they should drop off our list of members – ie no more e-mails! I reached the conclusion that Bill Pike’s mate out the back who complains about the fact that we send him an email with a Word attachment, can go and get lost in his world of depravation!
AOPA should not be looking after the interests of winging, dust eating, outback, out of touch, kite flyers who complains when the winds of progress financially reach their preserve of a humanity that perhaps existed before the compass!
Greg Lucas forwarded me an email from an ex member. The exmember complained about an attachment that he could not open – it was an MS Word document!
Bill Pike – stuff your bloody mate that just wants to fly around his little bit of the world! He (assuming it is a he) can get elcricricty. Whatever, AOPA should waste its time on these people – these people who will never come into town where there are no kite flyers, where they have to pay a fee, where they will have to work their radio, where they have to be accountable, accountable, good grief, do you mean keep to the left – no you mean keep to the right. – I cann’t do that – that’s why I will stay out the back and windge about you people who can.
I say – Tell them to look around and join the great outback. If you can’t be bothered to stay with developments in technology, in communications and aviation, then don’t waste AOPA’s time by it having to listen to your backward, dusty, achonistic view on life!
I think it’s time we change our preference of the type of member we service. Just because some loud mouth, illitrate, dust dweller, does not want to get a radio, or even talk on a radio, does not mean AOPA should bend over backwards to preserve his (God knows, a female would not be so dumb!) so called right to fly! They don’t need us, they’ll fly anyway!
These two bob hicks, hicks that make much boring noise, trying to drag us all down to their dark, insular, procial, deprived, benighted existence, and probably just because we have electrict and have a working knowledge of the alphabet! STUFF THEM – AOPA does not need to wast it precious resources on these miserable excuses for an aviator in the in the 21 Century!
He should have had MS Word.
( BTW, this is an exact copy – spelling mistakes, warts, and all! Nice of you to let us know your real thoughts Chris.)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: middleofthehighway
Posts: 426
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ulm
You ever seen those monkeys with the eyes shut, ears blocked and mouth covered.
Well, I am all of the above, bar the mouth covered bit. (tee hee)
My assumption was my own, yes, I can have them.
Fair enough with the list, compiled by yourselves. That answers one question, (that did not really need to be answered anyway, because I AM not taking sides) BUT! I doubt Mckeown or Hamilton are telling me who to vote for.... and that is the nagging thing.
Re: Questions about where you live. I believed it to be an innocent conversation and no secret motives or such intended. Just a concern regarding issues. PM if you want a full explanation or call.
<sigh>
Dog
Well, I am all of the above, bar the mouth covered bit. (tee hee)
My assumption was my own, yes, I can have them.
Fair enough with the list, compiled by yourselves. That answers one question, (that did not really need to be answered anyway, because I AM not taking sides) BUT! I doubt Mckeown or Hamilton are telling me who to vote for.... and that is the nagging thing.
Re: Questions about where you live. I believed it to be an innocent conversation and no secret motives or such intended. Just a concern regarding issues. PM if you want a full explanation or call.
<sigh>
Dog
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmmmm
V&S
I do recall that e-mail. I am also a little sadened that someone would leak it. This is why a degree of Board confidentiality is needed. But, I suppose if one 'side' leaks some of the 'other side' are bound to follow.
Now, I own a non-radio 'rag and tube kite'. I don't like this particular 'opinion'. I remember when Chris sent out this e-mail he was invited to drop his trousers so it could be correctly filed.
Other Board members jumped on him, including me, and he promptly pulled his head in. I am of the opinion the red wine content of that e-mail exceeded 85%!!!
That is why you have Boards. To filter other's opinions. This is why this Board doesn't work, one opinion won't accept filtration ... and it isn't Chris McKeown.
So, give Chris a break, he is after all a 'South East Corner-ite' with little real experience of much beyond where the dirt turns red.
Mind you, if he keeps up trying to censor the magazine it'll be trousers down time again, if I get reelected
Dog.
No one is telling, we are just asking. On the other issues, your explanation is accepted. We just wondered, thats all
AK
I do recall that e-mail. I am also a little sadened that someone would leak it. This is why a degree of Board confidentiality is needed. But, I suppose if one 'side' leaks some of the 'other side' are bound to follow.
Now, I own a non-radio 'rag and tube kite'. I don't like this particular 'opinion'. I remember when Chris sent out this e-mail he was invited to drop his trousers so it could be correctly filed.
Other Board members jumped on him, including me, and he promptly pulled his head in. I am of the opinion the red wine content of that e-mail exceeded 85%!!!
That is why you have Boards. To filter other's opinions. This is why this Board doesn't work, one opinion won't accept filtration ... and it isn't Chris McKeown.
So, give Chris a break, he is after all a 'South East Corner-ite' with little real experience of much beyond where the dirt turns red.
Mind you, if he keeps up trying to censor the magazine it'll be trousers down time again, if I get reelected
Dog.
No one is telling, we are just asking. On the other issues, your explanation is accepted. We just wondered, thats all
AK
Last edited by snarek; 14th Apr 2003 at 22:53.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
snarek me old
You are much too kind.
The Genie is now out of the bottle.
I did not encourage the revelation of the above, but it has been and by your corroboration shown to be so and now cannot be ignored.
I am embarrassed, cringeful even, that my representation is currently in these hands.
I am not being precious, I have been known to enjoy the odd demijohn of singing syrup also, but I actually become even more relaxed and tolerant, not less so.
I am disappointed that you choose to defend such boorish behaviour. I am the most tolerant person you could meet with regard to personal peccadilloes, having gained a PhD with Post Doctoral awards at the University of Hard Knocks and Experience, but I am also a student of Freud.
I think I know from whence McKeown comes and it is difficult to disagree with the thrust of his sentiments, but it is the manner and tone of their expression and the misogynistic flavours that greatly alarm me.
Nup, to even begin to rebuild the respect we need, to be heard we need people who are a little more “balanced”, both in respect for the membership and their problems and the manner in which we communicate with them.
As has just been demonstrated, you can’t have it both ways and be ingenuous enough to expect to get away with claiming “protection” from the effects of the singing syrup, it is just not acceptable.
High office in the representation of our membership demands high standards of ethical and personal public behaviour.
Me perfect, not even close, I’d at least have had the sense to run my rant through the same “spell and grammar checker” embedded in the very MS Word application of which he so roundly berates the poor miscreants lack of use.
You are much too kind.
The Genie is now out of the bottle.
I did not encourage the revelation of the above, but it has been and by your corroboration shown to be so and now cannot be ignored.
I am embarrassed, cringeful even, that my representation is currently in these hands.
I am not being precious, I have been known to enjoy the odd demijohn of singing syrup also, but I actually become even more relaxed and tolerant, not less so.
I am disappointed that you choose to defend such boorish behaviour. I am the most tolerant person you could meet with regard to personal peccadilloes, having gained a PhD with Post Doctoral awards at the University of Hard Knocks and Experience, but I am also a student of Freud.
I think I know from whence McKeown comes and it is difficult to disagree with the thrust of his sentiments, but it is the manner and tone of their expression and the misogynistic flavours that greatly alarm me.
Nup, to even begin to rebuild the respect we need, to be heard we need people who are a little more “balanced”, both in respect for the membership and their problems and the manner in which we communicate with them.
As has just been demonstrated, you can’t have it both ways and be ingenuous enough to expect to get away with claiming “protection” from the effects of the singing syrup, it is just not acceptable.
High office in the representation of our membership demands high standards of ethical and personal public behaviour.
Me perfect, not even close, I’d at least have had the sense to run my rant through the same “spell and grammar checker” embedded in the very MS Word application of which he so roundly berates the poor miscreants lack of use.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
THIS ELECTION IS BECOMING A KINDERGARTEN
Last two pages very interesting, and Ulmy has me a thinking.
Gaunty, no matter who was involved, if CASA has bypassed the correct procedure it is a mortal sin and complete arrogance. Try em on in your aviation business and see how you fare if you step outside procedural guidelines ... bye, bye, baby etc! This attitude of Boyd has Dick in his hand, so to speak, is allowing the surrounds to hide the weapons of mass destruction lurking in the CASA mindset.
I like the comment about ultimatims, and also about sodium and water. What we rank and file can deduce from all this is that nine people selected are unlikely to be able to work as a team. I'm sorry, but I cannot accept this and I believe other normal minded members feel the same.
These individual members who aspire to the Board are supposed to be doing it for the good of aviation and AOPA. Yet probably 30% of these 14 pages is devoted to hate mail and attempts to substantiate why the Board must be hand picked or it will not work. What a crock of sh1t!!!!!!!!!
There is a bloody good fiction story by McLean or Innes. The last sentence always sticks in my mind - "We have met the enemy, and the enemy is us". In the Boards, RSL and sporting committees, etc I have been involved with there has always been a mix of likes and dislikes but we have managed to survive and thrive. Yet we now have an allegedly mature group incapable of harmonising. I'd vote informal in disgust if I wasn't worried that this would possibly allow the wrong result.
To all candidates - start telling we members how you will work as a team, not why you need to be the team selector. Lift your game!
Gaunty, no matter who was involved, if CASA has bypassed the correct procedure it is a mortal sin and complete arrogance. Try em on in your aviation business and see how you fare if you step outside procedural guidelines ... bye, bye, baby etc! This attitude of Boyd has Dick in his hand, so to speak, is allowing the surrounds to hide the weapons of mass destruction lurking in the CASA mindset.
I like the comment about ultimatims, and also about sodium and water. What we rank and file can deduce from all this is that nine people selected are unlikely to be able to work as a team. I'm sorry, but I cannot accept this and I believe other normal minded members feel the same.
These individual members who aspire to the Board are supposed to be doing it for the good of aviation and AOPA. Yet probably 30% of these 14 pages is devoted to hate mail and attempts to substantiate why the Board must be hand picked or it will not work. What a crock of sh1t!!!!!!!!!
There is a bloody good fiction story by McLean or Innes. The last sentence always sticks in my mind - "We have met the enemy, and the enemy is us". In the Boards, RSL and sporting committees, etc I have been involved with there has always been a mix of likes and dislikes but we have managed to survive and thrive. Yet we now have an allegedly mature group incapable of harmonising. I'd vote informal in disgust if I wasn't worried that this would possibly allow the wrong result.
To all candidates - start telling we members how you will work as a team, not why you need to be the team selector. Lift your game!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is interesting to see all the candidates scrambling for support "votes" from the present AOPA members. I hope we see this same dedication and enthusiasm from the same candidates after they are elected, and the members are not just forgotten about until next round of voting. 
Personally it maybe better to vote for the quite achievers, those less vocal candidates who not discredit others?
I hope we see this same dedication and enthusiasm from the same candidates after they are elected, and the members are not just forgotten about until next round of voting. Personally it maybe better to vote for the quite achievers, those less vocal candidates who not discredit others?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a non-defence???
Gaunty
I wasn't defending the e-mail, nor the opinion (which I do not share). Only that the contents of that e-mail were never communicated with members because the filtration system worked.
Therefore it does no real good attacking McKeown.
Dog.
I will work 'with' Hamilton et al, but I will never again trust their opinions. I learned that from the Board of hard knocks!!!
I will do my utmost to make sure the 'new' AOPA is effective, communicates with and effectively represents members, and does not dream up policy on the run.
I also will do my absolute to ensure Hamilton et al do not represent AOPA to the world. Or, dog, are you suggesting 'working with' means subservience???
I wasn't defending the e-mail, nor the opinion (which I do not share). Only that the contents of that e-mail were never communicated with members because the filtration system worked.
Therefore it does no real good attacking McKeown.
Dog.
I will work 'with' Hamilton et al, but I will never again trust their opinions. I learned that from the Board of hard knocks!!!
I will do my utmost to make sure the 'new' AOPA is effective, communicates with and effectively represents members, and does not dream up policy on the run.
I also will do my absolute to ensure Hamilton et al do not represent AOPA to the world. Or, dog, are you suggesting 'working with' means subservience???