AOPA election results
although the author of the said article on the aopa forum has the right to ask such questions it must not be assumed that he is correct (as he says "I am not a lawyer") – yes the agm was interesting to say the least but i don’t believe there was any choice if the association was to go forward – the issues raised are now with respect history and although i don’t suggest that they should not be answered at this time there are far more critical things for the aopa board to address – in terms of the election there was no choice as the previous committee and its leadership did not deliver the goods - in fact they almost sold the whole show out the back door regardless of where you put the subs paid in advance – only with this board is there any chance for aopa to survive and provide ga with the representation it rightly deserves – aopa deserves to have a respected board and not one that leaks or perhaps more correctly one with members that leak – it serves no good whatsoever
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASH VERSUS ACCRUAL
I am not an accountant (proven by the fact that I still have a sense of humour) but I did have some tertiary accounting exposure doing the Company Director Diploma and a Post-Grad in Biz Mgt.
The issue has been debated over 12 months on various Forums.
A small business can exist on a cash basis - albeit somewhat precariously if it uses depreciation of assets and does not put the $ away for when the new plant or vehicle is needed at life expiration of the old.
Larger businesses should use accrual accounting, because it doesn't all happen in a short timeframe.
In the case of AOPA I have just paid my 5 year subscription (no comment on my sanity please).
One would expect that a prudent business would acknowledge that there is an obligation to me to provide the magazine, office support, etc for the next 5 years. But, I will not be pumping in any more $ in years 2 to 5 so an even wiser business would accrue some $ into future years to ensure wise financial management. A foolish business would take it all as revenue this year and blow it.
The ridiculous case quoted in the debate was more whether AOPA had any legal obligation to long term subscribers therefore if AOPA went down the gurgler they were legally OK anyway.
As an aside, there is a mandate to use the accrual system above a certain turnover (I think half a mil but don't quote me).
I have yet to see ANY sustainable grounds to NOT use the accrual system.
Any Gaunty, before you weigh into this and pull out your six shooter, I have reams of past emails etc on the topic and suggest i am holding an exorcet to your minigun!
Cheers
BrianH
The issue has been debated over 12 months on various Forums.
A small business can exist on a cash basis - albeit somewhat precariously if it uses depreciation of assets and does not put the $ away for when the new plant or vehicle is needed at life expiration of the old.
Larger businesses should use accrual accounting, because it doesn't all happen in a short timeframe.
In the case of AOPA I have just paid my 5 year subscription (no comment on my sanity please).
One would expect that a prudent business would acknowledge that there is an obligation to me to provide the magazine, office support, etc for the next 5 years. But, I will not be pumping in any more $ in years 2 to 5 so an even wiser business would accrue some $ into future years to ensure wise financial management. A foolish business would take it all as revenue this year and blow it.
The ridiculous case quoted in the debate was more whether AOPA had any legal obligation to long term subscribers therefore if AOPA went down the gurgler they were legally OK anyway.
As an aside, there is a mandate to use the accrual system above a certain turnover (I think half a mil but don't quote me).
I have yet to see ANY sustainable grounds to NOT use the accrual system.
Any Gaunty, before you weigh into this and pull out your six shooter, I have reams of past emails etc on the topic and suggest i am holding an exorcet to your minigun!
Cheers
BrianH
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: FNQ
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brian
It is excocet. Just like a PR!C(k) 10
All in the spelling.
As for accrual (whatever that has to do with aviation) It is fixed, our treasurer says it is fixed and I am too stupid to argue with an accountant who is also a lawyer. Besides, we are trying to build an industry here, not debate ultra-boring accounting standards :P
AK
It is excocet. Just like a PR!C(k) 10
All in the spelling.As for accrual (whatever that has to do with aviation) It is fixed, our treasurer says it is fixed and I am too stupid to argue with an accountant who is also a lawyer. Besides, we are trying to build an industry here, not debate ultra-boring accounting standards :P
AK
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Australia, NSW
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was banned from the AOPA forum as a member for posting a one liner on Saturday....
I am told the whole thread has now since been removed.
I will be thinking twice about re-joining AOPA.
It would be nice to see some transparency and truth come forth.
I will be thinking twice about re-joining AOPA.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BUT FIXED HOW?
Akkers
I failed spelling once it got past ASRAM.
Hopefully for my future AOPA wellbeing the accounting is fixed a la accrual.
But I must take you to task re "trying to build an industry not debate accounting standards". I hope Creamy creams you on it also.
Accounting standards are to industry (well to a small degree) almost what paper warfare is to our Regulator. Go to any flying school or charter operator and ask are they flying. Surely you jest - not until the daily paperwork is done, ah no too late it's last light.
Paper rules. Go to your room and write out 100 lines my boy!!
Cheers
brianH
Is it true Gaunty?
Was Andrew w banned from the AOPA Forum as he claims?
Yet I and others have the highest regard for his honesty and integrity.
Let me guess - he has wounded Bonnie and Clyde, eh Clyde?
Let us see your transparency and truth come forth and tell us all about it now AW has made it public.
Or, you may still have time to blame a "technical hitch" and reinstate him.
How many are banned from the AOPA Forum (no names please).
Very interesting!
BrianH
I failed spelling once it got past ASRAM.
Hopefully for my future AOPA wellbeing the accounting is fixed a la accrual.
But I must take you to task re "trying to build an industry not debate accounting standards". I hope Creamy creams you on it also.
Accounting standards are to industry (well to a small degree) almost what paper warfare is to our Regulator. Go to any flying school or charter operator and ask are they flying. Surely you jest - not until the daily paperwork is done, ah no too late it's last light.
Paper rules. Go to your room and write out 100 lines my boy!!
Cheers
brianH
Is it true Gaunty?
Was Andrew w banned from the AOPA Forum as he claims?
Yet I and others have the highest regard for his honesty and integrity.
Let me guess - he has wounded Bonnie and Clyde, eh Clyde?
Let us see your transparency and truth come forth and tell us all about it now AW has made it public.
Or, you may still have time to blame a "technical hitch" and reinstate him.
How many are banned from the AOPA Forum (no names please).
Very interesting!
BrianH
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Disappearing posts
I for one are glad that the posts (here and the AOPA Forum) were deleted. Irrespective of the merits of the argument - & I am sympathetic to some of the points made - the thrust was offensive and must have had the lawyers thinking about issuing Writs.
On the matter of the AOPA accounting, I thought this was all dead and buried at/after the AOPA AGM.
It would be insanity to treate the 5 year subs as anything but a liability. I too am a 5yr member and want the new board to handle my monies properly and undertake to make the proper provision for a continuum of services over the period.
The uninformed gallahs who don't have the qualifications to comment ought belt up. Fortunately the ghosts of the previous AOPA regime have almost all been exorcised.
On the matter of the AOPA accounting, I thought this was all dead and buried at/after the AOPA AGM.
It would be insanity to treate the 5 year subs as anything but a liability. I too am a 5yr member and want the new board to handle my monies properly and undertake to make the proper provision for a continuum of services over the period.
The uninformed gallahs who don't have the qualifications to comment ought belt up. Fortunately the ghosts of the previous AOPA regime have almost all been exorcised.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OH REALLY?
I have just postd this on the other thread, but as it is relevant to the Emeus comment and other matters AOPA, here tis again:
Despite the attempts to shaft Bill Hamilton by those with hidden agendas, the fact remains that he WAS democratically elected by the AOPA membership.
One would anticipate that the vote was based on Bill's PAST performance; rather than the election of some other new AOPA Board members based on promises that may or may not come to fruition. Therfore, criticising Bill's past performance and the members choice of him as a Board member is actually criticising the ability of the majority to choose their elected represenative.
To requote the comment of those who have tried to gag any threads on this Forum when AOPA is mentioned with any degree of negativity "let go folks, the election is over". Bill was elected and should serve his term without a back full of knives.
If anyone wants to criticise AOPA Board members, the first place to start is with those who are using their position to gag freedom of expression on this forum and the AOPA forum. I understand Andrew W is still censored - that will teach him to make an honest comment and be a member of the AGAF forum. Absolute power corrupts and it's time Bonnie and Clyde realised that they are denigrating their positions by their use of their power to gag free speech. I might not agree with what has been said by some posters, but I agree with their right to post it.
Vive la revolution.
Brian h
Despite the attempts to shaft Bill Hamilton by those with hidden agendas, the fact remains that he WAS democratically elected by the AOPA membership.
One would anticipate that the vote was based on Bill's PAST performance; rather than the election of some other new AOPA Board members based on promises that may or may not come to fruition. Therfore, criticising Bill's past performance and the members choice of him as a Board member is actually criticising the ability of the majority to choose their elected represenative.
To requote the comment of those who have tried to gag any threads on this Forum when AOPA is mentioned with any degree of negativity "let go folks, the election is over". Bill was elected and should serve his term without a back full of knives.
If anyone wants to criticise AOPA Board members, the first place to start is with those who are using their position to gag freedom of expression on this forum and the AOPA forum. I understand Andrew W is still censored - that will teach him to make an honest comment and be a member of the AGAF forum. Absolute power corrupts and it's time Bonnie and Clyde realised that they are denigrating their positions by their use of their power to gag free speech. I might not agree with what has been said by some posters, but I agree with their right to post it.
Vive la revolution.
Brian h
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Censorship
Brian H says some sensible things about accounting.
He is not so rational about Bill Hamilton's role in the demise of AOPA nor about "censorship" of the AOPA (and pprune) Forum.
I read Mr Murphy's tirade before it was removed from these sites. There were a large number of allegations and some of these went well beyond fair comment.
I too attended the famous AGM and have to say it is probably the most bizzare AGM I have attended. The Chairmanship by the then acting President had to been seen to be believed. Murphy didn't criticise this because the Chairman was part of his team, along with Bill Hamilton.
Murphy may have had some legitimate complaints but (whoever at) AOPA were entitled to remove the offensive post.
Andrew's post was of lesser concern & perhaps shouldn't have been cut. I am against censorship per se but contributors need to be responsible, perhaps that's my old-fashioned values coming out.
However the bottom line is really:
1. Hamilton only just clawed his way back in. The AOPA members clearly gave their support to the new team.
2. Mr Murphy, a Hamilton supporter, did not get elected and is crying foul. I'll bet we wouldn't have heard a word about the election irregularities had he been elected !
3. We should give the new board a chance. It took 7 years to get AOPA into this mess, it is going to take at least a couple of years for it to be fixed. It is a tough job reestablishing credibility and sorting out the financial mess.
4. Now Mr Pike, another Hamilton supporter has resigned from the Board. So the old regime is almost gone (John Lyon is the only other Hamilton supporter left).
5. Those who are part of the continuing Hamilton (underground) movement who get some morbid delight in trying to bring down AOPA are to be condemned.
That's my bit!. I'm an old & bold, been an AOPA member for many years, am too stuffed to fly but not too silly to see behind the petty agendas being conducted through this forum.
He is not so rational about Bill Hamilton's role in the demise of AOPA nor about "censorship" of the AOPA (and pprune) Forum.
I read Mr Murphy's tirade before it was removed from these sites. There were a large number of allegations and some of these went well beyond fair comment.
I too attended the famous AGM and have to say it is probably the most bizzare AGM I have attended. The Chairmanship by the then acting President had to been seen to be believed. Murphy didn't criticise this because the Chairman was part of his team, along with Bill Hamilton.
Murphy may have had some legitimate complaints but (whoever at) AOPA were entitled to remove the offensive post.
Andrew's post was of lesser concern & perhaps shouldn't have been cut. I am against censorship per se but contributors need to be responsible, perhaps that's my old-fashioned values coming out.
However the bottom line is really:
1. Hamilton only just clawed his way back in. The AOPA members clearly gave their support to the new team.
2. Mr Murphy, a Hamilton supporter, did not get elected and is crying foul. I'll bet we wouldn't have heard a word about the election irregularities had he been elected !
3. We should give the new board a chance. It took 7 years to get AOPA into this mess, it is going to take at least a couple of years for it to be fixed. It is a tough job reestablishing credibility and sorting out the financial mess.
4. Now Mr Pike, another Hamilton supporter has resigned from the Board. So the old regime is almost gone (John Lyon is the only other Hamilton supporter left).
5. Those who are part of the continuing Hamilton (underground) movement who get some morbid delight in trying to bring down AOPA are to be condemned.
That's my bit!. I'm an old & bold, been an AOPA member for many years, am too stuffed to fly but not too silly to see behind the petty agendas being conducted through this forum.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
moderator noun: Someone who tries to help other people come to an agreement: Someone who makes certain that a formal discussion happens without problems and follows the rules:
censor noun: A person whose job is to read books, watch films, etc. in order to remove anything offensive from them ….. to remove parts considered unsuitable.....and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.
PPRuNe is Moderated in accordance with the Rules. It is not Censored.
Woomera
censor noun: A person whose job is to read books, watch films, etc. in order to remove anything offensive from them ….. to remove parts considered unsuitable.....and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.
PPRuNe is Moderated in accordance with the Rules. It is not Censored.
Woomera
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PLAY ON WORDS
Emeus
I say again - he WAS elected. Live with it.
There seems to be a number of, to quote you, "underground" movements - one aimed at Bill Hamilton - so I suggest you don't throw sticks either. The petty agendas being conducted may well include those alleging this of others.
No matter who or what at the AGM, and on Forums, material should be removed (censored) "to remove anything offensive" if I may quote Woomera direct.
Forget Murph. That gentleman Andrew W has been "censored" and removed from AOPA Forum over a totally INNOFFENSIVE comment - however one that was obviously not appreciated by Bonnie and Clyde. I note however that his comment is still on PP - there's balance for you.
Woomera
You are one of a cast of thousands - well, a number of Woomera moderators - so I don't intend to enter any debate on Mod versus Censor as you are hopefully not the one involved earlier.
That debate was well conducted on here some weeks ago, including a lovely comment by Andrew K that he had spoken to a certain person and he alleged not to have censored any of my posts on PP. A number of us, admittedly not Rhodes scholars, were able to nevertheless savvy what was happening and who that person may have been - one of the new brigade mentioned by Emeus as our future hope.
I'll be happy when they start going for the ball instead of the players!
Cheers
Brian H
I say again - he WAS elected. Live with it.
There seems to be a number of, to quote you, "underground" movements - one aimed at Bill Hamilton - so I suggest you don't throw sticks either. The petty agendas being conducted may well include those alleging this of others.
No matter who or what at the AGM, and on Forums, material should be removed (censored) "to remove anything offensive" if I may quote Woomera direct.
Forget Murph. That gentleman Andrew W has been "censored" and removed from AOPA Forum over a totally INNOFFENSIVE comment - however one that was obviously not appreciated by Bonnie and Clyde. I note however that his comment is still on PP - there's balance for you.
Woomera
You are one of a cast of thousands - well, a number of Woomera moderators - so I don't intend to enter any debate on Mod versus Censor as you are hopefully not the one involved earlier.
That debate was well conducted on here some weeks ago, including a lovely comment by Andrew K that he had spoken to a certain person and he alleged not to have censored any of my posts on PP. A number of us, admittedly not Rhodes scholars, were able to nevertheless savvy what was happening and who that person may have been - one of the new brigade mentioned by Emeus as our future hope.
I'll be happy when they start going for the ball instead of the players!
Cheers
Brian H
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WHERE WAS AOPA?
Emeus
Call Boyd a liar if you wish but I am just reading his latest fax re the CAA Bill 2003 where the 2 major parties have agreed to amend the Bill to repeal CAR 268 and amend CAR 269, to allow more of a natural justice arrangement in licence suspension or removal.
Boyd notes that "no other aviation organisation asked parliament for ven one amendment, much less campaigned for one".
Being a 5 year AOPA subscriber and, like you, a firm believer that they have the potential to get their act together in time, can I suggest that they would have more chance if they stop bullying the Andrew W's of this world for expressing honest, non-derogatory, opinions and got back into the macro world of aviation. Likewise putting the legal threat at Kris's head to get him to post that load of cods on PP that rebounded so heavily and justly on the heads of Bonnie and Clyde.
To my knowledge AW is still suspended from the AOPA Forum. That is certainly censorship, not gentle Woomera moderation.
And Woomera,
just to return quickly to yesterday's theme - you not being the Woomera of my concern back then:
1. Threads were closed to gag debate.
2. Threads went missing ref to Admin - same result.
3. Creamy - our favourite legal eagle - hinted how closing a thread was stage managed.
4. I complained to PP admin about one only Woomera and his previous admission of a potential COI re the AOPA election.
5. The threads mentioned in points 1 and 2 above related to AOPA of course.
6. Suddenly normality returned and no further problems.
I add that one comment by that Woomera on an AOPA thread, as a closing excuse, was totally unsustainable in law or English usage. After 25 years of ministerial, ombudsman, and regulator involvement I am particularly careful to stay within the bounds of legal and proper behaviour on forums.
I value your definitions of moderator and censor and know you will live by the high standards espoused. Let us hope all others can achieve these same ideals.
cheers
brian H
Call Boyd a liar if you wish but I am just reading his latest fax re the CAA Bill 2003 where the 2 major parties have agreed to amend the Bill to repeal CAR 268 and amend CAR 269, to allow more of a natural justice arrangement in licence suspension or removal.
Boyd notes that "no other aviation organisation asked parliament for ven one amendment, much less campaigned for one".
Being a 5 year AOPA subscriber and, like you, a firm believer that they have the potential to get their act together in time, can I suggest that they would have more chance if they stop bullying the Andrew W's of this world for expressing honest, non-derogatory, opinions and got back into the macro world of aviation. Likewise putting the legal threat at Kris's head to get him to post that load of cods on PP that rebounded so heavily and justly on the heads of Bonnie and Clyde.
To my knowledge AW is still suspended from the AOPA Forum. That is certainly censorship, not gentle Woomera moderation.
And Woomera,
just to return quickly to yesterday's theme - you not being the Woomera of my concern back then:
1. Threads were closed to gag debate.
2. Threads went missing ref to Admin - same result.
3. Creamy - our favourite legal eagle - hinted how closing a thread was stage managed.
4. I complained to PP admin about one only Woomera and his previous admission of a potential COI re the AOPA election.
5. The threads mentioned in points 1 and 2 above related to AOPA of course.
6. Suddenly normality returned and no further problems.
I add that one comment by that Woomera on an AOPA thread, as a closing excuse, was totally unsustainable in law or English usage. After 25 years of ministerial, ombudsman, and regulator involvement I am particularly careful to stay within the bounds of legal and proper behaviour on forums.
I value your definitions of moderator and censor and know you will live by the high standards espoused. Let us hope all others can achieve these same ideals.
cheers
brian H
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brian, I am not yesterday's person - I'm incapable of taking more than one day at a time. 
Your comment that PPRuNe moderating is "stage managed" leaves me mystified.
Stay within the Rules of PPRuNe, we'll all be friends and Woomeri won't need to moderate.
W
Your comment that PPRuNe moderating is "stage managed" leaves me mystified.
Stay within the Rules of PPRuNe, we'll all be friends and Woomeri won't need to moderate.
W
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DON'T BE MYSTIFIED
Womera whichever
I have been out in the real world and just returned, forgive the reply delay.
I do stay within the rules of PP, as Woomeri well know - otherwise I'd be actioned. However, I take your comment as wise counsel rather than criticism.
At no stage did I indicate that MODERATING is stage managed.
My comment was "how closing a thread is stage managed" and it was based on Creamy's wise hint that this may well be organised by the appearance of any two of a group of pseudonyms appearing and posting. Nor have I placed the motivation of those individuals as a moderator issue.
In PP, as in politics, all is not always as it seems - I think I have read that somewhere in the actual PP info.
And, in praise of the Woomeri and PP - I believe Andrew W is still banned from the AOPA thread for a comment that would not have raised an eyebrow on PP but of course raised the eyebrows of Bonnie and Clyde. How true that absolute power corrupts and that only earthly gods are toppled from their pedestals by the light of truth being shone into their eyes.
Cheers, have a great weekend all
Brian H
(Long term AOPA member in the hope that freedom of speech returns to it someday)
I have been out in the real world and just returned, forgive the reply delay.
I do stay within the rules of PP, as Woomeri well know - otherwise I'd be actioned. However, I take your comment as wise counsel rather than criticism.
At no stage did I indicate that MODERATING is stage managed.
My comment was "how closing a thread is stage managed" and it was based on Creamy's wise hint that this may well be organised by the appearance of any two of a group of pseudonyms appearing and posting. Nor have I placed the motivation of those individuals as a moderator issue.
In PP, as in politics, all is not always as it seems - I think I have read that somewhere in the actual PP info.
And, in praise of the Woomeri and PP - I believe Andrew W is still banned from the AOPA thread for a comment that would not have raised an eyebrow on PP but of course raised the eyebrows of Bonnie and Clyde. How true that absolute power corrupts and that only earthly gods are toppled from their pedestals by the light of truth being shone into their eyes.
Cheers, have a great weekend all
Brian H
(Long term AOPA member in the hope that freedom of speech returns to it someday)
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congratulations, Chris McKeown.
It appears we had a "fade out with Pprune when I posted this earlier today. I heard that other networks have had trouble also.
However, given the recent resignation of Bill Pike from AOPA, it appears from information I received today that Chris McKeown has fulfilled the vacancy as per the "countback" system applied after the AGM at murray Bridge.
When prompted, the same source denied that a pre election resignee had been "appointed" to the position.
I am very glad that the democratic process has been applied to keep the Board at the 12 that is necessary for good corporate governance and I congratulate the Board for it's probity.
Ax.
However, given the recent resignation of Bill Pike from AOPA, it appears from information I received today that Chris McKeown has fulfilled the vacancy as per the "countback" system applied after the AGM at murray Bridge.
When prompted, the same source denied that a pre election resignee had been "appointed" to the position.
I am very glad that the democratic process has been applied to keep the Board at the 12 that is necessary for good corporate governance and I congratulate the Board for it's probity.
Ax.
My ‘dream team’ will get up yet!
McKeown back in…
Gaunt keeping cards close to chest …
Pagani diverting increasing amounts of time to censorship and extinguishing credibility bushfires …
eggsellent….
Gaunt keeping cards close to chest …
Pagani diverting increasing amounts of time to censorship and extinguishing credibility bushfires …
eggsellent….
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IS A NIGHTMARE A DREAM?
Creamy
There are times your work is pure genius.
Rumour has it that Andrew W has served a demand on that lady re his ban from the AOPA Forum and will post his and her emails on several forums to put it to public trial if she does not allow legal experience plus logic to overrule a desire to strangle anyone whose opinion differs.
That will provide some interesting exposure to the issue. If it occurs, I will greatly value your considered opinion on the links she may have attempted to draw between what he posted and what she purports it to mean but I suggest you won't need to raise your awareness level above VCE/HSC Legal Studies to enjoy a clay pigeon shoot.
I believe she referred to him as a "publisher" - makes it pretty obvious that it is a disguised attack on agaf as much as anything else wouldn't you think?
Cheers
Brian H
There are times your work is pure genius.
Rumour has it that Andrew W has served a demand on that lady re his ban from the AOPA Forum and will post his and her emails on several forums to put it to public trial if she does not allow legal experience plus logic to overrule a desire to strangle anyone whose opinion differs.
That will provide some interesting exposure to the issue. If it occurs, I will greatly value your considered opinion on the links she may have attempted to draw between what he posted and what she purports it to mean but I suggest you won't need to raise your awareness level above VCE/HSC Legal Studies to enjoy a clay pigeon shoot.
I believe she referred to him as a "publisher" - makes it pretty obvious that it is a disguised attack on agaf as much as anything else wouldn't you think?
Cheers
Brian H