Censorship Alive And Well On Pp
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Censorship Alive And Well On Pp
My posting of today asking where the AOPA thread has moved to was quickly moved also. Where to one asks?
This is blatant censorship by the moderator and indicates a clear bias toward matters AOPA that should prevent the moderator operating on matters AOPA on PP if he wishes to claim ethical behaviour. The faintest criticism of AOPA and threads are closed or moved.
For your info, oh Woomera of the West, the posting you have "moved" has been widely circulated by email as will be this posting. I predicted at the time that it would be censored so it came as no surprise.
However, to those who read this posting and the email containing it before Woomera unfairly exerts his censorial power on this forum, ask yourselves whether this is the sort of behaviour one would wish of someone who may well be a director of AOPA since the AGM.
Readers should also be aware that AOPA is flexing its muscles into censoring other forums. Perhaps the new symbol could be a "Stealth" bomber?
Still, I guess the woomera users were known for spearing opponents in the back. Seems nothing changes.
Cheers
This is blatant censorship by the moderator and indicates a clear bias toward matters AOPA that should prevent the moderator operating on matters AOPA on PP if he wishes to claim ethical behaviour. The faintest criticism of AOPA and threads are closed or moved.
For your info, oh Woomera of the West, the posting you have "moved" has been widely circulated by email as will be this posting. I predicted at the time that it would be censored so it came as no surprise.
However, to those who read this posting and the email containing it before Woomera unfairly exerts his censorial power on this forum, ask yourselves whether this is the sort of behaviour one would wish of someone who may well be a director of AOPA since the AGM.
Readers should also be aware that AOPA is flexing its muscles into censoring other forums. Perhaps the new symbol could be a "Stealth" bomber?
Still, I guess the woomera users were known for spearing opponents in the back. Seems nothing changes.
Cheers
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My neighbour asked Danny to intervene in the matter last night and his post was REMOVED from the major Pprune forum. (like #1 on #1 post.
Apparantly he mentioned something about media manipulation and the media laws in Australia.
If I can't get my two bobs worth in here, I will resign after Personal contact with Danny.
Apparantly, when you are outed you are out, but you still count as a number on the big picture count.
Danny;
People here want dialogue with you but we can't get past Woomera.
I'm not hard to find. Woomera reckons I have multiple ip addresses across the country as does my mate. You and I know how many I have and you can easily find out.
I've given up on Woomera as have many, will you please respond.
Bob.
Apparantly he mentioned something about media manipulation and the media laws in Australia.
If I can't get my two bobs worth in here, I will resign after Personal contact with Danny.
Apparantly, when you are outed you are out, but you still count as a number on the big picture count.
Danny;
People here want dialogue with you but we can't get past Woomera.
I'm not hard to find. Woomera reckons I have multiple ip addresses across the country as does my mate. You and I know how many I have and you can easily find out.
I've given up on Woomera as have many, will you please respond.
Bob.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
You may be making a mountain out of a molehill, gentlemen.
The exact same thing happened to a topic here on Dunnunda some months back - the message indicated that is had been "moved", and when I clicked on it another follow on appeared with the wording something like "You do not have permission to access this page.".
After contacting the moderator, I was told that the topic had been referred to the Administrators for their verdict. A couple of days later it was re-instated.
I would suggest that your wish has been granted, axiom, and that it is awaiting Danny's "Yeah" or "Nay".
BTW, Bob, if you have been around D&G for any time at all, you would be aware that it is not only the Woomera(s) who intervene/moderate here, Rob (aka PPRuNe Towers...or should that be PPT aka Rob
) FREQUENTLY steps in. It may well have been he who is responsible for your dilemna!
The exact same thing happened to a topic here on Dunnunda some months back - the message indicated that is had been "moved", and when I clicked on it another follow on appeared with the wording something like "You do not have permission to access this page.".
After contacting the moderator, I was told that the topic had been referred to the Administrators for their verdict. A couple of days later it was re-instated.
I would suggest that your wish has been granted, axiom, and that it is awaiting Danny's "Yeah" or "Nay".
BTW, Bob, if you have been around D&G for any time at all, you would be aware that it is not only the Woomera(s) who intervene/moderate here, Rob (aka PPRuNe Towers...or should that be PPT aka Rob
) FREQUENTLY steps in. It may well have been he who is responsible for your dilemna!
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Oz
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kap M, you are being very generous toward those who have been unable to accept the results of an AGM/Vote. If these bleating posters have something concrete to say then say it to the appropriate authority and I suggest PPRuNe is not that authority.
You do your cause no good by the types of posts we've seen here and R&N over the last few days. They come across so bent & twisted to be regarded as the mutterings of a sad individual rather than a valid and cogent argument about some matter or other.
I could not disagree with anybody who argued that the content of many of those posts were slanderous and libelous.
I am not one of the "woomeri", but they have my sympathy for having to deal with the type of posts aformentioned.
ding
You do your cause no good by the types of posts we've seen here and R&N over the last few days. They come across so bent & twisted to be regarded as the mutterings of a sad individual rather than a valid and cogent argument about some matter or other.
I could not disagree with anybody who argued that the content of many of those posts were slanderous and libelous.
I am not one of the "woomeri", but they have my sympathy for having to deal with the type of posts aformentioned.
ding
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great thing this communication business.
Can someone either contact me personally (without prejudice), or post with some authority where we stand in this matter.
It is quiet decicive and apparantly nobody at AOPA or the moderators care about the future of GA in Australia today or in the future.
This is serious gear people and no amount of filibustering or threats are going to make an iota of difference to the grass roots people who care.
Not too much to ask ;
WHAT IS GOING ON, (and without the usual mundane platitudes that follow the Woomera diatribe).
I have been offended and lived to tell the tale. Perhaps about time someone called a truce here, or are some AOPA members (shareholders), more important than others?
Bob.
PS Dannys Yea or Nay appears to be taking an enormity of bandwidth in vacuum.
We really need to hear from the Boss because as Brian said, excellent forum::::::: But.
Can someone either contact me personally (without prejudice), or post with some authority where we stand in this matter.
It is quiet decicive and apparantly nobody at AOPA or the moderators care about the future of GA in Australia today or in the future.
This is serious gear people and no amount of filibustering or threats are going to make an iota of difference to the grass roots people who care.
Not too much to ask ;
WHAT IS GOING ON, (and without the usual mundane platitudes that follow the Woomera diatribe).
I have been offended and lived to tell the tale. Perhaps about time someone called a truce here, or are some AOPA members (shareholders), more important than others?
Bob.
PS Dannys Yea or Nay appears to be taking an enormity of bandwidth in vacuum.
We really need to hear from the Boss because as Brian said, excellent forum::::::: But.
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: International
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Six posts in four months Mr Murphie, and you now want to own the shop and dictate policy?
Whether you realise or not, this is a privately owned Forum. He who owns the shop, dictates rules and policy. The vast majority of those who post to this forum accept and abide by those rules, which are extremely tolerant.
Except it seems yourself, BrianH, Axion and an infinitely minute minority who wish to bring this forum into disrepute by using it as a platform to air your alleged personal grievances – which are irrelevent to the vast majority and probably quite rightly and legally belong within your AOPA organisation.
I also question your integrity and intent in publicly posting your irrelevant allegations, when you have direct access to the forum owner and/or moderator via email and personal message.
I for one find your posts pathetic, irrelevant and potentially libellous.
Whether you realise or not, this is a privately owned Forum. He who owns the shop, dictates rules and policy. The vast majority of those who post to this forum accept and abide by those rules, which are extremely tolerant.
Except it seems yourself, BrianH, Axion and an infinitely minute minority who wish to bring this forum into disrepute by using it as a platform to air your alleged personal grievances – which are irrelevent to the vast majority and probably quite rightly and legally belong within your AOPA organisation.
I also question your integrity and intent in publicly posting your irrelevant allegations, when you have direct access to the forum owner and/or moderator via email and personal message.
I for one find your posts pathetic, irrelevant and potentially libellous.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IT IS ABOUT FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Air Ace & Dingo
You both seem keen to attack the players instead of the ball.
Getting back to basics, if Woomera is on the AOPA Board, allowing him to moderate AOPA threads on PP is not only unfair to the readers but to him because of the potential conflict of interest. Sort of like CASA moderating a Forum desiring to get a balanced view of the NAS, eh?
Just for your info, here is what I have sent before your postings to PP admin re the matter - yes, it is their Forum and they set the rules and I will abide by their decision, a decision which obviously affects the credibility of PP as regards freedom of speech. I draw your attention particularly to the first two sentences of my second last paragraph below, and to the fourth para below: -
"Danny et al,
Woomera has already acknowledged a potential conflict of interest to PP management, as noted in his own posting on one of the now locked or moved threads.
I posted this morning on D & G GA, asking "Moved to Where" in regard to the thread "AOPA on the way up".
My posting of this morning has been moved within the day.
I have just again posted pointing out that this is blatant censorship. Anything critical of AOPA seems to be shut down.
I wonder how long my current posting will last?
You may not be aware that AOPA has also intruded into another forum using legal threats that the convenor is not financed to test, to have it censor a posting by an ex-AOPA staff member.
During the AOPA election period, messages close to defamation and libel (but not quite) were allowed to remain on the PP thread - have a read if any confirmation needed. But, current messages not in the least defamatory or libellous are being censored by Woomera.
This email, and the two threads posted today, are being widely shared within the ranks of those who wish AOPA to survive but also to be honest with itself. Past director behaviour makes this a mandate. Because they are widely shared, it is important that they do not detract from PPs credibility in matters other than those involving AOPA.
In conclusion, my point to you is that Woomera has acknowledged a duality of purpose where AOPA is concerned. If you confirm that he is now a Director of AOPA, and he confirms that he has "moved" the threads off the PP forum, then I respectfully suggest PPRUNE must examine whether it remains acceptable for Woomera to remain placed in a strong potential conflict of interest situation - particularly as it is becoming common knowledge and reflects on the credibility of PP which - despite many wild threads and rumours - nevertheless otherwise remains an excellent and valuable sharing place.
Best regards
Brian Hannan"
PS - in answer to the email query I just received, here is what I posted Sunday morning that was "moved" by Sunday evening - gee, it is really strong compared to what was allowed on the AOPA election thread ............. isn't it?
"MOVED TO WHERE"
OK, I give up, where did the AOPA thread "move" to?
Woomera, I have commented previously on your slip is showing - or is it your show is slipping? - when AOPA is mentioned. Notice I do not state "conflict of interest" although I think your own posting did allude to it once.
Don't you think it's time to take your spear and head for just an AOPA role?
Cheers
You both seem keen to attack the players instead of the ball.
Getting back to basics, if Woomera is on the AOPA Board, allowing him to moderate AOPA threads on PP is not only unfair to the readers but to him because of the potential conflict of interest. Sort of like CASA moderating a Forum desiring to get a balanced view of the NAS, eh?
Just for your info, here is what I have sent before your postings to PP admin re the matter - yes, it is their Forum and they set the rules and I will abide by their decision, a decision which obviously affects the credibility of PP as regards freedom of speech. I draw your attention particularly to the first two sentences of my second last paragraph below, and to the fourth para below: -
"Danny et al,
Woomera has already acknowledged a potential conflict of interest to PP management, as noted in his own posting on one of the now locked or moved threads.
I posted this morning on D & G GA, asking "Moved to Where" in regard to the thread "AOPA on the way up".
My posting of this morning has been moved within the day.
I have just again posted pointing out that this is blatant censorship. Anything critical of AOPA seems to be shut down.
I wonder how long my current posting will last?
You may not be aware that AOPA has also intruded into another forum using legal threats that the convenor is not financed to test, to have it censor a posting by an ex-AOPA staff member.
During the AOPA election period, messages close to defamation and libel (but not quite) were allowed to remain on the PP thread - have a read if any confirmation needed. But, current messages not in the least defamatory or libellous are being censored by Woomera.
This email, and the two threads posted today, are being widely shared within the ranks of those who wish AOPA to survive but also to be honest with itself. Past director behaviour makes this a mandate. Because they are widely shared, it is important that they do not detract from PPs credibility in matters other than those involving AOPA.
In conclusion, my point to you is that Woomera has acknowledged a duality of purpose where AOPA is concerned. If you confirm that he is now a Director of AOPA, and he confirms that he has "moved" the threads off the PP forum, then I respectfully suggest PPRUNE must examine whether it remains acceptable for Woomera to remain placed in a strong potential conflict of interest situation - particularly as it is becoming common knowledge and reflects on the credibility of PP which - despite many wild threads and rumours - nevertheless otherwise remains an excellent and valuable sharing place.
Best regards
Brian Hannan"
PS - in answer to the email query I just received, here is what I posted Sunday morning that was "moved" by Sunday evening - gee, it is really strong compared to what was allowed on the AOPA election thread ............. isn't it?
"MOVED TO WHERE"
OK, I give up, where did the AOPA thread "move" to?
Woomera, I have commented previously on your slip is showing - or is it your show is slipping? - when AOPA is mentioned. Notice I do not state "conflict of interest" although I think your own posting did allude to it once.
Don't you think it's time to take your spear and head for just an AOPA role?
Cheers
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I HOPE YOU ARE NOT IN MY AIRSPACE
Air Ace
It is not MY perception. Woomera is the one who acknowledged the potential conflict in his own posting recently.
I am quite happy to abide by the PP rules - Danny and the team would have jumped me if I was errant.
However, where a chink in PP's armour is apparent, as evinced by the "moved" threads, I reserve the right to draw it to attention.
As already noted, I leave the decision to PP management. They may prove me in error by a categorical denial of the concern I have raised. Conversely, they may decide to act. Alternatively, they may decide to do nothing, or to act and say nothing.
This is not an issue about a personal attack on a moderator. It is a question of censorship and bias that affects the very credibility of PP as a BALANCED rumour and discussion Forum. In the ultimate, that is what the rules are here for, as well as preventing libel and defamation.
You will note also that I have not done this anonymously - that's commitment unlike the disgusting anonymous personal attacks by others existing during the AOPA pre-election period.
It is not MY perception. Woomera is the one who acknowledged the potential conflict in his own posting recently.
I am quite happy to abide by the PP rules - Danny and the team would have jumped me if I was errant.
However, where a chink in PP's armour is apparent, as evinced by the "moved" threads, I reserve the right to draw it to attention.
As already noted, I leave the decision to PP management. They may prove me in error by a categorical denial of the concern I have raised. Conversely, they may decide to act. Alternatively, they may decide to do nothing, or to act and say nothing.
This is not an issue about a personal attack on a moderator. It is a question of censorship and bias that affects the very credibility of PP as a BALANCED rumour and discussion Forum. In the ultimate, that is what the rules are here for, as well as preventing libel and defamation.
You will note also that I have not done this anonymously - that's commitment unlike the disgusting anonymous personal attacks by others existing during the AOPA pre-election period.
I assume you have expressed these grievances to the AOPA Board, not received the satisfaction you believe your ego deserves and now wish to air your allegations on PPRuNe?
You don't like umpires decisions, do you?
No wonder your posts get moved!!!
You don't like umpires decisions, do you?
No wonder your posts get moved!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NOW I AM CONFUSED
Torres
Now I am confused.
I don't know how Danny and the PP crew will take it if I I follow your suggestion and go to the AOPA Board about a conflict of interest in the moderation on PP - in fact, I would have thought AOPA could best look after THEIR Forum and my approach to PP about its Forum was appropriate.
As far as the Umpire's decision, what are you on about? What umpire, what decision? It may surprise you to know that a good number of those I voted for were elected to the new AOPA Board. I value their excellent efforts since the election. I have posted quite constructively and positively on their Forum.
What I do not like is censorship of quite normal non libel or defamatory posts on this PP Forum. For your info, my post on the other thread that got "moved" is as follows: -
"AOPA AND THE NAS
Very interesting to hear our two USA colleagues at the Melbourne NAS presentation. Couple of my observations:
1. They were adamant of the need for a strong AOPA, alleging AOPA USA has around 2/3 of the 600,000 owners/pilots.
2. They believe we are way ahead re Ultralights in Oz.
I think there is a clear message that AOPA Oz must gain members not just to survive but to have a voice.
Another hidden message as to why the AUF is so far ahead of the USA - a cynic would argue that CASA and Minister Anderson have created this advantage for Oz!!!
I like the NAS concepts I have seen and heard, being a VFR pilot.
However, I wonder how much of it will occur in my lifetime.
Will certain parties again conspire to make sure we have lots of
incident reports to repeat the previous Class E sabotage?
Will the Military accept that their aviation fleet can be counted on
one's hands and fingers and really relinquish the massive sector of the Oz skies that they so treasure?
Will CASA accept that one can fly over YMML at 3000' without having to put in a written flight plan.
I hope our USA colleagues don't take the audience questions at the NAS presentation Wednesday as indicative of the standards of Oz pilots and thinking. Very disappointing.
I'd rather the NAS than the JAR. I'd rather AOPA than nowt.
But, in both cases, the entrenched politics and attitudes pose the
greatest threats to success.
Cheers
Brian H"
Now, Torres, I would have thought this post was very positive about the need for people to be AOPA members?
Your posting endeavours to throw together several wild unsubstantiated accusations and personal vilification to blot my escutcheon and take this thread off on a tangent. Thinking readers will continue to follow the context of this thread - whether censorship of threads has followed the rules or been affected by bias.
Cheers
Now I am confused.
I don't know how Danny and the PP crew will take it if I I follow your suggestion and go to the AOPA Board about a conflict of interest in the moderation on PP - in fact, I would have thought AOPA could best look after THEIR Forum and my approach to PP about its Forum was appropriate.
As far as the Umpire's decision, what are you on about? What umpire, what decision? It may surprise you to know that a good number of those I voted for were elected to the new AOPA Board. I value their excellent efforts since the election. I have posted quite constructively and positively on their Forum.
What I do not like is censorship of quite normal non libel or defamatory posts on this PP Forum. For your info, my post on the other thread that got "moved" is as follows: -
"AOPA AND THE NAS
Very interesting to hear our two USA colleagues at the Melbourne NAS presentation. Couple of my observations:
1. They were adamant of the need for a strong AOPA, alleging AOPA USA has around 2/3 of the 600,000 owners/pilots.
2. They believe we are way ahead re Ultralights in Oz.
I think there is a clear message that AOPA Oz must gain members not just to survive but to have a voice.
Another hidden message as to why the AUF is so far ahead of the USA - a cynic would argue that CASA and Minister Anderson have created this advantage for Oz!!!
I like the NAS concepts I have seen and heard, being a VFR pilot.
However, I wonder how much of it will occur in my lifetime.
Will certain parties again conspire to make sure we have lots of
incident reports to repeat the previous Class E sabotage?
Will the Military accept that their aviation fleet can be counted on
one's hands and fingers and really relinquish the massive sector of the Oz skies that they so treasure?
Will CASA accept that one can fly over YMML at 3000' without having to put in a written flight plan.
I hope our USA colleagues don't take the audience questions at the NAS presentation Wednesday as indicative of the standards of Oz pilots and thinking. Very disappointing.
I'd rather the NAS than the JAR. I'd rather AOPA than nowt.
But, in both cases, the entrenched politics and attitudes pose the
greatest threats to success.
Cheers
Brian H"
Now, Torres, I would have thought this post was very positive about the need for people to be AOPA members?
Your posting endeavours to throw together several wild unsubstantiated accusations and personal vilification to blot my escutcheon and take this thread off on a tangent. Thinking readers will continue to follow the context of this thread - whether censorship of threads has followed the rules or been affected by bias.
Cheers
Brian. I am aware you have been confused for some time! You and your colleagues have clearly indicated an intent on using this forum to attack some individual.
I am not a member of AOPA, never have been, no desire and no interest to ever join. The vast majority of those who post on PPRuNe abide by the rules and have no interest in your petty squabbles, which could jeopardise all our posting rights, as has occurred in the past.
I have supported PPRuNe (for many years), abide by the rules and support the Moderator(s), whoever they may be.
It's time you took your perceived AOPA concerns to the AOPA Board - and accept the umpire's decision here on PPRuNe.
I am not a member of AOPA, never have been, no desire and no interest to ever join. The vast majority of those who post on PPRuNe abide by the rules and have no interest in your petty squabbles, which could jeopardise all our posting rights, as has occurred in the past.
I have supported PPRuNe (for many years), abide by the rules and support the Moderator(s), whoever they may be.
It's time you took your perceived AOPA concerns to the AOPA Board - and accept the umpire's decision here on PPRuNe.
Last edited by Torres; 18th Aug 2003 at 10:22.
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another Option
I guess the other option that could be taken by anyone dissatisfied with their treatment here 
is for them to invest their own money and set up their own BB where they can post as many posts on as many topics as they like without fear of 
. That will give them all the "free speach" that they can handle. But, just remember, don't censor anyone elses posts should they not agree with your feelings.
If you do not wish to spend your own money and you want to continue to use this BB like the rest of us, it's quite simple, abide by the rules, play the "game" not the "man" and I'm sure we will all be happy little campers here for a long time to come!!!
Regards to all,
BSB
is for them to invest their own money and set up their own BB where they can post as many posts on as many topics as they like without fear of . That will give them all the "free speach" that they can handle. But, just remember, don't censor anyone elses posts should they not agree with your feelings. If you do not wish to spend your own money and you want to continue to use this BB like the rest of us, it's quite simple, abide by the rules, play the "game" not the "man" and I'm sure we will all be happy little campers here for a long time to come!!!
Regards to all,
BSB
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Emerald, Vic, Aust
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WRONG AGAIN TORRES
Torres
You just cannot abide by the facts can you.
I have not used this Forum to attack some individual. This sort of incorrect comment reflects on yourself - don't throw bricks at rubber walls, mate!
If you are not an AOPA member one can only hope you are neither an Oz pilot or aircraft owner.
Again you are on about an umpire's decision - there has not been one. A message has been sent to PP management about the potential conflict of interest in moderation on PP re AOPA matters, and I clearly indicated in my earlier posting that their decision was theirs and theirs alone, and would be followed by myself.
All this tripe you have thrown in about posting rights and petty squabbles is irrelevant. PP allowed the AOPA election thread with its significant squabbles, posting rights were very liberal, and the AOPA thread had a significant following.
If you are going to post
1. Please stick to the facts although based on your previous postings this may require significant self-discipline, and,
2. Please don't make statements about me that you cannot substantiate.
3. If you are not and will never be an AOPA member, then practice what you preach and leave the AOPA threads alone.
BSB
Long time no hear.
Thank you for your posting into which I read that you are well aware that I abide by the rules and play the ball, not the man.
Yes, there is another forum that was set up while the AOPA one was down. It does not censor, except in matters defamatory etc.
Surprisingly, the only attempt at "censorship" on it has been by - guess who, AOPA - because they did not like a posting with some pertinent suggestions by an ex staffer.
I agree entirely with your final paragraph. Let's all live by the PP rules. As noted earlier, I am so prepared to put the case for those rules to include unbiased moderation that I have put my own name to my posting and email to PP management.
What I do find surprising in several postings to date, and I am not specifying yours, are the attempts to pervert the course of this thread away from free speech and bias by launching totally unsubstantiated and unsustainable allegations about myself - then suggesting I an others are "going the man". I can only conclude that this departure from the Australian ethos and ethical behaviour is a desperate attempt to draw attention away from the real issue of the censorship allegation.
Has anyone considered that Woomera can stop this debate cold in an instant. All he has to post is that he is not a Director of AOPA. This confirms no serious conflict of interest exists and gives us no clue to his real identity. Result, I withdraw my concern and we all go away happy. Isn't that what you would do in similar circumstances?
Must run, I have work to do.
Cheers
You just cannot abide by the facts can you.
I have not used this Forum to attack some individual. This sort of incorrect comment reflects on yourself - don't throw bricks at rubber walls, mate!
If you are not an AOPA member one can only hope you are neither an Oz pilot or aircraft owner.
Again you are on about an umpire's decision - there has not been one. A message has been sent to PP management about the potential conflict of interest in moderation on PP re AOPA matters, and I clearly indicated in my earlier posting that their decision was theirs and theirs alone, and would be followed by myself.
All this tripe you have thrown in about posting rights and petty squabbles is irrelevant. PP allowed the AOPA election thread with its significant squabbles, posting rights were very liberal, and the AOPA thread had a significant following.
If you are going to post
1. Please stick to the facts although based on your previous postings this may require significant self-discipline, and,
2. Please don't make statements about me that you cannot substantiate.
3. If you are not and will never be an AOPA member, then practice what you preach and leave the AOPA threads alone.
BSB
Long time no hear.
Thank you for your posting into which I read that you are well aware that I abide by the rules and play the ball, not the man.
Yes, there is another forum that was set up while the AOPA one was down. It does not censor, except in matters defamatory etc.
Surprisingly, the only attempt at "censorship" on it has been by - guess who, AOPA - because they did not like a posting with some pertinent suggestions by an ex staffer.
I agree entirely with your final paragraph. Let's all live by the PP rules. As noted earlier, I am so prepared to put the case for those rules to include unbiased moderation that I have put my own name to my posting and email to PP management.
What I do find surprising in several postings to date, and I am not specifying yours, are the attempts to pervert the course of this thread away from free speech and bias by launching totally unsubstantiated and unsustainable allegations about myself - then suggesting I an others are "going the man". I can only conclude that this departure from the Australian ethos and ethical behaviour is a desperate attempt to draw attention away from the real issue of the censorship allegation.
Has anyone considered that Woomera can stop this debate cold in an instant. All he has to post is that he is not a Director of AOPA. This confirms no serious conflict of interest exists and gives us no clue to his real identity. Result, I withdraw my concern and we all go away happy. Isn't that what you would do in similar circumstances?
Must run, I have work to do.
Cheers
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: South Pacific
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"There is none so deaf as those who will not listen." Selective hearing seems synonymous with some previous AOPA office bearers.
Boring and pointless diatribe!
Boring and pointless diatribe!
Last edited by Tail_Wheel; 18th Aug 2003 at 12:20.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: The Coast of Sunshine, Australia
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't ya just love a good conspiracy theory.
I have till now read with some amusement posts of brianh. bob murphie, bart and elsewhere dear axiom.
I have read and marvelled at the rational (if misplaced) approach by BSB, Torres, air Ace, Kaptin M and dingo84.
All this huffing and puffing is entertaining, yes, but a massive waste of energy. I won't be wasting any more of mine.
In the mean time, don't ya just love a good conspiracy theory
Disco Stu
I have till now read with some amusement posts of brianh. bob murphie, bart and elsewhere dear axiom.
I have read and marvelled at the rational (if misplaced) approach by BSB, Torres, air Ace, Kaptin M and dingo84.
All this huffing and puffing is entertaining, yes, but a massive waste of energy. I won't be wasting any more of mine.
In the mean time, don't ya just love a good conspiracy theory
Disco Stu
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brian,
As has been said on countless occasions "Woomera" are a multiple; i.e. more than one person, so having any of them claim to be or not to be on the board of AOPA is really irrelivant as their decisions on PPRuNe would be collective and not those of any individual. (Unless all the "Woomera" are all AOPA directors!!!).
Surely this should allay your fears of bias here and allow you to enjoy your time on PPRuNe like the rest, sorry, most, of us do.
You have raised some interesting topics on here in the past, how about another interesting one just to change the subject!
BSB
As has been said on countless occasions "Woomera" are a multiple; i.e. more than one person, so having any of them claim to be or not to be on the board of AOPA is really irrelivant as their decisions on PPRuNe would be collective and not those of any individual. (Unless all the "Woomera" are all AOPA directors!!!).
Surely this should allay your fears of bias here and allow you to enjoy your time on PPRuNe like the rest, sorry, most, of us do.
You have raised some interesting topics on here in the past, how about another interesting one just to change the subject!
BSB