How bad did the topic get that it just disappeared.....

[dashx]

You know the one where Strega insinuated that plumbers got more classroom time than pilots..

It was there this sunday morning and by the afternoon someone (moderating) had pulled it.

So what was so bad that it had to get pulled??????

[sky's the limit]

Getting there, yes.

We're reviewing it.. please wait for the next available operator.

stl

[MUSKEG]

Every thread that becomes a little heated could then be considered "getting there" Just how do you measure between "getting there" and "there"? Kind of like a moveable goalpost?

[Cat Driver]

Maybe Avcanada could have a separate forum for threads that go way off track where only those interested in the idiot mindset could entertain them selves if they so wish?

[North Shore]

There's tons 'o threads that 'disappear' on here - some about plane crashes, some about people, some that get too heated etc.. It is really frustrating sometimes, but then, it is Joe's (AvCanada's) website, and he gets to run his sandbox the way he likes. I guess it comes down to the old saying: if you don't like it, then leave. I keep coming back...

[MUSKEG]

I have no issue with pulled threads. I realize I am a guest here, but call it like it is. Either over the line or not. Getting there is vague.

[niss]

When a thread strays into questionable waters sometimes they disappear with out a trace...



In dangerous waters ye be....yarrrgh.

[Changes in Latitudes]

She strayed into what is called STREGA waters.

[pika]

Lack of consistency is the issue. For instance, the site is littered with derogatory references to Merlin Preuss and Dave Nowzek but the threads remain. Any other names results in the magic disappearing thread.

[GoinNowhereFast]

When a thread gets too derogatory, I stop following it and I rarely notice them disappearing.

[Widow]

Do we really need the thread back?

How many threads have we had about lack of professionalism? How many of such threads have degenerated into the usual pissing match?

It was pulled because it was turning into trouble - if we (the mods) see that happening we try to nip it in the bud. We don't always see in time, hence some threads lasting longer than they should.

If you really want it back, we'll do some editing and get rid of all the off-topic stuff (i.e. pilots vs. AMEs).

Personally, I'd rather let sleeping dogs lie.

[Cat Driver]

For instance, the site is littered with derogatory references to Merlin Preuss and Dave Nowzek but the threads remain. Any other names results in the magic disappearing thread.

Therefore one must ask the obvious question on why these references are allowed to remain.

If said references are libelous the people to whom the references are directed have the right to either demand said references be removed or they can take legal action against the person who made said references and against Avcanada for allowing them to remain here.

Main Entry: de·rog·a·to·ry
Pronunciation: \di-ˈrä-gə-ˌtȯr-ē\
Function: adjective
Date: circa 1503

1 : detracting from the character or standing of something —often used with to, towards, or of
2 : expressive of a low opinion : disparaging <derogatory remarks>

— de·rog·a·to·ri·ly \-ˌrä-gə-ˈtȯr-ə-lē\ adverb

Lets examine it a little closer and ask another question.

Are the allegations true?

What do you think pika?

[North Shore]

Are the allegations true?

We don't know....

al⋅le⋅ga⋅tion  [al-i-gey-shuhn] Show IPA
Use Allegation in a Sentence
–noun
1. the act of alleging; affirmation.
2. an assertion made with little or no proof.
3. an assertion made by a party in a legal proceeding, which the party then undertakes to prove.
4. a statement offered as a plea, excuse, or justification.
Origin:
1375–1425; late ME < L allēgātiōn- (s. of allēgātiō), equiv. to allēgāt(us), ptp. of allēgāre to adduce in support of a plea (al- al- + -lēgāre, deriv. of lēx law; see legal ) + -iōn- -ion

Synonyms:
1, 2. charge, accusation; claim, contention.

[Cat Driver]

We don't know....

Really?

O.K. here is the way to find out.

Why don't you make an allegation about any of TCCA's top management alleging they are dishonest and name them personally without you having enough documentation to defend yourself in a Federal court and lets see what happens.

I will be interested in seeing whether you have the fortitude to do that.

[pika]

Forum rules tell us:

You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws.

Therefore one must ask the obvious question on why these references are allowed to remain.

Indeed one must. Does one's devout insistence upon the issue make slanderous comments acceptable? Does Mod status transcend thread removal? As already referenced, the moving goal post is a tough game for everybody.

Are the allegations true?

Maybe, maybe not. Since the common mantra for thread removal is to avoid legal issues what have the courts decided about the truth of the allegations?

What do you think pika?

I have no direct knowledge of the events so my thoughts on the matter are irrelevant.

[Cat Driver]

I have no direct knowledge of the events so my thoughts on the matter are irrelevant.

Than why bother putting your thoughts into words?

There is one thing I will agree with and that is when posting anonymously whatever one says is irrelevant for the simple reason no one really knows who or what the poster really is.

At least I make my allegations using my true identity.

[just curious]

Before this thread makes a right turn into rock-filled clouds. it's pretty simple:

If someone complains about a thread, particularly when it is easy to identify an offending party, the thread goes away.

Pika has a valid point about consistency. That's why we now remove threads to a review area to have the obvious vitriol removed. It will come as no surprise that Cat Driver has an outstanding issue with the upper echelons of TC. And yes, guilty, we should be heavily editing him every time he mentions names. Having said that, I am not aware that any of the parties named in his posts have rebutted, refuted or complained about him.

So, edit his posts and listen to the shrieks of outrage? Sometimes. On the other hand, until the shrieks come from without the forum, we will look at the threads with a certain toleration.

If we witness the emergence in a post that is nothing more than a malicious attack, then the thread is removed, the offending parties chastised, and the thread is returned.

In retrospect, some of the moderators, me included, may have been less than moderate about some posters. Early in the summer, a wave of particularly clever spammers were burying the board in porn ads. To combat that (new spam was occurring at the rate of something nuts like 100 an hour), we were given banning powers. Posters who were particularly negative were warned, and warned again. I suspect that some were banned. There are two posters in particular in the past season who have irked me. But I hadn't banned them. I should have when I had the chance, but now, the decision to ban a user lies with Joe. We can recommend but...

In retrospect, with one at least, perhaps I should have. Often of late, when a thread goes awry, one of my least favorite posters is in the thick of it. I used to agonize and hyperventilate about this, but sometimes we need a few drops of Tabasco in an otherwise bland thread. It doesn't mean they don't annoy me, just that some of the vitriolic posters appear to do a better job of displaying their ass.

While all of the mods have their own hobby horses, I decided that since my secret identity is one of my company's worst-kept secrets, threads that run against my employer are not going to be moderated by me. I have no way of being objective.

JC

[Widow]

Well said JC.

Making the assumption that Pika may have been thinking of me when he asked, "Does Mod status transcend thread removal?", a review of my posts since becoming a moderator in early March will show that I have been very careful to no longer cross that line.

But yes, even moderators can and have been moderated by other mods.

[Cat Driver]

And yes, guilty, we should be heavily editing him every time he mentions names. Having said that, I am not aware that any of the parties named in his posts have rebutted, refuted or complained about him.

Which leaves us with only two realistic reasons why they have not.

Either they are unaware of what I have been accusing them of.

Or they have been advised by the Department of Justice or their own internal lawyers they would lose in a Federal court.

All four of us have been involved in the process we went through for almost three years.

TCCA's top management.

The Department of Justice.

TC's own lawyers.

And me.

The findings were in my favor and the wording was very short and precise.

TC was found guilty of denying me " Due Process "

Last time I checked that was the foundation of Canadian law.

[pika]

JC, thanks for the explanation.

Than why bother putting your thoughts into words?

Believe it or not this thread doesn't revolve around the corrupt/inept/illegal etc actions of some government bodies and my thoughts/words are no way related to that topic.

[floatplanepilot]

Anyone else feel like having a good ol' fashioned book burning?

[niss]

[Strega]

For the record..

Plumbers have more classroom instruction time than pilots.....



Prove me wrong..... and once again Im not talking about the government funded aviation "colleges"


It always nice to know that even though a ton of people hate me here, Im still appreciated

[Changes in Latitudes]

Plumbers have more classroom instruction time than pilots.....

As soon as we start flying classrooms around at 41,000ft, I'll start doing more training in them.

[sky's the limit]

Is it a slow news day? I mean really, can't we pool our collective intellects and come up with a topic of substance, any topic?

That said, I've got nuth'in.... so carry on.

stl