Reporting a violation
- Thread starter FriendlySkies
- Start date
- Status
Cessna414JJB
Unknown Member
It's ok though, you're 10 posts above the 1,000 post minimum-respect threshold. You should be fine. Still got a ways to go myself.
What respect? Don't hold your breath on that. The 1000 posts are more of an incident than a planned event. I cashed in three warnings for insulting other members, before I realized that there is no common denominator for who gets to say what to whom.
I am solidly split on the subject of reporting a violation. I would not ever report anyone to the FAA, unless I have exhausted every possible available avenue to get a point across to the offending airman including safety reps. Honest confrontation is best.
In the end we all have to live with the image in the mirror. Your integrity is subject to what you perceive to be the only, final and right thing to do. If I was convinced that someone endangers other airmen with stupidity, I'd go to battle free of all and any worry for the consequences. You can break a nose and bones, destroy a reputation, badmouth and shun all you want, but truth and honesty always win in the end, in this jungle of temptation, lust and frustration. I don't think we have to duel each other, or take each other behind the hangar for a beating and sometimes the FAA can put a stop to idiots.
When a discussion board triggers you to feel as if you need to go beat someone up, it's time for a break, a chill pill or maybe a time out, independent from your file and rank on the site.
Nobody needs crap like this, and it reflects terribly on this site. JC used to be about something different.
Maurus
The Great Gazoo
I would like to say that there is a reason why people like to see a high post count. Yes the person could be the next OA, but people in the past have screwed over other members and that causes the scepticism seen in this thread.
I recall one incident where one of our good members hired a low post count member to fly a corporate jet. He dropped $10k (maybe more) on the guy only to have the dude suddenly break his contract.
I'm sure the guy was qualified for the job, but the guy ended up being a complete failure and potential black eye for JC.
The lack of trust for low count posters is based on experience.
I recall one incident where one of our good members hired a low post count member to fly a corporate jet. He dropped $10k (maybe more) on the guy only to have the dude suddenly break his contract.
I'm sure the guy was qualified for the job, but the guy ended up being a complete failure and potential black eye for JC.
The lack of trust for low count posters is based on experience.
Cessna414JJB
Unknown Member
Now I must ask:
I thought JC was for networking and paying it forward?
What you wrote makes me wonder what is considered being "qualified" for any job. Is that determined with a proper interview and asking the right questions, or simply a result of that persons internal JC reputation? Imagine what a joke it would be if there is an "online hiring committee" smoking online cigars, determining and calling out who's resume get's walked into the CP's office and which one doesn't... all based on how awesome a member they are on this site. Our industry and hiring procedures already spit smack in the face of equality and common sense and minimum respect by discriminating people solely based on the size of their log book. It's idiotic and corrupt enough without implementing some corrupt little secret incest and "always only hire your own" special opportunity club.
It's that kind of favoritism that got the kids of famous, correct last name, proper party, and right stuff parents kids into schools, colleges and jobs they never belonged in.
When I was hiring/ managing employees I saw the memo's that prohibited us from even writing or giving a short reference to a prospective employer, just to avoid costly litigation in case someone who was regarded well turned into a total schmuck on the job. It seems as if that idiotic system is alive and well in our aviation society. It's corrupt and wrong on so many levels that it's really just sad.
If jobs only go to those who had enough time to slime their rear end of, so that their resume could be walked in, why advertise a job at all? Imagine all sellers and buyers on ebay would refuse to sell or buy to/from anyone with less than 1000 good deals? Ebay would be non existent. Imagine McDonalds would only hire 350 pound whales with dirty fingernails and greasy hair?
Just sayin'
WacoFan
Bigly
The guy comes here, makes a post that was unclear in some ways, and asks for help in violating someone. The post count issue has nothing to do with credibility - you can have 50 posts but if they serve to introduce you, discuss your background, etc - that builds credibility. A low post count, an imcomplete story (initially), and help in trying to harm some unknown pilots livlihood based upon that incomplete story...yeah, let's all get behind that immediately!
Things weren't too personal against the OP until he became offended that people were actually asking questions about the incident instead of simply complying with his request for the most efficient way to zap the guy in question. Then, this led to "F you...F you...F you...".
The OP could have 18,000 hours of SR71 time as well Shuttle landings...but as for me, if he can't hold up to people questioning things as they have in this thread..well, tough titty. I tried to explain this in an earlier post but the OP's "F you" post kind of iced it for me.
Things weren't too personal against the OP until he became offended that people were actually asking questions about the incident instead of simply complying with his request for the most efficient way to zap the guy in question. Then, this led to "F you...F you...F you...".
The OP could have 18,000 hours of SR71 time as well Shuttle landings...but as for me, if he can't hold up to people questioning things as they have in this thread..well, tough titty. I tried to explain this in an earlier post but the OP's "F you" post kind of iced it for me.
redwings191
Well-Known Member
Agreed. That was completely uncalled for and unprofessional.
FriendlySkies
Well-Known Member
Well, I did it as a joke and I know some laughed. But I wasn't asking for support... this thread became unprofessional when I got the first slam! I really dont care now and theres a reason for the low thread count.... that means two things 
Well, I did it as a joke and I know some laughed. But I wasn't asking for support... this thread became unprofessional when I got the first slam! I really dont care now and theres a reason for the low thread count.... that means two things
"F you" is not acceptable language here, joke or not. Capiche?
Autothrust Blue
”…trusting ze process…”
Shut 'er down Clancy, she's a a-suckin' mud again.
Avalon781ML
Well-Known Member
It was actually a movie quote... not that it matters... I find it interesting how an "F you" isn't acceptable yet we allow unmitigated criticism and borderline harassment occur because a guy has an issue and is looking for advice. Way to go team JetCareers! Rather unfortunate that this place is turning into FI.com.
Tram
Well-Known Member
Basing someone's experience with post count is silly.. I've never understood why people care about post count..
Tram
Well-Known Member
Your post makes no sense to me..
You're defending some of the attitude that is making this place like FI.com while yet, condemning the people who run JC.com because they all this type of drivel to be posted?
*ETA*
While we are bemoaning how the site is run, why arn't we allowed to edit a post after a given time period? There may be a lot of attitudes, posts that start the "good" threads, etc, that might not exist if we were allowed to edit our post whenever.. I know I've made comments that were out of line, had time to reflect and decided I should not have said that. Tough, you have to leave it. Then the other guy it was aimed at reads it and voila. It's a "wee on each other" contest..
Yet "we" allow???
"We" is all of us. You, me, Doug, Jim, Joe, Billy Bob and Aunt Mae. "We" should all be adult enough and proactive enough to use our keyboards to help direct the tone of the site. The only way it works is that the guy at the top sets the tone, and EVERYONE helps keep each other accountable. It can't happen if it's just the Mods and Admins dishing out spankings when we happen to catch someone acting up, it absolutely has to be a joint effort to make this a place we all want to hang out. If it's only the Mod team that is trying to correct people it just becomes a free-for-all of "he said", "she said" finger pointing and games of who can get the other guy violated first. Heavy handed moderating is not what we need.
In threads like this one it should be enough that Bumblebee makes a post calling attention to things getting out of hand. At that point people should be stepping back and deciding if their actions are contributing or hurting the overall vibe, and they should modify behavior accordingly. When some people won't be able to do that because they are too emotionally involved, the level headed ones need to help steer the ship. Note, I'm talking about level-headed responses, not burn-the-house-down responses.
Doug has said many, many times; "This is YOUR website. It is what you make of it."
WacoFan
Bigly
Has nothing to do with experience but has everything to do with our familiarity with the poster. If Zap had come on here...or Polar...or MikeCweb...and asked "Hey, I need to violate someone, how do I do it?" then I imagine that very few people on this thread would even question why, they'd just do answer the question (including probably Boris who's against authority in any form). The reason is that these guys have been around, we know them, we know their temperament - that is the only thing that a post count matters for - familiarity. We don't know this guy well - is he a "sand in the •" type guy, or is he someone whose opinion and temperament we trust? Based on how prickly he got even before we started pouring hot lead on him from the tower I would say "hmm...he may get a little prickly at other things too quickly too".
Tram
Well-Known Member
Because it gets too confusing when a post is edited after numerous responses have been addressed at the original post. I mean REALLY confusing.
The best way to handle the situation is to come back into the thread, make another post where you own up to the issue in the original post, explain why you posted it and why, upon reflection, you want to change it. Doing this will do sooooo much more to get people to understand you and your thinking than just going back and changing posts after the fact.
After you do that a few times you tend to become a little bit more reflective PRIOR to posting. Ask me how I know.
irate:
Tram
Well-Known Member
- Status