Thank you "Engines"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, I will say it again for the hard of thinking.
I am not suggesting that we make it mil only.
I am not suggesting that we make it mil only.
I am not suggesting that we make it mil only.
I agree that would be unworkable.
I agree that would be unworkable.
I agree that would be unworkable.
I am saying that we should try to make it less attractive to wierdos and more attractive to current serving military.
I suggested that having current serving mods might help, and I open the floor to other suggestions.
A mil forum without mil is embarassing.
Incidentally, If you knew me, then you would know that taking things seriously is something I have very rarely been accused of.
I am not suggesting that we make it mil only.
I am not suggesting that we make it mil only.
I am not suggesting that we make it mil only.
I agree that would be unworkable.
I agree that would be unworkable.
I agree that would be unworkable.
I am saying that we should try to make it less attractive to wierdos and more attractive to current serving military.
I suggested that having current serving mods might help, and I open the floor to other suggestions.
A mil forum without mil is embarassing.
Incidentally, If you knew me, then you would know that taking things seriously is something I have very rarely been accused of.
Tourist
When this topic has been raised before it is always pointed out that this is not a military site but a civilian one with just one minor board for military. I suspect we are little more than tolerated here - were the Military Aircrew board to go I suspect it would have little effect on visitor numbers (or even be noticed!). This is now a commercial site so revenue is everything. Anything seen as controversial (and I suspect some of the topics you previously mentioned would fall into that category
) and may affect advertising revenue will soon be stepped on.
Sites such as ArRSe, Rum Ration and e-Goat (to name the 3 of the UK based ones - other military boards are available
) are run by mil/ex-mil for the benefit primarily of the military (although they too seem to have a problem with trolls, walts and the never-served giving their opinion on everything) - each of these sites has a large number of boards dedicated to the various sub cultures/trades of that particular service (including a NAAFI/Diamond Lils/Pigs Pen where it seems pretty much anything goes [unlike Jet Blast which still expects 'Hotel Lobby' rules to apply]). Granted, these sites are not to everyones tastes, but perhaps where the yoof of today hang out. Or face-thingy.
Kreuger Flap
When this topic has been raised before it is always pointed out that this is not a military site but a civilian one with just one minor board for military. I suspect we are little more than tolerated here - were the Military Aircrew board to go I suspect it would have little effect on visitor numbers (or even be noticed!). This is now a commercial site so revenue is everything. Anything seen as controversial (and I suspect some of the topics you previously mentioned would fall into that category
) and may affect advertising revenue will soon be stepped on.Sites such as ArRSe, Rum Ration and e-Goat (to name the 3 of the UK based ones - other military boards are available
) are run by mil/ex-mil for the benefit primarily of the military (although they too seem to have a problem with trolls, walts and the never-served giving their opinion on everything) - each of these sites has a large number of boards dedicated to the various sub cultures/trades of that particular service (including a NAAFI/Diamond Lils/Pigs Pen where it seems pretty much anything goes [unlike Jet Blast which still expects 'Hotel Lobby' rules to apply]). Granted, these sites are not to everyones tastes, but perhaps where the yoof of today hang out. Or face-thingy.Kreuger Flap
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,449
Received 3,192 Likes
on
1,339 Posts
More attractive to current service people, green background, porn section?
For one that was hoping to cut through some of the detritus, look what you have spawned lol....
For one that was hoping to cut through some of the detritus, look what you have spawned lol....
Yes. I agree. As I suggested much earlier in this thread, I don't think you initial meaning was quite understood. But, a good debate.
I have noramlly agreed with most of your posts, T, and think this one drifted, but still a good debate to have had.
So, my suggestion: much like happened to the annoying idiot here last night, just ignore the crap and press on with the conversation around it. They will eventually get bored and wonder off - or get banned. We cannot legislate for everything.
Good thread, though. Poor Engines.
I have noramlly agreed with most of your posts, T, and think this one drifted, but still a good debate to have had.
So, my suggestion: much like happened to the annoying idiot here last night, just ignore the crap and press on with the conversation around it. They will eventually get bored and wonder off - or get banned. We cannot legislate for everything.
Good thread, though. Poor Engines.
"the people who this forum is for?"
"No, what I am suggesting is not what has been debated before."
"That is not, as I have said repeatedly, what I am suggesting."
"Most serving guys just laugh when you ask if they go on Pprune because it has nothing to do with them."
Just a few of the idiotic statements from Tourist! Mods, please give him what he wants. A forum all to himself and the under three's
"No, what I am suggesting is not what has been debated before."
"That is not, as I have said repeatedly, what I am suggesting."
"Most serving guys just laugh when you ask if they go on Pprune because it has nothing to do with them."
Just a few of the idiotic statements from Tourist! Mods, please give him what he wants. A forum all to himself and the under three's
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
newt
???
Courtney
Yes, I do feel bad about embarassing him because that was not my intention, however I am loath to delete the thread.
Wrathmonk
No, it is not "one minor board", it has far more posts than most others put together bar Jetblast.
The suggestion that having more liberal rules like that den of licentousness "Mumsnet" might lose advertisers is not really born out by the facts.
Look it up on Wiki. It is the biggest and most supported Forum site going, so filth does not tseem to put off advertisers.
Having just seen the post above, is it just me that finds it ironic that he can have that as his name,(and his is by no means the worst, or funniest!), but I cant write c### because it might upset the advertisers?
???
Courtney
Yes, I do feel bad about embarassing him because that was not my intention, however I am loath to delete the thread.
Wrathmonk
No, it is not "one minor board", it has far more posts than most others put together bar Jetblast.
The suggestion that having more liberal rules like that den of licentousness "Mumsnet" might lose advertisers is not really born out by the facts.
Look it up on Wiki. It is the biggest and most supported Forum site going, so filth does not tseem to put off advertisers.
Having just seen the post above, is it just me that finds it ironic that he can have that as his name,(and his is by no means the worst, or funniest!), but I cant write c### because it might upset the advertisers?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,449
Received 3,192 Likes
on
1,339 Posts
Ok... I'll say it...
The Engines Captain...... They canna take it......... Or can as the case may be.
The Engines Captain...... They canna take it......... Or can as the case may be.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PS. If you retired 4 months ago does that mean your are now a civilian
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
Tourist,
Another factor to consider is that ex-military posters have far more licence in what they post than those still serving. Not always an issue, but you are probably more likely to elicit a "warts and all" response when the poster is not overly concerned about the Official Secrets Act cramping his or her career aspirations.
PS. Yes I know the OSA stays extant once you've signed it, but it has slightly more "context" after you have hung up the uniform.
Another factor to consider is that ex-military posters have far more licence in what they post than those still serving. Not always an issue, but you are probably more likely to elicit a "warts and all" response when the poster is not overly concerned about the Official Secrets Act cramping his or her career aspirations.
PS. Yes I know the OSA stays extant once you've signed it, but it has slightly more "context" after you have hung up the uniform.
I am not against having ex mil on here by any means, but I do think that the preponderance should be weighted towards the serving types, and that is not going to happen with things as they stand.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys,
My last post on this thread, I promise, and possibly my last on this PPrune forum (see below).
Nutloose - great post. Humour always helps.
I'm not in the least embarrassed. I'm too old and ugly for that.
But I would respectfully suggest that some people might be taking this issue of 'who posts' a tad too seriously. It's a thread on an open forum, there are no real ways of controlling input without almost closing it, so we all have to get along together or just stop posting - a bit like not watching TV programmes you don't like.
If the serving military aircrew and support folk don't want anyone else on the thread at all, just say so and I, for one, will be off doing other stuff. Gentle reminders to trespassers every now and then should keep your turf clear.
Your call, let us retirees (and civilian types) know how you want it played. Really, you won't hurt our feelings, honest.
Once again, thanks to those who offered such kind compliments - they have been very much appreciated.
Best Regards as ever
Engines
My last post on this thread, I promise, and possibly my last on this PPrune forum (see below).
Nutloose - great post. Humour always helps.
I'm not in the least embarrassed. I'm too old and ugly for that.
But I would respectfully suggest that some people might be taking this issue of 'who posts' a tad too seriously. It's a thread on an open forum, there are no real ways of controlling input without almost closing it, so we all have to get along together or just stop posting - a bit like not watching TV programmes you don't like.
If the serving military aircrew and support folk don't want anyone else on the thread at all, just say so and I, for one, will be off doing other stuff. Gentle reminders to trespassers every now and then should keep your turf clear.
Your call, let us retirees (and civilian types) know how you want it played. Really, you won't hurt our feelings, honest.
Once again, thanks to those who offered such kind compliments - they have been very much appreciated.
Best Regards as ever
Engines
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,634
Received 513 Likes
on
273 Posts
ShyT
You need to learn to read
You need to learn to read
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engines et al,
The only thing of note is that none of "us" either own the site or moderate the forums and it's as clear as the nose on my face that those that do are more than happy with the status quo in here, look at Beags post count and you get the idea that things are fine the way they are
It's a healthy mix of mil, ex mil, non mil input and banter and never should that change. The forum entrance criteria is clear and precise and I never tire of tweaking the odd pompous tail with the "but you are only a bed wetting civvy" jibe but it's nowt but a tweak
The only thing of note is that none of "us" either own the site or moderate the forums and it's as clear as the nose on my face that those that do are more than happy with the status quo in here, look at Beags post count and you get the idea that things are fine the way they are
It's a healthy mix of mil, ex mil, non mil input and banter and never should that change. The forum entrance criteria is clear and precise and I never tire of tweaking the odd pompous tail with the "but you are only a bed wetting civvy" jibe but it's nowt but a tweak
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: lincoln
Age: 63
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I reckon I am about the youngest regular poster on here (based fairly arbitrarily on general demeanor, I'll admit) and that is frankly appalling since I am old and haggard and in the process of leaving the mob!
Will you stop posting once you leave the "Mob" then ?
Or will you be coming back as a weirdo to join the rest of us "ex" low life
I think this is a pretty sad post and any new viewer military or not would be put off coming anywhere near the site after reading it.
Will you stop posting once you leave the "Mob" then ?
Or will you be coming back as a weirdo to join the rest of us "ex" low life
I think this is a pretty sad post and any new viewer military or not would be put off coming anywhere near the site after reading it.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: The Chemistry Lab
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before you start to try limiting who can post on - or even view - this forum you have to define just who is your customer base,and just what the point of this forum is.
Is it for serving aircrew to discuss current theory and practice? If so it won't get far as its an insecure forum and no current serving are going to risk it.
Is it a forum for old duffers to air old reminisces?
Is it a general discussion forum for all matters of military aviation. not just current?
Is it for educating people from outside the aviation fraternity?
I suggest that very few of the threads on this forum have any relevance to current actual flying. Most are historical reminisces / romances, with a fair proportion of current political events as related to the prevailing threat.
Further, if you banned those who are non-aviators, and even more so if you banned those who are ex-aviators you would lose the majority of ACTIVE members of this forum. That is a problem for you. The forum only exists because of its ability to draw advertising revenue. Cut the number viewing and the revenue goes down. Cut it a a low enough point and the forum becomes non-cost-effective and will be shut.. You can already see that the forum owners don't regard this part of the site as worthy of effective moderation - probably because its not cost effective to provide the service.
If you want this forum to thrive, the key is in effective, consistent and valid moderation. At present you have a situation where trolls are allowed to go unpunished with personal insults, while lesser issues result in arbitrary bans with no explanation. Partly that is due to certain individuals clearly complaining to the mods about anyone they consider as "interlopers", creating a knee-jerk reaction creating arbitrary bans and punishments.
Something else to remember is that this forum is predominantly used by people from the UK, but is run by a commercial organisation in the USA. In the overall scheme of their activities, this forum probably does not register. If you cut the readership, you'll kill the forum
Finally, something to stick in your pipe and mull over, just whose forum is it? I get the impression that certain posters here seem to think they have some kind of proprietorial right, like its a private members club just for them within which they can blackball newbies.
Sorry, rant over
Is it for serving aircrew to discuss current theory and practice? If so it won't get far as its an insecure forum and no current serving are going to risk it.
Is it a forum for old duffers to air old reminisces?
Is it a general discussion forum for all matters of military aviation. not just current?
Is it for educating people from outside the aviation fraternity?
I suggest that very few of the threads on this forum have any relevance to current actual flying. Most are historical reminisces / romances, with a fair proportion of current political events as related to the prevailing threat.
Further, if you banned those who are non-aviators, and even more so if you banned those who are ex-aviators you would lose the majority of ACTIVE members of this forum. That is a problem for you. The forum only exists because of its ability to draw advertising revenue. Cut the number viewing and the revenue goes down. Cut it a a low enough point and the forum becomes non-cost-effective and will be shut.. You can already see that the forum owners don't regard this part of the site as worthy of effective moderation - probably because its not cost effective to provide the service.
If you want this forum to thrive, the key is in effective, consistent and valid moderation. At present you have a situation where trolls are allowed to go unpunished with personal insults, while lesser issues result in arbitrary bans with no explanation. Partly that is due to certain individuals clearly complaining to the mods about anyone they consider as "interlopers", creating a knee-jerk reaction creating arbitrary bans and punishments.
Something else to remember is that this forum is predominantly used by people from the UK, but is run by a commercial organisation in the USA. In the overall scheme of their activities, this forum probably does not register. If you cut the readership, you'll kill the forum
Finally, something to stick in your pipe and mull over, just whose forum is it? I get the impression that certain posters here seem to think they have some kind of proprietorial right, like its a private members club just for them within which they can blackball newbies.
Sorry, rant over
Last edited by COCL2; 14th Jan 2012 at 21:35.
IMO anyone who worries about who posts on an open forum such as pprune has to get a life. Their motive surely can’t be just to keep it “current military” or have them as the majority of posters. It is unrealistic.
Reading pprune tells me people who make these pompous demands are reacting to an event, post or a thread which they have personal reasons for not wanting explored in depth. Think no further than Purdey on the Mull thread. So I ask myself what has been discussed recently that upsets our friend Tourist. The real purpose of the thread quickly became obvious. As Two’s In said,
Very true and I suspect some recent warts and all posts have got too close for comfort.
Reading pprune tells me people who make these pompous demands are reacting to an event, post or a thread which they have personal reasons for not wanting explored in depth. Think no further than Purdey on the Mull thread. So I ask myself what has been discussed recently that upsets our friend Tourist. The real purpose of the thread quickly became obvious. As Two’s In said,
Another factor to consider is that ex-military posters have far more licence in what they post than those still serving. Not always an issue, but you are probably more likely to elicit a "warts and all" response when the poster is not overly concerned about the Official Secrets Act cramping his or her career aspirations.
Previous 2 posts, concur.
OK, leave Tourist alone now. I think we should all be able to see what he means and few could disagree. Time to lighten up AND take to heart his real point - which we all missed to start with to varying degrees.
Excellent points made on every side of the argument, AND M2 agreed with me for the second time ever - although can't recall what the first time was.
Whatever anyone says, this is still a good place for some thoughts.
Just a couple of closing thoughts that may be closer to a lot of people’s hearts.
A fair few of the threads are not flying related at all, more current politics that might involve aircraft in the future. So still valid ideas that current aircrew and those that support them might like to discuss.
One or two individuals have stirred up a lot of trouble here, but pleased to see that the main problem has recently been removed. So the mod system is working. Once the offenders have been removed, all the problems seem to cease too - just look at this thread.
At the moment, I don’t think there are any players in this game that are causing offense or not contributing good ideas. Yes, I know there is a former missile guy that can a bit whacky, but we can control that ourselves.
That is all.
OK, leave Tourist alone now. I think we should all be able to see what he means and few could disagree. Time to lighten up AND take to heart his real point - which we all missed to start with to varying degrees.
Excellent points made on every side of the argument, AND M2 agreed with me for the second time ever - although can't recall what the first time was.
Whatever anyone says, this is still a good place for some thoughts.
Just a couple of closing thoughts that may be closer to a lot of people’s hearts.
A fair few of the threads are not flying related at all, more current politics that might involve aircraft in the future. So still valid ideas that current aircrew and those that support them might like to discuss.
One or two individuals have stirred up a lot of trouble here, but pleased to see that the main problem has recently been removed. So the mod system is working. Once the offenders have been removed, all the problems seem to cease too - just look at this thread.
At the moment, I don’t think there are any players in this game that are causing offense or not contributing good ideas. Yes, I know there is a former missile guy that can a bit whacky, but we can control that ourselves.
That is all.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My personal opinion is that all should be welcome (But we do need the small print changed to allow observers). We seem to be quite good at putting down insurgencies, informing the ill informed and spotting the odd walt purporting to be what he/she isn't. Similarly our posts and profile very quickly mark us out for what we are/ aren't.
If I could have three wishes they would have nothing to do with one's credentials. I would like to see the 'Beadwindow police' disappear when open source/ unclass is being discussed. I would like to see the 'errr - facts only please police' disappear when a rumour is discussed on a rumour forum. Lastly I would like anyone posting news of a fatality in any form prior to official release to be banned for life (And tracked down and shot - but that's a little fanciful).
Oh, and we need a thread about how the decision to get rid of Harrier was at best ill considered but I can't think of a catchy headline.
If I could have three wishes they would have nothing to do with one's credentials. I would like to see the 'Beadwindow police' disappear when open source/ unclass is being discussed. I would like to see the 'errr - facts only please police' disappear when a rumour is discussed on a rumour forum. Lastly I would like anyone posting news of a fatality in any form prior to official release to be banned for life (And tracked down and shot - but that's a little fanciful).
Oh, and we need a thread about how the decision to get rid of Harrier was at best ill considered but I can't think of a catchy headline.