Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
All Members Please Read This Very Important!  
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3112 times:

Thank you for taking the time out of your forum reading to read this post. It will be short and sweet. The amount of truthful and fact based posts in this forum has rapidly been decreasing. Certain forum members posts are never ON TOPIC and throw off the entire post as others now have to deal with the nonsense and garbage they have posted. WE ARE THE LAUGHING STOCK OF THE INTERNET AVIATION COMMUNITY. Other aviation related forums laugh about the nonsense and blatant mistatements of fact and fiction. I myself chuckle when I read the blurb about our forum which is "known for its high quality". Low quality is more like it. Fellow members lets turn this site around. Politics have got to be thrown out and no more ridiculous postings. Johan is it possible to weed out those that only cause trouble or post ridiculous readings?

Sincerely,
CX747


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBOS-CDG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2671 times:

I agree ! But...

The following is what you said in one other thread :

" Boeing has stated that it currently does not see the need for an ALL NEW
SUPERJUMBO. THE MARKET IS NOT BIG ENOUGH TO SUPPORT AN ALL NEW DESIGN."

So the first sentence is correct, the second is milseading because it is only Boeing's opinion (or yours and others) which eventually may be proven true...or not at all...

So you are in some sort misleading people or constructing vague or partial information by putting this statement together...

E.


User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2625 times:

No, my post was stating what Boeing's philosophy was on the Super Jumbo. They do not feel that the market warrants an entirely new Super Jumbo. The comments that are in caps lock are Boeing's views and have been stated time and time again in various news outlets.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineGaut From Belgium, joined Dec 2001, 344 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2601 times:

You are out of subject  


«Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae.»
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2582 times:

Thank you Gaut for proving my point. You summed up exactly why posts like the one you just posted on this subject are a waste of time to this forum and its members.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineLBSteve From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2569 times:

CX747, considering the consolidated ownership of major US news media outlets into the hands of six large corporations, how can you discern what they are feeding you to be as absolute truth?

User currently offlineGaut From Belgium, joined Dec 2001, 344 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2544 times:

It was ironic CX747. Have you ever change your mind about something you seems to have a closed mind and a lot of violence inside you.
Please let us in our discussions or leave the forum.
I can assure it's not what I want because I thing it's very interesting to share idea with other poeple even if they don't have the same as mine.

Regards

Gaut



«Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae.»
User currently offlineTexairport From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2547 times:

I disagree with you. The point of a discussion is to discuss, speculate, observe, comment, and learn. If speculation about a NW/AA merger discussed, how could it be fact based when none of us have inside information. We can only speculate and weigh the pros and cons of such an event. Does that mean it is garbage?

The longer threads do tend to get off topic, but with many points raised, it is understandable.

Also, when people disagree with other forum members, they can be rather harsh in their comments. I don't like that because everybody has a common interest and some will know more about things than others, so don't degrate them for their lack of knowledge.

The bottom line is the other aviation forums I have seen don't even compare to the scope and contrast of Airliners.net. There are different forums for your choosing. If you don't like our topics in the General Aviation, go to Tech/Ops. Johan and crew are to be commended for providing us this invaluable resource.


User currently offlineSndp From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 553 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2519 times:

CX747,
It totally agree with you that this forum should be of the highest possible quality. But as you seem to know more about how such a forum should be, and even more, how it shouldn't be, you can maybe give a few examples of topics you consider worth to be here and others who are not. Of course, you will have to take into account that not all of us will agree as you will give your personal opinion, but I want to hear it. Please, do not understand this as I'm laughing whit your first statement, not at all. I just want to know whether my posts are found stupid or not and what we should do to make this a better forum. But even if we know, of course, this forum is full of people who have the right to give their opinions in correspondance to the rules set out by the administrator. So, maybe these rules should be stricter or otherwise you will have to live with a site which is as good as its members want it.
But again, I want as well as you do a site of the highest possible quality and I am prepared to listen to your arguments to make it better but please give them.
kind regards
sndp


User currently offlineLBSteve From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2502 times:

I admit in exasperation I’ve snapped back a few, I do apologize for offending anyone.

User currently offlineIlyushin96M From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2609 posts, RR: 12
Reply 10, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2501 times:

I agree with CX747 wholeheartedly. I have unfortunately been finding more and more in the way of childish posts on this Forum, to the extent that I have considered giving it up. Quality posts which are well-written and get thoughtful responses are becoming more and more sporadic.

Unfortunately, it is probably more due to human nature than anything else that members take sides, make each other wrong and get into heated and inappropriate arguments.

It is a shame postings like this one have to be made, but unfortunately it is necessary to bring attention to areas where it is needed. Thanks, CX747!

IL96M


User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3125 posts, RR: 14
Reply 11, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2501 times:

I think you're just angry because some members doesn't agree with you on the A3XX discussion. Sorry the world is made of different opinions.


User currently offlineSea_Tac2000 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2514 times:

"ridiculous postings" SUCH AS THIS, though you do have right to your opinion.

"WE ARE THE LAUGHING STOCK OF THE INTERNET AVIATION COMMUNITY." WHAT ????? DO WE CARE? I don't.

plus this is not aviation related and I agree with Texairport other aviation forums do not compare to Airliners.net.

I disagree with you CX747 totally.

Texairport...you are right and I must agree with you.





User currently offlineBOS-CDG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2490 times:

>I disagree with you. The point of a discussion is to discuss, speculate,observe, > comment, and learn.

I agree with you, but in the same time I agree with CXA3XX.. no...CX747...

If you have a background strong enough to elaborate on subject for which we don't know all about yet, then perfect it can lead to fructuous discussions, but sometimes people assume stories/facts for granted while they are not, or sometimes people just jump on their email just to throw a quick and easy mail with no real substance in it..or unverified information that eventually may be preceived as being the truth....

So facts, only the facts (or at least indicating sources of information)...Sometimes, it does not hurt...

E.


User currently offlineAb.400 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2494 times:

As stated before, there are plenty of topics for anybody free to give his/her comment if wanted. And obviously stupid posts usually turn into ignorrance by the members.

User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4454 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2430 times:

I thank you all for taking time to respond to my original post. All I would like to see is a return of the facts. Debating an issue or talking about a rumor are fine, I love it!! But when the real issues are muddied by irrelevant posts or posts that are truly unintelligable. As to the statement that there are plenty of topics to choose from and if you don't like it find another. That is ridiculous. Not being interested is one thing. Thats fine. But having to read posts that are ridiculous are just that, ridiculous. Hopefully other forum members will respond with their ideas or questions.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineAb.400 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2412 times:

CX747. Honey, you try to make this world , including that forum , a better world ? So just calm down a little and don´t be such a Schleimer.

User currently offlineSebastian From Argentina, joined Oct 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2397 times:

RE:CX747
"WE ARE THE LAUGHING STOCK OF THE INTERNET AVIATION COMMUNITY. Other aviation related forums laugh about the nonsense and blatant mistatements of fact and fiction."

I've yet to come across another internet aviation community that has forums......what are they and are they even at the same caliber as airliner.net?


User currently offlineWISHIHADALIFE From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2408 times:

The only reason why I read and post here is so I can laugh at all of the idiotic youth and the nonsense that they post everyday. This place is hilarious.

User currently offlineDelta772 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2391 times:

I totally agree with CX747. Yes, there are other aviation related discussion forums out there. And for the the most part they're not riddled with the jingoistic proclamations that are fast becoming the norm in here. It seems that many European members here have a chip on their shoulders when it comes to Americans. AND it seems that the American members respond in kind with arguments regarding WWII. Nationalistic fervor is natural I suppose. My Canadian friends often point out to me when my "America Rules!" mentality gets out of check. But I can honestly say that I haven't let that enter into any of my posts on here. We are, for the most part, discussing two large manufacturers, as well as many large corporate airlines. I don't think that hostility and animosity towards other members should enter into any post. And a little bit of introspection on the part of some of the members who have disparaged CX747 might help things along.

User currently offlineCstarU From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2378 times:

...let's not take each other too seriously.

"...can't we all get along" Rodney King (L.A. 1993)...then again maybe not, makes it even more interesting!


User currently offlineAA-SAN From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 139 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 2331 times:

Yes... it would be great if we could throw out all those totally bogus statements that are made in the heat of argument or just to start an argument... but where do we stop? A lot of the time the line between BS and truth is very hard to see (especially when we are speculating). I think a better approach would be to stop getting all worked up at the people making these comments and to just prove them wrong in a civil way and move on. People keep posting untrue facts because they enjoy the disruption they make, and so if we just quickly slap them on the wrist and move on to the discussions that we all seek, it will eventually start to show. It was like that weird guy a few weeks ago that started posting all that garbage. A lot of the members here went crazy... doing exactly what that person wanted us to do. Yet if we had just ignored what he was doing, he would have been gone a lot quicker than he was. Sorry I blabbed on for so long, but just another prospective on making this into a better forum.

User currently offlineTAA_Airbus From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 726 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2329 times:

Is it 5 or 6 ? duh!

Geez, speek of hypcrits. Dont talk off the subject he says, but forgive me If Im wrong, but doesnt the subject have to be aviation related in the first place.

And If your blushing because a few aviation people are laughing at you................well, you are a soft c##k.
Who cares, if you dont like it here, go somewhere else, I dont see anyone else complaining, except for the people who witnessed SouthWestJG737s posting yesterday, but that has been delt with and is now history. So if you dont like it, you dont have to stay.

Cheers All
TAA_Airbus


User currently offlineTrvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 21
Reply 23, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2327 times:

I agree that this forum has degenerated somewhat since I have joined, but not so I would not want to come here. It is still the best one on the net and most of the 'lower quality' stuff is what makes it a little bit more interesting.

Aaron G.


User currently offlineVelocityair From United States of America, joined May 2000, 134 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (14 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2313 times:

relevant to aviation or not ... i believe most things said in this forum are relevant to the topic at hand and other issues brought forth by the discussion. if at anytime you find that politics and nationalism and other "so-called non-aviation" factors are brought in... then please forget about a Flag Carrier for a certain nation ... or why AF can't buy 777s without first investing in the A3XX ... it is all political and nationalistic. Europes pet is Airbus ... they will always support it as a collective and as an aspiring region. they want to see their industry prosper as do Americans. so please ... when things get "too political" for you ... you are not really into the industry itself. you like to watch the pretty planes ... get into the industry into the business ... as it is ruled by people, their views and the governments ruling those people. go to "Captain Kangaroos Bi-Plane Fest" if you want to talk about pretty airplanes.
This forum is for the people who love airlines (ie the business and anything related to the decisions that a carrier may make.) and the pretty pictures   ... but it is both.

Johan ... this is all relevant to establishing this forum!! don't delete this as it is not crap.  


25 Samurai 777 : I'd agree more with Texairport's posting than CX747 in most respects, especially where the politics and quality is concerned. Politics can't be separa
26 Post contains images Administrator : Guys, This has been going on from the very beginning. Everyone has always claimed that things were better when they first came here. That is not true,
27 CstarU : I agree...Although I'm one of the guilty party tonight, I've apologized and called a truce, unfornately my post was taken down. Samurai777 Did you fin
28 Samurai 777 : Johan - thanks for taking the time to come in here. I totally agree with you! CStarU - I did find the proper site about computer-related incidents in
29 CstarU : samurai777...roger, good day.
30 Dnalor : CX747 said "The amount of truthful and fact based......." Care to name the "other sites laughing at us"??? Rememver as Johan said, it is a PUBLIC form
31 FrontierMan : It's very simple. I have responded to numerous posts, and I used to just state opinions, but now I just state facts and opinions. I've noticed what a
32 Balloonatic : Cx747, you reckon this forum is a laughing stock? Try Airdisater.com! Cheers, Ex(real) CX747.
33 Udo : Great idea from CX747!!! So, CX747, when will you stop posting on that forum? That would help. I couldn't say it better than Ab.400!!! Regards Udo
34 DeltAirlines : Thank you Johan. I agree with you totally on this issue. I do think this is the best aviation website on the internet, and this forum is one of the gr
35 Coz1100 : While this is only my second post, I have long been a reader of the posts here... I for one think this forum is a great resource!! The discussions are
36 Tom in NO : OK, I'll bite.....if there are other airliner forums that are supposedly more mature than airliners.net....someone tell me where they are. Until then,
37 Trintocan : Yes, after reading the comments in this thread I feel compelled to respond. I discovered airliners.net from a link from aviation-safety.net which I fi
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
All ATPs Please Read This! posted Mon Jan 10 2000 23:37:35 by Shawn Patrick
All Pilots Please Read posted Thu Feb 15 2001 22:25:17 by Deltadude8
please read this fly777ual! posted Mon Mar 8 1999 02:35:26 by Capt777IGW
All Forum Members: Read This posted Tue Nov 28 2000 19:08:56 by Brissie_lions
Please Sign This Petition To Save A Concorde posted Wed Nov 15 2006 23:01:59 by Gh123
Someone Please Explain This Yellowstone Thing 2 Me posted Fri Jun 9 2006 03:15:57 by UAL747
Someone Please Explain This. posted Sun May 7 2006 09:57:51 by BlazingCessna
Somebody, Please Post This Pic! posted Fri Dec 16 2005 18:29:22 by Boeing Nut
Can Someone Please Explain This Pic To Me? posted Tue Sep 20 2005 20:49:53 by Pilotaydin
Boyd: Airline Ch. 11's Myth Vs. Fact -Please Read! posted Mon Sep 19 2005 23:03:39 by PSU.DTW.SCE