Captaingomes From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 6413 posts, RR: 55
Reply 2, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3302 times:
Where's the vote taking place? What are the reasons for voting no? I think it's nice to have the choice of posting here or elsewhere. Anybody who votes no has the choice of not posting here. Sounds reasonable to me.
"it's kind of like an Airbus, it's an engineering marvel, but there's no sense of passion" -- J. Clarkson re: Coxster
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 30101 posts, RR: 58
Reply 7, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3170 times:
The other thing about this poll is that I don't recall Johan making an anouncement he was taking a poll. Therefore a lot of people, including myself where not aware that it was going on until you you brought it up, Alessandro.
I think that may have skewed the results somewhat and is an indication that this is not a drop the hammer on the forum if it loses survey.
Silverfox From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1058 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3142 times:
If it does go, there is nothing to stop one of you starting up a newsgroup on Yahoo or wherever. Just ask Johan for enough time to direct everyone (who only use the non av ) to go there.
Myself.... where will i put all my jokes...
And if that isnt enough reason to close it i dont know what is!!
AA61hvy From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 13977 posts, RR: 56
Reply 18, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3089 times:
It will be amazing to see the number of posts that drop by people if this forum goes. And we will see who actually posts in the Civil Aviaton Forum etc.. But I would rather keep this forum. Some of us actually have worth while things to say. But if it got shut down, I would not be very upset at all. Life goes on.
AWspicious From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 3076 times:
uh... Was it something I said???
Seriously, though - I'm curious to know the reason behind the poll in the first place. If I were to guess, I might think there's a concern about overwhelming the server(s). Perhaps, the feeling is that many topics (...and some of the resulting responses) are probably somewhat meaningless and it's becoming difficult to justify allotting so much resources to maintain this forum at the expense of other more relevant aviation related areas of this website... Contrary to the initial idea.
Personally, I'd like to see it stay. However, I suspect this poll may give some of us something to think about before we start a topic or post a response.
As a member who sometimes post silly, light-hearted responses, I know I've opted to refrain from posting to a thread because I felt doing so may offend some, or, be viewed as inappropriate. Although, there have been times when I digressed. For that, I offer my apologies :-]
MxCtrlr From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 2485 posts, RR: 33
Reply 22, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3052 times:
I voted for it to stay. I wonder how many people clicking on that poll have never even been to the non-av forum (or any of the forums for that matter). For a long time, when I first started surfing a.net, I never even read the forums. It was about a year after I started surfing here that I started reading the forums. It wasn't until about 4 months ago, when I had a post moved from Civil Av to non-av, that I started reading this forum and found it entertaining (to use Heavymetal's phrase, "Sport-bitching" can be fun sometimes, while still getting your point of view across).
Not to sound elitist or anything like that but, since the First Class memberships help Johan pay for this site, then maybe he should poll us separately to make his decision. There are many paying First Class members who post in this forum and would not be happy if it were to disappear (I know I got my First Class membership because of this forum)!
Freight Dogs Anonymous - O.O.T.S.K.
DAMN! This SUCKS! I just had to go to the next higher age bracket in my profile! :-(
B757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 21
Reply 23, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3042 times:
I say get rid of it. All the trouble on this website is here and most of the trolls and flamers reside in this forum and no where else. There are plenty of other websites dedicated to politics, religion, and the other topics that some here must flame as soon as they see.
Mika From Sweden, joined Jul 2000, 2914 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3018 times:
Whats even more worrying is the number of people that voted "no to non-av" and commented on saying how retarded the forum is...
4 out of 5 I have never seen posting in this forum...
My thought exactly. There is an old saying that makes as much sense now is it always have: If you don't like it don't use it. It really really is that simple. I cannot see how this forum can harm anyone who never visits it in the first place. Asking for something's removal that in no way affects you is just plain stupid and very egoistic.
: Removing this forum will probably remove the sh!t stirrers from this website, that's why I voted yes.
: Removing this forum will probably remove the sh!t stirrers from this website, that's why I voted yes. ...along with a good number of fun topics, inter
: Right clovis, but this website was designed as an aviation website. If people wants to discuss politics there are hundreds of other forums specificall
: Agreed we all love aviation But isn't this forum also unique in its diversity and level of education? In all seriousness, 90% of the people on this si
: There will still be interesting debates on here if the non-av forum goes, but they will be aviation related, we all love aviation right? Personally, a
: I need somewhere to rant about my girl problems I vote STAY
: I vote get rid of it. This forum is just turning everyone against each other. In the General Av forum, everyone is cool-headed and has a good opinion.
: Stay. The people that get into the bashing may as well take it, but it doesn't really bother those who stay away from it. And sometimes, especially wh
: Here's a thought..... Let's keep it......... and actually try to get along...sharing and discussing similar and opposing views without actually going
: This forum, in it's present form must go. I started posting to this forum fairly recently. I used to exclusively post on the Tech/Op forum as aviation
: That was when I started seeing extremely idiotic posts (in my opinion) attempting to raise the Bush administration to God like stature while attacking
: In my opinon a non aviation forum is a place to discuss non aviation questions. What I see here is just childish attempts to catch attention. I think
: OK, Here is the entire argument in a single paragraphs: People come to Airlines.net forums to mainly post threads concerning aviation. However, those
: This is an aviation website, fine. There are seven out of nine forums on this site that mainly deal with aviation. One site related forum so you won't
: Airplay, While I rarely agree with your politics, I do agree with your assessment that the pro-Bush vs. anti-Bush crap needs to stop. The same goes fo
: Generally, I try not to be opinionated in the member forums. However, I have to question the members who voted for non-av's removal. If the non-aviati
: Well Airplay, leave it to a.net to make a liar out of me. There is a glitch that is preventing me from adding you to my Respected Users List. I have e
: If non_aviation goes, this board will lose a lot of older users who've been around since the beginning. I've been around for a long time, long enough
43 We're Nuts
: Let's put it this way, Johan. If you get rid of this forum, you'll lose many valuable, long-time members. It's a perfect example of cutting off your h
: I'll second We're Nuts: If this forum goes, I'm reseting my homepage to http://www.vhforums.com ! [Edited 2003-05-12 07:07:35]