Guest neo Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 You didn't use the word "troll", MCDU, nor did I say you did. Our colleague incorrectly applied the term. My comments were general, as you can see from reading them, and targeted directly at the widening tendency to cry "Mommy!". I didn't say that you "shrilly" cried for the administrator. Where did you get that 'quote' from? It's no where to be found in the posts above. What you did say was that the post was libelous. That statement is incorrect, and merely one example of the syndrome I pointed out: that, "This repetitive crying of "libel!" and "Administrator!" when a post strays "dangerously close" to the line does no one any credit." And I repeat, that suggestion is respectfully offered. If you recognize that your claim of libel is tenuous, then why make it? Why roll out an empty cannon when a few words will do the job? I repeat, it was not libel it was a cheap shot, and was removed by the person who made it. Did you stand up and say the post was reprehensible? Well, let's see. Your first post on the subject, made to me, was that the post was over the line. Your second post on the subject, made to me, was that the post was libelous. By your third post on the subject, again made to me, you were beginning to realize how tenuous your libel claim was so you stated the post was reprehensible. Not exactly a forthright stand, MCDU. What I had in mind was for you to tell the poster directly how you felt about his comments and ask for a retraction. Am I being "intolerant" because I criticize intolerance? You do love a circular argument, don't you? OK, if you wish, I'm intolerant of intolerance. Guilty as charged. Am I inconsistent? To be human is to be inconsistent at times. But on this subject I try to treat all posters equally. neo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 "To publicly label someone not convicted of any crime "pedophile" is reprehensible," Correct me if I'm wrong but, wasn't or isn't it the law that's accused this individual of being a "pedophile"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 Neo "You can't convert those who have made scope and lawsuits the foundation of their careers. But I tell you this, there isn't a corner of Labor Hell hot enough for those who continue to feed and nurture this monster." I think I may be one of those that you have referred to above? My future was destroyed as a result of actions taken by the AC pilot group. I see myself and others as those that will make every effort to hold those responsible accountable. It is nothing more than a David & Goliath scenario. Some will go willingly to their death while others are prepared to stand and fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skirt Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 Some of you guys should take up acting! Enough with the dramatics already! I'm curious DEFCON, though I know I will regret myself asking, but how did your career get DESTROYED by the AC pilots group? When you joined whatever regional airline at the time, what was your career expectations (now be realistic please...) and what do you fly now and from what seat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 "how did your career get DESTROYED by the AC pilots group?" The AC group wanted to merge with us (AO 1986) and then convinced the convention assembly of the need to put the declared merger in abeyance (1988). The AC group got scope in their CE (1989) only after convincing the CALPA Pres (an AC pilot) that they were committed to the merger with AO and that scope wouldn't be used against AO. The AC group pursued the merger again in 1991 and then walked away from Picher scope intact and formed ACPA. My company's growth, my future potential and my career were capped! "When you joined whatever regional airline at the time, what was your career expectations (now be realistic please...) and what do you fly now and from what seat?" The sky was the limit. Deregulation arrived and we started to grow. AC couldn't compete then as they can't now and so, bought us. It's been all down hill in every regard since! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted January 26, 2004 Author Share Posted January 26, 2004 Aye, there's a point. The "my future was destroyed" attitude probably comes from years of arguing that point, while the truth may lie somewhere closer to an analogy of a lottery winner who matched only 4 numbers, but the 5th and 6th were close. I understand the frustration... maybe even the attempts to argue that close should have won, and maybe it should have? ...but to hang on so dearly to the notion that "my future was destroyed" seems a shame... Without that almost win, life would have continued, much as it has, except without the feeling of loss... so if the feeling of loss is the cause of the misery.... adjust the mindset and move on. Sense makes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skirt Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 Let me get this strait. AC bought AO, not the AC pilots themselves, you are probably a Dash-8 or RJ Capt with Jazz (making decent money!), you guys had a chance to go to AC (at BOTL) and if you did you would most likely be a 320 Capt or 767 FO (more than I would expect if I joined a regional airline). But this isn't enough. Your career was DESTROYED because AO isn't where you thought it would be when you joined and it's the AC pilots fault for all of this?! Holy $hit, maybe I can sue the russians (old USSR) for ending the cold war and DESTROYING my Air Force career (or at least what AF career I was expecting when I joined!) Or maybe I can sue Bin Ladden for what his satanic worshiping martyrs did on 911, which DESTROYED my AC career so far... And this $300,000,000.00 lawsuit hasn't been thrown out yet? Sorry, but you get no sympathy from me (a son of hard working parents who will never have it as good as you do...). Stop, take a deep breath, look around, and try and realise what's really important in life... and to quote Wayne Campbell, please "Live in the NOW!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duckedy Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 what a great post skirt!!! they all think this is ACPAs fault, when they made the decisions they did. Aren't the Jazz pilots the highest paid Dash 8 pilots in the world? You sure don't make that kind of coin in the USA flying around Dash-8's. What a crock! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 You must have blinders on! You'd suggest that we just give up and give in to the almighty acpa? Never!!! If our country had been threatened would your squadron have capitulated to the enemy and advised the gov that it was necessary so that we might all get along? I sincerely hope not! Thanks for the legal advise but, we'll let the courts decide the 300M issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 "and to quote Wayne Campbell, please "Live in the NOW!" I believe I am and here's another quote: Those that don't learn from history are bound to repeat it! ...and another: You can't make a good deal with bad people! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 We'd have done and would do a whole lot better without the boat anchor known as AC wrapped around our neck! Perhaps we'll win this arb for the purpose of making us saleable? One can only hope! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted January 26, 2004 Author Share Posted January 26, 2004 You do seem to believe in burning bridges... "Bad people"? ...C'mon Defcon for every ounce of right you feel for your side of the issue, there's guys on the other bank that feel just as strongly for their side of it... Which one of you is "bad"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted January 26, 2004 Author Share Posted January 26, 2004 You do seem to believe in burning bridges... "Bad people"? ...C'mon Defcon for every ounce of right you feel for your side of the issue, there's guys on the other bank that feel just as strongly for their side of it... Which one of you is "bad"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted January 26, 2004 Share Posted January 26, 2004 We had a deal through "Final & Binding" arbitration. They walked. I guess you'll have to decide who the bad side is Mitch! PS: there aren't any bridges left to burn. ACPA burned them all as they retreated from CALPA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted January 26, 2004 Author Share Posted January 26, 2004 Without even dealing with whether that was right or wrong, can't you see how easily you yourself could have been there at the time, powerless to change anything, should you even have wanted to -- which is doubtful in any case --... And now, there'd be someone like you, on the other side, calling you "bad", and doing his level best to destroy you. How many there now deserve your venom? All? Or might there be a few among the bunch who were along for a ride, just like you? All I'm trying to say Defcon, is that your apparent fixation on setting things right, and your apparent hatred (if that's what it is?), isn't doing you any favours... Good grief man how many years can it continue to get you down?... Move on already! Deal with what's now in some kind of a positive way and maybe you can help to improve it.... (Kryst, I should write this stuff down for myself eh? ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duckedy Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 Yah, and next will be the Jazz collextive agreement! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCDU Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 You want to talk about forthright? You started by defending Jazzplayer. You then accused me of partisan politics for my original objection to his/her post. That didn't work, so then you accused me of "unreasonable tactics" and "attempting to discredit someone" to further my own views. That didn't stick, either. By this point, you were criticizing Jazz player. My first post "The personal attacks on people such as the RJ Captain were over the line " pretty much covers the "reprehensible" I used later. Amazingly, here I am in post #5 still saying the same thing. I also stated that calling someone a pedophile on a public forum was a libelous statement if that person had not been convicted of said crime. Okay, he didn't directly use the individual's name. However, because of previously posted information, several hundred of us immediately knew who he was talking about. If it isn't libel, it's awfully close. You allow yourself to speak "generally", shoot and miss three times, return with a shotgun in an attempt to hit something, miss again, and then you acuse me of not being forthright. Thanks for the chuckle. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 Glad I was able to brighten your day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 Definitely most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 I'll copy, paste and email it to ya, if you like. neo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 Mitch "Without even dealing with whether that was right or wrong, can't you see how easily you yourself could have been there at the time, powerless to change anything, should you even have wanted to -- which is doubtful in any case --... And now, there'd be someone like you, on the other side, calling you "bad", and doing his level best to destroy you." My union and the AC pilots said there was goig to be a merging of the groups. I chose not to go because of that fact. Others at the junior end decided it was worth the risk to jump the que (the 243). Later and after the breach hundreds of very very junior regional pilots continued to head that way as they had nothing to do with Picher in the first place. As an aside, I can't help but wonder how many zillions that group has cost AC? If I had been one of the jumpers etc I'd have to say I deserve whatever negative consequence arises as a result of my action. Believe me though when I say, watch the pony show over there should we prevail with the suit. The seniors will be left to pay for their sins and will have effectively sponsored the career aspirations of the que jumpers. The que jumpers will not, I repeat, will not pay any portion of the damage claim. They're the me generation and their position will simply be one of "you did the crime now you can pay the fine"! "How many there now deserve your venom? All? Or might there be a few among the bunch who were along for a ride, just like you?" On this forum I can say I have found people like Neo & Dragon to be very sensible and men of honor. Additionally, I'm aware that there are several AC pilots that have provided correspondance that will ensure that they don't end up on the sh!t end of the stick when the suit ends and I'm sure there are others as well that I'd like to know. "All I'm trying to say Defcon, is that your apparent fixation on setting things right, and your apparent hatred (if that's what it is?), isn't doing you any favours..." You're right, it doesn't however, what's the alternative? "Good grief man how many years can it continue to get you down?" As many as it takes! It's been what 17 yrs of this BS now? "Move on already!" Not until it's over! "Deal with what's now in some kind of a positive way and maybe you can help to improve it" I believe I am. A victory in the 300M suit may be awhile yet in coming but, it will be oh so sweet when it finally does come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 I don't know if you fall into the group I was refering to, DEFCON. Help me out: are scope or lawsuits the foundation of your career? Do you continue to feed and nurture the bitter division between mainline and regional pilots? Rather than point the finger at ANYONE, perhaps my comments will encourage people to look in their own hearts and do the right thing. Best wishes, neo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 NEO "Help me out: are scope or lawsuits the foundation of your career?" Unfortunately scope is and at the end of the day the lawsuit may be the only vehicle available to rectify the wrong. "Do you continue to feed and nurture the bitter division between mainline and regional pilots?" I guess I probably do but, it's quite impossible to sit back and listen while those who've done us wrong blow their ACPA trumpet. Believe me Neo, I wish this whole mess was resolved and we could collectively get on with our chosen occupations. "Rather than point the finger at ANYONE, perhaps my comments will encourage people to look in their own hearts and do the right thing." One can only hope! Cheers DEFCON Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GTFA Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 HI DEFCON, I don't think it was the 243 who were considered to be the que jumpers. The phrase came from the 243 calling all regionals who wished to have date of hire at AC, "que Jumpers". They used the term because it would mean that there were people getting ahead of them on the list and others who would not have to complete the same application process. After that, the pilots who left the regionals after the merger declaration to get an "early" spot at AC were called que jumpers by those still at the reg's. It has become another tired, worn out term that has lost it's meaning by having too many references. GTFA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted January 27, 2004 Share Posted January 27, 2004 Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.