Thread Tools
Dec 14, 2019, 09:15 AM
lurking in the HOLE :)
KCV6's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Cole
No such precedence has been made. There are plenty of discussions of AMA both good and bad on this site. Nothing wrong with that. That’s not why a moderator would issue a warning. They issue warnings for posts breaking the site rules. Please don’t make up false statements and spread them like that.
I think Lofo meant discussing the AMA in the advocacy area, not on the site. I get the opinion from what's being said that if you discuss "negative issues with the AMA" in Advocacy then it's off topic and trolling. In fact the belief seems to be that if you raise any negative that's happened in the Advocacy area it's off topic. Me personally, I think Advocacy involves discussing both the good and the bad.

For example. accident happens at field. CBO and elements of the hobby get together and implement changes to prevent it happening again. Lawmakers see that as self regulation and it is a good news story advocating for the hobby in general.
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Dec 14, 2019, 09:30 AM
Registered User
Lufo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Cole
No such precedence has been made. There are plenty of discussions of AMA both good and bad on this site. Nothing wrong with that. That’s not why a moderator would issue a warning. They issue warnings for posts breaking the site rules. Please don’t make up false statements and spread them like that.
Jason ... I don't view it as a false statement but as what I observed. Look at my past posts on the matter; obviously I feel that posts made about AMA in the Advocacy board run the potential to be deemed trolling, especially if it is the first post of the thread and, someone who opposes comments about AMA decides it is trolling. As we know, the mods determine what is trolling and mostly I agree with the mods, I have no shame in admitting that here. Then there are times like this were I simply feel the posts that were pointed were not trolling. Perhaps they were written with a "tabloid flair" but certainly not trolling.
Last edited by Lufo; Dec 14, 2019 at 09:31 AM. Reason: clarity .. thank you KCV6
Dec 14, 2019, 09:31 AM
Registered User
Lufo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by KCV6
I think Lofo meant discussing the AMA in the advocacy area, not on the site. I get the opinion from what's being said that if you discuss "negative issues with the AMA" in Advocacy then it's off topic and trolling. In fact the belief seems to be that if you raise any negative that's happened in the Advocacy area it's off topic. Me personally, I think Advocacy involves discussing both the good and the bad.

For example. accident happens at field. CBO and elements of the hobby get together and implement changes to prevent it happening again. Lawmakers see that as self regulation and it is a good news story advocating for the hobby in general.
Yes, that is correct and I should have included the Advocacy board as the common factor in this.

Thank you.
Last edited by Lufo; Dec 14, 2019 at 09:37 AM.
Dec 14, 2019, 09:36 AM
Registered User
Lufo's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike2663
Thanks. Your suggestion and reasons ( over on the site suggestions ) to shut that down really make a lot of sense. Your said it better than I ever could have.

Mike
Thank you, occasionally this old brain matter functions with some clarity. Now, if only my fingers and brain could sync up when I think and type I would not need to edit so many of my posts.
Dec 14, 2019, 10:23 AM
Hey Guys, Watch This.......
mike2663's Avatar
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Cole
Iíd have to go look, but I can almost never remember seeing the Over Reporting warning being issued. Please donít let that scare you from reporting posts you think break the rules.
"Keep reporting posts you think break the site rules. If no action is taken you can make an appeal in this section. "

Your post from the site suggestions on this topic. By suggesting this doesn't encourage "over reporting"? Seems to me like it does.


Mike
Dec 14, 2019, 10:32 AM
Registered User
aeronaut999's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike2663
"Keep reporting posts you think break the site rules. If no action is taken you can make an appeal in this section. "

Your post from the site suggestions on this topic. By suggesting this doesn't encourage "over reporting"? Seems to me like it does.


Mike
Right, because "Keep reporting" obviously means to push the "report" button again... and again... and again... and again... for any one post that you think is breaking the site rules...

( Kidding! )
Last edited by aeronaut999; Dec 14, 2019 at 04:40 PM.
Dec 14, 2019, 10:34 AM
RCG Admin
Jason Cole's Avatar
Certainly doesn't encourage over reporting. Just for clarification, here's the what rule states: "Trolling (Obnoxious Reporting) The user has abused the reporting system by repeatedly requesting moderator intervention when none is required."

That would only be used in the case of a user reporting many many posts at a time that don't break any rules. Like I've said, I can't even remember the last time I saw that warning pop up. There isn't a rule for "over reporting" and no one would ever have a problem with a user reporting many posts that break the site rules. That how this whole system is supposed to work in the first place.
Dec 14, 2019, 10:47 AM
pushing the envelope
rcgroupie's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Cole
Thought I just explained that....
Yes you did. I'll give you a perfect example as well:

I started a thread entitled
Tiered System for Testing Complexity and Airspace Rights
The very first line in bold read:
Notice: If you want to endlessly discuss the pros/cons of the AMA this is not the thread, start your own or get out.
Yet the VERY FIRST reply was from FM:
Quote:
I'm all for FAA administered* testing and licensing for tiered privileges in the airspace.
By "FAA administered" I mean something structured similar to how FCC amateur licenses are handled. Other agencies can give the test, for a fee even, but the questions are controlled by the FCC and the license comes from the FCC.
IMHO, that was implicitly 'don't let the AMA hog the testing'.
So there were a couple replies along that line with FM chiming in and it completely derailed the discussion on tiers. So I had to clarify:
Quote:
'To clarify, this thread is about tier and testing reg recommendations, not about what org. does the testing.
I'm thinking tier 0 would be no test, no license, no registration and 500g weight limit at some reasonable altitude.
Tier 1 might be 400' in class G with appropriate gear and knowledge.
etc.'
What a PITA having to continuously try to keep the thread on topic.
Last edited by rcgroupie; Dec 14, 2019 at 10:53 AM.
Dec 14, 2019, 10:51 AM
Hey Guys, Watch This.......
mike2663's Avatar
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcgroupie
Yes you did. I'll give you a perfect example as well:


I started a thread entitled
Tiered System for Testing Complexity and Airspace Rights
The very first line in bold read:
Notice: If you want to endlessly discuss the pros/cons of the AMA this is not the thread, start your own or get out.
Yet the VERY FIRST reply was from FM:
IMHO, that was implicitly 'don't let the AMA hog the testing'.
So there were a couple replies along that line with FM chiming in and it completely derailed the discussion on tiers. So I had to clarify:
'To clarify, this thread is about tier and testing reg recommendations, not about what org. does the testing.
I'm thinking tier 0 would be no test, no license, no registration and 500g weight limit at some reasonable altitude.
Tier 1 might be 400' in class G with appropriate gear and knowledge.
etc.'
What a PITA having to continuously try to keep the thread on topic.
LOL so what was wrong with that? He had a valid point. So much for a open dialog on the subject.

Mike
Dec 14, 2019, 12:38 PM
pushing the envelope
rcgroupie's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike2663
LOL so what was wrong with that? He had a valid point. So much for a open dialog on the subject.
Mike
First, what was wrong was EXACTLY why he was banned, he posted AMA spam in the wrong forum, whether or not it was a valid point.
Second, he derailed a meaningful thread attempting to do what the forum was set up to do, advocate model aircraft, apparenly for his own selfish reasons.

Here's the link:
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/show...irspace-Rights
Dec 14, 2019, 01:31 PM
Hey Guys, Watch This.......
mike2663's Avatar
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcgroupie
First, what was wrong was EXACTLY why he was banned, he posted AMA spam in the wrong forum, whether or not it was a valid point.
Second, he derailed a meaningful thread attempting to do what the forum was set up to do, advocate model aircraft, apparenly for his own selfish reasons.

Here's the link:
https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/show...irspace-Rights

Where did he post AMA "spam" in that post? Testing would be done by the FAA.

"I'm all for FAA administered* testing and licensing for tiered privileges in the airspace.

By "FAA administered" I mean something structured similar to how FCC amateur licenses are handled. Other agencies can give the test, for a fee even, but the questions are controlled by the FCC and the license comes from the FCC. "

Mike
Last edited by mike2663; Dec 14, 2019 at 01:43 PM.
Dec 14, 2019, 03:02 PM
pushing the envelope
rcgroupie's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike2663
Where did he post AMA "spam" in that post? Testing would be done by the FAA.
"I'm all for FAA administered* testing and licensing for tiered privileges in the airspace.
By "FAA administered" I mean something structured similar to how FCC amateur licenses are handled. Other agencies can give the test, for a fee even, but the questions are controlled by the FCC and the license comes from the FCC. "

Mike
Read, then post. Look at my post above that quotes EXACTLY what you just quoted and my opinion of why he posted it. Read, then post. If you don't agree with my interpretation, say so, but don't make me post it again and again and again and etc.
Dec 14, 2019, 03:58 PM
Registered User
The advocacy forum is where AMA discussion should be you cant really separate the two after all the AMA claims to be advocating for us. Just
because someone has a different opinion of the AMA than the next guy does not make them a troll in fact the AMA forum should have been
moved to the advocacy forum.
Dec 14, 2019, 04:40 PM
Hey Guys, Watch This.......
mike2663's Avatar
Thread OP
"Notice: If you want to endlessly discuss the pros/cons of the AMA this is not the thread, start your own or get out."

Again just where did he mention the AMA? He clearly mentioned the FAA not the AMA. " In my opinion" doesn't fly.
Now in my opinion he was following your "rule".

Mike
Dec 14, 2019, 04:41 PM
Hey Guys, Watch This.......
mike2663's Avatar
Thread OP
Quote:
Originally Posted by ira d
The advocacy forum is where AMA discussion should be you cant really separate the two after all the AMA claims to be advocating for us. Just
because someone has a different opinion of the AMA than the next guy does not make them a troll in fact the AMA forum should have been
moved to the advocacy forum.
Exactly. They are differently involved and should be included.


ike


Quick Reply
Message:

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion Not just "really bad"....but "really...really bad"....ok ..now they got my attention. rockyboy2 Life, The Universe, and Politics 61 Jan 03, 2019 09:25 AM
Discussion Trumps numbers ... they are really really bad ... Tim Green Life, The Universe, and Politics 78 Oct 19, 2017 04:42 PM
Discussion New Yorkers. Really, I mean,,,,REALLY? davecee Life, The Universe, and Politics 13 Dec 15, 2016 03:36 PM