Your Opinion: The T&Cs of AvCom

[Mike Wissing]

My opinion will get me banned!

Whirly.

Love you Whirly!!

[southside]

Gentlemen, without too much backlash towards me on this comment…

Are we not taking this a little too seriously?

It’s an online internet forum.

Yes one can learn from things said here ect, I get that. I have also learned from reading here.

Individuals make comments and we carry on.

If you are so worried about being moderated on an internet forum, perhaps one needs to re-evaluate one’s priorities?

Is there nothing better to do?

Just saying. Mountain out of a mole hill in my opinion.

I have been moderated and just think ok I was out of line and carry on.

I know that their are plenty of members here who do not comment ever, but just observe, that have many years of experience in all fields of aviation, often well above the experience of the common posters here, and think this discussion is just silly, while they watch the few here argue about comments being moderated and find it humorous to a degree.

I think that some perhaps just invest too much interest in their comments on an online forum.

Happy to take any criticism on the chin.

I find it ironic that this topic bought HJK back into the game. Now all we need is Cage to come back and throw some banter into the works.

[jimdavis]

So it seems that was all a waste of time. Nothing is going to change.

jim

[HJK 414]

Are we not taking this a little too seriously?

It’s an online internet forum.
I think that some perhaps just invest too much interest in their comments on an online forum.

Happy to take any criticism on the chin.

I find it ironic that this topic bought HJK back into the game. Now all we need is Cage to come back and throw some banter into the works.

Southside,

Have you ever considered that for some Avcom is not just a game ?

Have you ever considered that for some Avcom is a way to share experience and perhaps contribute to less accidents / fatalities in aviation ?

Perhaps taking that “seriously” / even though it is an internet forum - is not so bad after all ??
Perhaps people preventing an accident in someone's flying career is the consequence ??

If you look at the attendance of Jim Davis – he does that around one single purpose – and that is analysing aviation and preventing accidents / promoting safety.

If we look at the quality of flying instruction nowadays - we need 100 people like Jim Davis attending Avcom.....
Yet we see more and more "old hands" leaving and Avcom becoming just another internet blog / forum for some "loose" aviation comments .....

If you were to read up on the aviation experience and knowledge of people like Chalkie Stobbart in Aviation or Dave Mortimer in the Gliding arena !!
Perhaps people like that deserve a bit more respect than some humorous post explaining that they should take it on the chin as it is only a game ??

I offered to buy a part of Avcom quite some years ago, as I do not see it as a game either – yet being badgered by some members that see the forum as a past-time for their own ego made me quit.

Hence my plea (which I started few years ago) for a closed forum where I can discuss with peers and like minded souls …...without some attention seeking fool constantly diverting threads or making underhanded comments - which then leads to reciprical posts ..... etc etc ...

Why I reacted ??
Avcom decaying further and further simply does not sit right with me – yet it is Roger's business and he is free to do as he pleases.
I have been communicating with him outside Avcom about the same subject - as this is an old topic .....
I was just surprised that he is asking for opinions on the forum if he has no apparant intention of changing …. or am I missing the point ? ...

C'est la Vie ...

JK

[Roger]

Well then Jim, we are all rogue mods.

There are sometimes debate amongst the mods, that is true, but at the end of the day with a group of us, we will land on a balanced outcome that we all support. To act as individuals in our moderation with no oversight, or support, will result in as many differing standards of moderation or no moderation at all. That will not work.

The change is what this thread is about. We require specific changes to be proposed to the T&Cs. What changes are you proposing? Are you for instance in support of the T&Cs to allow the political, off topic, discussion on Safety topics?

Roger, I spend most of my time on Academy, and hope that my contributions have value as far as flight safety is concerned. If you are clamping down on the occasional joke and a bit of fun then so be it.

Your posts here indicate that the mods are not allowed to exercise a bit of discretion. I understand you must do this because how much is a "bit" of discretion?

You have now defended the way the mods are implementing the T&Cs and have told us there will be no change.

So Roger, it's your business to run the way you want. And I believe it is a business since it's crowded with ads. Perhaps that's a part of the problem - I don't remember this sort of fear amongst the members in the old days.

This thread seems to have caused the mods to close ranks rather than be open to solutions to what has become an extremely unpleasant mess.

You asked for our opinions and I have offered mine. There's nothing more I can do but watch the decay of a once happy pub.

jim

Whoa, nowhere have we stated there will be no change. The only thing we have said no to is that we will not disclose the steward that was involved in the moderation.

Yes, the mods have been enforcing the T&Cs as they currently stand and that is what this topic is about. This thread is what do you propose should be changed in the T&Cs.

For instance your stand in the Academy against us moderating, off topic, political posts, can we take that as you proposing we should allow Academy topics to run in those directions?

[Argonaught]

Very similar to humour debate, the mods took a lashing for moderating an Academy post today (Trumps Bump). The thread had drifted into a political discussion of which country's president was better than the other. In my mind, this has got no value in an aviation safety discussion.

This is the post that started it:

At least he can count and did a wonderful job being President….unlike some South African Presidents…..

The topic was 16 posts long and 8 of them were moderated or deleted as they were a follow on to the above statement debating presidents, or attacking/supporting the mods for removing that type of content.

Those that got upset with this moderation, are you proposing that we should allow that level of political discussion in the Academy topics?

We agree that in some circumstances that politics may make an appearance in a topic, such as the SAA thread, and we will apply ourselves accordingly, but what we saw in the Trumps Bump thread had no place under our current guidelines.

Worthwhile also mentioning that had the posters started topics with the the same content discussed in the last two posts, in 123.45, they would have been left alone.

I sense an ego trip here…..I hope I’m way off base as I’ve never got that from you before!
Roger, you are incorrect about that being the post that started it. That post quoted was mine, (did I lie in my post?) - I was responding to a previous post attacking Trump, which you had not removed at the time of my posting……If you can’t get your facts straight, take a look at why you’re a moderator! Your mind/opinion, as stated, has no relevance in being a moderator. Just because you get all bunched up about something should not play into your decision making as you admitted above.
I’m seriously considering leaving AVCOM. I’m a nobody, but what I do know is this is becoming ridiculous and heavy handed moderating has made a lot of good, experienced people leave this site.

“Mods took a lashing”…..really! Somebody mods the posts, put your name to it, simple.
A silly question…..why didn’t you just move the entire post to 123.45 when you became displeased with the direction it was taking? There was no value in the entire thread as a learning tool.

Ditto on the being way off base and associated ego trips. You have always struck us as being a level headed individual.

To put into context the modded response, will add the bit that you were replying to:

7675 wrote: ↑Wed May 15, 2024 6:29 pm
Only something associated with Trump could claim an old B757 is worth $100m

Mike Wissing wrote: ↑Sat May 18, 2024 7:49 am
At least he can count and did a wonderful job being President….unlike some South African Presidents…..

Our take is that 7675 was commenting on the accident news report and that the accident aircraft owner's value of such. This was deemed on topic. The response was not related to the accident and where things began to derail. To keep the topic on track, the content was removed. There were no warnings issued or any punitive measures taken. Similarly a number of subsequent, equally off topic, responses were also removed that had been made by a number of other posters.

As mentioned earlier, if there is enough support for Academy posts to run off topic, we will change the T&Cs.

[HJK 414]

So it seems that was all a waste of time. Nothing is going to change.

jim

Jim,

The question that no one seems to be asking is - WHY the moderation is deemed neccessary .... in the ever increasing manner it seems

Is it the difference in level of experience of the contributors (more and more "old hands" leaving ? - is there a generation conflict ?)

Is it the attitude of some of the new generation that seem to be Chuck Yeagers with 500 hrs and tolerate no criticism ?

Is is the ever decreasing tolerance in the world (Woke) and Political correctness ?

Is it incompatibility between generations ? (old style teaching - new style baby-sitting / as evident in flying training ?)

Is MORE Moderation yet with MORE tolerance required ?
Or
Is placing "compatible members" in forums the way to overcome the "differences" ?
Whereby the question becomes whether that would require LESS moderation ?
Or
Does Avcom adapt and accept that the old flying hands (which are the ones that seem to have a problem ) dissapear and a new generation take it from there ??


JK

[Barros]

Now wheres the salt for the popcorn

[southside]

Are we not taking this a little too seriously?

It’s an online internet forum.
I think that some perhaps just invest too much interest in their comments on an online forum.

Happy to take any criticism on the chin.

I find it ironic that this topic bought HJK back into the game. Now all we need is Cage to come back and throw some banter into the works.

Southside,

Have you ever considered that for some Avcom is not just a game ?

Have you ever considered that for some Avcom is a way to share experience and perhaps contribute to less accidents / fatalities in aviation ?

Perhaps taking that “seriously” / even though it is an internet forum - is not so bad after all ??
Perhaps people preventing an accident in someone's flying career is the consequence ??

If you look at the attendance of Jim Davis – he does that around one single purpose – and that is analysing aviation and preventing accidents / promoting safety.

If we look at the quality of flying instruction nowadays - we need 100 people like Jim Davis attending Avcom.....
Yet we see more and more "old hands" leaving and Avcom becoming just another internet blog / forum for some "loose" aviation comments .....

If you were to read up on the aviation experience and knowledge of people like Chalkie Stobbart in Aviation or Dave Mortimer in the Gliding arena !!
Perhaps people like that deserve a bit more respect than some humorous post explaining that they should take it on the chin as it is only a game ??

I offered to buy a part of Avcom quite some years ago, as I do not see it as a game either – yet being badgered by some members that see the forum as a past-time for their own ego made me quit.

Hence my plea (which I started few years ago) for a closed forum where I can discuss with peers and like minded souls …...without some attention seeking fool constantly diverting threads or making underhanded comments - which then leads to reciprical posts ..... etc etc ...

Why I reacted ??
Avcom decaying further and further simply does not sit right with me – yet it is Roger's business and he is free to do as he pleases.
I have been communicating with him outside Avcom about the same subject - as this is an old topic .....
I was just surprised that he is asking for opinions on the forum if he has no apparant intention of changing …. or am I missing the point ? ...

C'est la Vie ...

JK

Just to clarify, I said I will take any criticism on the chin for my post. How others take criticism is up to them.

Aside from that, you and I see this debate in a completely different light.

I see it as an online forum that I enjoy and maybe learn something from time to time. Certainly not something I am going to spend my time stressing over.

You take it very seriously and that is your prerogative.

So perhaps it is best to just respectfully agree to disagree.

Take care.

[HJK 414]

..........
Aside from that, you and I see this debate in a completely different light.

I see it as an online forum that I enjoy and maybe learn something from time to time. Certainly not something I am going to spend my time stressing over.

You take it very seriously and that is your prerogative.
............

Southside

Thank you for the reply.
Is that not the essence of this whole thread ?
What does Avcom want to be ....??

A "frivolous" forum - like many others with aviation enthusiasts that want to have a bit of fun - and talk about "aeries" etc ........

Or a more "serious" forum - with pilots of all levels and aviation enthusiasts that share knowledge - and maintain some form of a Hangar pub.

It used to be the latter .......

That choice is on the line in my view, and has been for some time
The 2 are not compatible on one forum as we have seen, it requires tons of moderation.
So - either split the forum / threads - or make a choice either way.....

For me - all said - I will wait and see
Hat - coat - door ....

Cheers
JK

[GeraldNagel]

One thing that seems to allude this noteworthy conversation is moderators unfair action removing posts when it comes to über avcommers and the reply to them.

Since using the blocking function, AVCOM is now a pleasure as those being blocked seems somewhat unimportant in my life.

[Fransw]

I still don't know what this is all about!? Can someone please tell me what triggered this debate?

[Roger]

I still don't know what this is all about!? Can someone please tell me what triggered this debate?

In a nutshell, it was triggered by us moderating a post with a humourous, AI generated picture, on an accident topic, along with us removing political, off topic discussion, on another accident thread.

Both types of posts are against the current set of T&Cs. This thread is to address whether the T&Cs should be changed to allow such posts.

[Burner]

As a moderator, for some time, I have witnessed the growth of Avcom membership over the years and it would be an impossible task to vet every new applicant’s background before allowing membership. This route would inevitably be seen as some form of discrimination and hence we have a wide spectrum of personalities, aviation experience etc. but the one common denominator is the passion for flight whether it be from an Airline pilot, Air force pilot, recreational pilots or a kid flying a kite. Now, I believe, that this wide spectrum of members views is what contributes to a lot of misunderstanding or interpretation of many of the posts, posted here on Avcom. It is impossible for every member to know the aviation experience of the member posting and sometimes such a post causes a knee jerk reaction creating an annoyance to other members. This is why the moderation on the Academy channel is more strictly moderated as we want it to be a place where serious, well-meaning contributions can be made to aid the process of learning.

As far as the statement that some mods are on an ego trip I can categorically state that this is not the case. Every moderator can be held personally liable for not removing or moderating posts that contravene the law and all of us do this, free of charge, out of the passion for aviation. If a moderator is uncertain about any aspect of moderating a certain post it will be brought to the moderator’s group for discussion and a collective decision will be taken on whether to moderate or not.

I have been using the handle of PJL since I joined, and that was even before I obtained my PPL, but for those who don’t know who I am my name is Peter John Lea (PJL).

PJL

[Patrick AL]

I still don't know what this is all about!? Can someone please tell me what triggered this debate?

In a nutshell, it was triggered by us moderating a post with a humourous, AI generated picture, on an accident topic, along with us removing political, off topic discussion, on another accident thread.

Both types of posts are against the current set of T&Cs. This thread is to address whether the T&Cs should be changed to allow such posts.

I think that the 'AI picture' was simply posted as a relevant graphic illustration-not to derail the thread or to seek comic greatness!
( in the incident thread where the pilot 'flew' and crashed with a strapped-open door )
- illustrating the concept of Extreme power : weight/drag
-essentially showing that one can 'fly a barn door with the right engine strapped to it' -despite its non-aerodynamic shape


Ironically -it was posted by an Old Analogue Dog! -in all good intent to illustrate a crucial safety-related concept -and, bizarrely, his censure and departure will ultimately lead to loss of very valuable and experienced input, and diminishing the available forum pool of good, sound, and practical aviation safety contributions.

Seems his using Modern Digital AI, saw him getting a good old Traditional Analogue AI!




The political aside reference on the other thread..... that thread did drift a bit .....but it was actually a political thread from the start! -disguised as a 'safety / incident /accident ' thread!

It was simply notice of a (too-close) pre-emptive 'High5' motion from Trump1 to the BizJet! -they know what's coming!
Probably just a MAGA BizJet!


As to the general topic re: Moderation

---I think that the process should be a little more consultative than authoritative, and be seen/experienced so by the 'offender'
( unless a gross and obvious violation in post which requires immediate deletion due to defamatory/illegal content )

-possibly Mods could engage the alleged offender before summary amputation of their contributions? -this would allow respective understandings of posts to be clarified, and hopefully 'censorship' can be settled by agreement between poster and mods?

That said -respect to all Mods in a difficult task!

This is a great forum, and it contributes a vast wealth of information on all things aviation -would be sad to see it whittled down by overly-cautious administration.

Hoping to see many returns of members who recently signed off.