turboplanner Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Possibly. Maybe people, especially those who are on the RAA board, should check to see that the interconnect 'tween brain and mouth is intact, lest they continue to sprout nonsense both here and in the boardroom. The people on the board are from the peer group of members, so they may or may not fire a blank now and again. They should not be expected to suddenly have a level of posting expertise that is perfect. A forum particularly is a place which breeds quick responses, which sometimes my be more measured if the person was spending 300 hours writing a submission. Better to get their thoughts in rough form rather than not get them at all. Oddly enough, for about five or six relatively recent fatalities it was their failure to fly a perfectly good glider that killed them rather than the engine stopping, and without those statistics RA woulod be looking a lot more reasonable in terms of risk factor, so he may well be on the money. 1 3
Kyle Communications Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Possibly. Maybe people, especially those who are on the RAA board, should check to see that the interconnect 'tween brain and mouth is intact, lest they continue to sprout nonsense both here and in the boardroom. And before you fire up Kyle, that isn't directed at you but at all the others who seem to have a barrow to push in these fora, but not the brains to foresee the consequences of their slander. Hey who said anything about firing up....I actually agree with you....and I am usually calm and thoughtful before I ever open my mouth. Some on here may not think so
gandalph Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Better to get their thoughts in rough form rather than not get them at all. Sorry TP but I can't agree with you there. I can accept that we mere mortals may fire off a quick and perhaps not well though out retort, but that behaviour is not acceptable from a member of the Board. It would sometimes be better for Ross to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak (or post) and be proved one. His post #32 was certainly on of those times. The problem I have with some of Ross' blanks ( and for that matter with Fly Tornado and Dr Zoo's blanks ) are that they are less than harmless and, I suspect, not innocently aimed or fired.
Oscar Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Possibly. Maybe people, especially those who are on the RAA board, should check to see that the interconnect 'tween brain and mouth is intact, Being a wee bit presumptive there, aren't you - or is it ironical? Your use of an obvious oxymoron is noted, but the wish is rather negated by the lack of essential equipment. 1
DrZoos Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 I really dont think anyone could be accusing Maj of all people of being biased or shooting his mouth off. Just because he has an opinion different to yours does not mean its wrong or ill thought out . Personally i find it fantastic that we have a board member willing to chat and not be silenced by political correctness gone mad. The board needs to be representative of the community. Not just all a bunch of over analytical thinkers who are silenced by supposed codes of behaviour . Big pat on the back for Maj. Are you really proposing that Maj needs to cross check everything he says against the board before he speaks. Surely not. Thats a sad society that one. It might be different if he was being paid $500K a year to attend 6 board meetings and paid to tow a company line. But in a board that represents a user group we need real users not afraid to speak about any issue that is not confidential for a serious reason. Similar boards like NRMA etc all have board members that are free to speak opinion on all non confidential issues. I believe its equally important that board members can speak openly about what goes on in board meetings, who votes which way and for what reasons. As well as raising imminent issues with the membership. If the board really represents its members then they have nothing to fear about anything. 1 4 1
Oscar Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 I really dont think anyone could be accusing Maj of all people of being biased or shooting his mouth off. More comedy gold! Just because he has an opinion different to yours does not mean its wrong or ill thought out . When someone denies a basic law of physics, then it's plain wrong. 2
gandalph Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Hey who said anything about firing up....I actually agree with you....and I am usually calm and thoughtful before I ever open my mouth. Some on here may not think so Yep, agreed. Just making sure you understood you weren't my target.
gandalph Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 I really dont think anyone could be accusing Maj of all people of being biased or shooting his mouth off. Well Doc, Sorry But I do. Just because he has an opinion different to yours does not mean its wrong or ill thought out . Again we differ. Ross is no longer "just a guy from Nth QLD." He speaks as a member of the RAA Board and as such I, as a member of that Association expect him to behave responsibly and that his posts here and his comments elsewhere should be considered and not off the cuff. He does a dis-service to those he represents in Qld, the membership in general, the Association and the sport when he gives an opinion on serious matters that are not supported by empirical evidence but heresay and superficial reporting. Personally i find it fantastic that we have a board member willing to chat and not be silenced by political correctness gone mad. The board needs to be representative of the community. Not just all a bunch of over analytical thinkers who are silenced by supposed codes of behaviour . I have no problem with him voicing his opinion and I agree that's its great that some members of the Board choose to comment in these fora. He, and they, just need to be certain he's got FACTS not rumour. He is clearly passionate about our sport/hobby/pastime and that's great. I just wish he would be disinterested i.e. unbiased and balanced when he speaks on our behalf. And don't come back at me and say that his posts here are not made as a board member. He is, and they are. And because of that he needs to temper his remarks and accept that he is not a free agent. Big pat on the back for Maj. Well maybe more of a slap up the back of the head..... ;-) just joking Are you really proposing that Maj needs to cross check everything he says against the board before he speaks. Surely not. Thats a sad society that one. No, not with the Board, just with facts supported by evidence. It might be different if he was being paid $500K a year to attend 6 board meetings and paid to tow a company line. But in a board that represents a user group we need real users not afraid to speak about any issue that is not confidential for a serious reason. Similar boards like NRMA etc all have board members that are free to speak opinion on all non confidential issues. Here we can agree. But when he , or any other representative of the Association speaks, they need to do it responsibly, carefully and disinterestedly i.e. with out an interest or bias one way or another. I believe he let's us all down by not doing that. I believe its equally important that board members can speak openly about what goes on in board meetings, who votes which way and for what reasons. As well as raising imminent issues with the membership. If the board really represents its members then they have nothing to fear about anything. 3 1
DrZoos Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Well we will have to agree to disagree. I hear what you say, but in my opinion its not right. Hes not trying to speak as a board member and he is completely entitled to his opinion on any aircraft or engine based on his beliefs and experiences. Its important that we have a board that is diverse in its opinions. Discussion at a forum level or board level is pointless shallow and generally ineffective if people feel pressure to conform , be inhibited or follow to many protocols. Maj stand up and be counted. Youve been voted in because people see admirable qualities in you. Dont let the thought police silence or inhibit you. It takes people with courage to stand up and challenge the status quo. Without freethinkers we would be missing a lot. Steve jobs, mark zucherburg and many other great minds suceeded and changed the world because they had opinions and they took risks. They did things others though was crazy, and they proved them wrong. We need to stop encouraging the squashing of free discussion and free thought. In terms of a ceo or staffer , they need to tow the line. But with board members of organisations like ours we need to promote the hell out of free speech .there are literally hundreds of posts on here accusing our board of keeping secrets. We have a great member communicating with us "as himself"and the thought police want to silence him??? Why because they disagree ?..? 1 3 1
gandalph Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Well we will have to agree to disagree. I hear what you say, but in my opinion its not right. Hes not trying to speak as a board member and he is completely entitled to his opinion on any aircraft or engine based on his beliefs and experiences. Its important that we have a board that is diverse in its opinions. Discussion at a forum level or board level is pointless shallow and generally ineffective if people feel pressure to conform , be inhibited or follow to many protocols.Maj stand up and be counted. Youve been voted in because people see admirable qualities in you. Dont let the thought police silence or inhibit you. It takes people with courage to stand up and challenge the status quo. Without freethinkers we would be missing a lot. Steve jobs, mark zucherburg and many other great minds suceeded and changed the world because they had opinions and they took risks. We need to stop encouraging the squashing of free discussion and free thought. In terms of a ceo or staffer , they need to tow the line. But with board members of organisations like ours we need to promote the hell out of free speech .there are literally hundreds of posts on here accusing our board of keeping secrets. We have a great member communicating with us and the thought police want to silence him??? Sorry Doc, it is right. It may not be fair, but when he or any other Board member speaks in public on aviation related matters, he speaks as a representative of the Board, and he needs to temper his opinions appropriately. My gripe is that he either hasn't seemed to grasp that important fact or he chooses to ignore it. If it's the first, then that's unfortunate. If it's the second then it's reprehensible and I will do what I can to have him and any other loose cannons on the Board gagged until they learn to behave responsibly. 1 1
Oscar Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 . Hes not trying to speak as a board member When a member of the Board of the RAA says: 'The RAA is aware of the need to do something in the interest of safety and the goodwill of their members.', that is a statement of an official position of the Board. 5 1
DrZoos Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 When a member of the Board of the RAA says: 'The RAA is aware of the need to do something in the interest of safety and the goodwill of their members.', that is a statement of an official position of the Board. Its also the opinion of a man with an opinion. That sentence can be interpreted in many ways and your playing a game of semantics. 2
gandalph Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 And so they bloody well should. And yes, sorry fellas, But the RAA is aware of the problem. And yes, the RAA is taking action behind the scenes. Or so i was told by senior level RAA persons, and asked for relevant documents to aid their cause. Watch this space lads.. Merv, Was that "senior RAA Person" an employee or a board member?
DrZoos Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 but when he or any other Board member speaks in public on aviation related matters, he speaks as a representative of the Board, and he needs to temper his opinions appropriately. Well thats about the craziest thing i have read on this forum. So you take a position on the board and you lose your right to talk about aviation in public, you cant be real. You want him to temper his opinion and be gagged..... we live in a democracy and our board is democratically elected...... We have a democratic right to free thinking, expression of opinion and a right of peaceful protest in public or private (as long as you pay the permit fee) And that includes board members of RRA. Everybody makes a poor choice of words sometimes, including you above but that doesn't mean they need to be gagged and censored. And i for one hope like hell that our board all have differing opinions on many issues and that they express them whenever and where ever they want. Thats how you get good decisions and thoughtful discussion. If you want a great example of stiffled debate and opinion, look no further then our own parliaments where members can rarely express an opinion or vote based on conscious. Thats why we have many decisions that do t reflect what society wants on issues like gay marriage etc. If you want a board that serves its reps rather then its members , that fosters secrecy and censorship. Then go ahead. But be careful what you wish for because the secrets of the unions and political parties , the backhand deals, the faceless men , have proven for many years to make poor decisions and not represent their constituents very well at all. If you want a board that represents its members then promote freedom of speech and opinion whether you like what they say or not. At least that way you know what your dealing with and you can vote appropriately. Oakshott wasnt popular with his decision, but at least he was always open and honest. And we knew whether to vote for him again or turf him on his ear. Other politicians towing the party lines, contribute little to debate and we have no idea what they stand for. I know what i prefer.
gandalph Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Its also the opinion of a man with an opinion. That sentence can be interpreted in many ways and your playing a game of semantics. Sorry to keep re-stating the bleeding obvious. It's not just "the opinion of a man with an opinion" it's the opinion of a representative of the Board of the RAA. Maybe the Maj is not accurately reporting the actions of the Board. If that's the case he should keep quiet but that leads us back to my contention that he and all board members should make sure their "opinions" are backed by facts not fantasy or wishful thinking. As for Oscar's comment. I don't think he's playing a game of semantics I think he, like me, thinks the issue of Board responsibility is a lot more important than that. It's not semantics it's fact The point I'm trying to make Doc, is that you and I can voice our opinions , whether they be informed or otherwise, in this forum and they are just that: opinions. But when a Board member posts here they speak as a Board member. What part of that remains unclear to you? 1 3
gandalph Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Well thats about the craziest thing i have read on this forum. So you take a position on the board and you lose your right to talk about aviation in public, you cant be real. Hey Doc, Maybe you should re-read what I actually said. (see below) I'm not asking Board members to be silent, I'm asking them to be fair and unbiased, and have their opinions backed by FACTS when they speak in public. "It may not be fair, but when he or any other Board member speaks in public on aviation related matters, he speaks as a representative of the Board, and he needs to temper his opinions appropriately. My gripe is that he either hasn't seemed to grasp that important fact or he chooses to ignore it. If it's the first, then that's unfortunate. If it's the second then it's reprehensible and I will do what I can to have him and any other loose cannons on the Board gagged until they learn to behave responsibly." You want him to temper his opinion Yes and be gagged.....Only if he continues to talk unsubstantianted nonsense in public forums as a Rep of the Board. If he wants to push a barrow, fair enough, that's his right as an individual but he should either resign from the Board and express his opinion as you or I can and do, or he should confine his barrow pushing/lobbying to the boardroom. we live in a democracy and our board is democratically elected...... We have a democratic right to free thinking, expression of opinion and a right of peaceful protest in public or private (as long as you pay the permit fee) And that includes board members of RRA. Everybody makes a poor choice of words sometimes, including you above but that doesn't mean they need to be gagged and censored. And i for one hope like hell that our board all have differing opinions on many issues and that they express them whenever and where ever they want. Thats how you get good decisions and thoughtful discussion. Gee! Thoughtful discussion would be nice..... If you want a great example of stiffled debate and opinion, look no further then our own parliaments where members can rarely express an opinion or vote based on conscious. Thats why we have many decisions that do t reflect what society wants on issues like gay marriage etc. If you want a board that serves its reps rather then its members , that fosters secrecy and censorship. Then go ahead. But be careful what you wish for because the secrets of the unions and political parties , the backhand deals, the faceless men , have proven for many years to make poor decisions and not represent their constituents very well at all. If you want a board that represents its members then promote freedom of speech and opinion whether you like what they say or not. At least that way you know what your dealing with and you can vote appropriately. Oakshott wasnt popular with his decision, but at least he was always open and honest. And we knew whether to vote for him again or turf him on his ear. Other politicians towing the party lines, contribute little to debate and we have no idea what they stand for. I know what i prefer. 1
motzartmerv Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Man. Cant win hey. Some people say there isnt enough communication from the board. Some people say that maj should check everything he says with the board. It doesnt say "RAA board member" in his handle. This is not the official RAA website. He has been posting as Maj for years before he was on the board. He qualifies his statements as not being the views of the board (unless he is actually expressing board views). Whats the problem here people? Cant you see the resource for what it is. You have the ear of a board member here. He is willing to take comment and give some. I sence the axes are being grinned in the background here and its got little to do with Ross expressing his "qualified" opinion on jabiru engines. lets not forget, this dude has been fixing (and operating) aeroplane engines professionally since long before jabiru were around:) 1 11 2
gandalph Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Thank you for your suggestion Windsor, but I think not. While ever he continues to talk rubbish as a board member, I'll continue to challenge him. Sorry if that's inconvenient for you.
motzartmerv Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Im fast becoming a very bored member. 2 3
motzartmerv Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Thank you for your suggestion Windsor, but I think not. While ever he continues to talk rubbish as a board member, I'll continue to challenge him. Sorry if that's inconvenient for you. I assume you take such a hard line with the current GM as well, with his actual official communications being complete garbage? Or do you save your petty anger for the bloke thats in here on the front line taking crap from dissgruntled jab owners? I received an officially stamped commincae from the GM last week that has turned out to be absolute rubbish. Not just some opinion about obvious failings with countless engines,..Oh no..Thios was a genuine balls up in the highest degree. if i were you guys, id be talking to maj about what you want. hes listening. Very few other ever do/have or will. 3 2
gandalph Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Man. Cant win hey. Some people say there isnt enough communication from the board. Some people say that maj should check everything he says with the board. Not me. It doesnt say "RAA board member" in his handle. This is not the official RAA website. He has been posting as Maj for years before he was on the board. He qualifies his statements as not being the views of the board Does he? Where? I missed that bit (unless he is actually expressing board views). Whats the problem here people? Cant you see the resource for what it is. You have the ear of a board member here. Agreed He is willing to take comment and give some. I sence the axes are being grinned in the background here and its got little to do with Ross expressing his "qualified" opinion on jabiru engines. lets not forget, this dude has been fixing (and operating) aeroplane engines professionally since long before jabiru were around:) Yes, I do have a dog in this fight. I own a Jabiru and I've got a fair few dollars invested. I don't believe the Jab engine is the bees knees but I did do a lot of research before I made the decision to purchase and I'm going with a lot of CAMit's mods because my research shows that they will improve the reliability of my engine. I'm not happy when someone is spreading rumours in this or other public forums that may adversely affect my investment. When that person is a Board member his "opinions" tend to carry more weight and all I ask is that they be backed by fact. I don't believe that is the case with the Maj on the subject of Jabiru's. His posts here show a distinct bias against Jabiru. In a member of the public posting here, that's ok. but when a Board member posts with a bias then that's not acceptable. That's my opinion. If that's bashing the Maj then that's unfortunate. The solution rests with him. 1 1
winsor68 Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 You need to examine your own motives mate rather than question someone else's.
gandalph Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 I assume you take such a hard line with the current GM as well, with his actual official communications being complete garbage? Or do you save your petty anger for the bloke thats in here on the front line taking crap from dissgruntled jab owners? I received an officially stamped commincae from the GM last week that has turned out to be absolute rubbish. Not just some opinion about obvious failings with countless engines,..Oh no..Thios was a genuine balls up in the highest degree. if i were you guys, id be talking to maj about what you want. hes listening. Very few other ever do/have or will. I have been following that thread and I am very concerned that someone ( not sure who) is either seriously mis-informed or is telling porkies. Either way it's not acceptable and I share your anger.
rankamateur Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 Board members hanging their dirty washing on each other out on the public line will get old fairly quickly too!
gandalph Posted January 21, 2014 Posted January 21, 2014 You need to examine your own motives mate rather than question someone else's. Done that. Quite comfortable with them, thanks.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now