Sorry, but where does it say that volunteering to serve as a leader for your fellow pilots means you sign up for abuse. Who created that rule? It seems to me that the most abusive forum posters are the ones who created that rule. What if I were to find out the real name of Check Essential was John Doe and then I started posting about what "someone said" about John Doe. I could post any abusive or untrue comment and then justify it by saying "John Doe signed up for abuse by posting in a public forum."

So sorry, you do not have the right to abuse people just because they have taken positions of leadership in the union. You can question their decisions and strategy, but you do not have the right to abuse them. If someone gives themselves the right to abuse people, then they are a lowlife in my book. If someone can't stick to the facts and avoid innuendo and personal attacks, then their ideas suck and they need to develop better arguments. Shouldn't we hold ourselves to higher standards than 12 year old girls who post nasty comments on Facebook? Shouldn't we at least try to stick to the facts when dealing with personal reputations? What would your response be if Delta management attacked one of your fellow pilots like this?

I like the rumor of buying multiple 747's or 777's just as much as the next guy. These rumors are rampant in this industry. I just think that when we are dealing with the personal reputation of your fellow pilots, they deserve the same respect you would expect from them in a personal interaction. We should not allow our standards to fall in the gutter just because we can.