Originally Posted by
Pineapple Guy
Of course not; but then again, you knew that.
Providing input is one thing -- asking tough questions is perfectly fine. Holding your leaders accountable is of course acceptable too. But continually Monday morning quarterbacking as if you could do something better gets old really quick, as you have ZERO basis to justify that your position would yield better results than the current path.
So who gets to determine where to draw the line between providing input/holding leaders accountable and Monday morning quarterbacking? If there is "ZERO basis" to justify a different approach, then what's the point of providing input if it differs from the current path? Still sounds to me like you think any of us who disagree with the current path should either shut up and color and leave everything to our elected reps who know better, or do everything ourselves. I don't see any room in your argument for the "bottom up" input/accountability process ALPA is supposed to be using.
Originally Posted by
Pineapple Guy
Everything is hypothetical to those who never get involved.
There's that favorite talking point again.