A challenge to ALPA
05-16-2011 | 12:03 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
From: MD-11 Capt
A challenge to ALPA
I was talking to a high level mgt person the other night about the security to get on line with the company. He said the problem isn't the individual wanting to access his sign in, but the BOT people who are hitting the site several thousand times an hour trying to beat the open time system.
My question for the people on this site is the same I asked him...."Why don't you HAMMER those guys and leave the other 90+% alone so we can have a rational sign in system." My question to this Board and ALPA is why don't they team with the company to put an end to this type of ********** the system and work with the company to end these guys permanently with harsh penalties so the vast majority of us can get back to a less Fort Knox security system.
WHERE DO YOU STAND?
My question for the people on this site is the same I asked him...."Why don't you HAMMER those guys and leave the other 90+% alone so we can have a rational sign in system." My question to this Board and ALPA is why don't they team with the company to put an end to this type of ********** the system and work with the company to end these guys permanently with harsh penalties so the vast majority of us can get back to a less Fort Knox security system.
WHERE DO YOU STAND?
05-16-2011 | 03:17 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
NoHaz,
That's a really good idea, and since you're the first to bring it up, and are obviously a bot user, I'm sure you'd be more than willing to fork over some bucks, so that the company can purchase some more servers, so that they can help you and the rest of the bot users. In fact, perhaps the company should assess a "fee" to all bot users, so that they can help offset the additional resources required to keep the system running smoothly and efficiently. After all, it's the bot users who have the most to gain, by gaming the system, so perhaps it's fair to ask them to pay to play.
That's a really good idea, and since you're the first to bring it up, and are obviously a bot user, I'm sure you'd be more than willing to fork over some bucks, so that the company can purchase some more servers, so that they can help you and the rest of the bot users. In fact, perhaps the company should assess a "fee" to all bot users, so that they can help offset the additional resources required to keep the system running smoothly and efficiently. After all, it's the bot users who have the most to gain, by gaming the system, so perhaps it's fair to ask them to pay to play.
05-16-2011 | 03:42 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,065
Likes: 40
From: 767 Captain
05-16-2011 | 06:17 AM
#8
New Hire
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
APLA is too busy doing things that really matter to us, like lending our support to the public sector unions up in Wisconsin. Funny, almost everyone I talk to does not want their union jumping in on the public sector union side of that issue. The bot issue and the Wisconsin union issue are just additional cases where the majority opinion of the dues paying union member does not count.
05-16-2011 | 06:31 AM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
APLA is too busy doing things that really matter to us, like lending our support to the public sector unions up in Wisconsin. Funny, almost everyone I talk to does not want their union jumping in on the public sector union side of that issue. The bot issue and the Wisconsin union issue are just additional cases where the majority opinion of the dues paying union member does not count.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
