slowplay

I guess I'm easily confused. Who is the "we" that sent the campaign literature since you now say you didn't send it?

acl65pilot

We the candidates did not have an issue with it being sent out. I use "We" as none of the ones that responded had an issue with it being sent out. Some had concerns as you are aware, but no one had an issue with it being sent out. No one said NO to the answers that were provided.

WE were all asked to respond to the E-mail from the author stating that we did not have an issue with it. I am sure that those that are included did that. I know I did. I do not speak for anyone else.

Check Essential

This little spat is quite revealing.

Seems the Moak Politburo does not take kindly to any outsiders using Kremlin resources to communicate with the peasants.

ACL65-
How could you dare think its OK to provide information to the voters?
Shame on you. Don't you realize the danger?

You have run afoul of slowplay. You have even brought out the great and powerful RockymtMaddog from his long slumber. These are powerful apparatchiks. They sit at the Premier's right hand.

It was nice knowing you acl. Send us a postcard from the gulag.

slowplay

Normally you stick to substance, Essential. You work better from that position.

Just to be clear, your parody endorses the idea of an e-mail to all C44 pilots done without attribution and the exclusion of a candidate?

If so, I reject your political view of the world.

RockyMtMadDog

ACL,

It was a very simple and direct question, but you did not answer it. Let me ask it a couple of different ways. It took me a while to find the information on the ALPA site, but as I read it in the long and boring policy manual, material can only be sent out by a candidate or on behalf of a candidate. A plain old line guy like myself cannot. So . . .

Was the email sent out by you? You answered (very carefully) "I did not send the email to national".

So . . .

Was the e-mail sent out on your behalf? IOW, did you authorize the e-mail to be sent out even if you did not physically het the send button and send it to ALPA national?

At this point, I don't really care about the answers to the survey that much. They are not all that revealing to me as they are simply the words of someone trying to get elected. Integrity does matter though.

What I do care about is a candidate (assuming you are a candidate) who can't answer a simple question with a simple and direct answer. I am not picking on you personally. I don't even know who you are (though I have my suspicions). The MEC forums kinda suck, but at least you know who is who.

Check Essential

This questionnaire was done right out in the open for everyone to see.
Nobody was excluded. Every candidate had a chance to respond. It circulated for weeks. Some didn't like the questions so they chose to ignore it or answer in sound bites, safe in the knowledge that it would never appear on the DALPA forum. It was prohibited. That was their choice to be "excluded".

You guys didn't have any problem with it as long as it only existed as an obscure, hard to get and little noticed document circulating among a handful of "radicals".

Be honest.
Putting it out where lots of people will see it is what has you upset.
Especially using DALPA's own tightly controlled comm system.

80ktsClamp

Looks like some people are feeling threatened...

johnso29

It certainly seems that way.

acl65pilot

There was not exclusion. Lets make that clear. Everyone was sent those questions at the same time. Everyone was told that the author wanted to share the answers at the same time. Everyone was asked if they had any objections and or desire for their answers to be included or excluded at the same time.
I looked at the e-mails and all of the candidates were included in the proffers from the author. What was discussed between the author and other candidates is information that I do not have, but everyone was sent the same three e-mails:
One on Oct 15th with the questions
One on Oct 16th with the desire to share via mass e-mail
One on Oct 19th to have each candidate verify that they wished their positions and answers to be shared.

How each candidate responded is known by the candidate and the author, but each candidate was included in all of these e-mails.
The notion of trying to state that people were purposefully left out is false.

Furthermore, I am of the opinion that I want each and every candidates opinions side by side so our pilots can make an informed decision. To make the point true. I have am willing to personally pay for another mass mailing if anyone feels left out. I am not of the mind to be exclusionary. I want that cleaned up. If I am not the correct person for the job, I do not want pilots to vote for meif I am not the best person for the job. This is not political mud slinging.
There were no names on the e-mail at my urging to the author so that it was clean of ANY candidates willingness or lack there of to do this. I see that he took my advice. The irony here is that the author took great lengths and my suggestions to keep it clean. I want there to be once person making the decision in this election. That is the pilot(s) of 44.

Superpilot92

+3 what a bunch of ladies....