On friendly chat board, just amongst "us" line pilots :confused:

I wonder why that is. I mean, we're just spitballing here.

I am taking a break from this thread. It has become very toxic and hateful...

DH,

Your question was fair. No need to defend a fair question. Iav8 is just being lawyerly without any justification except to be argumentative.

No, it is patently unfair to construct a question asking what PS is worth in Pay only. That isn't spit balling. Spit balling would require an acknowledgement the entire PWA is up for improvement and suggestions for where best to use a newfound asset to leverage contractual gains. The premise of his question forces me to acknowledge that PS can only be leveraged to improve pay.

Unavoidable as the contract amendable date approaches.

You can always skip those posts and just look for the good stuff. :D


http://media.giphy.com/media/iXiNM6SYmWkSc/giphy.gif

That's the only common theme to his posts: arguing. I really don't think the subject matters.

He has the right to post his opinions, and yet I don't think anyone has the right to turn the L&G into the forum formerly known as the ALPA forum. I've never read chit-chat, but the people who cross over, manage to respect the (mostly) good-natured banter of the L&G.

Carl and sailing do have their moments, but who doesn't like to watch Grumpy Old Men?

Hey guys, just block IAV84DAL like I did. Then he can come back under some other new account extolling the benefits of giving up profit sharing. Hearing one's opinion is fine, but hearing it incessantly at the expense of our normal discussions is detrimental.

If someone doesn't want to be ignored, and they make their threads qualify under the TOS, but controversial enough, they're going to be quoted incessantly. The ignore feature only goes so far.

I think the issue becomes this: when a poster is essentially spamming up the L&G, the mods should step in. Open lav8 another thread, just for the PS. It's basic intellectual honesty: if you can't follow the rhythm of the L&G, then you should have the intellectual honesty of creating a separate discussion.

Don't ban: re-direct.

33 House GOP members joined in writing a letter to Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx this past June urging him to reject the NAI bid, yet some of these members were not supported by the PAC. If the PAC were not concerned with which party a congressman was affiliated, it would seem supporting every single one of these 33 would be helpful to our cause.

So adult and professional that I don't even know how to handle it. You and Elvis.


I'm in awe. If we were at the ECP overnight I'd buy you guys beers.