Well, your reply did not reflect that. I would like a more in-depth answer too, however my point was that two of the big issues being discussed on this page were responded to there. I thought the responses to those two specific questions were just.
Some of the folks on here (not you), that are making statements about this TA (i.e. "there is no definition of regional aircraft") that are completely false.
Going back to the "picketing" issue on the Q&A page I thought they gave a very good explanation. Your post just disagreed with me without anything to back it up...

I was the one that said their was no definition for regional aircraft and someone mentioned there was. I found it and noted as such. I also noted that that definition didn’t change the risk of the language.

Straight from the ALPA Daily

https://www.ch-aviation.com/portal/n...321lrs-in-2019

The TLDR is "Norwegian Turk Uhr Jurbs!"

^^^^^THIS!!!!!!!!

Also, section 1.E was mentioned in the latest FAQ email. Did anyone find that answer acceptable?

I did not

What's wrong with this?

7) Why is there no mention of capacity purchase agreements in Section 1?

Capacity purchase agreements are covered by the term "marketing agreement" Section 1.B.3. This application was first discussed in 2010 negotiations and reconfirmed in this round of negotiations in discussions with the Company's General Counsel which took place on the record before both mediators. In any case, a capacity purchase agreement is a form of codeshare. We note that subsection B.3. describes exclusions to our scope. Hence, if "marketing agreement" did not cover capacity purchase agreements the Company could not conduct flying under such an arrangement.

That seems lots easier than "CPA not allowed"

1.E was question number 8. Acquisition without merger

I put that there because you were ranting about a CPA somewhere else in your hundreds of scope ranting posts.

Ok so CPAs are unlimited then. Sounds wonderful. Keeps getting better