Evan Burton

I also demand that post #63 be set to INVISIBLE whilst this matter is being investigated by John Simkin and moderators.

It is a clear misrepresentation of my views.

Jan,

Do you mean to say that you did NOT post those words?

Jan,

Your post has already been referred to John.

Still no PM received.

As I said, I CC'd Antti on the PM and kept a copy in my Sent Items folder. Since you appear not to have received it, here is the text:

Jan,

I have made your last post to Len invisible. You said:

What a crock of lying, disinformational, BS.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=151533

This type of post is unacceptable. Calling someone a xxxx ("...a crock of lying, ...") is prohibited.

Please refrain from using such language towards another member.

Thank you.

Michael,

I'm confused. What question was asked that I didn't respond to? I'll do my best to answer it.

Thanks,

Evan, please save the thanks for Jack White. All you have to do is go back and read Maggie's post and mine.

There are lots of comments. If you point out what I have not answered, I'll try to answer.

If you wish Evan but I wouldn't on my account. I have pilots here that I can ask.

What is not understandable to me is why Hanjour needed to turn. I understand what you are saying about descent and turning on approach but why turn why not just descend and approach? The turn is superfluous. Just descend and aim. Much easier.

Because you'd approach the target at a much more vertical angle, like dive bombing. It is more difficult and the chances of exceeding Vne are much greater. The turn allowed a more controlled approach to the target, at a lower angle. They could then have a much greater chance of success of hitting the target.

Whilst I am waiting for Michaels response, others might consider the level of knowledge that is required for an FAA Commercial Pilot Licence:

The Aeronautical Knowledge Test (PDF)

The Practical Handling Test (PDF)

They are just the CPL standards. Higher standards apply for an ATPL.

Michael,

I'm confused. What question was asked that I didn't respond to? I'll do my best to answer it.

Thanks,

Where's my post responding to Len's list gone?????

Jan, its been set to invisible, not by me, I guess because it contains the word Lying, which is against forum rules. Steve.

Done by me, for the reasons Stephen has stated. Please refer to the PM I sent you.

What PM? I've received nothing.

Jan,

Please check your PMs again. I have a copy of the PM sent to you, so it can be confirmed that it was at least sent.

Edited to add: it was sent at 9.54PM my time, 32 mins before this post. It was also sent to Antti at the same time, so he can confirm if it was received by him or not.

Michael,

I did respond. The turn was necessary to lose height, because it is more difficult to make a vertical approach than a more horizontal approach to a target.

Hanjour and others had the necessary skills to guide the aircraft into their targets. Would it help if I asked a 747 captain with training experience, who has stated that he could train someone to fly the approach with nothing more than about 30 mins simulator time, to come here and state that for himself? Would you actually believe him? I think not, but am willing to ask them to do it if required.

How many pilots would it take to convince people that this claim of "could not fly the approach", etc, is wrong?

Where's my post responding to Len's list gone?????

Jan, its been set to invisible, not by me, I guess because it contains the word Lying, which is against forum rules. Steve.

Done by me, for the reasons Stephen has stated. Please refer to the PM I sent you.

Charles,

I have made your post invisible because I believe it contains an inappropriate reference with regard to Len. I have notified John S and asked him to advise.

Again???? Evan, John this is so unfaiar. CD does serious rersearch. Len merely attacks. Check out his bio folks,: "GG Allin" concerts, then google GG Allin. A most fitting and admirable way to earn a living.

Dawn

Dawn,

I did this because I have concerns over something that was said in it. Recently a similar situation occurred, and I found that I should have acted. As I said, I have referred the matter to John to ensure that my decision is valid. If I am wrong, then his post is restored without editing - no harm done. If I am right, then he will be given the chance to edit his post, being aware of the reasons for it being considered unacceptable.

I hope you can understand. Thank you.

Edited to add: Also, Dawn, it is not my place to judge on the validity or worthiness of a members extra-forum activities. Their activities outside this Forum are none of my concern. I am only interested in what people post here, or if they post a link on this Forum to their activities outside this Forum.

Maggie,

Do Jack's rules apply to you?

I suggest this be amended to say IDENTIFIABLE FACIAL PHOTO. This would

rule out a distant photo of a man on a motorcycle or strolling the beach, or any

photo in which the face is not large and well lighted. A face in shadow or

silhouette is not suitable.

Jack

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=149441

You are currently in violation of Jack's suggestion. Is Jack right or wrong?

Evan,

Do you specialize in persecuting people?

Why are you doing this to me?

I do not wish to drawn on this matter. It is a matter for John Simkin.

If ALL photos have to be of a particular what ever I am happy to comply. The point, not that many of the moderators seem to notice, of my posts today and my PM to you is that there are rules bent for some and others are hounded. What you or Jack think of anyones photos in particular I am not that interested in. If I have to change my photo (which will be fine by the way) I will be expecting to others having to change their photos too as they are not clear or up close.

Talk about shooting the messenger!

Your avatar does not meet Forum requirements. 'Nuff said.

No Evan. Not enough. As I have said but some are hard of hearing I will post another photo if required by John. You are asking me if I am in violation of Jack's suggestion and my answer is I don't know. Nor do I care. Why don't you go ask Jack. You also ask Is jack right or wrong? Does it matter? Does my opinion on this matter? Is it relevant to any thing? Please.....

No, I am trying to enforce the regulations John has asked all members to abide by:

(ii) All members should use a photograph of themselves as an avatar (see below for instructions how to do this). If you still find you have problems with this please email me and I will help you with this.

Your avatar could be anything, not even identifiable as a person. As Antti has asked, please correct it.

Thank you for observing the rules of this community.

EVAN: Oh no. John and Andy have applied a standard to every member on this Forum. You are asking that another standard be applied to Len, therefore you should provide supporting evidence why that higher standard should be applied to another member.

That is just untrue Evan. Doubt has been created about the identity of some one called Len Colby. I and others here have asked that this be clarified. I would ask the same of any other member if the circumstance were the same.

Okay - you do not show an identifiable photograph, and I have doubts as to the accuracy of your name.

Please provide to the whole Forum - not just me - verifiable proof of your identity. I ask this as a Forum member, not as a Moderator.

Maggie,

Do Jack's rules apply to you?

I suggest this be amended to say IDENTIFIABLE FACIAL PHOTO. This would

rule out a distant photo of a man on a motorcycle or strolling the beach, or any

photo in which the face is not large and well lighted. A face in shadow or

silhouette is not suitable.

Jack

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=149441

You are currently in violation of Jack's suggestion. Is Jack right or wrong?

Evan,

Do you specialize in persecuting people?

Why are you doing this to me?

I do not wish to drawn on this matter. It is a matter for John Simkin.

If ALL photos have to be of a particular what ever I am happy to comply. The point, not that many of the moderators seem to notice, of my posts today and my PM to you is that there are rules bent for some and others are hounded. What you or Jack think of anyones photos in particular I am not that interested in. If I have to change my photo (which will be fine by the way) I will be expecting to others having to change their photos too as they are not clear or up close.

Talk about shooting the messenger!

Your avatar does not meet Forum requirements. 'Nuff said.

Maggie,

Do Jack's rules applie to you?

I suggest this be amended to say IDENTIFIABLE FACIAL PHOTO. This would

rule out a distant photo of a man on a motorcycle or strolling the beach, or any

photo in which the face is not large and well lighted. A face in shadow or

silhouette is not suitable.

Jack

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=149441

You are currently in violation of Jack's suggestion. Is Jack right or wrong?

Maggie,

What proof do you have that len is NOT using his real name?

Evan, this is your job not mine. Or John and Andy's. Leave me out of it please.

Oh no. John and Andy have applied a standard to every member on this Forum. You are asking that another standard be applied to Len, therefore you should provide supporting evidence why that higher standard should be applied to another member.

Would it be appropriate to ask you for proof of your real identity? Perhaps the 100 point check?

Happy to comply if it is required of all.

I think not.

Also:

pet·u·lant pɛtʃələnt/ Pronunciation Key - [pech-uh-luhnt]

– adjective

moved to or showing sudden, impatient irritation, esp. over some trifling annoyance: a petulant toss of the head.

[Origin: 1590–1600; < L petulant- (s. of petulāns) impudent, akin to petere to seek, head for]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/petulant

???

All Jack has to do is abide with the rules of the Forum. Easy. He has been offered every assistance to do so. We are not asking him to do something every other member has to do. He is not being asked to reveal personal information he wishes to remain private. He is being asked to do what every other member here seems to regard as something quite normal. I think the term is accurate.

Yeah, Evan. As long as your bio link works you can use what ever alias you like. Great. Totally impartial. Play the ball not the man. Yeah.

You have a strange definition of the saying, Maggie. Where have I asked Jack to abide by a Forum rule that every other Forum member is not obliged to comply with? In what way am I applying a different standard to Jack? Where have we allowed another member to not provide a biography (excepting, of course, those individuals approved by John or Andy for reasons of privacy)?

Now we have Charles posts being censored by Evan and Antti threatening to censor Jack by making his posts invisible even though we all know who Jack White is.

And the reason Len has to register under his real name is that it is a rule of this forum that the moderators are suppose to enforce, but apparently Kathy thinks its funny, Evan is waiting for John to wake up so he can check and see if he should allow Charles' statement, and Annti thinks its okay for Len to have a handle, or "call sign," when no one else is allowed to use one.

There is a reason why people hide behind such pseudo "call signs" and avoiding responsiblilty is one of them. Engaging in covert operations is another.

Len doesn't need somebody to vouch for him. All he has to do is be square with us.

Bill "Alec Hidell" Kelly

Bill,

If you mean to make invisible a post which I believe makes an personal and unfair attack on another member, and which I have referred to the Forum owners for clarification, then I plead guilty.

As to your other point, then I propose the following:

1. All members are required to provide proof of their identity.

2. Proof of identity is to be provided to John Simkin or Andy Walker, the Forum owners.

3. Proof of identity shall be subject to the 100 point check:

PRIMARY DOCUMENTS - 70 Points

* Birth Certificate

* Citizenship Certificate

* Current Passport

* Expired passport which has not been cancelled and was current within the preceding 2 years

* Other document of identity having the same characteristics as a passport including diplomatic documents and some documents issued to refugees

SECONDARY DOCUMENTS - 40 POINTS (MUST HAVE PHOTOGRAPH & NAME)

* Driver licence

* Licence or permit issued under a law of a Government - (e.g. a boat licence)

* Identification card issued to a public employee

* Identification card issued by the a Government as evidence of the person's entitlement to a financial benefit

* An identification card issued to a student at a tertiary education institution

SECONDARY DOCUMENTS - 35 POINTS (MUST HAVE NAME & ADDRESS)

* A document held by a cash dealer giving security over your property

* A mortgage or other instrument of security held by a financial body

* Council rates notice

* Document from your current employer or previous employer within the last 2 years

* Land Titles Office record

* Document from a recognised Credit Reference association

SECONDARY DOCUMENTS - 25 POINTS (MUST HAVE NAME & SIGNATURE)

* Marriage Certificate (for maiden name only)

* Credit Card

* Membership to a Registered Club

* EFTPOS Card

SECONDARY DOCUMENTS - 25 POINTS (MUST HAVE NAME & ADDRESS)

* Electoral Roll record

* Records of a public utility - phone, water, gas or electricity bill

* Records of a financial institution

* A record held under a law other than a law relating to land titles

* Lease/rent agreement

* Rent receipt from a licensed real estate agent

SECONDARY DOCUMENTS - 25 POINTS (MUST HAVE NAME & DATE OF BIRTH)

* Record of a primary, secondary or tertiary education institution attended by you within the last 10 years

* Record of professional or trade association of which you are a member

4. Every member shall indemnify the Forum owners from criminal or civil or other legal action in case of inadvertent or intentional release of personal details supplied by members.

How about that? Every member will be guaranteed to be who they say they are. That should assail any concerns about "non de plumes".

Will someone please provide me a link to Len's bio, as his page says he has no personal statement, that Jack is apparently lacking as well, though I'm pretty sure I know who Jack White is.

As on the bottom of every one of Len's posts:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=4878

Works for me - and complies with the Forum rules.

I do not understand why you don't 'get it'. Charles Drago has his post made invisible. Jack is treated like a child who is being naughty or 'petulant' as Evan called him and yet Kathy, Evan and you find no problem with someone being deceptive and using an alias. Mr 'what document do you have to support this claim' Colby is being let off with out being required to provide any proof of his own or being called to explain.

Maggie,

What proof do you have that len is NOT using his real name?

Would it be appropriate to ask you for proof of your real identity? Perhaps the 100 point check?

I think not.

Also:

pet·u·lant pɛtʃələnt/ Pronunciation Key - [pech-uh-luhnt]

– adjective

moved to or showing sudden, impatient irritation, esp. over some trifling annoyance: a petulant toss of the head.

[Origin: 1590–1600; < L petulant- (s. of petulāns) impudent, akin to petere to seek, head for]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/petulant

All Jack has to do is abide with the rules of the Forum. Easy. He has been offered every assistance to do so. We are not asking him to do something every other member has to do. He is not being asked to reveal personal information he wishes to remain private. He is being asked to do what every other member here seems to regard as something quite normal. I think the term is accurate.

Jack - all you have to do is put the link to your bio in your profile, as you have been asked to do several times now and in accordance with Forum rules, and your posts will all be made visible. Simple. If want assistance on how to place it in your signature line:

1. Near the top of the page, on the right hand side, there is a link labeled MY CONTROLS. Click on that.

2. A new page will appear. Go to the left hand side, and look for the heading PERSONAL PROFILE. Under that heading will be a selection labeled EDIT SIGNATURE. Click on it.

3. A text box will appear. Simply paste the URL for your biography into that box, then click on UPDATE MY SIGNATURE at the bottom of the box.

We CANNOT do this for you; you have to do it yourself. If you need assistance, please contact myself or one of the other Mods via PM and we'll help you.

Thank you.

Maggie,

1. What screen name a member here chooses to use on another forum is none of our business. It has nothing to do with what Len posts here. If you have an issue with what Len posts here, then take him to task here.

2. I am not "pouncing" on Jack. John put out a PM regarding avatars some time ago, saying that members who did not comply were to have their posts stopped until they did comply. I took the bio to be equally important as it is a similar rule (John can say if this is so, or not). Jack was given several warning, and offered every assistance to comply with the Forum rules. If he chooses not to abide by the Forum rules, then he must accept the consequences. If ANY other member makes the same omission, then they will be asked in the same way to comply. I cannot understand why this is so difficult to understand.

But which is the real LEN? And why the need for an alias?

It is quite simple: Len's real name is the name he uses here - UNLESS he has received permission from John or Andy (NOT me or other Mods) to use an alternate.

Do you mean to say that you use your real name on all the forums you post on? If so, I must say you are being very foolish and leave yourself open to spam / hacking / identity theft / etc. You'll find that the Forum here is an exception to the rule; most members of other forums do NOT use their real names. In many cases it is discouraged.

Kathy,

My issue is that while something is happening with one member in one thread which is pretty trivial IMHO and he is getting

pounced on by some moderators while some one else is using an alias here/there we don't know and nothing is said?

Not only that you question what the problem is? Obviously some people are more equal than others here.

If Jack has to update his bio fair enough. But WHAT ABOUT LEN? WHAT EVER HIS NAME IS. Is he going to be given

a green light on this? Sure seems like it and that is my point.

I do not consider that I have 'opponents' here. I have no problem with debate. When it happens. I have no problem with robust debate.

My issues are with applying the rules selectively. I do have an issue with deception and dis-information and provocoteurs. I am not

saying that we should all be in agreement just that we should all be playing the same game with the same rules.

And that doesn't seem to be the case.

Maggie,

1. What screen name a member here chooses to use on another forum is none of our business. It has nothing to do with what Len posts here. If you have an issue with what Len posts here, then take him to task here.

2. I am not "pouncing" on Jack. John put out a PM regarding avatars some time ago, saying that members who did not comply were to have their posts stopped until they did comply. I took the bio to be equally important as it is a similar rule (John can say if this is so, or not). Jack was given several warning, and offered every assistance to comply with the Forum rules. If he chooses not to abide by the Forum rules, then he must accept the consequences. If ANY other member makes the same omission, then they will be asked in the same way to comply. I cannot understand why this is so difficult to understand.

Maggie,

There are not one set of rules for Jack, and another for the rest of us. Everyone has to do it.

(i) All members have to provide a biography. A link to this biography should be added to their signature (see below for instructions how to do this).

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1471

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=13297

Jack has been asked repeatedly to do this. We offered assistance to do so. I posted how to do it.

It seems quite simple. If Jack does not wish to abide by the rules of this forum, then he cannot complain about the consequences.

Charles,

I have made your post invisible because I believe it contains an inappropriate reference with regard to Len. I have notified John S and asked him to advise.

Maggie,

With due respect, to my knowledge you are not a pilot. I am. You don't need enormous skill, and these guys were licenced commercial pilots. They had practiced in simulators. The big turn around the Pentagon was to lose altitude.

With due respect, if it is so easy then why do they pay pilots so much? Can't have it both ways.

Because airline pilots have to deal with regular check rides, systems knowledge, be able to bring people through bad weather with minimal discomfort, handle emergencies, etc. That is when they earn that money (have a think about the recent Qantas incidents).

Also, there are levels of licences: private, commercial, and air transport pilot (ATPL). Commercial means you can earn money flying, including carrying a certain number of passengers. ATPL means you can carry the number of passengers like you find on airlines. That where the big bucks come in. Regular commercial pilots often don't earn a great deal of money; many are trying to build their flying hours in order to go across to the airlines.