Why do things like the current mess only seem to happen when I go TDY or try to enjoy a much earned vacation? Normally the boards are calm and everyone gets along so I sneak away for a couple weeks to Nellis, Tyndall...even had PMs when I was in Iraq a few months ago (sorry, intenet is dog slow there! ). Now I'm on vacation trying to relax (Crew Chief's know how hard we work) and the boards erupt again. I volunteer to moderate the USAF forums and I try to do a good job...normally it's a very pleasant and informative forum.

I've read through all of the posts and I respect everyone's opinions. This is a discussion forum and that's what it's here for. It's when those opinions turn into personal attacks that gets me riled. This is also a forum that's seen by the world and we should present ourselves a lot better and more professional than what's been currently going on.

Post counts? Post counts don't mean squat to me. Folks come in here all the time with a post or two and give out awesome information or even tell a good story. I'm glad to see newer people join up for the conversations, and I love "meeting" new people around here. When post counts do mean anything is when a handful of people join up and come into my forum to gang up on somebody for the sole purpose to disrupt the forums and attack a member. Some of the new faces around here seem to think it's fun to belittle others around here and claim they're doing a service to this forum. There are much easier ways to help out the forum...and one would be to contact me or the other USAF moderators. Having a high post count isn't the reason I defended the person in question. Being attacked by a gang in an ally is.

Like I said, I read the original post in question. It would have been just fine to present the facts and move on rather than bringing in a gang to attack. What's even worse is having another 5 topics that keep bringing up the same thing and still including attacks.

What might have also been better would be to PM me or the other USAF mods rather than bringing in outside moderators. I don't have much contact with other moderators since I stay in the USAF forums so I don't know how they'll react. Since this mess began I've only received about 5 PMs about it. I try to remain as fair as I can and although I don't like to flex the moderator muscle very much, I'm not afraid to use it when I have to. I'd rather not though.

We can move on from here. We have a couple of members here who I personally suspended in the past who finally calmed down and are now great assets and value to our community. I hope the same can be said for the new folks and old folks as well. Let's move on together.

I certainly hope that Weasel_Keeper doesn't mind me chiming in on this topic.

But I'd like to further say that as to whether or not there was erroneous information given and those that came here to correct said information it was certainly done in a manner not becoming of members of the US Air Force. As a matter of fact it wasn't even addressed in a mature like manner.

No the number of post does not make one smarter or better than the one(s) that have low post counts. About the only thing a high post count means is that the person has made a high number of post.

Yes, there are members around here that have been on for a long period of time and have garnered respect from other individuals. However when you have relatively new members, more than one who have recently signed up, gang up and without mercy blatantly attack and belittle that said longtime posted, certainly you'll have those coming to the defense of that longtime poster.

If you really have that much of a problem with another then by all means follow the proper procedures and report your problem to one or all of the Moderators of that particular forum. The manner in which this whole incident unfolded and overflowed into other topics was completely and totally uncalled for and shows a complete disregard and disrespect for all members of the US Air Force, active, retired, Veterans, dependents, supporters, civilian alike.

Also remember you can select to "ignore members" from their profile.

I think the issue many of us from the other forum have is that many of you lack a thick skin that should normally be a default feature of military members. Last I checked when you are wrong in the military you get hammered and no one spares your feelings when you screw up. Why should a forum filled with military members have any different standard or manner of action then what they do every day. What I have witnessed from a strictly observatory position since the details of the debaucle over here were posted has been this.

1) I have seen threads were a spouse has threatened AD members chances of retraining.

2) I have seen a spouse flex rank she herself does not hold

3) I have seen a group of senior posters and mods come to defense of said thin skinned spouse

4) I have seen new members pointing out the aforementioned issues banned and labeled as trolls

5) I have seen thread mysteriously disappear or post go bye bye because they pointed out the hypocritical behavior of individuals

Basically rules are fine and good when applied universally I myself am a member of forums where I have gotten my pee pee slapped when I was in the wrong even as a senior well known member.

The issue is you are not equally applying said rules and you have groups of followers (much like you accuse the members of the other forum of) sticking up for someone. The difference is we are defending someone who gave correct information and pointed out incorrect info. You are defending people who gave bad information and instead of admitting to it diverted by saying well what the reg says and what really happens is different based on zero days TIS.

I think you can see our issue?
If not then perhaps it is best we both leave one anothers forums in peace as we will not see eye to eye.

Q357

I second what Q357 said. Some people have gotten suspended for relatively minor infractions, only because someone found out they were from the other forum. If that's grounds for getting suspended then why is it OK to falsely accuse a TACP NCO of falsifying his service record? I would think accusing someone of commiting a federal offense is more serious than just calling someone a hypocrite.

quote:

I think you can see our issue?
If not then perhaps it is best we both leave one anothers forums in peace as we will not see eye to eye.

First of all, the thread starter didn't have to come on here to get correct information! This is not a military only website. If someone wanted to correct misinformation with an AFI, than do so, and let it go. The thread starter could have gone beyond the flack and looked up the AFI to calm his fears.
The pack mentality was clear on both ends, but it's no different than you attacking Lori in my presence. I'm going to defend her right to be on here and post. Same goes for any group of newcomers, who acted as these guys did. It's what they chose to do.
BTW, her number of quality posts outweigh anything she may have misspoke 100-1.
Everyone is more than welcome to contribute, or you're welcome to leave. It's your choice, providing for the TOU. The MODS seized control, as they should. If someone fell on a sword, that's the price you pay, when you don't pay attention.

quote:

Originally posted by Torch8306:

quote:

I think you can see our issue?
If not then perhaps it is best we both leave one anothers forums in peace as we will not see eye to eye.

First of all, the thread starter didn't have to come on here to get correct information! This is not a military only website. If someone wanted to correct misinformation with an AFI, than do so, and let it go. The thread starter could have gone beyond the flack and looked up the AFI to calm his fears.
The pack mentality was clear on both ends, but it's no different than you attacking Lori in my presence. I'm going to defend her right to be on here and post. Same goes for any group of newcomers, who acted as these guys did. It's what they chose to do.
BTW, her number of quality posts outweigh anything she may have misspoke 100-1.
Everyone is more than welcome to contribute, or you're welcome to leave. It's your choice, providing for the TOU. The MODS seized control, as they should. If someone fell on a sword, that's the price you pay, when you don't pay attention.

A dependent has little to no place pretending they are an SME on ADAF issues, then to argue with an AFI and say it's not like that because her "source said so"?

If you are defending this type of misinformation I pray you don't work in a job where mistakes and bad information gets people killed. Given the gravity of the information here was not to that extent but many of us are not used to the luxury of being able to pass on inaccurate information and feel no consequences. A dependent is used to that luxury as they will never be held personally responsible for their actions.

For me the biggest straw was in a thread about predator pilots where she went as far as to threaten a members chances of retraining based on his comments towards her assumptive and in my opinion ignorant statements in regards to the stress level of a Pred Pilot vs. a real Pilot.

The biggest issue is no one will admit they are wrong here. The members of the other forum surely could have been "kinder, gentler" but that is not the way things are run there. The members here could have been reasonable and open to criticism instead of being butt hurt but that didnt happen either. The biggest issue is when people from here came to the other forum they were allowed to express themselves where as here they were banned and mods felt it necessary to swing their e-peenz. Yet those members from the other forum are called immature. I see a blatant double standard and that is what bugs me.

quote:

If you are defending this type of misinformation I pray you don't work in a job where mistakes and bad information gets people killed. Given the gravity of the information here was not to that extent but many of us are not used to the luxury of being able to pass on inaccurate information and feel no consequences. A dependent is used to that luxury as they will never be held personally responsible for their actions.

For starters, don't come on here preaching to me. You don't have a clue who I am. Secondly, I didn't defend what she said, and I made that very clear to the loud mouths, who can't read or comprehend the English language. I simply stated her right to be on here, whether you like or dislike what she posts.
If you have a problem with her, or me for that matter, I suggest you click on the yellow triangle, in the bottom right of each post and alert Admin. MODS also have a hyperlink at the top of each webpage.
I can assume our conversation is finish.

quote:

Originally posted by Torch8306:
For starters, don't come on here preaching to me. You don't have a clue who I am. Secondly, I didn't defend what she said, and I made that very clear to the loud mouths, who can't read or comprehend the English language. I simply stated her right to be on here, whether you like or dislike what she posts.
If you have a problem with her, or me for that matter, I suggest you click on the yellow triangle, in the bottom right of each post and alert Admin. MODS also have a hyperlink at the top of each webpage.
I can assume our conversation is finish.

Its the internet she can be anywhere she wants. But if she decides to post misinformation and then chooses to defend the bad info, people should be allowed to inform her that she is a dependent and should stick to her area of expertise which is not ADAF issues. I fully agree she should be able to post wherever she feels as long as she is willing to 1) know her place 2)realize when she is wrong admit that fact and leave the thread alone as her information is not relevant at that point.

Once again if you are comfortable with people providing bad info and not experiencing consequences I live in a different world then you.

quote:

Once again if you are comfortable with people providing bad info and not experiencing consequences I live in a different world then you.

If you're not intelligent enough to glean out the good from the bad, that's your problem. Making an international issue out of a molehill is pure elephant dung.

quote:

Originally posted by Torch8306:
If you're not intelligent enough to glean out the good from the bad, that's your problem. Making an international issue out of a molehill is pure elephant dung.

Or I place a higher value on providing accurate and factual information to those seeking career advice then you do. Fortunately I don't have to stoop to questioning your intellect and your posts speak for themselves.

quote:

Or I place a higher value on providing accurate and factual information to those seeking career advice then you do. Fortunately I don't have to stoop to questioning your intellect and your posts speak for themselves.

Actually, YOU DON'T. I've just been able to bait you into continuing with your ongoing rant. Doesn't shed a very good light on you, Johnny Regs!

quote:

Or I place a higher value on providing accurate and factual information to those seeking career advice then you do.

Though forums like this are a good place to start looking for information, nobody should ever take what is said on the internet as fact without verifying it from a source first. Too many dorm lawyers to trust everything you read on the net.

And that is why Wikipedia, as great of an idea as it really is, can't be held for truth or fact without the proper sources.

quote:

Originally posted by Torch8306:
Actually, YOU DON'T. I've just been able to bait you into continuing with your ongoing rant. Doesn't shed a very good light on you, Johnny Regs!

Johnny Regs??? Weren't you the same individual touting TOS and professionalism moments ago? Now we are baiting for fights and (gasp) Trolling for an arguement...perhaps we should call the mods on you for your gross violation of the TOS.

quote:

Originally posted by caninedale:
Though forums like this are a good place to start looking for information, nobody should ever take what is said on the internet as fact without verifying it from a source first. Too many dorm lawyers to trust everything you read on the net.

I absolutely agree but we should make every effort to ensure the information being posted and given to those seeking career advice be as accurate as possible.

And that is where the core issue came to light here a person posted the AFI and was told well then that must be the "official" stance but it doesnt really work like that. The issue was the person telling them it didnt work like that has not served 1 day of .mil service other then whatever takes place in the private areas of her home with her hubby.

quote:

Originally posted by caninedale:

quote:

Or I place a higher value on providing accurate and factual information to those seeking career advice then you do.

Though forums like this are a good place to start looking for information, nobody should ever take what is said on the internet as fact without verifying it from a source first. Too many dorm lawyers to trust everything you read on the net.

I though one of the reasons sites like this exist is to provide sources of information.

quote:

Originally posted by Torch8306:

quote:

Once again if you are comfortable with people providing bad info and not experiencing consequences I live in a different world then you.

If you're not intelligent enough to glean out the good from the bad, that's your problem. Making an international issue out of a molehill is pure elephant dung.

What a retarded attitude to have. There is an enormous difference in posting obviously satirical information in a serious thread and posting second-hand information and trying to pass it off as fact. The fact that you all run to this individual's aid simply because this person has been here for a while is nauseating. I'm glad you take the position that people who know potentially nothing about the Air Force should be left to distinguish between good and bad information on their own. Others, however, aren't going to stand for that. We will continue to point out factually incorrect information being passed off as fact. Don't like it? Sorry.

In the meantime, maybe you should reanalyze your philosophy. How you expect someone with no experience with the military to be able to "glean out the good from the bad" is beyond me. Especially when the person posting such information claims it came from a Commander/former Commander. Why would they not trust such information? Get a clue, please.

So what I am getting from this is....... If someone is wrong, then someone should tell them, right? That happened and folks got banned and suspended. I don't know how it is/was for you guys, but we don't sugarcoat **** in my career field. If the baby is ugly, then call it ugly!

quote:

Originally posted by TraineeFerguson:

quote:

Originally posted by Torch8306:

If you're not intelligent enough to glean out the good from the bad, that's your problem. Making an international issue out of a molehill is pure elephant dung.

What a retarded attitude to have. There is an enormous difference in posting obviously satirical information in a serious thread and posting second-hand information and trying to pass it off as fact. The fact that you all run to this individual's aid simply because this person has been here for a while is nauseating. I'm glad you take the position that people who know potentially nothing about the Air Force should be left to distinguish between good and bad information on their own. Others, however, aren't going to stand for that. We will continue to point out factually incorrect information being passed off as fact. Don't like it? Sorry.

In the meantime, maybe you should reanalyze your philosophy. How you expect someone with no experience with the military to be able to "glean out the good from the bad" is beyond me. Especially when the person posting such information claims it came from a Commander/former Commander. Why would they not trust such information? Get a clue, please.

As a newbie to the military, I agree with Ferguson. I come to this forum from time to time for help. While I realize that this is not an official site with 100% correct answers 100% of the time, I *did* think that for the most part, it was a trustworthy source. I think active AF members are a necessity in a forum like this; especially when other members might post second hand info.

I'm sure I've posted questions on this site before, and that I've been given several answers. I relied on the answers of the active duty military personnel, and appreciated their help. I don't think people just trying to be helpful should be banned or suspended. Most people who AREN'T in the military phrase things like, "I don't know for sure but..." or something along those lines. What am I to do when I post a question and a non-mil member posts something claiming it to be fact?

Pardon me for not being able to glean the good from the bad on a forum like this, when I expected military.com to have higher standards than to allow just anyone to post anything.

I guess this website doesn't meet the standard that I once thought it did. I better go start reading all the posts from the past year that I've been a member on here, so I can start "gleaning out the good from the bad."