Ok , hal you're right

[Bill Greenwood]

Hal, you are correct in that my post about the Onion article didn't have anything about aviation in it.
Frankly, here in Boulder it is considered so old fashioned to need an airplane to soar above.

I just thought most folks could use a good laugh, on any topic. Sometimes it seems to me that this forum gets a little mundane, is a bit like the Nile, "a mile wide and a foot deep", and that we need some diversity,as well as some depth in topics that really matter in life. The people that I really enjoy in life aref the ones who can laugh at things, even themselves. Two examples I have known are Tex Hill and Howard Pardue, both with lots of flying and humor.

Who is "your boss"? I am surprised that with the transitional difficulty that EAA seems to be going though, that one of the EAA execs has spare time to monitor and censor what one person, me, writes on the forum. If EAA runs short of time and manpower to guard against too much of that freedom of speech nonsense; then I think I know where you can get some volunteers from another site to make sure I don't corrupt the masses with my posts.

I hope that it is not just "sour grapes" for you personally that you didn't rate the selection. Please know that I nominated both you guys; your for you sense of color and Zack for free food which even trumps color. You guys made the top five, but were just bested by Kim Un, Ahmajerk, and Justin Beaver.

You guys ought to be a little extra nice to me. We did win the election, even up there in cheese country, but my Longhorns are not at the level that I used to expect.

Thanks for the message, and in my book anyone who flies a Tiger Moth is ok.

[rwanttaja]

Hal, you are correct in that my post about the Onion article didn't have anything about aviation in it.
Frankly, here in Boulder it is considered so old fashioned to need an airplane to soar above.

I just thought most folks could use a good laugh, on any topic. Sometimes it seems to me that this forum gets a little mundane, is a bit like the Nile, "a mile wide and a foot deep", and that we need some diversity,as well as some depth in topics that really matter in life.

Ooooh, now THAT is a slippery slope. Pretty soon, someone feels that have to post the new woo-woo dietary plan, so we all live and fly forever. Someone else has a magical new garden implement, that shortens our time in the yard so we can fly more. And someone ELSE thinks that a certain political candidate is going to be the death of aviation, and all right-thinking pilots should do all they can to be sure he/she is defeated during the election.

And they ALL can claim, "...we need some diversity, as well as some depth in topics that really matter in life."

The owner of a forum page has the right to determine the type of content they're going to allow. I'm the moderator of a modestly-sized email group for Fly Baby fans (~600 members) that might see ten posts a week. Yet I've got a set of guidelines that is about three pages long. I'm very fortunate that I don't have to clamp down very often...but I do, occasionally have to clamp down. If someone opens a Fly Baby mailing list, they have the right to expect it is directly related to building or owning a Fly Baby.

And I think participants in the EAA forums have the same sort of right.

Some privately-operated aviation forums, such as Pilots of America, have sub-forums that allow nearly any topic. But since the EAA forum is an official corporate resource, there are good legal reasons for them to ride tight herd on the contents. Hal's ridin' drag all day long to make sure the content stays within the bounds his bosses was him to maintain.

Where I don't necessarily agree with the rules of the forums I participate it (have had postings get cancelled, and I think Hal was just quivering over the cancel button waiting for me to respond to a post two or so months back), it is *their* ball. I'm happy to open an EAA forum topic, knowing that the contents are going to reflect the purposes of EAA.

Ron Wanttaja