AOPA shuts down comments in videos

Status
Not open for further replies.
Daleandee said:
Being lost? It's been long gone for a long time. Just look at some of the vitriol that's allowed on this site ... and this is one of the better sites on the net. The innuendo that is allowed here is unbelievable at times. Most of us have developed quite a thick skin so this stuff just runs off our back and we roll our eyes or look the other way.

But ignoring a problem has never fixed it .. but nobody is of a mind to fix it as they seem to like it this way. Welcome to the new world (dis)order.
Click to expand...
I think this is extremely well said and much more succinct that how I was thinking.
 
Dave Anderson said:
I think most were toward AOPA not the employee.
Click to expand...
They were not terrible until the last day before they pulled the comments. After Dan Gryder posted it on FB, there were some really nasty comments posted about the host in question, so I can understand why they pulled them. I'm surprised they decided to put the show on hold. I really expected them to plow ahead, damn the torpedoes.
 
Jim K said:
They were not terrible until the last day before they pulled the comments. After Dan Gryder posted it on FB, there were some really nasty comments posted about the host in question, so I can understand why they pulled them. I'm surprised they decided to put the show on hold. I really expected them to plow ahead, damn the torpedoes.
Click to expand...
Yeah I only saw the first few, enjoy the content.
 
AOPA needs to figure out their audience. Agenda or not, my guess is that most of my circle of friends wouldn't be too impressed by their choices at this point, and the segment of the population that they ARE appealing to, is not the people knocking on my door for flight training.
 
Yup....that ain't goin over well in Peoria. o_O
RyanShort1 said:
AOPA needs to figure out their audience. Agenda or not, my guess is that most of my circle of friends wouldn't be too impressed by their choices at this point, and the segment of the population that they ARE appealing to, is not the people knocking on my door for flight training.
Click to expand...
 
Dave Anderson said:
I kinda stopped caring when they got an Extra 360 for the exec to play with. donation or not, sell it and stop asking me for more $
Click to expand...
I stopped caring after they sent me 2 emails within a few weeks asking to become a "legacy donor". Wanting me to give them my money when I kick off. I'm more valuable to them dead than I am alive.
 
Honest question - the issue is the age, attractiveness or orientation?

Why does that matter? I listen to people different from me to get good content (if the content is good).

comments were focused on no women commentators? Get more experienced? More attractive? Of a certain orientation / life choice?

I guess I didn’t see how it warranted much comment. Pretty boring (at least the first two minutes).
 
Terry M - 3CK (Chicago) said:
Honest question - the issue is the age, attractiveness or orientation?

Why does that matter? I listen to people different from me to get good content (if the content is good).

comments were focused on no women commentators? Get more experienced? More attractive? Of a certain orientation / life choice?

I guess I didn’t see how it warranted much comment. Pretty boring (at least the first two minutes).
Click to expand...
I find your line of questioning disingenuous.
 
2 things to clean up a comment section. Short quiz to make sure your intelligent enough to leave a comment on that particular forum, which I'd fail that more often than not. And full name and address in case someone has follow up questions.
 
AKiss20 said:
So being more relatable to you somehow outweighs it being relatable to people who are trans?

BS statements like this is why representation is important. There’s a million sources of “relatable” aviation content for middle aged, straight, cis, white guys. The one time someone produces some aviation content with something that is relatable to someone who isn’t you, you throw a fit?

give me a break. I might get banned for this post but this thread is really making my blood boil. The entitlement is unreal.
Click to expand...
That is why I’m quitting AOPA and moving to content that is more relatable to straight cis guys or girls. did you actually read the other response or did you just get ideologically locked up?
AOPA can do whatever they want but they will do it without me. I don’t need them.
 
Last edited:
If more people simply 'turned it off' moderation would be much easier. I fear this thread will demonstrate that.

Nauga,
into the fray
 
AKiss20 said:
So being more relatable to you somehow outweighs it being relatable to people who are trans?

BS statements like this is why representation is important. There’s a million sources of “relatable” aviation content for middle aged, straight, cis, white guys. The one time someone produces some aviation content with something that is relatable to someone who isn’t you, you throw a fit? Not to mention the content had nothing to do with the gender identity of the hosts. You want relatable? Try relating to the content instead of focusing on the hosts for one second.

give me a break. I might get banned for this post but this thread is really making my blood boil. The entitlement is unreal.
Click to expand...
I'm explaining WHY it's turning people off. I'm not throwing a fit, just being "bold" enough to actually say, yeah, it's offensive to some of us.
And, your argument is stupid. If a trans person wants to fly, no one is stopping them. The "common ground" is the flying, not the sexual orientation. I don't think I have to see someone that looks, smells, tastes... just like me to relate, the CONTENT of what I want to do is the subject. Aviation is showcased by FLYING and aerial photography, not by earings, hair, lipstick, and makeup... if trans people can only relate to trans people, then there is absolutely something wrong with them. OTOH, hearing a guys voice coming out of a guy's face, which is obviously disguised, does indeed distract, and not in a pretty girl sort of way. Some people here don't like Dan Gryder's mug - it turns them off, along with his whiny tone. That distracts from his message, but it is who he is, and if people choose to tune in to his channel, they choose to do so. If you're used to a channel with a certain look, and they change it up for what appears to be purposes of appeasement for a group that is NOT their primary demographic, it looks like they are tone deaf.
 
nauga said:
If more people simply 'turned it off' moderation would be much easier. I fear this thread will demonstrate that.

Nauga,
into the fray
Click to expand...
Yes, but if you value something, it's not "immoral" to give the people who's product you valued feedback as to why you are no longer interested in their product, and that you'd like them to return it to what you were expecting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top