No-politics zone

jmaynard

jmaynard

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
1,487
Location
Fairmont, Minnesota
Display Name
Display name:
Jay Maynard
I fly, and talk about aviation, to get away from politics. With the recent discussion in Hangar Talk showing that that's not a no-politics zone, are there any forums on this site that are guaranteed politics-free? As it is, I'm going to have to drop Hangar Talk.
 
Jay, most of them will be fairly free of politics, but politics is part of life, so it will pop up almost anywhere.

I really hope that you stick with us - in just a few weeks this will all be over.
 
TMetzinger said:
I really hope that you stick with us - in just a few weeks this will all be over.
Click to expand...
I doubt it. There's enough rancor and bad blood on both sides of the argument that we won't hear the end of it.

There are times I just want to get away from it. Unfortunately, my impression that it was supposed to be confined to the Spin Zone turned out to be incorrect.

Part of it is that it really, really appears to me that the partisans of one candidate can get away with murder, or nearly so, and those tho favor the other are on a much tighter leash. There's only one person on here who I can definitely point a finger toward, though, but he is constantly skirting the line, and getting away with it.

I'm heartily sick of it all. I can't say a good chunk of the reason why that's the case, lest I get slapped down for bringing politics into this, but I'll remain quiet. I simply wish that the rules would be enforced equally, and that there was a place we could all retreat to to get away from it.
 
Jay,

They are hopeless over there. Just hit the button. It's not worth the aggravation.

Wayne
 
John,

I share your frustration. The political threads tend to be a bunch of blowhards who like to listen to themselves talk. No "debate," just try to out-shout the other. I avoid Spin Zone. I'm upset the HT thread has begun spinning already. Hopefully the mods will put it where it belongs.
 
jmaynard said:
I doubt it. There's enough rancor and bad blood on both sides of the argument that we won't hear the end of it.
Click to expand...

Remember the good ol days when the winners extend a hand to the "non winners" and we would all join hands and sing God Bless America? :cheers: Neither do I.

Personally, I think that way though. Seriously, whoever wins is my president. Get over it and move on.
 
Last edited:
Most pilots, because of their type A personalities, don't understand the definition of "No".

My dog does.

But pilots don't.

It's sad on many levels.
 
jmaynard said:
There are times I just want to get away from it.
Click to expand...

Only way to do that right now is to lock yourself in a box and yell "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" at the top of your lungs until Nov. 5th. (Hopefully we won't end up with the same situation as 2000!)

That said, there are very few political threads in Hangar Talk, and if you see one you either 1) don't click on it, or 2) Well, never mind. I thought you could go into "thread tools" and choose "ignore this thread" but apparently not. :dunno:
 
Jay,
I understand your frustration. I've not joined the SZ for that very reason. That said, the current threads, while they do talk about politicians, are pretty aviation-related. I'm an ASN rep for my airport, and I realize that politics DO play a role in what goes on in aviation, like it or not. If we ignore it, it tends to ignore our wishes, which isn't a good situation. No matter who wins the upcoming election, it behooves you to have an inkling of their stance on aviation-related topics.

Maybe I'm somewhat insulated from all the rhetoric, since I'm from a state that isn't considered to be in play in this election. But I still try to pay attention.:yes:
 
The social style research shows pilots are no different from the population at large. Some of all kinds. Some Chuck Yeagers, some Andrea's, lots of them just like your dog, always trying to please. That's one of the big reasons why they end up in the ditch.

timwinters said:
Most pilots, because of their type A personalities, don't understand the definition of "No".

My dog does.

But pilots don't.

It's sad on many levels.
Click to expand...
 
Just hit the button and bypass those you don't want to read. I'm a regular in the SZ and even do so in that forum. I've considered leaving and if things don't change in the SZ, I may pull from it. I'm hoping some of the bloviating going on does diminish after another few weeks.
 
Political threads do not belong in Hangar Talk unless they are also aviation related.

If you are finding political threads occurring outside of The Spin Zone, please report the thread using the "bad post" button
report.gif
so as to bring it to our attention, and we will move it (provided we concur that the thread is both political and non-aviation related).

Thank you.
 
tdager said:
Nope....I will not "get over it". There are serious philosophical and policy differences between the two candidates. One of them is so far out of tune with me and what I believe that should he win I will consider him an enemy occupier and will quietly suffer under the yoke of his oppression until he is forced out of office (BTW, I am not advocating, nor condone, violence as a means of protest).

THAT is my reality...and the depths of the divisions that exist between me and one party/candidate. :dunno:
Click to expand...

I think roughly 50% of the country know exactly what you are talking about.
 
Greebo said:
Political threads do not belong in Hangar Talk unless they are also aviation related.
Click to expand...
Not good enough.

"It's politics, politics, politics, aviation, and politics."
"But I don't want any politics!"

As things stand, any thread in Hangar Talk is subject to taking a turn into politics. If I'm trying to avoid politics entirely, I have to avoid the entire forum.
 
No one forces anybody to open political threads or any thread for that matter.
 
jmaynard said:
If I'm trying to avoid politics entirely, I have to avoid the entire forum.
Click to expand...
Actually, Jay, if one wants to avoid politics entirely one needs to do a whole lot more than that! One can't go outside (lawn signs), turn on any electronic media (TV, radio, internet), or read any publication. Plus one winds up being ill-informed and, in my mind, unqualified to vote and thus forgo any moral right to complain about any laws or regulations that may affect one.
 
Politics is an undeniably integral part of human interaction.

What gets tedious is the constant drumbeating for one candidate over the other in what should be a non-partisan forum.
 
jmaynard said:
Not good enough.

"It's politics, politics, politics, aviation, and politics."
"But I don't want any politics!"

As things stand, any thread in Hangar Talk is subject to taking a turn into politics. If I'm trying to avoid politics entirely, I have to avoid the entire forum.
Click to expand...

Aviation has a political aspect to it. You can't hide from politics in aviation.

So your choices remain, either you:
1) avoid threads that turn political; or
2) REPORT them to us (because contrary to popular misconception, we don't have time to read every post here), and if they are out of bounds, we will move them, so that you can avoid them.
 
Greebo said:
Aviation has a political aspect to it. You can't hide from politics in aviation.
Click to expand...
When I'm flying, I don't have time to think, or talk, about politics. I'm flying the airplane.

So your choices remain, either you:
1) avoid threads that turn political; or
2) REPORT them to us (because contrary to popular misconception, we don't have time to read every post here), and if they are out of bounds, we will move them, so that you can avoid them.
Click to expand...
The problem is that any thread in Hangar Talk can turn political, and it's clear that some politics is not considered "out of bounds". For me to avoid it completely, I must avoid the forum.

Where else is politics not considered "out of bounds", so I can avoid that too?
 
I don't think about politics when I fly either. Oh wait. Yes I do. TFR's, the ADIZ, Restricted Areas, MOA's, FAA regs are all influenced by guess what? POLITICS.

Personally, I want to know who is most likely to positively or negatively influence GA flying and often it is NON PARTISAN. Looking at this month's AOPA Pilot mag there are six Democrats out of nineteen legislators that actively support GA, including John Kerry.
 
jmaynard said:
When I'm flying, I don't have time to think, or talk, about politics. I'm flying the airplane.


The problem is that any thread in Hangar Talk can turn political, and it's clear that some politics is not considered "out of bounds". For me to avoid it completely, I must avoid the forum.

Where else is politics not considered "out of bounds", so I can avoid that too?
Click to expand...

Any politics that are avation related can be in any forum. Aviation medical rule making politics could be in the medical forum, general flight rule politics could be in flight following, Politics over TFR's could be in the way of a "cool place to fly", Politics relating to aircraft mantiance orders could be in the matinance bay... get over it, you have to deal with some.
 
Missa said:
Any politics that are avation related can be in any forum. Aviation medical rule making politics could be in the medical forum, general flight rule politics could be in flight following, Politics over TFR's could be in the way of a "cool place to fly", Politics relating to aircraft mantiance orders could be in the matinance bay... get over it, you have to deal with some.
Click to expand...

The thing of it is, there are politics and then there are POLITICS. The politics I can deal with. The POLITICS, I try to avoid as much as possible.
 
jmaynard said:
When I'm flying, I don't have time to think, or talk, about politics. I'm flying the airplane.
Click to expand...
And you also aren't posting on a forum. This is a forum, not an airplane.

The problem is that any thread in Hangar Talk can turn political, and it's clear that some politics is not considered "out of bounds". For me to avoid it completely, I must avoid the forum.

Where else is politics not considered "out of bounds", so I can avoid that too?
Click to expand...
If the politics is related to aviation, you can't.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
The thing of it is, there are politics and then there are POLITICS. The politics I can deal with. The POLITICS, I try to avoid as much as possible.
Click to expand...
That sounds like something I can identify with.

Every time I call for a brief the subject of TFRs come up. A couple times those really screwed up my plans and I was ticked. Why do they exist? Washington Pests infringing on our liberties for their own sake. That sounds like politics to me. You can't avoid it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
KennyFlys said:
That sounds like something I can identify with.

Every time I call for a brief the subject of TFRs come up. A couple times those really screwed up my plans and I was ticked. Why do they exist? Washington Pests infringing on our liberties for their own sake. That sounds like politics to me. You can't avoid it.
Click to expand...

When I agree with Kenny I know we're on to a deep truth. Truly, to keep the President absolutely safe we should evacuate every city he visits. Then there is no one to possibly harm him. Obviously this is unworkable. On the other hand no one wants the leader of the free world out in the middle of town wearing a bullseye. We need something in between. I think what Kenny is driving at and I agree is that the security has perhaps moved over too much toward the evacuation model. Unfortunately the largest effect is on the smallest minority, us.
 
We do need a change in that area.

I have to wonder... on the day Bush showed up in Phoenix, the intended day to take my nephew and great nephew flying, what impact did that have on the economy in the Phoenix Valley? How many flight schools did that shut down for the day? How many instructors did not work and how many students lost out on their training regimen?

We do need something without that effect.
 
If the President is going to cause such a disruption when he visits, especially when it is to the site of some disaster, he should stay in Washington. Part of the problem is that when he doesn't visit people accuse him of not caring. Of course he cares... the same amount whether he is there or not. Visiting only gives him the opportunity for some photo ops of him hugging people. :rolleyes:

Lest anyone think this is too political or partisan, I'm talking about presidents of both parties.
 
Everskyward said:
If the President is going to cause such a disruption when he visits, especially when it is to the site of some disaster, he should stay in Washington. Part of the problem is that when he doesn't visit people accuse him of not caring. Of course he cares... the same amount whether he is there or not. Visiting only gives him the opportunity for some photo ops of him hugging people. :rolleyes:

Lest anyone think this is too political or partisan, I'm talking about presidents of both parties.
Click to expand...


And no matter which party he/she is if they don't actually go, the oppostion party will try to make them look uncaring and thus more TFR's!
 
Last edited:
I guess Jay has a really valid point. Politics, or politcal themes, can easily creep into any thread, and threads creep.
The TSA week-at-a-glance thread had posters discussing wetsuit urination. Human nature I guess. There's always the Red Board.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdager
Nope....I will not "get over it". There are serious philosophical and policy differences between the two candidates. One of them is so far out of tune with me and what I believe that should he win I will consider him an enemy occupier and will quietly suffer under the yoke of his oppression until he is forced out of office (BTW, I am not advocating, nor condone, violence as a means of protest).

THAT is my reality...and the depths of the divisions that exist between me and one party/candidate. :dunno:

woodstock said:
I think roughly 50% of the country know exactly what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

Well, maybe not quite, but, yes, if Neil Young sang about you.
 
smigaldi said:
I am loving the irony here in this thread!
Click to expand...

+1

All of the sudden people start talking politics in a thread begging for less politics.

I see his point now more than I did when I first read the thread. Some people just can't help themselves.
 
FlyNE said:
+1

All of the sudden people start talking politics in a thread begging for less politics.

I see his point now more than I did when I first read the thread. Some people just can't help themselves.
Click to expand...


The difference is that it has not gotten partisan nor vitriolic.
 
FlyNE said:
+1

All of the sudden people start talking politics in a thread begging for less politics.

I see his point now more than I did when I first read the thread. Some people just can't help themselves.
Click to expand...

But it has politics in the title so of course it's about politcs.:goofy:
 
Anthony said:
The difference is that it has not gotten partisan nor vitriolic.
Click to expand...
It sure has gotten partisan. One poster here has expressed his support for a candidate. That is what got Jay all upset in another thread and caused him to start this discussion. The difference this time is that the candidate is the one that Jay most likely supports as do you, so you are not seeing the partisan nature of the post in question.

But the issue is not whether one states one's candidate is better than another outside of the SZ. The issue is does it relate to aviation.

In any election or issue if one person in office is anti-GA and the other is pro-GA there is noting wrong, under the current rules, for anyone to point that out.

In the thread that started all of this, three people, me being one of them, pointed out that we felt one candidate was a better representative than the other for GA.

Two people then took issue with discussing aviation politics outside of the SZ. But the MC, the RoC, and the forum descriptions are clear that aviation related politics is ok outside of the SZ.

There are a lot of topics covered on PoA. Jay has expressed his disinterest in politics in any way shape or form. That is his opinion and he is free to pass those topics up. I for one really have no interest in the computer war (PC vs. Mac) threads that Jay and others find so compelling. But I have yet to call for a complete ban of that topic. I am simply able to not click on the thread titles of topics I do not want to read and move on.

We are all mostly adults here and should be able to recognize that we have choices. We can excerise free will in what we read and do not read.
 
Last edited:
You folks just may be getting a glimmer of what the MC goes through trying to deal with all this stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top