[mars6423]

I believe that there should be 4 groups of catorgories on this forum.

1) airline sympathisors- people who defend airlines at all cost, even if it is clear that the airline is in the wrong, and will not understand or accept that they maybe in the wrong

2) neutral- people who defend airlines when it is clear that it is the passengers fault that something occured (such as arriving at check-in 5mins before departure). However when it is apparent that the airline is in the wrong than they defend the passenger. Also may offer advice.

3) antiairline- people who will go against airlines just because they may not see that the airline was following the correct and accepted procedure, while the passenger was unruly and/or was in the wrong. Someone who is anti-industry and no matter what will defend a passenger even if it is clear that it was that persons fault.

4) advisor- people who provide advise and give pointers for situations that may arise out of a complaint so that it can be avoided


.......on a sidenote for the mods (jimworks) has been using the word (nazi) in some of his posts to describe an airline, many people aswell as myself are offended by his/her description or word choice, i would like the word nazi to be considered a unusable word, as it is commonly known for the regime that massacred millions of people and that there is no comparisson that could come close to what the nazi's did....jimworks please use another way to describe the airlines

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

First, your criteria appears slanted toward the airline industry.

Second, someone who is not familiar with this board probably could not figure-out, or be willing to look-up the definitions for, all these terms.

The current crop of "Airline Employee," "Former Airline Employee," "Airline Sympathizer" is unnecessarily excessive. A single "Airline Sympathizer" label appears to be a one-size fits all solution. The reality is that people, on both sides of the airline vs. consumer debate, will lie. There is no way to verify the authenticity of someone's claim to be an airline employee vs. a NON-airline employee any more than someone who says they work in the mail room at Delta Air when, in fact, all or part of their salary is from Delta's media relations dept.

As to bad language: That's a two-way street Mars. Accusing someone (or implying) someone has a mental disorder, as the airline people on here have done far more often than the pro-consumer people, can be every bit as offensive as calling someone a Nazi. On the other hand, if a person, or a group of people, voluntarily ADOPT a bad name, such as the Sky Nazi name some American Air flight attendants have used, then I have a hard time seeing how someone, who points this out, is using "bad language."

[jimworcs]

My use of the term Nazi is to convey the attitude of totalitarianism and abuse of power. I consider many airline employees, especially since 9/11 have totally abused their power. We place very considerable training requirements and restrictions on those who have legal powers, such as police for example. Unfortunately, since 9/11 we have given similar powers to airline employees and TSA employees. Sadly, many of these people have neither the training, nor in some cases, the intellect to manage such power. This is very similar to what happened in Germany, when the brownshirts were given powers, but were not a disciplined police or military force. They abused their power. I think there is a fair analogy to be drawn.

For example, a flight attendant who had a child removed from an airplane because he kept saying "bye bye plane" and it was getting on her nerves. This intolerant abuse of power is outrageous and I feel that drawing an analogy with nazi attitudes is legitimate criticism and free speech. Similarly, the abuse of power to hold passengers hostage for up 9 hours against their will, often depriving them of access to basic facilities such as water, toilets and medications because it would be inconvenient to the airline to disembark them is a similar abuse of power.

There appears to be a *** for tat war going on, in which people are reporting each other to the moderators, calling for Butch to be banned, and Butch calling for DL to be banned, etc. I have never reported anyone for abusive posts or messages, nor have I ever called for anyone to be banned. At one point, PHX was banned from this board, in part, because of supposed "abusive" postings aimed at me. I wrote to the mods asking for him to be re-instated. Come on guys... this is free speech, why is everyone so sensitive.

I am sorry Mars if you find the word Nazi offensive, but just because you are offended is no reason whatsoever to impede free speech. You have never heard me make a comparison between airline employees and the desire to murder millions. Nazism was a political movement which was also associated with the abuse of power... my comparison is made in that context and I think most reasonably intelligent readers would understand that.

This does not mean that I think some airline employees support the holocaust, are anti-semitic or plan to invade Poland.

[justme]

Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy Slept Here

The current crop of "Airline Employee," "Former Airline Employee," "Airline Sympathizer" is unnecessarily excessive. A single "Airline Sympathizer" label appears to be a one-size fits all solution.

The problem with that solution is there are some of us, "Pro-Airline" posters that don't always side with the airline. It depends on the situation. Giving everyone a blanket label would be ill-fitted because it is subjective. And the people being "subjective" are self admittedly always Pro-Consumer.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

A Lufthansa spokesman.jpg

Vas ist Nazi! Me and Helga are off to Las Vegas. Lufthansa, First Class of course.

[Jetliner]

Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy Slept Here

Vas ist Nazi!

Um, I don't know. What is Nazi? (Vas = What, not this)

Anyway, I think this whole thing of labels is nuts. Who cares? I will stand behind what I post, no matter what label is up there.

Butch - in all fairness, while I understand you point about not being able to prove who is who, no more than we can't prove you aren't Kate Hani herself, I really don't think we have any media department people here. Take your example of Delta. If someone was with media relations (or whatever the department) I would expect them to then either side with people complaining about AirTran (Delta's biggest competition) or not post at all and let the complaints be. I don't keep up that much with who posts where, but I think all of the regulars post across the boards. Even the current airline employees seem to post airline to airline.

The problem is too many people think that just because you don't side with the passenger, you are automatically a sympathizer, even if the passenger is dead wrong.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

just because you don't side with the passenger

Jetliner: It's not a question of always siding with the passenger. That's impossible in all cases. It's how the pro-airline people on here DON'T side with the passenger. There are posters on here, other than myself, who have noted posts, from pro-airline people, the content of which was not far removed from what one would hear from a borderline sociopathic gate agent or flight attendant. I'm talking about snotty comments for one thing. I can't remember anything openly abusive. But, if I looked I wouldn't be surprised if I found something.

Even those stupid form letters the airlines crank-out manage to be superficially polite while disagreeing with the passenger.

Jetliner, you and your airline friends and I have a basic difference in philosophy which is probably the source of a lot of the contention noted on this board. My basic position is that air travel, at least in the USA, is NOT customer friendly. That Contract of Carriage, for one thing, is NOT easy to read. If one were to give a mass reading comprehension test based on a contract of carriage for, say American Air, I think you'd have something close to 50% with failing grades. For someone to have a reasonable shot at a problem-free trip planning, at a level comparable to preparation for a filing of IRS Form 1040, with Schedule A, is required. There's the issue of how far in advance of your flight do you arrive at the airport. How does one have a problem-free experience with TSA? What do you say or do, or not say or do? Frankly I recommend citing one's 5th Amendment right to remain silent, and forgoe any cabin service, once the door to the aircraft is shut and/or there are no more routine questions to be asked.

With all the "hoops" an air traveller must jump through it's no surprise you get cases of people wanting to check their baggage 10 minutes prior to flight departure or someone who doesn't observe the time frame applicable to reporting delayed/lost baggage. The important thing is to be calm and polite with these people, not treat them as "the enemy," "self-loading cargo," or assume they were verbally, or physically, abusive before you've even heard the full story. Having even 70 years of airline experience does not give one a license to act like this.

An example of what I consider to be excellent behavior, by all concerned, can be seen at:

“Visa”

http://www.airlinecomplaints.org/showthread.php?t=5003

The posts were a bit repetitive but everyone was indeed polite, even though some might say the OP made a stupid mistake.

[jimworcs]

Originally Posted by justme

the people being "subjective" are self admittedly always Pro-Consumer.

Er....no. I am perceived to be pro-consumer, but have regularly posted comments which challenge passengers who have unreasonable expectations. Just me... I am afraid all postings on here are "subjective"... which ever side of the fence you are on.

I don't particularly like the use of labels, but you have to start from the premise that this board is called "Airline Complaints". It is not the same as Flyertalk or Airliners.net... it's reason d'etre is to provide a single place where people can make public their grievances with airlines. Therefore it is not neutral. It sets out to try to champion the consumer. That is the reason that the moderator has chosen to label those who are prone to challenge the consumer perspective.

If I was in charge of the boards, I would certainly not have labels. I would not even have "airline employee" as a label. I would simply post prominantly on a banner on each page which says "remember, posters may not be who they appear to be". Beyond that, I would leave it to grown adults to get on with it. But, I am not.. and the moderator pays his money and makes his choice. Our only alternatives are take it, or lump it.

Mars attempt to classify everyone is bonkers, but may be cultural. He is a big fan of Singapore, where regulation of every aspect of your life is routine. It is a highly ordered society, where you cannot chew gum, and it is actually a criminal offense not to flush the toilet. Bliss for control freaks, but my idea of hell!

[The_Judge]

"and it is actually a criminal offense not to flush the toilet"

I like that idea...I have a room-mate guilty of that.

[mars6423]

jimworks, have you ever been to singapore? I just brought a bunch of family over from england and they all had the expectation that it was how you described it ashighly ordered and very controling, and yet they loved every second they were there, and wished that england was more like it.

yeah some of the laws may sound crazy, like flushing the toilet, but wouldnt you rather go to a toilet where you dont have to look at someone elses waste? alot of the laws are for personal hygene, and i think thats important since singapore is a tiny country with 4million people living there.

The people in singapore are much more upbeat and positive than anywhere else i have been. I was glad to leave england where so many people seemed to be depressed and it seemed that you couldnt walk down any street safely...my family said its gotten worse and my brother was randomly attacked twice while running.....the laws in singapore and the punishments deter people from wanting to commit crimes, people respect the laws and abide by them, it creates a good living society for everyone.

besides talking about gum....my sister and my mom who came over to singapore, told me that in england they are trying to limit or stop chewing gum, besides at least in singapore it is clean

and i understand the way you use the word nazi and the manner that you use it, and freedom of speech but in this forum as well as others i believe there are words that are blocked ex curse words, but whatever not important, i didnt say that you were calling airlines nazi's (if i did than that was my mistake, i didnt correctly write what i was thinking, so if thats the case i apologize) comparing them to what the nazi's did,

[jimworcs]

Well, without trying to go off topic too far.... I have no issue with Singapore's somewhat paternalistic legal framework. I just would prefer to live in a liberal democracy in which the government does not feel that it needs to regulate every aspect of life, such as flushing the toilet. Countries like Singapore and Switzerland are lovely, well ordered societies... I just wouldn't want to live there. Especially as I am gay, and the law doesn't much like that either!

That doesn't mean I want to live with Troy's room-mate... and his propensity for leaving gifts, I just don't want the government poking it's nose into my ablutions.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

I would not even have "airline employee" as a label. I would simply post prominantly on a banner on each page which says "remember, posters may not be who they appear to be".

Again, my concern is with "full disclosure" to the aggreived customer who may not know the character of this board. If one were to run a forum for complaints about doctors, and a majority of those who post regularly were either doctors; their friends and relatives; or those who work in the health care field, it would be a major omission not to disclose this fact. So, as an alternative to a single "Airline Sympathizer" label, or ANY labels, a banner of the type shown below might be appropriate.

A place where airline professionals offer their advice.

Some might argue this is misleading. There are posters on here who are, clearly, knowlegable about airline procedures but allege to not be connected with an airline. Still this type of banner sets what I think is a tone that reflects the reality of this board and can thus, at least, reduce the surprise some customers have shown by the replies they get.

[mars6423]

the government in singapore isnt as involved as you may think it may be, i feel just as free living there as i do living in the United States, in many cases i felt more freedoms in singapore than i did when i was in england where i was born. I regret having to go back and see family from time to time, each time i have gone back it seems people have lost another freedom there, and that everything feels more regulated and my relatives feel the same way

i believe that if you visit singapore than you would understand and its hard to demonstrate while someone who has never been to the country has views on it just based on the countries info

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

"Airline Employees," "Former Airline Employees," and "Sympathizers" OUT-NUMBER "the others" (now, is THAT a politically correct phrase?) TWO to ONE:

14 to 7

If Gromit801 were counted as an "other," the total would then be 13 to 8

These figures are current to today. They reflect all users with 20 or more posts. They EXCLUDE any users who have NOT posted within 60 days prior to today (08-30-09.)

The "Last Visit" date was used to determine the most recent post. I know this is not reliable in that someone can log-on, and not post.

I'll be glad to post my source material if it appears people want to see it.

[PHXFlyer]

Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy Slept Here

"Airline Employees," "Former Airline Employees," and "Sympathizers" OUT-NUMBER "the others" (now, is THAT a politically correct phrase?) TWO to ONE:

14 to 7

If Gromit801 were counted as an "other," the total would then be 13 to 8

These figures are current to today. They reflect all users with 20 or more posts. They EXCLUDE any users who have NOT posted within 60 days prior to today (08-30-09.)

The "Last Visit" date was used to determine the most recent post. I know this is not reliable in that someone can log-on, and not post.

I'll be glad to post my source material if it appears people want to see it.

Since most "complainants" post only once or twice and usually never post any follow-up information your data is seriously flawed so the "Statistics" are meaningless.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

So, Phx, we're supposed to believe that there is, actually, fair representation of both "airline," and "non-airline on this board?" And, if your answer is "yes," lets see YOUR figures and how you got them!

As to frequent posters: The break-down for those with 100 or more posts was 9 to 4, favoring the "airline" people. Gromit was counted as an "airline" person.

[jimworcs]

Mars..
I am well aware of the social and governmental problems in the UK, and I am far from happy about the overbearing intervention by government in the UK either. This does not preclude me from stating categorically, that I do not wish to live in a country which seeks to regulate whether I chew gum, flush the toilet or what I get up to in the privacy of my bedroom. However, for those who wish to live in such a society, fill your boots. I would not wish to do so, but then I doubt they would wish to live with me either!

Butch..
I am not sure the statisical analysis you have made reveals much, although I admire your dedication to the cause. Isn't the basic point that anyone is free to come onto the board and say what they want. If airline defenders "swamp" the board, airline complainers are perfectly entitled to "swamp" it back. It's free speech and the truth will out.

If you read the threads on here, I think you get a fairly good picture of the abuses of their monopoly power in the US... despite the efforts of the "defenders" and "sympathizers"....

[The_Judge]

Originally Posted by jimworcs

and his propensity for leaving gifts

As you well know....it's not a him. That's what's funny about it. What chick does that?

btw......for the record, I've no problem with being given a label. I think it helps the OP'er to decide what weight to give the response.

[justme]

Originally Posted by jimworcs

Er....no. I am perceived to be pro-consumer, but have regularly posted comments which challenge passengers who have unreasonable expectations. Just me... I am afraid all postings on here are "subjective"... which ever side of the fence you are on.

Jim, what I meant to convey when I said, "Giving everyone a blanket label would be ill-fitted because it is subjective. And the people being "subjective" are self admittedly always Pro-Consumer." was that the moderators are the ones who decide if you are "pro airline" or "pro consumer." They are the ones that are self admittedly, and as you pointed out rightly so, pro-consumer. That fact is what makes the idea of them deciding who gets what label, IMO, a bad idea because their ideas are biased to begin with.

[jimworcs]

Sorry Troy.. I can't believe I made such an error, I do indeed know it is a her!! Thank god she lives in Bangkok and not Singapore.. you would constantly be bailing her out of jail!!

Just me... sorry, I misinterpreted what you were saying. You are right of course, the decision of which label is applied is also highly subjective, but I don't think there is any pretence that the board is neutral.. it is self avowedly, anti airline!

[abutterfinger25]

Originally Posted by Butch Cassidy Slept Here

"Airline Employees," "Former Airline Employees," and "Sympathizers" OUT-NUMBER "the others" (now, is THAT a politically correct phrase?) TWO to ONE:

14 to 7

If Gromit801 were counted as an "other," the total would then be 13 to 8

These figures are current to today. They reflect all users with 20 or more posts. They EXCLUDE any users who have NOT posted within 60 days prior to today (08-30-09.)

The "Last Visit" date was used to determine the most recent post. I know this is not reliable in that someone can log-on, and not post.

I'll be glad to post my source material if it appears people want to see it.

Just wonder which category I fit in

Originally Posted by jetliner

while I understand you point about not being able to prove who is who, no more than we can't prove you aren't Kate Hani herself.

I can say with an almost 100% guarantee that Butch is not Kate Hani. She is a little too ego-centric to be hiding behind a fake name.

I believe that the whole use of labels on the site is to give the casual poster an understanding of the point of view of the responders of the original post.

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

Just wonder which category I fit in

You were counted among the "others"--the 7 pro-consumer posters. Regardless of what your personal feelings may, or may not, be toward those in the passenger rights movement your posts appear to have, overwhelmingly, provided information supportive of airline consumers. And I note you managed to do this even under your former bosses--the G.W. Bush Administration.

As to labels: I suspect the most of the "airline" people on here don't want ANY labels, in ANY form. I did note one "sort of" dissention. Anyway, I wonder if my previously-suggested banner comment would be seen as the lesser of two evils

A place where airline professionals offer their advice.

[The_Judge]

Originally Posted by BCSH

I did note one "sort of" dissention.

If you're referring to me and this quote, "......for the record, I've no problem with being given a label. I think it helps the OP'er to decide what weight to give the response."
There was nothing, "sort of" about it. I don't know how much more clear I could have been.

Troy-biting my tongue hard

[Butch Cassidy Slept Here]

"......for the record, I've (there should be) no problem with being given a label. I think it helps the OP'er to decide what weight to give the response."

Judge, it comes-down to a matter of honesty. There may be some who have no problem with posting complaints on an airline blog. A lot of people choose not to because the character of the forum is self-evident. The character of THIS forum is NOT as self-evident. Honesty is owed to unknowing posters so an informed decision can be made as to whether to even post at all.

This forum is represented by airline people, "sympathizers," etc. two to one, favoring the latter. The figures are based on actions taken by the moderator, specifically his assigning labels and requiring airlines employees to self-identify. In other words, I didn't make these numbers up. There's no way these numbers can be cooked to make it look like there is "balance" on this board--no matter how hard some people may want to try or despite the efforts of some to dismiss said numbers as irrelevant.

I’d like to think I have the ability to express loyalty to former colleagues—at least in cases where there is no overriding public interest or interest of justice. So, if it means anything Judge, I would likewise use the word “I’ve” if I were in your position.

Most on here will, doubtless, be overjoyed to hear I'll be sitting this game out for a while. If the moderator wants to make it permanent, by all means, go for it!

[The_Judge]

From this post, I draw the conclusion BCSH is on the bench for awhile. Too bad. Hopefully, he'll be back to keep things interesting.
Sometimes we all have to take a step back and remember (I did this recently) it's only a forum. It's not life and death when it finally gets here.