Debating: Tone and Content on Army.ca

[MattyH]

Altough, this forum isn't basic training and, from my understanding, isn't meant to be like that. 

And on Basic Training, I talked to my Course Officer about stuff I didn't like about the way he ran the course.  In private, of course...  Somehow, he was charged a few months after the course was done and subsequently released for the CFs for stuff that happened on our course.  Just to show that the staff isn't always right...  The simple mortal can be right

Max

I expect to be wrong 99.9% of the time... make no mistake.

 

[armyvern]

Altough, this forum isn't basic training and, from my understanding, isn't meant to be like that. 

And on Basic Training, I talked to my Course Officer about stuff I didn't like about the way he ran the course.  In private, of course...  Somehow, he was charged a few months after the course was done and subsequently released for the CFs for stuff that happened on our course.  Just to show that the staff isn't always right...  The simple mortal can be right

Max

SupersonicMax I invite you to do the same thing here and ask Mr. Bobbitt to change his guidelines to accomodate.
Mr. Bobbitt:

army@army.ca

And I'm truly hoping that your "simple mortals" comment with the wink wasn't meant to infer that the staff here are not of that group. That would be trolling. Keep it up and I will take your bait.

 

[Meridian]

As to all the posts that have been made regarding advice to new users to use the "search function"

This is not because they will necessarily find the specific answer they are looking for (but usually will), it is so that they post their question in an already running thread on the subject; saving this site bandwidth.

Except that I've seen this happen a few times in old threads, and people have been chastised (perhaps playfully, but new people don't always get DS humour, in the  military or out) for "reopening" old topics.  Clearly there are a lot of newbies who create new threads where there is a relatively active topic they could use already... I'm not making an X or Y argument here, just saying that -sometimes- it can appear unfair.


As to 48th's earlier question to me about seeing Mod's use their power unjustly...  My point is less about it necessarily being true, and more about perception.  Lots of people I'm sure tend to add much more weight to any comment made by someone with a Mod/DS icon on their profile...  should they? I don't know, but many people do.  Lots of other people dismiss comments by mods as someone pulling their weight for no reason.  Should they?  I think not... 

I'm not debating your abilities necessarily to remain impartial... I was simply putting forth an option to facilitate the perception that you are.  From the topics on this topic that I've seen here and in the past, I think a lot more of the problem has to do with how people -perceive- they are being approached, rather than how they really are.

 

[the 48th regulator]

So your concern is with regards to perception?

Very valid point.  Now explain to me on this, do you value the weight of perception on all posters here, or does your eye only catch flashy avatars?

Obviously you did mention the avatar part, which is a shame.

As you miss a lot of other "Non" senior members here, who have never spent a day in uniform, mouthing off and getting caught.

A shame all of that was lost due to my pee comment.  Maybe you are correct, in this Fast Food digital generation, it is all about who the top dog is and how they are perceived, as opposed to the underhanded snide comments made by the average Joe.

However, Meridian, it is my job here Voluntarily, to catch those types of posts and correct the member that post them.  And I have the fortitude to withstand the attacks of those who can't see from the end of their nose.  I live with integrity with regards to my duty.

dileas

tess

 

[scoutfinch]

Meridian:

I am generally pretty quick to step in and call posters on stupid comments, failures to search, msn-speak and poor attitudes.  I have remained out of this discussion to this point; however, your last comment provided a focal point for my thoughts.

While I appreciate what you are saying, let's be realistic:  there are 10,000 members of this site, if I recall correctly.  The mods cannot be expected to balance the individual perceptions of various posters.

Bottom line:  Matthew Hopkins was out of line in a number of posts.  He demonstrated a poor attitude when not satisfied with the tenor of answers to his questions, as evidenced by his responses to airmich.  He pulled rank (and I remain of the opinion that he was rightly called on this whether it was inadvertant or not -- he needs to learn NOW that the expression "rank has its privilege" should really be rank IS a privilege, one that he has yet to earn.)  He continues to bray about his mistreatment.  The mods have handled this situation as professionally as Mr. Hopkins has permitted but they should not be expected to sit back and accept unwarranted public criticism from posters such as Mr. Hopkins.

Mr Hopkins:  You have much to learn.  I understand that your initial forays here have been in an effort to gain information about your future career.  Your questions demonstrate a sincere effort to inform yourself.  The problem is with your listening skills. I advise you to take a few moments to re-read the advice provided to you over the past few days and take it to heart.  I will be very frank with you -- your performance here to date has done nothing to impress me.  I hope that you can turn it around and become a valued contributing member of this Board and to the military in general.  That being said, if you don't change your attitude, you are in for some difficult times. The ball is in your court now, what you do with it is up to you.

 

[Michael OLeary]

On that note, I am locking this thread.  If anyone wishes it to be reopened, please appeal to Mike Bobbitt (and him alone) for a repeal.  He may decide to open it, or not, or to split it into its various parts and may unlock one or more of them.

For now, this thread is locked.

Milnet.ca Staff