[Bill Cummings]

This thread has developed into a extensive unproductive waste of time. This diversion should not only be locked down but relocated in the, “free speech zone.” Other than to say that I have no further comment.

[Bob Kuczewski]

This thread has developed into a extensive unproductive waste of time.

I suspect that was Jacmac's point about Tad. I think he (Jacmac) was pointing out that a computer program spewing a truly unending stream of nastiness is pretty much what's on Tad's web site. I think he was also hinting that selecting the 20 paragraph version and posting it was about the maximum level of effort that we should be spending on Tad's remarks.

This diversion should not only be locked down but relocated in the, “free speech zone.” Other than to say that I have no further comment.

I've asked Jacmac if I can add a red moderator's note on the top of his post so new people will know what they're reading. How does that sound?

[Jacmac]

Bob, I don't know why we can't edit our own posts, but add this:

The following is a joke, so well played, that people continue to think it is real. It is not real folks, read or skim through the follow on posts to see how it was done. The main thing is that it baffled Tad for a while!

[Bob Kuczewski]

Bob, ... add this:

The following is a joke, so well played, that people continue to think it is real. It is not real folks, read or skim through the follow on posts to see how it was done. The main thing is that it baffled Tad for a while!

Thanks for that update. I took me a while to "get" it as well.    I think your note will help.

Bob, I don't know why we can't edit our own posts...

There are a few reasons. First, if person "A" writes something, and person "B" responds, and then person "A" changes what they wrote, then person B's response may appear out of context ... when it originally wasn't. Second, it's consistent with the spoken word ... once you say something you can't "unsay" it. You can correct it or elaborate on it, but once spoken, words cannot be "unspoken". Finally, I've seen forums where people have gotten mad and gone back and deleted all their posts ... essentially erasing history. It's hard to learn from history when you can't trust it.

So we have a standard 1 hour editing period for each post on the US Hawks. Beyond that, I am happy to make minor corrections (spelling, grammar, clarification, etc) as long as they don't seriously alter the meaning of the post. I can also add notes (like the one you wrote above) indicating more substantial changes so the context of subsequent posts is still understandable.

Once the Board forms, we can review these policies, so any suggestions are always welcome. I hope you'll consider volunteering for the Board Jacmac!!   

[Merlin]

I didn't get it at first either, reason: TL;DR
That is one verbose generator.

[Bob Kuczewski]

I didn't get it at first either, reason: TL;DR
That is one verbose generator.

Hi Merlin,

I've enjoyed your posts and thoughts. Would you mind participating in our trial Board of Directors? It's not a commitment. In fact, it's more of an ... experiment. What do you think?

[wingspan33]

Despite the RED Note at the beginning of this thread I had no real idea of what was going on - till the "complaint letter" link was provided. And even then it did not sink in. I was convinced that Jacmac was schizophrenic - in complaining about himself (? ? ?) and that this thread was proof of that sad fact.

Luckily, Bob's post snapped everything into clear view - along with my own "writing" of a complaint letter via the linked web site.

Now I am ROTFL -

One thing that I would point out is that there seems to be a modified version of this "complaint letter" generator. A version in which foul language is inserted in place of the otherwise (extremely) elevated vocabulary utilized. That would explain a lot!

Hey, maybe I missed a "Profanity Inserted" option at the Complaint Letter web site?

[Bob Kuczewski]

Hey, maybe I missed a "Profanity Inserted" option at the Complaint Letter web site?

That's the one thing that's missing from any comparison between those auto-generated letters and Tad's profanity-laced writing.

[Rick Masters]

I don't know why we can't edit our own posts...

It's an authoritarian measure at odds with the principles of democracy. What I write is my product. It is my right to change or remove what I write. Period. Such a policy relays a poor level of respect from the operator. The inability to correct errors tends to limit one's enthusiasm and/or participation if one has high standards regarding communication.

Second, it's consistent with the spoken word

Speaking is consistent with the spoken word. Writing is consistent with the written word.

person "A" changes what they wrote, then person B's response may appear out of context

This is a "problem?" This is a problem more important than the resulting lack of participation? No. I would describe it as an imaginary problem used for the purpose of rationalizing an inadequate forum structure that impedes complex responses.

[Bob Kuczewski]

I don't know why we can't edit our own posts...

It's an authoritarian measure at odds with the principles of democracy.

From Cleisthenes to Thomas Jefferson (and beyond) democracies were founded by men who wrote letters and stood behind them. Sometimes they were even chiseled in stone.

What I write is my product. It is my right to change or remove what I write. Period. Such a policy relays a poor level of respect from the operator. The inability to correct errors tends to limit one's enthusiasm and/or participation if one has high standards regarding communication.

Members have all the time in the world to research a topic and correct any errors before posting them. Posting is like pushing the "Send" button on an email or dropping a letter in a US Postal box. It becomes part of history. And just like a letter or an email, it becomes the possesion of the recipient. But unlike a letter or an email, members do have an additional hour to change it anyway they like ... and for any reason. Beyond that hour, members can even request changes that are consistent with what they wrote indefinately. That's all much more than you can do with a letter or an email message. And of course, anything anyone writes can be used by them anywhere else they want. We don't copyright what people write to keep them from republishing it anywhere else. Note that this needs to be codified so it's clear that the poster does NOT give up their ability to use their own words anywhere else they want. That's implied right now, but I'd like to be sure that's an official policy.

Second, it's consistent with the spoken word

Speaking is consistent with the spoken word. Writing is consistent with the written word.

Posting to a public forum is like sending a letter to be published in a newspaper or magazine ... in writing. Once it's published, it can only be corrected by a further publication that describes the correction.

person "A" changes what they wrote, then person B's response may appear out of context

This is a "problem?" This is a problem more important than the resulting lack of participation? No. I would describe it as an imaginary problem used for the purpose of rationalizing an inadequate forum structure that impedes complex responses.

Allowing people to change what they've written would create a forum where no one knows what really happened or when it happened. That's the nightmarish future that George Orwell predicted back when "1984" was still in the future. The "Ministry of Truth" would go around rewriting history whenever they wanted. That's the way hanggliding.org and the Oz Forum already are. When you go there you have no idea what's been removed or altered ... or by whom. That's one of the major motivating factors for the US Hawks. We stand for truth. We don't need to rewrite our history because we don't say what we don't mean in the first place. And if we do make a mistake, we publicly admit it and correct it. We don't cover it up after the fact.

Having said all of that , we could possibly create a separate place (forum? wiki?) where it's understood that people can change what they post to their heart's content. But I would argue that it should NOT be in the main discussion forums where the history of what we write should matter.

But all of this is academic right now. All of the future rules of the US Hawks will be determined by our Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation. That's what we're working to build. If you want to be part of the team that creates that framework, I'd surely welcome it.