As some may know, the "Discussions+" category was specifically created years ago because of Ted's wholesale posting of "link posts", to the extent that there were numerous and ongoing member complaints about having to root through his clutter to find anything of interest or value to them. To work around the problem MFO created the "Discussions+" category, with the operational rule being that any post must have one or more comments to be eligible for this category. Virtually every member of MFO now understands this, and honors the procedure.
Except Ted.Because so few of his posts attract a comment, and evidently frustrated by his inability to enter Discussions+, he hit upon the brilliant idea of posting a comment himself, so as to fake out the system. At first, his "comment" consisted of the single word "bump". I called him on that.
Then he simply posted the letter "b". I called him on that.
Then he simply posted a single period (.). I called him on that.
And finally he realized that if he posts a phony "Update" notice, it will at least have the appearance of legitimacy. I call BS on this entire juvenile operation, and frequently post a notice to that effect in his "Closing Bell" threads.
And now...Ted, for reasons known only to himself, has chosen to personally attack me a number of times in the continuing coverage of
@hank's "737" thread. I contacted him privately to point out that that thread has over 90 comments, and over 1.2k views, as compared to one of his typical "Closing Bell" posts which typically attract very few views and virtually no comments.
He responded by, and I quote exactly:
"You can kiss my ass, and I'm going to ask David to ban you from the board".
I just thought that everyone should be aware of what's been going on here.
Thanks- OJ
Comments
Derf
As long as Ted honors the rules I have no problem with him.
Quick summary of Boeing 737 Max thread ...
- I initiated the thread March 10 after the second 737 Max disaster within about 6 months. It is a a brand new state of the art aircraft. Boeing and arch-rival Airbus are by far the dominant players in the highly profitable commercial aviation market. I felt there was both a financial and technology story here in addition to the human tragedy.
- The post resided in the “Discussions” section of the board until Ted bumped it over to the “Discussions +” section with a relevant comment on the next day.
- As of today the thread has elicited 95 separate comments from 15 different board members. One member mentioned buying some BA shares based in part on the discussion. One or two others hinted at selling their BA.
- The story continues to evolve with Congressional hearings on the FAA / Boeing certification process taking place in Washington this week.
- Ted has made 10 contributions to the thread (give or take). These seem about equally divided among: (1) constructive insights, (2) spirited verbal sparring and (3) unwelcome personal insults toward others.
From the unwelcome variety ...
- March 13: “@Old_Joe & hank: Stop piggy-backing the news items I link first. Find your own material, led ,follow, or get out of the way.” (Time stamp shows Ted did initiate a new, but related, thread on the same topic 2-minutes before I posted an update to my thread.)
- March 14: “@MFO Members: I didn't know that Wilber Wright's or Orville Wright's real name is Old_Joe !”
- March 22: Ted posted a video clip of a child pretending to fly a plane. Ted’s caption: “@MFO Members: OJ MFO's resident aircraft expert showing his stuff! I'm impressed, not.”
Two simple thoughts ...
- First, why has Ted been seeming to “troll” someone else’s thread repeatedly over a 2-week period? Lord knows he has a few of his own to attend to if he doesn’t find this one relevant.
- Secondly, I feel two of Ted’s posts were “over the top” in their treatment of individuals. They were / are not in accordance with mfo’s stated ethic to “encourage civility and good humor.”
Regards,
Ted
What I chose to do with the party that I feel needs to change their manners and the way they engage others was simply notify them that I had placed them on ignore. Perhaps, in time, I will lift my personal ignore block on them should I see a change in their manners in how they engage others. If not, then they will simply remain on my ignore status.
Gent's, in this case, there are no winners here in going tit for tat with one another. With this, I ask both of you to give it a break and go to your corners. And, put each other on ignore status, if felt necessary.
Again, I consider both of you an asset to the board.
Peace be with you ... and, also with you.
Old_Skeet
Whelp, I guess I've known the both of you at least as long as anyone around these parts . . . chill TF out. Life is too short for utter bullshit and not only do you two NOT have the time, none of us do either.
thanks,
and so it goes,
peace,
Sgt O,
rono