[DMCForum] Re: ATTN: Walt Coe (You Can Read This One)

["checksix3" <jetjock11@xxxxxxxx>]

> I'll forward this morning's eMail correspondence when I get back to
> the office. "Abrasive" is a charitable description. A different "A"
> word came to my mind<

Now Billy, thats not fair because you can edit to make me look 
more "abrasive" than I really am. It's also not fair unless you 
forward your replies and all previous messages. I'm afraid you leave 
me no choice but to post in public where you can't edit things. 
I dislike correcting people in public and is why I wrote you off list 
to begin with. 

Do you really believe Martin, Walt, and I are the only ones who read 
your posts? Good God man, if you really think that then why do you 
post at all? In that case, what would be your contribution? Frankly, 
your thought processes continue to astound me.

I assure you no one gets "mad" over what you write. Martin should 
know better than to tussle with you because it's such an easy win for 
him. I suspect it's more of an effort to stem the tide of 
misinformation than anything else. As for Walt and myself (or 
others), I think it's simply for amusement.

In the end it's all up to you. It's clear you think you're right in 
cases when you're not. No skin off my nose, I'm not the one who 
suffers from that approach. I needed no one's help to make 
my car run like a swiss watch but it'd be nice if the people who 
do need it (and there seem to be many because of the peculiar 
demographics of D ownership) could get good advice and not have to 
have the bad constantly corrected. 

Fwiw, I see the same problem over on the "real" list too. Other than 
a handful of people who know what they're doing it's all form and no 
substance. Mass confusion. Still, it beats reading some of the 
foolishness that goes on here and is why I only offer advice off 
list. Lol, and here I see someone wants to start *another* list? 
Keeerist...

It pains me at times to have ready answers to things people often ask 
about. For example, my car had anti-lock brakes and a system that 
greatly increased highway mileage (and I could tell you something 
about LED lighting that's never been mentioned on either list) but 
it's not worth the hassle to deal with the BS that goes on here. 

Ah well, I've got too many other lists that take my time. I'll leave 
it up to Walt and Martin to keep you honest, though I'm not sure why 
they continue to bother.

PS: I was simply too stunned to reply after reading your comments 
about the B777, B737 (in which I have many hours) and the DC 8. Made 
me finally realize just how far gone you are. Let me know when you're 
typed in any of these aircraft, that way you can put some substance 
behind your comments. Ugly you say? As if looks matter much in 
aviation. It's safety, reliability, and ease of maintenance that 
counts. Thats why all modern aircraft use God awful, crappy, 
unreliable electronic technology, with many of the lastest employing 
fly-by-wire and glass cockpits...just as our front line military 
fighters do. Hello? McFly?

I also remind you an airplane is unlike any other machine: How it 
works is on the *outside*. It's shape is what determines it's 
performance and compromises must be made. Still, the people who fly 
them tell me the triple seven is one of the most beautiful airplanes 
ever made and a joy to operate, if not excruciatingly boring at times.
Even the ScareBus has a decent history compared to older technology. 

If you want to see *real* ugly, look no further than your driveway 
full of old Fords...

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

---

Yahoo! Groups Links

• To visit your group on the web, go to:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DMCForum/
   
• To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
  DMCForum-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   
• Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.