Why on earth would he want to submit himself to trial by forum?
Which forum were you thinking of?
Not EuroGA. The Guidelines are clear, and are enforced.
I am sure that if you actually want to know what’s going on, a meeting would be very useful.
The community has a lot of interest in answers – as the last 1000+ posts, plus my mailbox, demonstrate. Not me personally. I need to only touch UK CAS and based on CAP1404 it is game over for me, so my interest is limited.
Well, maybe @Graham or @Fuji_Abound would like to accept the invitation? They are both full of questions that [name removed on CAA request] could answer instantly.
It just seems a shame, with all the questions that you want answered, not to accept an offer from the horse’s mouth.
I have a meeting with [name removed on CAA request] on Wednesday, I could suggest it, if you like?
I have got another email (about matters already extensively covered here, as it happens) and have emailed the gentleman suggesting that an official statement can be supplied, for publication here.
Briefing individuals is of no use. What are they going to do? Bring a recorder along?
Will a clarification to CAP1404 have the effect of changing that document for future cases? If so, why not just rewrite it so it hangs together 
And so on…
I am informed today (by an ex CAA guy) that the CAA has a ban on forum participation (other than in private capacity i.e. using a nickname / not recognisable as CAA). It is widely disregarded; the “better established” the person is, the more openly (and occassionally more threateningly) they post.
Ultimately, an organisation has to make a decision whether to participate on social media, or not. If they choose not to (which is the option most choose) then it is no use them complaining that stuff is being discussed when they don’t like being discussed.
I have been offered a meeting. I was keen to engage, but when it became clear I was expected to drive to Gatwick during office hours I felt that went beyond the limit of my interest.
It does seem a bit bizarre to contact individuals and offer these meetings. As far as I can see he’s a civil servant and we’re just members of the public. The ‘corrective’ tone that comes across in what I’ve received makes me slightly uncomfortable. For government employees to be trying to tell us what our views should be is a bit odd.
Perhaps they want to round up all the ringleaders and pick ‘em off one by one.
Or maybe they want to explain what’s really going on, and the ringleaders don’t want to hear that, as it might reduce their opportunities to lead rings.
I’m open to hearing anything. I’m just not sufficiently interested in what the CAA have to say to take a day off work and spend 4-5 hours on the motorway, especially when they have the easy (and far more appropriate) alternative of publishing some sort of statement/clarification.
Ringleaders is quite funny. I’m just a bloke with an opinion. There are plenty more out there, and mine is worth no more than the next man. This also goes for some of those in aviation who perhaps take themselves a little bit too seriously.
