Definitely, for extreme views, and personal attacks, nearly all aviation forums and indeed most of the internet is far better than EuroGA
Well, I meant forums in general vs other channels. Not EuroGA vs other forums. A big difference. People are always better off with objectivity, truth and honesty instead of subjectivity, untruth and dishonesty. The intrinsic problem with forums is the lack of former due to extreme views etc by a few.
Peter wrote:
I have a Q re Sweden. Can the newspapers report that [name] has beenarrested
charged
sentenced
jailed
All the above affect the person’s reputation, obviously, but all can be easily proven as true.
Yes, as news reporting is generally considered justifiable. (Although, contrary to what is the case many other countries, ethical guidelines for media say that persons which are not public figures should normally not be named until they have actually been sentenced. This can sometimes get silly when everyone knows who the “30 year old artist” is but the media still doesn’t name him/her.)
It is not so clear if this is not in connection with news reporting, e.g. in an opinion piece. But what is considered “justifiable” depends much on the public interest. E.g. it would certainly be justifiable to e.g. report that a newly elected MP was been sentenced for a crime 10 years ago. Not so much if it was some random person.
Thanks. As you can no doubt see, an inability to publish that stuff would have created some pretty interesting situations…
People are always better off with objectivity, truth and honesty instead of subjectivity, untruth and dishonesty. The intrinsic problem with forums is the lack of former due to extreme views etc by a few.
Why don’t you actually say what you mean instead of beating about the bush? What “objectivity, truth and honesty” are you seeking and not getting on EuroGA, and what “subjectivity, untruth and dishonesty” are you seeing on EuroGA and aren’t happy about, LeSving?
If you say that “Annex 1 can fly IFR”, but actually can do so only in Norway, and somebody picks that up and reminds you that Norway is not the whole world, actually is not even the whole of Europe, and you don’t like that, that is not “subjectivity, untruth and dishonesty”. But the original posting is definitely disingenuity.
If I didn’t know you better I would think you want EuroGA to be the champagne socialist mouthpiece which so many others would like.
I once looked up the registration of an aircraft that I knew to have been involved in an accident (not one that I own, incidentally) and I swear that at the bottom of the page the following appeared:
“Some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe. Learn more”
I haven’t been able to reproduce the event so perhaps the search engine in question got wise to the misuse of the ‘right to be forgotten’ feature. Still, it was an interesting application of it.
gallois wrote:
It’s why some of the gutter media here spend more time gossiping and rumour mongering about the UK Royal family than they do about prominent people in France.
If I remember right, there was something about the Monegassian royal family who sued the French press sucessfully about some privacy things which apparently had quite some effect on the way they get treated by the press? One wonders why the UK Royals put up with all the total tosh written about them and the abhorrent behaviour of some members of the press. Not that I think they are particularly different but they are probably the highest value target for the gutter press.
The thing is: If they are allowed to get away with what they do with the Royals, it is quite a bit more difficult for an individual whose reputation has been tarnished by such kinds of abuse than if the press were put in their place by a high profile libel case. It would probably enable/encourage other innocently accused people to step forward rather than saying, it’s not worth it.
Looking at quite a lot that is written in this kind of press, I would qualify a good portion of it as hate speech as well as stuff written with the clear intent to incense people to the point of hatred. This IMHO is a MASSIVE problem in the “click bait” press of today. The consequences for the individuals concerned, be it prominent or not, may be horrible.
Clearly hate mongering and diffamation is also a huge issue on social media and fora, even though in the latter, these things can be addressed via moderation and “no personal attack” rules better than in SM where there is no moderation at all.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
The thing is: If they are allowed to get away with what they do with the Royals, it is quite a bit more difficult for an individual whose reputation has been tarnished by such kinds of abuse than if the press were put in their place by a high profile libel case. It would probably enable/encourage other innocently accused people to step forward rather than saying, it’s not worth it.
I’d agree that the fines and/or criminal penalties against press are inadequate today – if they were to pay out millions for trivial cases and tens/hundreds of millions (and send individuals to prison) for more egregious violations, then it would have been a deterrent. And if some news conglomerates go bankrupt, I’m not going to be upset.
Peter wrote:
Why don’t you actually say what you mean instead of beating about the bush?
Exactly 
The truth is you have deleted/edited/moved lots of posts of mine lately, and will probably delete/move/edit this one as well.
Peter wrote:
If you say that “Annex 1 can fly IFR”, but actually can do so only in Norway
It’s NOT only in Norway you can do that, I have never, ever said such a thing, and no one else has for that matter!, but you keep on repeating similar half truths and twistings all the time. That is dishonest, as well as factually wrong. Personally, I couldn’t care less about IFR, but that’s beside the point, other people do, not many, but some.
Anyway, I have given up (several years ago in fact). You have won. I simply have to take that into consideration, move on (also done several years ago). I only have to become better at not letting myself become irritated when reading highly subjective half truths and erroneous twists about this stuff on this forum, that’s all. But it’s not easy, I’m not very good at it, obviously I find it difficult because it is in essence dishonest of me, all the time I know better. I have to apply more robust filters, and focus exclusively on what this board is good for: EASA stuff.
Referring to this
Sorry, but it somehow sets off my alarm when someone‘s second post here is to praise a product.
I had a close look at the poster and he seems real. He joined up 3 years ago.
We have about 5.5k joinups of which about 1.5k have posted. I don’t have stats for this but a majority of those 1.5k were probably on the forum for years before posting. Nowadays there is a vast number of online communities for every imaginable hobby and people move around them according to various factors e.g. somebody annoyed them somewhere.
Anything up to 50% of joinups are malicious, some cleverly, so an admin has to do lots of checks. The guy’s email address, when googled, shows he is active in the UK homebuilt community, which may explain why he carries a very small (and expensive) liferaft; the UK scene is a lot like that.
