There has been substantial conversation regarding the merit and content of Anonymous Posts. I want to assure all of you that COPA’s Board of Directors is taking the issue seriously. Please do not mistake our lack of action or comment for a lack of concern.
To the contrary, we do care and have been reviewing all comments and considering all viewpoints. We feel the issue is important enough for us to exercise extreme care.
The Public Forum has many virtues, not the least of which is allowing newcomers to ask questions of experienced Cirrus owners. It also provides many of us with an outlet for humor and wit, and personally, I find the forum rather entertaining.
The Board’s discussions are ongoing. Once we determine how to best address the issues, we will make the changes and communicate them to you. We continue to appreciate your comments and suggestions.
I don’t care either way, but I would like to point out that when an arial attack killed 5,000 people, some posters on this board were angry that their rights were violated by a government over reaction. Now some of these same people want to eliminate privacy rights because someone insulted their plane.
Frantic visit to doctor: “Doctor! Doctor! It hurts when I do this!” (says the patient twisting his arm behind his back).
Doctor’s reply: “Well … don’t do that.”
For those of you obviously quite upset by Anonymous posts, why do you read them? Why, for instance, are you reading this post?
For those of us who don’t feel your pain, why is it that you don’t want us to read such posts?
Marty: I don’t recall a single anonymous post that raised even one important issue relative to Cirrus aircraft. In the original concept of the forum, there may have been some idea that an anonymous post would raise some sensitive manufacturing or medical issue. I don’t think even one such post has ever occurred.
The idea that the solution to baseless and pointless posts is not to read them is not practical. They put up “junk” posts and if there is complaint, they say “don’t read them”. It makes no sense. COPA has no obligation to provide a forum for muckrakers and crackpots. Let them go somewhere else.
This site has been recently distracted by a number of posts put up by people with nothing better to do than make baseless and unfounded accusations about not only the aircraft but also about other members of COPA or persons posting on the forum. COPA is not required to give them a soapbox.
If people want their “right of privacy” let them express their concerns in other ways. If they want to use this forum there should be a registration process sufficiently secure to eliminate the “junk” posts that we are seeing. I agree with Jim Fallows on this point.
If there is even a single anonymous post that raised any significant issue, I wish someone would identify it. I don’t know of a single one.
I appreciate the concern expressed by COPA to make these forums “better” in some ways.
My 20-year experience on the Internet leads me to suggest that more open communication is better. Case in point, a recent post offers to communicate the identity of the obnoxious anonymous poster. More is better.
I also strongly support Art’s observation about retaining privacy rights. Censorship involves judgements made on your behalf, and probably never quite gets it right. Moderate a discussion perhaps, but don’t censor. Publish a digest perhaps, but don’t eliminate. Please keep the forums open to the curious, uncommitted, the wannabees.
I used these forums to learn about Cirrus Design, the planes, the problems, the reality and most importantly, the community. The openness of the discussion impressed me. Candidly, I bought my SR22 based on this community without ever flying one!! Now I have my plane and feel so much better prepared to enjoy it through the information gained here. Thanks.
Having had several decades’ worth of operating experience in this whole realm of free expression, privacy rights, marketplace of ideas, and so on, let me make the basic point:
There is NO conception of “privacy rights” that equates to the anonymous right to defame in public.
I could go in for a long trip down the lanes of libel law, defamation, and so on. But trust me: there is nobody who has actually worked in this field who thinks that someone’s right to remain “private” means a right to criticize other people, in public, from behind a pseudonym.
If someone wants to remain totally private, then let him keep his views to himself. But if he wants to criticize other people or institutions, he necessarily sacrifices some of that privacy right.
Put it this way: suppose I had logged on anonymously right now and posted a reprise of the “Person X is an Asshole” reply – rather than responding with my own name and accountability trail.
I don’t think that the guy that has been posting lately as anonymous is a “wannabee” I think he is a muckraker.
People who are “wannabee”'s would ask questions in a more rational manner (i.e. “what is the skinny on…” etc.)
“Mr. anonymous” continues to post things on this site re: mideast financing, etc. even after those of us (regular poster and COPA members) put our 2 cents in. He apparently does not take our advice (i.e. call the FBI or other agencies, or Crescent Bank themselves) to do any Due Diligence of his own. If he did that, and satisfied himself (which I don’t believe is his intent) then he could report his findings with the world here. We would love that. But to continually post innuendo, rumor, and speculation is not helpful to anyone.
Do you know what - if you stopped talking about this guy he’d go away. The only reason he posts is because you read and reply to his posts. I’ve seen it before on so many other sites, let him post what he wants and ignore it.
Because you are just stirring the s**t and not contributing… we want contributors to post… even if what they contribute are (valid) questions.
This is reposted from my post of a few minutes ago (see below):
I don’t think that the guy that has been posting lately as anonymous is a “wannabee” I think he is a muckraker.
People who are “wannabee”'s would ask questions in a more rational manner (i.e. “what is the skinny on…” etc.)
“Mr. anonymous” continues to post things on this site re: mideast financing, etc. even after those of us (regular poster and COPA members) put our 2 cents in. He apparently does not take our advice (i.e. call the FBI or other agencies, or Crescent Bank themselves) to do any Due Diligence of his own. If he did that, and satisfied himself (which I don’t believe is his intent) then he could report his findings with the world here. We would love that. But to continually post innuendo, rumor, and speculation is not helpful to anyone.
Usually, newcomers to the board who are trying to find out something about Cirri wind up asking a question that has been beat to death in the recent past.
Non registered casual people wanting to know more about the planes and the company can find out more information by reading a month’s worth of threads than by posting a question and being told to use the “search feature.”