[A href=http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/021007/us_airways_job_cuts_2.html]http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/021007/us_airways_job_cuts_2.html[/A]
Will there be more reservations layoffs..or just ATO's this time? At reservations we are all just hanging on for the ride wondering which office will become the dot com office ...and when our packets are coming for more layoffs...I know the ATO employees are just as stressed...thought maybe this time the anouncements would come from within the company....maybe they still haven't learned....Press Releases tell us more than the company we work for...this I find really sad....
genejockey
Advanced
Moderator: Please be consistent. This message thread regarding job cuts was started 14 hours ago under the heading more cuts. Some egotistical posters on this board cannot seem to deal the trivial reality of being scooped. If you are going to practice an editorial policy of eliminating redundancy and maintaining thread continuity, be consistent or leave moderation to someone who is not biased.
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/8/2002 7:09:42 AM genejockey wrote:
Moderator: Please be consistent. This message thread regarding job cuts was started 14 hours ago under the heading "more cuts". Some egotistical posters on this board cannot seem to deal the trivial reality of being "scooped". If you are going to practice an editorial policy of eliminating redundancy and maintaining thread continuity, be consistent or leave moderation to someone who is not biased.
----------------
[/blockquote]
you're not dissing Jimmy Olsen Munn, are you now?
----------------
On 10/8/2002 7:09:42 AM genejockey wrote:
Moderator: Please be consistent. This message thread regarding job cuts was started 14 hours ago under the heading "more cuts". Some egotistical posters on this board cannot seem to deal the trivial reality of being "scooped". If you are going to practice an editorial policy of eliminating redundancy and maintaining thread continuity, be consistent or leave moderation to someone who is not biased.
----------------
[/blockquote]
you're not dissing Jimmy Olsen Munn, are you now?
BillLumbergh
Veteran
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 10/8/2002 7:09:42 AM genejockey wrote: [BR][BR]Moderator: Please be consistent. This message thread regarding job cuts was started 14 hours ago under the heading more cuts. Some egotistical posters on this board cannot seem to deal the trivial reality of being scooped. If you are going to practice an editorial policy of eliminating redundancy and maintaining thread continuity, be consistent or leave moderation to someone who is not biased. ----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][BR][BR]I actually am being consistent. While a thread entitled more cuts was posted, there was not and currently is not a link to any news article on the issue. To the contrary, the more cuts thread notes only that news should be announced today. There is ZERO reference to any AP article which did not appear until 9:45 p.m. yesterday evening.[BR][BR]As to eliminating redundancy, please review past threads and you will plainly see that we DO eliminate repetitive and redundant threads. Take for example the following thread: [A href=http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=948&sessionID={938A85B4-792B-4032-8EF3-916E70988C03]http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=948[/A][/P]
[P]OTOH, this is not necessarily one of them.[/P]
[P][BR][BR]I actually am being consistent. While a thread entitled more cuts was posted, there was not and currently is not a link to any news article on the issue. To the contrary, the more cuts thread notes only that news should be announced today. There is ZERO reference to any AP article which did not appear until 9:45 p.m. yesterday evening.[BR][BR]As to eliminating redundancy, please review past threads and you will plainly see that we DO eliminate repetitive and redundant threads. Take for example the following thread: [A href=http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=948&sessionID={938A85B4-792B-4032-8EF3-916E70988C03]http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=948[/A][/P]
[P]OTOH, this is not necessarily one of them.[/P]
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/8/2002 8:56:16 AM BillLumbergh wrote:
[BLOCKQUOTE]
----------------
On 10/8/2002 7:09:42 AM genejockey wrote:
Moderator: Please be consistent.  This message thread regarding job cuts was started 14 hours ago under the heading "more cuts".  Some egotistical posters on this board cannot seem to deal the trivial reality of being "scooped".  If you are going to practice an editorial policy of eliminating redundancy and maintaining thread continuity, be consistent or leave moderation to someone who is not biased.  ----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
I actually am being consistent. While a thread entitled more cuts was posted, there was not and currently is not a link to any news article on the issue. To the contrary, the "more cuts" thread notes only that news should be announced today. There is ZERO reference to any AP article which did not appear until 9:45 p.m. yesterday evening.
As to eliminating redundancy, please review past threads and you will plainly see that we DO eliminate repetitive and redundant threads. Take for example the following thread: [A href="http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=948&sessionID={938A85B4-792B-4032-8EF3-916E70988C03"]http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=948[/A][/P]
OTOH, this is not necessarily one of them.[/P]
----------------
[/blockquote]
I think Gene Jockey was inferring that the link to the news site could have easily been posted as new info under the topic MORE CUTS 7 hours later as informative info about the new cuts....
----------------
On 10/8/2002 8:56:16 AM BillLumbergh wrote:
[BLOCKQUOTE]
----------------
On 10/8/2002 7:09:42 AM genejockey wrote:
Moderator: Please be consistent.  This message thread regarding job cuts was started 14 hours ago under the heading "more cuts".  Some egotistical posters on this board cannot seem to deal the trivial reality of being "scooped".  If you are going to practice an editorial policy of eliminating redundancy and maintaining thread continuity, be consistent or leave moderation to someone who is not biased.  ----------------[/BLOCKQUOTE]
I actually am being consistent. While a thread entitled more cuts was posted, there was not and currently is not a link to any news article on the issue. To the contrary, the "more cuts" thread notes only that news should be announced today. There is ZERO reference to any AP article which did not appear until 9:45 p.m. yesterday evening.
As to eliminating redundancy, please review past threads and you will plainly see that we DO eliminate repetitive and redundant threads. Take for example the following thread: [A href="http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=948&sessionID={938A85B4-792B-4032-8EF3-916E70988C03"]http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=948[/A][/P]
OTOH, this is not necessarily one of them.[/P]
----------------
[/blockquote]
I think Gene Jockey was inferring that the link to the news site could have easily been posted as new info under the topic MORE CUTS 7 hours later as informative info about the new cuts....
N513AU
Advanced
- Aug 20, 2002
- 219
- 0
[blockquote]
----------------
On 10/7/2002 9:53:37 PM chipmunn wrote:
[A href="http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/021007/us_airways_job_cuts_2.html"]http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/021007/us_airways_job_cuts_2.html[/A]
----------------
[/blockquote]
Thank you Dave! And those who voted yes.
![14.gif']](/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2F%5Bimg+src%3D%27http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usaviation.com%2Fidealbb%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2F14.gif%27%5D&hash=2e192c9453e16adbace959e22aa3e4aa)
----------------
On 10/7/2002 9:53:37 PM chipmunn wrote:
[A href="http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/021007/us_airways_job_cuts_2.html"]http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/021007/us_airways_job_cuts_2.html[/A]
----------------
[/blockquote]
Thank you Dave! And those who voted yes.
