Open dialog, really? What are you hoping to accomplish? Do you want compromise on the Nic? Is that where your open dialog is going to go?
Just because I don't believe in your Jesus crap doesn't mean I lack decorum. I threaten the east because I challenge their views on work issues. I threaten you because I challenge your beliefs.
What am I hoping to accomplish? I want to get any useful information that comes from participating in these boards. It's kind of a one-stop shop for seeing links and responses to court filings, news articles and sometimes inside information that pops up here before it does anyplace else. So my first order of business is information gathering.
My second order of business is to post when I think I can contribute to the discussion by using facts, logic and reason wherever possible. I don't get everything right and have accepted correction whenever someone points out an error or unintentional misstatement I may have made. Perhaps some are persuaded by the things I have posted, but I certainly don't kid myself into thinking that there are very many open minds populating these boards. I have even made a few attempts at being humorous just to give myself a laugh, but those comments are all-too-often taken the wrong way so I have decided to stop trying to do the humor thing.
I have made multiple conjectures and speculations about the integrity, morality and conduct of USAPA leaders and zealous followers, but have tried to back those up with a logical or rational basis for saying that the east pilots don't really want a JCBA because they know it will contain the NIC or that some are unquestionably responsible for engaging in an illegal work action. I can't prove such claims as fact, but I tend to think any reasonable person would agree that my approach is valid. When questioned, I try to give a full and complete response of why I believe what I believe.
I try, and all the more so as of late, to not attack another poster personally. I'm certainly willing to point out a flaw in their argument or challenge them to prove with facts or logic some claim that is being made (like the airline will be split up in a matter of days). I find such talk unintentionally humorous, just like when people claim to know what Doug Parker is thinking or feeling on a personal level. Those kinds of things are just too preposterous to pass up.
So what's your motivation and self-assessment? Do you believe you generally show respect for other posters viewpoints or would you classify you communications as often containing attacks and vitriol that would get you kicked out of a company meeting or a public meeting where a certain minimum level of professional decorum is expected?
BTW, you don't threaten my beliefs in the slightest. I couldn't possibly be happier or more content with where I am in life and in my beliefs. There wasn't even the smallest seed of doubt in my mind before our exchange and there certainly is any now.
A self-regulated discussion board requires personal responsibility and a respect for others to not let it degrade into a cesspool. Are you intelligent enough to get you point across without personal attacks and vitriol? You would have my full support on the pilot debate if you can.