I'm extremely disappointed

[D242]

Like Civilain Pilot, I came across this BB while searching for information on the Fossett search. As a former member of CAP, I was searching for insights more from the inside of the operation, than what one might find in the general media. I was subscribed to the CAPtalk listserver while I was an active member, and I see that some of the same personalities participate here.

I was moved to register, and comment, specifically on the "enjoy your forum" thread, which followed on the heels of the "FAO Tom..." thread which had been removed. Funny--now the second thread has been removed as well.

The comment I was going to make was intended to address the issue of whether this BB represents CAP or not.

In the same manner that your behavior, while travelling to and from meetings and missions, in your uniform, reflects on the organization, so does you behavior here reflect on the organization. Your membership doesn't cease when you leave for home, and it doesn't cease simply because this site isn't officially part of the organization. Ergo, the organization is judged by what goes on here.

I was going to express my disappointment that the first thread had been deleted, because I thought valid points were raised, and a discussion of those points was healthy. I had thought that was encouraging, rather than disappointing.

Now that I find the second thread has been deleted, my disappointment is extreme. In my opinion, that validates the criticsm that Civilian Pilot made about the CAP being thin-skinned.  And again, the organization itself will be judged on the conduct of its members, whether they're acting in an official capacity or not.

This is not a discussion of this forum, as much as it is a discussion of whether CAP members are willing to examine their own attitudes, and how they impact the "corporate culture". It seems that the people running this forum are unwilling to entertain discussions that may be critical of the way things are done. How is an outsider to interpret that insight, as it applies to the organization as a whole?

Forum Admin, you may as well delete this one too...   

[CLB]

How are things Mr. Hayden?   

[D242]

Sorry, guess again.

I doubt many outside of my own squadron would remember me, at least without seeing me in person. And my activity on the listserver was limited to lurking, so nobody is going to know me from any online activity.

I take it Mr. Hayden has been a frequent critic?

[Pylon]

Since this post was directed at the administrators, I'll field a response to this.

Regardless of the intent behind some of the people posting (that intent being to help CAP find ways to improve and/or to professionally discuss), the overall tone of the first thread that was moderated was not a professional one.

I welcome with open arms discussions on how CAP can improve and wish more people would participate in those discussions.  If you look at the tens of thousands of posts on this board, you would see quite a few of them criticizing the way CAP current structures one thing or another with a million ideas on how to change it, tweak it, overhaul it, or replace it.

While you're complaining about the thread filled with inter-personal issues, names being named, and public admonishion on individuals, there's been another discussion, one of a professional and helpful nature, on CAP utilizing volunteer pilots and resources which has been going on.

Let me explain in no uncertain terms that this board can and will continue to be a professional resource for CAP members while still meeting our fairly easy-going Code of Conduct.


Let me also offer an example of the type of discussion allowed and the type of discussion not allowed.  I'll use the sample situation of a CAP member demoted by his or her squadron commander.

Some squadron commander comes on the board and says "I'm the commander of Podunk Squadron and one of my members who was the Director of that PD course last week (was anybody there?) did A, B, and C and was completely out of line, can you believe it?  I am putting in paperwork to demote him!  Any ideas on how to avoid these types of ordeals?"

The member gets wind of the post, joins CAPTalk and posts "I'm Member XYZ and maybe I did do A, B, and/or C, but I don't see what's wrong with it!  I think this is the way we should do things."

The thread then becomes a debate on who is right and results in nothing productive for the organization.

This thread violates the Code of Conduct.  Names didn't need to be named, and those types of accusations don't need to be aired - with or without names.  Saying "the commander of 123 Squadron in NEWG" or "the IC on this specific mission" is the same as naming names, by the way.

How about an example of the same situation posted in a professional, and lesson-learning manner - what would that look like?

Maybe Squadron Commander Smith could have posted "Hey all, I'm a squadron commander and recently had a situation where a member was rude, and broke the regulation on X,Y, and Z.  Any ideas on how we can better train our volunteers to handle these types of situations in the future?"

That thread probably would fly.


Just to demonstrate that professionally-minded discussion is capable on this topic, while staying within the bounds of the Code of Conduct, I'm going to start a topic on the very subject.  Feel free to contribute appropriately.  I really enjoy hearing the thoughts of others, and we don't often get the opportunity to engage those outside the organization as much as we should.

I am one of the first people to admit that Civil Air Patrol needs improvement in many arenas.  I am not thin-skinned, and think that we can take constructive criticism well.  Destructive criticism, however, serves little purpose.  Help us understand that you're here in a constructive manner, and I think we can produce ideas and conversation beneficial to the organization.

On a side note, our moderators are working on restoring those original threads to public view, where possible.  I didn't want to take this much time out of my work day to address this, but since the issue was so urgently pushed, there you have it.

If you have further questions, just PM me.

[pixelwonk]

^What he said.

I'll add that whether it was intentional or not, a few of you you've supported our points fantastically. 

While some may not be CAP members, the majority of us are.  With that in mind, we would never think of behaving out of line during a squadron staff meeting, in front of cadets, or at a mission. Or would you?
 

There's no reason why integrity has to be left at the hangar.

[Pylon]

With that in mind, we would never think of behaving out of line during a squadron staff meeting, in front of cadets, or at a mission. Or would you?

That's actually the very subject of the thread I just started.

[D242]

The re-appearance of the "enjoy your website" thread, along with NIN's explanation there, has tempered my disappointment somewhat. (As well as probably making me look stupid to anybody who wasn't online and following this in real time--thanks, guys.  )

I have to catch up on some real-world things, but I'll rejoin this discussion later.

[NIN]

The re-appearance of the "enjoy your website" thread, along with NIN's explanation there, has tempered my disappointment somewhat. (As well as probably making me look stupid to anybody who wasn't online and following this in real time--thanks, guys.  )

I have to catch up on some real-world things, but I'll rejoin this discussion later.

Let me be clear: that's how we do it on CadetStuff.org's forums, not necessarily precisely how the CAPTalk.net mods operate.  Just don't want confusion there.

[Skyray]

The re-appearance of the "enjoy your website" thread, along with NIN's explanation there, has tempered my disappointment somewhat. (As well as probably making me look stupid to anybody who wasn't on line and following this in real time--thanks, guys.  )

I have to catch up on some real-world things, but I'll rejoin this discussion later.

Let me be clear: that's how we do it on CadetStuff.org's forums, not necessarily precisely how the CAPTalk.net mods operate.  Just don't want confusion there.

I have probably been slapped up side the head and told to cool it as much as anyone presently on the board.  I think the moderators do an excellent job of a very difficult fine line job.  For D242, you arrived at a very stressful time for CAP and the moderators, and not only because of the Fossett search.  I am a former Mission Coordinator, and you have no idea how crazy things get during a routine search, much less a high profile one.  Couple that with issues with the National Command cadre, and your critical post triggered an automatic reflex.  I apologize for your reception, but as you noted, the threads are back after the moderators had the chance to review them.  It would help if you were not anonymous, although I realize that may be purposeful.

[D242]

...and you have no idea how crazy things get during a routine search, much less a high profile one.

Well, yeah, I do have an idea. The last actual mission I worked lasted two weeks and the second weekend coincided with the previously scheduled wing eval. On the day the AFRCC was going to pull the plug, a ground team made the find. Even having the exact location, it couldn't be spotted from the air. So, yeah, I appreciate the pressures involved.

I've never seen the practice of removing a thread while moderating it, but more than once, (not here--I only started browsing here the other day), I've seen heavy handed mods and admins remove controversial threads, hence my extreme disappointment to finding the thread missing. Thanks for clearing up my misunderstanding.

As I said above, my disappointment was tempered, but not entirely eliminated, and I'll tell you why.

At the tail end of the "FAO Tom (name redacted)" thread, the person in question made a post. My take on that post was that he came off with a "You got a problem wit dat?" attitude.

Civilian Pilot is an aviator, and as such, a potential search objective, and a taxpayer, meaning he helps to foot the bill for all the expensive hardware it's you priviledge to operate. I believe he has a stake in how CAP performs. He did have a problem with the other individual's attitude, and took the time to speak his mind.

I was disappointed in that, the issue was never resolved because the thread was closed, and removed. I'd rather have seen the individual given the opportunity to account not so much for his actions, as for the attitude expressed in this public venue. As it stands now, whatever accountability there may be, is invisible to the public, and only the bad impression made remains.

That having been said, and the misunderstanding that led to the posting of this thread having been cleared up, I'd be happy to forego any further discussion here, and pay attention to the other discussions that are relevant to these events.

Thanks for addressing my concerns.