US Airways Dividend Miles (Pre-FlightFund Merger) - Outdated News

I, for one, would love to see these BS pasted links go away. We all know that pilot's union gas agreed to concessions, in theory, and then yesterday officially. When I see a posting that says pilots unions walk out of negotiations I get jittery. Then when people reply saying that's old or right or wrong it just keeps bumping up. It's annoying and misleading. I would suggest to Doc to find somewhere else to post news clips within flertalk, such as flyertalk news if you must keep pasting, or just date your subject line. Honestly, I would be more interested in seeing thoughts regarding the article rather than links links links. Makes one ponder whether to investigate or not. I never click on Doc's links anymore there's just too many of them. I wait to read other people's responses instead to get a feel for link's importance. No offense intended Doc.

[This message has been edited by Skip Middleton (edited 08-09-2002).]

I don't mind the news; much of it is of interest and I wouldn't know about it otherwise. Two thoughts:

1. Perhaps an edit/update of the subject is prudent to prevent heart problems.

2. I agree that the remarks *about* the news are even more informative. But how would we get remarks on DOC's posts w/o DOC's posts?

It's not the news per se (to quote Mike Tyson) but the links that prevent me from reading Doc's posts. Abbreviated versions of the news vs links would be better in my opinion, and subjects that reflect the date of the news. Going to the U forum this am it looked like U just sh** the bed early this morning, which contradicts my am review of the paper, and makes me have to go back and read outdated posts just to make sure. Again, my opinion only..

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Skip Middleton:
I never click on Doc's links anymore . . .</font>

I don't know doc other than from reading his posts, but I'll tell you what, I've gotten more pertinant, up to date info from his links than just about any other source.

This is a public board and everyone has a right to post pertinant info. If you don't like it, ignore it. The rest of us can just ignore your posts.

Originally posted by Skip Middleton: No offense intended, Skip.

2 items really here

1) Subjects cannot be edited. Makes sense because anyone could edit each other's subject to change relevance.

2) Net-etiquette suggests posting URLs along with excerpts of news items. This is definitely true for 'citing sources' when blurbs are extracted, but I would argue that one SHOULDNT't simply post a URL without even an excerpt. I hate going to a URL just to see that its the same recycled news story in a separate post/URL.

No offence taken, and I'm sorry, Skip!

Just doin' - or at least tryin' to do the best I can! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Have a great weekend all! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

-Mark

Here's my take:

1) Doc sometimes revives long dead posts which then give people a jolt with a now-out-of-date title.

2) Doc tirelessly and selflessly posts links to news articles, bonus offers that may be of interest to some of the FT community.

3) I personally (and my family) have thousands of miles and free nights that we would not have scored w/o doc's posts (including, for instance, a reminder on the last day to score the 500 mile USAirways Golf bonus).

On balance this is a good deal. Make that a great deal.

PS I met doc at the Philly Do and he is a nice guy.

<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by MarshB:
I don't know doc other than from reading his posts, but I'll tell you what, I've gotten more pertinant, up to date info from his links than just about any other source.

This is a public board and everyone has a right to post pertinant info. If you don't like it, ignore it. The rest of us can just ignore your posts.

Originally posted by Skip Middleton: No offense intended, Skip.</font>

agree 100%.

again, no offense intended skip but we're very lucky to have folks like doc who do so much of the work for us!

thanks doc.

The posts, especially the misleading topics, irk me, too.

Probably should edit my post, but thought I deserve the learning going on. I guess my issue is more the date linked with subject line Doc, not because I chose an unpopular stance but that it is quite obvious that Doc's intent is to inform, albeit with a record number of links. In researching my own stance I find many posts with links and synops(es?). While U is on the operating table it is very easy that these dredged up older posts make you think patient is dead, no he's not, yes he is, no, yes, maybe...If U was in the clear it would be less frustrating. However, it is plain to see Doc, that you do have a loyal and pleased contingency. So, again, no offense and if dating subjects is possible (doesn't Prince Charles do that?) I would be happy if it pertains to U's existence... Slante- Skip