Suggestion: A more realistic title for this sub-forum
I am a frequent lurker, but rarely post here.
1st of all, as a 61 year old SCOW (slow, chubby, old, white guy) with almost 30 years of business travel, I am NO fan of the TSA. But then again, I have always had issues with petty authority and/or stupid people.
In My Opinion, and in broad, gross, sweeping generalizations, TSA senior "management" is not very competent, local "management" has lost sight of the job objective, and the "Nuremburg Defense-I am just following orders" seems to be the mantra of every TSA agent when questioned about their behavior.
I prefer the metal detector over the nude-o-scope, but prefer the nude-o-scope (even with skin cancer) over the opt out, because 24/7 I always want the choice of who touches me. A tip of the hat for those who do opt out. And like a trip to the dentist, the end game for us all is to, using an old Doors song-"Break on Through to the Other Side".
Having said that, the title has become somewhat of a misnomer, because I have noticed also there is not much room for "debate" here. Anybody posting a less than anti TSA sentiment is treated with same respect that Rush Limbaugh has for our current president, or Rachel Maddow has for our former president.
Donning my flame proof underwear, and a Haz-Mat suit, I pose the question: Should the word "debate" be in the title of a sub forum, where debate is stifled and eliminated? Or could we, as a community, be a little more tolerant of those who hold a different viewpoint on the TSA, however unenlightened ()?
Fly safely, all.
__________________
"A liberal is a person whose interests aren't at stake at the moment." -- Willis Player
I understand your sentiment. I have tried to temper and subdue my language to present an argument that is absent the hyperbole and attitude. To do this I sometimes have to hide my true feelings.
That said, most of us here have spent hours evaluating the arguments and positions of the TSA and the AFS crowd and discussing the logic or lack thereof in the things presented. We have effectively shown them to be without merit and logical basis. Even you in your plea for civility recognize that the system has failed and that much of what we say is true.
There is debate here. Much of it is among ourselves in discussing ways to fix the problems on a personal level, discussing the level of the atrocities and in general, seeking ways to may the checkpoint experience less onerous.
We welcome reasoned and logical disagreement with our internal majority position. However, we do not easily tolerate idiots. Illogical arguments and contradictions are vehemently turned back.
There have been a few that came to this area with reasoned explanations and a spirit of true discussion. Some of those were treated poorly and left. The problem is that we do not just disagree with the processes and procedures and find them as point of debate.
Some of us, it is the camp I am in, find that these policies are against the very fabric of our constitutional republic and damage its existence in a small area of our interaction with the government.
Others have been emotionally harmed and damaged by the processes that have no compassion for those with hidden pain from past abuses and the come here to commiserate and seek agreeing minds and hearts.
There are those that simply find the whole process a gamut of unworkability piled on top of itself with procedures and process of questionable reliability and accuracy used with a definitive absolutism by people with little or no understanding of those processes to the point that they unknowingly contaminate their own procedures and can not be questioned.
Finally, there are those of us that detest officious martinets that display fake authority and overbearing attitudes for no reason except that they can.
Bring an argument to this forum that refutes these concerns with facts and logic devoid of the same sanctimonious overbearing attitudes that we get at the checkpoint, and we will welcome them with open arms. They usually do not last long, because they come with neither facts or logic. We have long looked for both in the process and have yet to find either in great quantity.
__________________
Livingston's observation of complex systems: The purpose of a system is what it does.
Last edited by InkUnderNails; Dec 27, 12 at 8:54 am..
Reason: Corrected the inevitable typos. I hope. And one more. Thanks to ladytraveler.
I understand your sentiment. I have tried to temper and subdue my language to present an argument that is absent the hyperbole and attitude. To do this I sometimes have to hide my true feelings.
That said, most of us here have spent hours evaluating the arguments and positions of the TSA and the AFS crowd and discussing the logic or lack thereof in the things presented. We have effectively shown them to be without merit and logical basis. Even you in your plea for civility recognize that the system has failed and that much of what we say is true.
There is debate here. Much of it is among ourselves in discussing ways to fix the problems on a personal level, discussing the level of the atrocities and in general, seeking ways to may the checkpoint experience less onerous.
We welcome reasoned and logical disagreement with our internal majority position. However, we do not easily tolerate idiots. Illogical arguments and contradictions are vehemently turned back.
There have been a few that came to this area with reasoned explanations and a spirit of true discussion. Some of those were treated poorly and left. The problem is that we do not just disagree with the processes and procedures and find them as point of debate.
Some of us, it is the camp I am in, find that these policies are against the very fabric of our constitutional republic and damage its existence in a small area of our interaction with the government.
Others have been emotionally harmed and damaged by the processes that have no compassion for those with hidden pain from past abuses and the come here to commensurate and seek agreeing minds and hearts.
There are those that simply find the whole process a gamut of unworkability piled on top of itself with procedures and process of questionable reliability and accuracy used with a definitive absolutism by people with little or no understanding of those processes to the point that they unknowingly contaminate their own procedures and can not be questioned.
Finally, there are those of us that detest officious martinets that display fake authority and overbearing attitudes for no reason except that they can.
Bring an argument to this forum that refutes these concerns with facts and logic devoid of the same sanctimonious overbearing attitudes that we get at the checkpoint, and we will welcome them with open arms. They usually do not last long, because they come with neither facts or logic. We have long looked for both in the process and have yet to find either in great quantity.
(edited to add We do have a couple 'good' TSOs who have posted here in the past - GSOLTSO and HSVTSO Dean. We've also had 'good' TSOs who posted here but left because they were told to do so by their own management. Whether or not I agree wholeheartedly with GSOLTSO and HSVTSO Dean, they don't come here to deliberately patronize or provoke, and I think most folks here respond in kind.
Folks who don't receive a warm welcome often don't come here for an honest discussion. They are the ones whose posts generally fall into one (or both) of two categories: the pax must have deliberately done something to rile the TSO, because the poster never has any problems, is always friendly and compliant, etc - or, the pax must understand that being a TSO is a hard job and TSOs get stressed out.
OP, I am curious. Do you read the official Blog on the TSA website? IMHO, that is a useless, antagonistic piece of nastiness. There truly is no attempt to debate or inform, only to condescend, provoke and insult. Bob works overtime, posting inflammatory items and then commenting ad nauseum about his own post under the userid 'anonymous'. Neither he (moderator) nor any other purported TSA employees posting there have ever corrected false information posted by another (real or alleged) TSA employee. It is truly one of the vilest sites I have ever had the misfortune to visit, and we, the taxpayers, pay for it.
Finally, I would say that if you look around (and compare this forum with, for example, OMNI/PR), folks here do, on occasion, call out others if criticism of TSA is unfounded (for example, not everything that happens at an airport is TSA's fault).
I never liked the TSS forum split approach and have had concerns that the "debate" sub-form title was given to it as a way to prep it for getting shoved into OMNI.
I would rather have the forum titled "checkpoints and border policy/practice discussion".
There is some debate in most active forums, including this sub-forum of TSS. In this forum, just like in some other forums on FT, some positions may be stronger than other positions; and as with some other FT forums so with this FT forum, those who are active in a forum may be more active in a forum because they tend to have a better than average handle of the facts related to the topic than most fly-by-posters to a specific forum. Thus, it is natural quite often for there to be a "debate" "position" that become predominant in a given forum.
__________________
Like TSA, DL SkyMiles management treats airline customers as if they are the enemy or sheep to be fleeced and it shows.
Basically the pro TSA crowd come here, debate, get flamed and leave. I can accept that.
I'm not certain that is a reflection on the current state of affairs. This forum has changed quite a bit (and to be frank, it did need changing but I'm not certain that the change has evolved into what you and the OP state) Many of the pro TSA crowd doesn't debate, and I think that is one of the reasons why I don't find as much value here anymore. I say that as someone who has radically changed my viewpoint over the years, thanks in part to FT.
Ink and chollie as usual have said it far better than I could ever attempt. I have long said however that the hyperbole which was sometimes overwhelming here damaged the argument against TSA, and am glad that the changes have toned it down somewhat.
But I also believe that this forum has become less useful in educating people who may not understand why there is a strong sentiment against the current US 'security' policies as voices have become more quiet, or silent.
Every now and again I read a post from Ink (and I myself don't read here often much anymore) which provides an excellent analysis of the situation, and which avoids hyperbole, and which strikes a balance between fact and emotion. I rarely however see the type of interaction which OP claims occurs here anymore.
I may however be wrong; I am not afraid to admit that.
Edited to add: For example, OP, you could with a few less years be one of the more prolific posters who joined FT from one of the largest, most vocal AFS travel websites. He often doesn't agree with the 'popular' sentiment here, and I have disagreed with much of what he has posted online over the last decade or so. Yet he provides interesting viewpoints and commentary from someone who is a very infrequent, while male leisure traveller who prefers the MMW over a pat down. I enjoy reading what he has to say, as I do believe that various opinions are important to the discussion, and I believe that he has been embraced by this community even though he does not always share the same viewpoints as the majority.
There is no debate allowed here, should anybody dare post anything that is not deemed of sufficient anti TSA wording, the name calling starts. Most of the people who actually tried to debate have long since given up, and the two security forums should probably be better off being called endless repetition of anti TSA rantings and random postings.
I look at it where Flyertalk is a house full of rooms. While in some of the rooms there is conversation with both sides being presented, this forum has somehow become a clubhouse of one type, where should anybody dare to disagree they are clearly made not welcome.
It's not just this forum, there are quite a few areas in Flyertalk that have become that way, where you are not at all welcome if you don't share the view of the forum.
But you are 100% correct, the word debate, and any attempt of this being one, is a total joke.
There is no debate allowed here, should anybody dare post anything that is not deemed of sufficient anti TSA wording, the name calling starts. Most of the people who actually tried to debate have long since given up, and the two security forums should probably be better off being called endless repetition of anti TSA rantings and random postings.
I look at it where Flyertalk is a house full of rooms. While in some of the rooms there is conversation with both sides being presented, this forum has somehow become a clubhouse of one type, where should anybody dare to disagree they are clearly made not welcome.
I disagree on both points.
Perhaps that is reflective of what it was here for awhile, but there are people who still post without hyperbole, without name-calling, and without ranting. I've provided one example above of a poster who certainly does not reflect the 'majority' here and yet engages in reasoned debate with some of the regulars/old-timers.
If anything, I find the misinformation given out as 'fact' on the other side of the TS&S forum more annoying, as it misleads travellers under the guise of providing factual information. At least on this side of TS&S it is clear that there will not be one 'correct' answer, and that responses shouldn't be taken as fact.
Thank you InkUnderNails for your "welcome" and very eloquent comments. I Look forward to being a frequent lurker, and infrequent commenter. Based on the comments so far, it seems that a well thought out and well written comment, expressing one's point of view, without sensationalism, baloney, and bombast, will be tolerated. Hopefully, you will initially all tolerate me, much like we all tolerate "old weird Uncle Bob" at Thanksgiving, and we can grow from there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by exbayern
........... For example, OP, you could with a few less years be one of the more prolific posters who joined FT from one of the largest, most vocal AFS travel websites. He often doesn't agree with the 'popular' sentiment here, and I have disagreed with much of what he has posted online over the last decade or so. Yet he provides interesting viewpoints and commentary from someone who is a very infrequent, while male leisure traveller who prefers the MMW over a pat down. I enjoy reading what he has to say, as I do believe that various opinions are important to the discussion, and I believe that he has been embraced by this community even though he does not always share the same viewpoints as the majority.
I do 100-150 segments a year on business plus vacations, and agree that various opinions can enhance a discussion. My preference for MMV centers on my desire to maintain as much control over a process that is part of an uncontrollable process.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chollie
(edited to add
OP, I am curious. Do you read the official Blog on the TSA website? IMHO, that is a useless, antagonistic piece of nastiness. There truly is no attempt to debate or inform, only to condescend, provoke and insult. Bob works overtime, posting inflammatory items and then commenting ad nauseum about his own post under the userid 'anonymous'. Neither he (moderator) nor any other purported TSA employees posting there have ever corrected false information posted by another (real or alleged) TSA employee. It is truly one of the vilest sites I have ever had the misfortune to visit, and we, the taxpayers, pay for it.
Finally, I would say that if you look around (and compare this forum with, for example, OMNI/PR), folks here do, on occasion, call out others if criticism of TSA is unfounded (for example, not everything that happens at an airport is TSA's fault).
Could you send me the link? I have never heard of it.
Fly safely, all.
__________________
"A liberal is a person whose interests aren't at stake at the moment." -- Willis Player
Last edited by Dallas49er; Dec 27, 12 at 12:31 pm..
If you've lurked here before, I'm sure you've seen references to 'Blogdad Bob' (Bob Curtis). There is also a thread here that posts the weekly updates of the weapons TSA confiscated at various checkpoints.
It is the official, taxpayer-funded blog to debate/discuss/inform the public on TSA matters. I am not personally a fan, but YMMV.
I do 100-150 segments a year on business plus vacations, and agree that various opinions can enhance a discussion. My preference for MMV centers on my desire to maintain as much control over a process that is part of an uncontrollable process.
I was trying to avoid specific poster names, but since I complimented Ink and chollie I suppose that it is ok to say that I was talking about WillCAD? He has a similar philosophy to you about the scanners, but he is also very active in discussion here and while his view may not be the most popular, I believe that he has become a member of the community in a relatively short time and is certainly not treated the way you state in your opening post. (He is admittedly not for the TSA and their policies, but is an example of how one can post here and engage in debate and not present the 'popular' viewpoint and yet still be treated with respect by other posters)
There actually is quite a bit of debate... but at least more recently its more of an internal discussion as Ink so well put it. There is quite a bit of variation within that group and a lot of topics go into the differences among those people. But most of the arguments I've seen from the Pro-TSA crowd are just illogical, and yeah they get shot down here and then the poster runs away. I'm an open minded person in that I'm willing to listen to the 'other side'. Though I'm still waiting for a logical, reasoned argument on why the TSA is a great agency we should support.
I don't think people are purposely trying to drive others away from the forum, but you have a group that is very passionate in how they feel. For myself, I don't fly a lot - a handful of times in the past couple of years. So it probably dosn't make much sense why I spend so much time thinking, reading, debating regarding airport security. But for me, the body scanners, the patdowns, the TSA as a whole and everything it stands for... all of it I feel is a part of an assault on our rights as individuals. The constitution is being thrown out and spat on at airports around the country. We should have the right to fly without being blasted by radiation, groped, and treated like terrorists, but right now we don't have that in the USA. And if individuals do nothing and just accept this because 'anything for security' is good.. where will it stop? People are so passionate because of what the issue represents. It comes down to our basic rights as americans and human beings.
Also, I think the 'testimonials' are important, and I think that the Nude-O-Scope opt out thread is one of the most important threads in the section. I think its important to know what happens to some of the others that decide to opt out.
)?
We do have a couple 'good' TSOs who have posted here in the past - GSOLTSO and HSVTSO Dean. We've also had 'good' TSOs who posted here but left because they were told to do so by their own management. Whether or not I agree wholeheartedly with GSOLTSO and HSVTSO Dean, they don't come here to deliberately patronize or provoke, and I think most folks here respond in kind.
