I have an opinion about Ozstamps and it is probably a minority opinion. I'm not afraid to state it, but I don't want to see this topic discussed any further so I won't divulge it.

No matter what your feelings about Glen, it was an ugly time on FT and I am regretful to see it brought back up.

I hope this thread dies a quick painless death.

I agree with Geo1004 100%. It certainly is lacking in taste to discuss Ozstamps unless he's around to both read & post.

Having said that, I do think its important to debate something else that this thread has again revealed, and that I think has been present ever since Ozstamps was banned. This "collective attitude" is something that comes up from time to time in various threads, it is present in the Chat room, and seems to be one of those "unwritten rules" that everyone on FT is expected to follow. It appears that to some members of this community, it is not OK to have an opinion that is contrary to "the OK thing to do" (as was pointed out by Punki). Specifically, I am saying that I think that anybody that "dares" to not jump on the bandwagon and slaughter Ozstamps is immediately branded as a "traitor to the FT community". What is this nonsense�? Aren't we all entitled to our opinion?

For the record, I pretty much share Punki's view on the " Oz Saga ". I think that while Oz did show some serious lack of tact and certainly turned aggressive on various community members, Oz was not only a conflictive member (to some), but he also uncovered a great deal here & there, thereby doing his part to contribute to the collective gain of the community. He also brought in a number of new people to the boards and contributed to the overall increase in traffic. There are examples of people that are still among us that only stir up controversy and contribute very little, yet we apparently are willing to put up with them�.? I apologize, maybe I need someone to explain things slowly to me, but I certainly don't follow this brand of logic.

I would ask, why does Punki have to be subject to ridicule and offense (I refer to the post by dallasflyer and the "my a**" comment by dhammer53) just because she thinks Ozstamps was unfairly treated? Is it OK for us as a community to jump in the protection of those that were attacked by Oz but at the same time harass others for not agreeing to beat up on him? What sort of a double standard is this? Why are those of us that think that Oz should be given one last chance to redeem himself suddenly branded as "bad guys"?

Forgive me for singling out dhammer and dallasflyer above, they just happened to post in this thread and I use their posts as a reference only of an attitude that I think is widespread across our community (and its executed not only against Punki, as I exemplify here).

I don't want or expect everyone to like everyone on these boards. Heck, I have my fair share of detractors on FT (and that list may grow with this post). Sure, many people that are avid contributors here were greatly offended by what Oz did and will probably never forgive him. That's for each and everyone to decide. But, do those that feel that way have to take things so far as to attack others for their different opinions? If the community were to decide to allow him back, why can't those against that just ignore him?

For us to really function as a community, I think (IMHO) that we need to practice what we preach, and by that I mean allow for freedom of speech and opinion. Those of us that don't think Oz is the Anti-Christ should be allowed to roam the realms of FT without being discriminated.

I just recently met one of the FTers most affected by Ozstamps' behavior and we discussed this issue. This FTer has a very strong opinion on the issue and will probably never be on close terms with Oz, but despite the fact that we agreed to disagree, he/she never used my opinion against me. Instead, he/she took the high ground and respected my point of view. I know that our disagreement will not impede us from developing a cordial relationship. I believe he/she has set a standard for all of us in this community to follow.

------------------
Gaucho100K

Very well said Gaucho. I totally agree. I regret even more, you won't make it to DUS.

I shared sidecars with ozstamps and Joh in jan-2001 at the Nikko Bar (top floor with a great sight on harbour and Opera House) in Sydney.

Where's that rolleyes smilie when you really need it?

Edited to add:

They really do work again! Thanks, Rudi.

[This message has been edited by cactuspete (edited 12-13-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Rudi (edited 12-13-2001).]

Gaucho100K writes: I don't see evidence of that here in this thread at all.

My friend, that's exactly what got them banned! Along with other things.

This can not be done. Plain and simple. Ignoring is not always an option when you are being attacked. Everything in the book was done for almost a year. Every opportunity was given. At some point you just have to say, "That's it. We tried."

You see Gaucho, some of us consider this sad chapter in FlyerTalk history over and done with and never mention that persons names. Late, but finallly appropriate actions were taken and should stick, IMHO.

But when someone opens the can of worms again and posts a defense of this persons, it is in the prerogative of their victims to not remain silent and remind the readers just how strongly they disagree, and to provide any historical back-up to their point of view, if nessessary.

Whenever anyone opens this can of worms in this "person's" defense, I will not remain silent and just let those opinions remain unchallenged just because they come from a respected member of the community.

At the same time, I would hope that nobody ever opens the can by posting negative remarks about this persons.

And I won't ever start or participate in a bashing thread against this persons, because they are no longer here to defend themselves. And it brings back painful memories.

But, if someone jumps up to the plate and starts to defend them, I won't remain silent.

And I would be lying if I didn't say that it takes a great deal of personal restraint (for me and many others) to keep from saying what I really feel about this. I don't say what I really feel because "free speech" issues do not apply here on FlyerTalk. It is privately owned and the rules can and are set by the owner.

And I try to respect those rules and requests of the owner. Unlike some.

Perhaps Punki should have listened to her own advise and just ignored this thread. Or just said, "I don't think it's appropriate to talk about someone who's can't be here to defend themselves." Rather than jumping to their defense.

Could someone please direct me to the original thread where the whole Ozstamps issue came up?

First of all there was a possibility of sarcasm in Punki's post. I did not attack Punki's post at all. However, the thought that Ozstamps was unfairly attacked borders on crazy. I have heard that in person OZ is a really nice person. Online he is trouble. My real response about OZ would be a violation of the TOC.

Gaucho100k, my post was intended to share my opposing view to Punki's without attacking her in any way. I did hope she was kidding, when she said she wasn't I left it alone. I thought my point of view was already made.

dallasflyer

dallasflyer-- after your clarification I now understand the spirit of your post. I do recognize that at first glance I did read your post as ridicule, but I now yield to you clarification and therefore request you accept my apologies for misinterpreting. Im all for having different opinions, and both yours and the response by PremEx (which I will answer to via a separate post) shows the level of respect/civility and community spirit that I think that the owner of this BB wants to see.

Gaucho,

I posted in the same spirit as dallasflyer.
I would never say anything to insult Punki. And like PremEx, I felt obligated to post.

I try not to get involved in these posts because they only get worse not better. I'm pretty smart most of the time. Today is not one of those days.

But sometimes you jut have to say what's on your mind. And believe you me, it took some restraint to post just those 3 words up above.

What I don't like about this thread is that it's destined to become one of those mulitple page jobs.

Sigh.
Dan

ajnaro,

There wasn't a singular ostamps/avgas issue. Glenn Stephens joined the FT community around the summer of 2000 and proceeded to make a huge pest of himself. (And that's a kind description of him.)

If you do a search of ozstamps or avgas' posts you will find what we're referring to. Specifically, check the United, MilesBuzz and Hilton fora.


{Edited to add ... }

Gaucho, while I appreciate your thoughtful post, I think that you are equivocating about the natute of Oz' presence here on FT. Flat out: ozstamps and avgas was just a real mixer. He didn't add significant substance to the so-called collective community. (And please, don't dredge up his MilesBuzz threadson the Baht Run, or Hilton or Aeromexico scams.)

[This message has been edited by essxjay (edited 12-13-2001).]

This is only a suggestion, but I would recommend that these requests and replies (if any) for info on historical info be taken to private email.

essxjay: I was going to e-mail you, but my mail server's down right now.

Is this thread relevant to this forum or to FlyerTalk? Why are we even talking about someone behind his back? Why do we even care about this persona anymore?

You know where this thread is headed, and it might not be pretty.

FewMiles..

------------------
[ FlyerTalkers' Resources on the Web ]
[ Unofficial Guide to AAdvantage ] [ Unofficial oneworld Info Desk ]

I think I understand fewmiles' concern, but will all due respect I have attempted to take this thread away from the persona of any flyertalker in particular and into what I think is a much more broad & important concept. I know its hard to separate this matter from any particular person completely, but (at least until now) this thread has remained very civil. Why do we need to gag it? Could we perhaps give this discussion a chance?

------------------
Gaucho100K