The John10 Show

[john10]

You are not my colleague, and you can  goad me all you want, I won't fall for it. 

Here you go pal, a video just for you.

http://youtu.be/FMEe7JqBgvg

dileas

tess

Maybe this thread needs to be locked down for a cool out period.

I don't mean anything bad. I told the original poster I thought his guidelines were good, and asked if he had some examples of the media reporting things that were said on this forum. I read most military-related articles that are published in the mainstream media, so I was curious if any came to mind.

 

[Journeyman]

Maybe this thread needs to be locked down for a cool out period.

Why deny the thread to everyone else? If you feel a "cool out period" is warranted, simply stop posting/reading.

 

[Good2Golf]

It's rather tame and polite, actually. You come sailing in, ask of Army.ca posters have ever been quoted by the media, one staff responds yes, then you ask for examples immediately following.  This comes across to many (or at least a few) as either: a) questioning whether the responding moderator was actually telling the truth, or b) lazy and wanting to be spoon-fed examples of the occurrence. Maybe the passive-aggression was you "kindly asking" for proof?  Anyway, it was you who accused others of inappropriate passive-aggressive behavior. Maybe the issue can be most clearly seen in the mirror.  No one on this site "owes" john10 any effort doing research.  If you feel hard done by, maybe you shouldn't have been so accusatory in the first place with your 'what the heck is up with you guys?' angle...

Food for thought; you are free of course to disregard it as you see fit.

Anyway, on topic good to see that MGen Day did the right thing by following up appropriately as the then CO of JTF 2.  That should have been seen by readers of the story to have faith in the CANSOF Chain of Command.  Issues of military jurisprudence thereafter are not so simple, and I am not surprised that there was question as to the likelihood of successful prosecution by Court Martial.  Remember, this was a Warrant Officer for whom the charges necessarily had to be referred, and not dealt with simply and expeditiously by Summary Trial. The procedural and evidentiary procedures for trial by Court Martial are notably more restrictive and constraining (and righty so, given powers of punishment in sentencing) than those at Summary Trial.

Regards
G2G

 

[john10]

Why deny the thread to everyone else? If you feel a "cool out period" is warranted, simply stop posting/reading.

Hi Journeyman, I don't feel I need a cool out. It's for the guys who react immaturely to a simple question.

 

[Journeyman]

:dunno:

 

[john10]

It's rather tame and polite, actually. You come sailing in, ask of Army.ca posters have ever been quoted by the media, one staff responds yes, then you ask for examples immediately following.  This comes across to many (or at least a few) as either: a) questioning whether the responding moderator was actually telling the truth, or b) lazy and wanting to be spoon-fed examples of the occurrence. Maybe the passive-aggression was you "kindly asking" for proof?  Anyway, it was you who accused others of inappropriate passive-aggressive behavior. Maybe the issue can be most clearly seen in the mirror.  No one on this site "owes" john10 any effort doing research.  If you feel hard done by, maybe you shouldn't have been so accusatory in the first place with your 'what the heck is up with you guys?' angle...

Food for thought; you are free of course to disregard it as you see fit.

Sure, but the underlying tone was one of whininess and irritation that somebody would ask that question. Unless I'm mistaken about what he really meant, in which case I take back everything I've written.

If some posters take a simple exchange that includes questions as impugning their honour or ordering you to do things for me, it's a reflection of their oversensitivity.

 

[Loachman]

It's for the guys who react immaturely to a simple question.

You mean members of the Directing Staff? Those people who run this site?

I've just read this thread and, if anybody is acting like you suggest, it is you.

 

[cupper]

Maybe it's the hurricane, but there seems to have been a lot of this in the past couple of days. ;D

 

[john10]

You mean members of the Directing Staff? Those people who run this site?

I've just read this thread and, if anybody is acting like you suggest, it is you.

Yes, they were acting immaturely. How does the fact they are Directing Staff change that? What a ridiculous fallacy.

 

[TN2IC]

Have a great day John...

 

[cupper]

You mean members of the Directing Staff? Those people who run this site?

I've just read this thread and, if anybody is acting like you suggest, it is you.

Yes, they were acting immaturely. How does the fact they are Directing Staff change that? What a ridiculous fallacy.

Could you guys move this over to the split topic specifically set up for this?

 

[TN2IC]

:ignore:

 

[Jarnhamar]

Not really contributing but I downloaded some kinda medal of honour first person shooter and you could pick a JTF dude.
I'm going to check to see if his melee attack is strangling someone..

 

[Loachman]

Yes, they were acting immaturely.

I read through the thread again and, no, they weren't.

You were given a simple answer to a question and then made a comment about "silly passive-agressiveness", thereby displaying the exact same behaviour that you ascribe to others. You then continued do the same thing in further posts.

You should re-assess your attitude.

 

[Good2Golf]

I read through the thread again and, no, they weren't.

You were given a simple answer to a question and then made a comment about "silly passive-agressiveness", thereby displaying the exact same behaviour that you ascribe to others. You then continued do the same thing in further posts.

You should re-assess your attitude.

Loach, blaming others for being "hypersensitive" to his 'innocent queries' on numerous topics itshis modus operandi, as a quick read through his post history will show.

Methinks he doth protest too much...

:ignore:

 

[George Wallace]

I don't know.  Is this not a case of "self-entitlement"; "the world owes me everything" type of attitude?  The gong show can continue ad nauseam with someone who has such an attitude.  Definitely one who can not take criticism and will pass a fault (thier own).  Will never make a 'Royal'.

 

[Pat in Halifax]

I believe this is a case where being on the internet vice face to face may have blown this out of proportion. Don't shoot me guys but I see where this MIGHT have come from. Consider the same coversation face to face. One person states that media trolls this site for info and the next logical question (if I had not been on here the last couple years and seen it myself, I know I would ask it) would be something along the lines of "Holy shit, you're kidding-like what?" I don't know the individual and I suspect there may be some PMs between he/she and some on this site but again, if this were a face to face, I am going to go out on a limb and say this NEVER would have gotten to this stage.
Too true, maybe it is the hurricane in the air!!

Pat

 

[Jarnhamar]

You are not my colleague, and you can  goad me all you want, I won't fall for it. 

Here you go pal, a video just for you.

http://youtu.be/FMEe7JqBgvg

dileas

tess

That video is awesome.

 

[Journeyman]

I believe this is a case where being on the internet vice face to face may have blown this out of proportion.

You're probably correct. However, this is the internet. As such we have interactions thrust upon us that would never happen in the real world.

I know the "entitlement generation" is out there, but they tend to choose other people to burden with their "dude, there's a lot of words on this site and I'm too lazy to search" issues. There's a reason I try to actively avoid the Recruiting threads; the results of our 'no one fails' dumbing down of society is painfully obvious.

One of the terrific things about the internet is that it levels the playing field and broadens circles of contacts. That however comes with the price of some people having to up their game when it comes to personal skills -- thinking, showing initiative, bizarre concepts like capitalizing some letters....

Some people may find that that's too steep a price and stomp off in a huff. I can live with their absence.

 

[Good2Golf]

I believe this is a case where being on the internet vice face to face may have blown this out of proportion. Don't shoot me guys but I see where this MIGHT have come from. Consider the same coversation face to face. One person states that media trolls this site for info and the next logical question (if I had not been on here the last couple years and seen it myself, I know I would ask it) would be something along the lines of "Holy crap, you're kidding-like what?" I don't know the individual and I suspect there may be some PMs between he/she and some on this site but again, if this were a face to face, I am going to go out on a limb and say this NEVER would have gotten to this stage.
Too true, maybe it is the hurricane in the air!!

Pat

Pat, that can be the case sometimes, but as noted earlier, and this is something that becomes rather apparent to the Directing Staff when dealing with various posters on the site, john10's most recent "thing" appears to be accusing soldiers/DS/etc... of being hypersensitive, oversensitive, overreactive, whiners, self-victims, etc... after they post countering or challenging positions to his.

While I and others chose not to do john10's research for him, doing but a small bit of posting research provides "a few" examples of john10's past exploits at pointing out others' oversensitivities...so, no; maybe it is not everybody else who is having an issue with internet-based communication, but in fact john10, himself:

Sure, but the underlying tone was one of whininess and irritation that somebody would ask that question. Unless I'm mistaken about what he really meant, in which case I take back everything I've written.

If some posters take a simple exchange that includes questions as impugning their honour or ordering you to do things for me, it's a reflection of their oversensitivity.

I simply asked if he had specific examples. No one was forced to do anything.

This hypersensitive whiny passive-agressive nonsense is so over the top. Is this how you guys speak to your colleagues?

Hi G2G,
I didn't say it didn't happen, I simply asked if an example came to mind. Why are you guys so sensitive and defensive?

Would you care to provide an example?

Also, I sense some silly passive-agressiveness in your post. Is there a reason for it? Disregard that bit if I'm mistaken.

Container, with all due respect, all the relevant facts are there. The trips were all for official functions, except for one, which was made necessary by the fact he attended a soldier's repatriation ceremony.

Really guys, grow some thicker skin.

Insofar as the whining and self-victimization is not based on anything actually written in the article, but rather on the "agenda" and "axe to grind" that allegedly underlie it, then yeah, it's baseless.

If there's something wrong with the article, step up to the plate and say what it is.

Actually, yes, I do have pride, which is why I expect my colleagues to behave like professionals, and not hypersensitive guys who think that simply reporting public expenses is a vile attack on the Canadian military.

The media are reporting a story about public expenses for travel by private jet. They did the same for the former GG a couple weeks ago. Big whoop. Did they misreport anything? No. Did they fail to provide context? No, they explained precisely which public functions he was attending, and in the case of the vacation, they explained that the use of a private jet was due to his attending the repatriation ceremony and being delayed by work. There is nothing wrong with the article. Nothing.

Canadian soldiers really need to tone down the baseless whining and self-victimization. It's unbecoming.

I don't think I've ever seen a group of whinier people than Canadian soldiers, when it comes to the media.