bullojm1 wrote: and poking fun at Chad (in good humor)
I thought this is why most of us come here?
Just kidding Spike...no I'm not Chad...yes I am Spike
Kitplanes article
Well,
When I wrote that email to Marc, I never in a million years thought that he would publish it. I don't even subscribe to that mag. I did not send it with the intentions of it being used as it was but I guess I asked for it by sending it. Like I said earlier, I most likely over reacted but I have to disagree with you Mike, he did attack Bob.
This issue with the article that seemed to pull the trigger on many emotions that have been building up revolving around Dan. For several years, he has been loading peoples guns with ammunition. There is no way anyone can dispute this fact. Just search the archives of any RV related forum and you will find this to be true. Most people have just lived with it in order to maintain peace and to prevent crossing someone with such a following. We are not the only people debating this article, every forum I visit related to RV's has had tons of people both arguing against and in support of Dan.
I don't think anyone is ready to kick Dan out of the RV community. He has a ton to offer and has and most likely will continue to be a great asset to us and others to come. But... it is OK to be called out by your peers every now and then, it is a good way for a person to stay grounded in their roots. Feel free to remind me of this if and most likely when I step outside of my bounds. (I am already too big for my pants
)
I meant every word I said to Marc in regards to what homebuilding does not need whether it be from Dan, myself or any of you guys. General aviation and homebuilding together as a group is in major jeopardy these days. The RV community as a whole is one of the greatest associations of people I have ever been a part of, lets all remember this as we move forward and do what we can to foster and grow this great organization!
When I wrote that email to Marc, I never in a million years thought that he would publish it. I don't even subscribe to that mag. I did not send it with the intentions of it being used as it was but I guess I asked for it by sending it. Like I said earlier, I most likely over reacted but I have to disagree with you Mike, he did attack Bob.
This issue with the article that seemed to pull the trigger on many emotions that have been building up revolving around Dan. For several years, he has been loading peoples guns with ammunition. There is no way anyone can dispute this fact. Just search the archives of any RV related forum and you will find this to be true. Most people have just lived with it in order to maintain peace and to prevent crossing someone with such a following. We are not the only people debating this article, every forum I visit related to RV's has had tons of people both arguing against and in support of Dan.
I don't think anyone is ready to kick Dan out of the RV community. He has a ton to offer and has and most likely will continue to be a great asset to us and others to come. But... it is OK to be called out by your peers every now and then, it is a good way for a person to stay grounded in their roots. Feel free to remind me of this if and most likely when I step outside of my bounds. (I am already too big for my pants
)I meant every word I said to Marc in regards to what homebuilding does not need whether it be from Dan, myself or any of you guys. General aviation and homebuilding together as a group is in major jeopardy these days. The RV community as a whole is one of the greatest associations of people I have ever been a part of, lets all remember this as we move forward and do what we can to foster and grow this great organization!
Last edited by Brantel on Mon Apr 28, 2008 9:24 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Brantel (Brian Chesteen),
RV12-IS, #121606, N912BC - Building Now!
RV10, #41942, N????? - Project Sold
RV-7/TU, #72823, N159SB - SOLD
RV12-IS, #121606, N912BC - Building Now!
RV10, #41942, N????? - Project Sold
RV-7/TU, #72823, N159SB - SOLD
What Brian say's here is absolute truth. I just deleated the rant I went into, sufice it to say WOW way to go Brian.
JohnR wrote:Bob, thanks for speaking your piece, it needed said.
For those who haven't seen it here is Brian's response as published:
Dan is an RV builder of one airplane
and before he did this, he was as green
as a gourd in the world of homebuilding.
How does building one airplane
elevate a man to the level of esteemed
RV builder? This man is getting way too
big for his pants.
I suggest that you do some research
on what the Experimental community
really thinks about this man before you
allow him space in your magazine. He
is a knowledgeable person, but his attitude
is that of some sort of elitist, and
his comments typically have a condescending
attitude about them. We do
not need this type of arrogance in the
homebuilding world.
BRIAN CHESTEEN
-
Bob Barrett
- Class C
- Posts: 625
- Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 8:37 pm
- Location: Sartell MN
Bob Collins, I really like your response in Kitplane. You have captured what home building is all about. I hope we both live to fly our planes and pass them on to our children or grandchildren. I woudn't have missed my Grandson's Confirmation to work on my airplane or even fly it if it were flyable. Of course I attend chruch regularly, which some view as another waste of time. I hope we can fly together some time soon!
-
Spike
- Chief Rivet Banger
- Posts: 4013
- Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:40 pm
- Location: Baltimore, MD
- Contact:
To be honest with you, I don't see "Dan" bashing. I do see people expressing differing opinions with respect to Dan's position, and those who are sharing their impressions with the way Dan has presented himself.I see some Dan bashing in this thread and I don't particularly care for it.
Actually I would not encourage any of the moderators (there are only 3 of us) deleting the same content if it were aimed at a member. I don't believe membership would make a difference, and to be clear about it, Dan is just as welcome to be a member here as anyone else is.How do you think he feels about the RB crowd if he was a member here? If someone wrote some of these words about another active RB member, do you think one of the moderators would delete it?
I have never seen Dan make a personal attack on someone. He can be harsh at times, but the underlying message he is trying to convey is positive.
I did not see any true personal attacks here Mike. I did see people openly disagree with Dan's position, characterize his presentation of those opinions, and take his arguments to their perceived conclusion using satire, etc. That is something I do intend allow here, especially in response to a published work or opinion. What I will not tolerate is specific name calling, character assassination, or general mud slinging. I assure you that if I think something falls into that area I will trash a thread without hesitation. Outside of that I will generally be slow to moderate things. One of the reasons Patti and I created this place was because much of the establishment at the time did alot of moderating and it was hard to present alternate opinions. As many have said, we do aim to be family friendly, but I do not take that to mean bashful of a good debate.
I guess this is what I disagree with the most. If someone publishes an article, especially an opinion piece, why is it that if you don't agree you should not challenge it or put forth a differing opinion? Many of the most notable people in history are notable because they did exactly that. I offer up Burt Rutan, one of the most beloved people in aviation. How quiet has he been regarding NASA and their efforts? Hell, the founders of the USA were by all historical accounts treasonists. Differing opinions are what move us forward and I would suggest that it is no different with the homebuilding community. To the contrary the homebuilding community is the epitome of dissenting opinions. The advancement of technology in aviation is many times driven by people who have a differing opinion, can do it better, or in general just want to show the established community they have it wrong.Lastly, if you don't care for what he has to say, don't read his articles, don't visit his web log and don't say "Hi" to him if you see him.
Will there be times when we (the mods of RB) get it wrong and don't get a handle on something quickly enough? I promise there will be. We will screw up at certain points in time, we are human like everyone else. However, looking back through the thread after reading your thoughts I still think we are ok for now.
Spike
http://www.rivetbangers.com - Now integrating web and mail!
Current Build: 2 years into a beautiful little girl
Current Build: 2 years into a beautiful little girl
EDITED...Spike, can you delete?
Last edited by cjensen on Tue Apr 29, 2008 10:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
RVNewsletter
- Class D
- Posts: 259
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 9:57 am
- Location: St. Paul, MN.
- Contact:
I've been on vacation so I haven't seen the bulk of this thread.
Regarding Dan bashing: I didn't perceive a lot if it, but the unfortunate nature of this is that it creates a Dan vs. Bob schism on the boards and that's unfortunte because my entire article TRIED to make the point that there's more than one way to build an airplane and more than one reason to.
Dan's original article seemed to postulate a standard for homebuilding. That's not only inappropriate, it flies in the face of the spirit. However, the underlying message in my article was "to each his own," and that needs to be extended to Dan as well.
My main criticism, voiced many times, is one of journalistic ethics, not homebuilding. Dan, basically, made up the facts of his article -- at least in as much as it describes me -- in order to make a point. That -- by any definition -- is a bad thing. He didn't need to belittle -- especially inaccurately -- someone else in order to make his position known. And Marc told me that he wishes he'd given the article a more thorough scrubbing. It was not a well written piece and could've used a couple of rewrites. Removing the criticism of others -- while it might've masked Dan's personality (which he acknowledges) -- would've actually strengthened an otherwise fine point. What works -- more or less -- on, say, an Internet bulletin board, tends to fall on its face on the printed pages of a magazine. And that's what happened with that article -- it just wasn't very well written and the actual message was lost in all of the nonsense that preceded the main point.
Again, that's not a homebuilding assessment, that's a journalism assessment and at least on that, I'm qualified to speak. In my original draft of the article (there were only two versions), I addressed Dan's points directly and then upon reflection (and the advice of Marc), I realized I didn't need to do that; that it was actually MASKING the points I wanted to make. So virtually all references to Dan were removed, the defensive nature of the article was eliminated, and I simply wrote from the heart, which is where our projects live.
I, actually, don't have much of a problem with Dan. I get a lot out of his Web site. He's a cranky East Coast guy and so am I. Life goes on.
However, the straw that broke the camel's back -- and was the main reason I pulled the plug on the RV BBQ -- was a comment someone posted on the Yahoogroup RV forum when I made this point that my main problem with Dan's article wasn't his conclusion, it was that he intentionally created "facts" about me to get to HIS point.
The comment was something along the lines of, "Shut up. We don't need to be making Dan mad and have him pull down his Web site."
That, again to me (YMMV) was the sort of "situational ethics" ("I have something to gain personally so therefore I'm willing to overlook simple right or wrong.") that led me to reassess the RV community as a whole and in the absence of being able to trust what I thought were some friendships and/or standards of common courtesies, led me to do what I need to do to make sure that nobody like that ever drinks MY beer again. I'm simply not interested in being associated with someone -- I'm talking the commenter here, not Dan -- who has such a low moral compass... and I realized I don't know how many there are out there like him.
Bottom line: Respect people's choices and decisions. Don't expect more out of the RV community (as a whole) than you would the larger community, and you'll never be disappointed.
Regarding Dan bashing: I didn't perceive a lot if it, but the unfortunate nature of this is that it creates a Dan vs. Bob schism on the boards and that's unfortunte because my entire article TRIED to make the point that there's more than one way to build an airplane and more than one reason to.
Dan's original article seemed to postulate a standard for homebuilding. That's not only inappropriate, it flies in the face of the spirit. However, the underlying message in my article was "to each his own," and that needs to be extended to Dan as well.
My main criticism, voiced many times, is one of journalistic ethics, not homebuilding. Dan, basically, made up the facts of his article -- at least in as much as it describes me -- in order to make a point. That -- by any definition -- is a bad thing. He didn't need to belittle -- especially inaccurately -- someone else in order to make his position known. And Marc told me that he wishes he'd given the article a more thorough scrubbing. It was not a well written piece and could've used a couple of rewrites. Removing the criticism of others -- while it might've masked Dan's personality (which he acknowledges) -- would've actually strengthened an otherwise fine point. What works -- more or less -- on, say, an Internet bulletin board, tends to fall on its face on the printed pages of a magazine. And that's what happened with that article -- it just wasn't very well written and the actual message was lost in all of the nonsense that preceded the main point.
Again, that's not a homebuilding assessment, that's a journalism assessment and at least on that, I'm qualified to speak. In my original draft of the article (there were only two versions), I addressed Dan's points directly and then upon reflection (and the advice of Marc), I realized I didn't need to do that; that it was actually MASKING the points I wanted to make. So virtually all references to Dan were removed, the defensive nature of the article was eliminated, and I simply wrote from the heart, which is where our projects live.
I, actually, don't have much of a problem with Dan. I get a lot out of his Web site. He's a cranky East Coast guy and so am I. Life goes on.
However, the straw that broke the camel's back -- and was the main reason I pulled the plug on the RV BBQ -- was a comment someone posted on the Yahoogroup RV forum when I made this point that my main problem with Dan's article wasn't his conclusion, it was that he intentionally created "facts" about me to get to HIS point.
The comment was something along the lines of, "Shut up. We don't need to be making Dan mad and have him pull down his Web site."
That, again to me (YMMV) was the sort of "situational ethics" ("I have something to gain personally so therefore I'm willing to overlook simple right or wrong.") that led me to reassess the RV community as a whole and in the absence of being able to trust what I thought were some friendships and/or standards of common courtesies, led me to do what I need to do to make sure that nobody like that ever drinks MY beer again.
I'm simply not interested in being associated with someone -- I'm talking the commenter here, not Dan -- who has such a low moral compass... and I realized I don't know how many there are out there like him.Bottom line: Respect people's choices and decisions. Don't expect more out of the RV community (as a whole) than you would the larger community, and you'll never be disappointed.
-
RVNewsletter
- Class D
- Posts: 259
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 9:57 am
- Location: St. Paul, MN.
- Contact:
I agree with what you said. I can't tell you how many things on this plane I've decided on based on the decisions that other builders who I respect -- that includes Dan -- made. Let me be clear: there is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to get in the air as fast as possible for as little as possible. Nothing. Absolutely nothing. There is something wrong with anyone saying that you're wrong in your motivation and dreams. That's my only point. Put me in the "fully behind you" category in how you approach this dream, and willing to lend a hand in any way I can.bullojm1 wrote:When I read his article that spawned all of this madness, I took it to heart and evaluated my own plane to see if I was being foolish in any manor. I respect his opinions because he has completed something I have not and has hindsight of the liking I could only hope for. Sure, I have a few extravagant items on my RV that I don't need, and I am happy with the decisions I made. But I also want to get in the air as fast as possible for as few bucks out of my pocket as possible.
As I said in my article, I've been making compromises on my plane since the day I started building. My panel is far from finished in design -- in fact, it's far from started in design -- but at this point I have settled ("settled" meaning that's what I've decided today. Tomorrow may be another story; one advantage of not needing to race to get into the air and paying as you go, is you get a lot of time to think about stuff) on a VP-50, which is a $1500 (approx) unit vs. a $6,500 unit. Obviously, fewer bells and whistles.bullojm1 wrote:And not to be causing more of a ruckus, but I read on Bob's blog (which I do enjoy reading) where the latest panel layout doesn't even have the Vertical Power component in it! How could you let him win?!!? (Just kidding, Bob's panel is very nice and has great bang for the buck!).
I need to sell some more articles!