Re: Indoor Housekeeping (with apologies to the innocent)

From: William Gowen <wdgowen_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2012 12:51:27 -0400

My recollection is that thus group was renamed a number of years ago
because of fights breaking out over rules. I believe the renaming of the
group was intended to focus discussions on the actual building and flying
of indoor models. (Mark correct me if I'm wrong about this).

I would personally like to see an adherence to this (extreme?) idea. I
really don't care to try to post anything here when it's likely that
another off topic fight is about to break out.

I also think it's asinine to try to convince outdoor flyers to fly indoor
freeflight. Every outdoor flyer I know is fully aware of indoor . If they
want to fly indoor competitively or just for fun then there's nothing
stopping them from doing it.

On Jun 30, 2012 9:54 AM, "Mark F1diddler" <f1diddler_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In Indoor_Construction_at_yahoogroups.com, Don DeLoach <ddeloach_at_...>
wrote:
> >
> > I think Murph's point is that calling yourselves indoorists is simply
unwise from the standpoint of appealing to a wider audience.
> >
> > Furthermore I'd bet there are a bunch more *FFers who fly indoor* than
"indoorists". Does that fact worry the indoorists? Not sure, but it should.
> >
> > Don DeLoach
>
> Don D,
> <<simply unwise>>
> I presume you are also speaking for yourself, and also for "Murph." In no
way is it unwise to reject a perfectly elegant and descriptive word due to
your belief that such a word is not attractive enough and does not
adequately tap dance for newcomers. If I were to run across a group calling
themselves "The Mulvihists", I would note, "Wow, here's who I need to talk
to if and when I want to try Mulvihill." Some people today crave genuine
description and truth instead of marketing PR hype (your profession?) IF
you want to package indoor differently, that's fine, do so, but when you
continue to insist that everyone else needs to package it the way you and
MMM wisdom dictates, then we will continue to fight you with words, since
you are relentless also. One problem is, too much of such pulls down the
overall interest of Indoor_Construction among those who check here. And a
few people who do offer indoor content, such as Don S, get mad and leave
(for the third time, now.) It's interesting to see how much power and
influence each side ascribes to each other, when really that much power
doesn't exist, and none of this in-fighting has much effect except on our
nerves.
>
> In my little world, the antidote for bad ideas or analysis is to counter
them with good ideas and better analysis. However, I throw this problem to
the wisdom of this group (EXCLUDING the 2 Dons,) since in last bad thread 3
members decided they were the moderator anyhow. What should be done about
these existential arguements? Does it come down to the personalities
involved? Should anyone be banned? If you propose new rule, how would you
enforce it? Private mails are safer, perhaps. But whatever....
> Thanks,
> Mark B
>
>
Received on Sat Jun 30 2012 - 09:51:28 CEST