Breaking USHPA's Monopoly Control of Flying Sites

[Steve Davy]

http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.php?t=35608
Jim Rooney

Jim Gaar - 2017/09/25 13:10:23 UTC

One of the best out there I would agree!

I nominate Jim Gaar for the title "Lowest IQ of any individual in that group".

[bobk]

The American Indians lost their continent because they were so busy trying to one-up their fellow tribes that they could never really unite ... at least not until it was way too late.

We are making progress, and Dockweiler is a good sign. But USHPA's monoply is very strong. The outcome is not clear.

I don't know if the native Americans could have held on to their land even if they were united. They had a lot of technology to catch up on. But I do know that their fragmentation sealed their fate.

Make whatever excuses you like. They won't matter in the long run because history is mostly written by the winners.

[Tad Eareckson]

Steve. Seconded. That'll make the rest of the arithmetic really easy.

Bob...

The American Indians lost their continent because they were so busy trying to one-up their fellow tribes that they could never really unite ...

The way the Europeans really united on the other side of the Atlantic in 1914 and 1939.

We are making progress, and Dockweiler is a good sign.

Didn't answer my question about how many individuals were needed/used to achieve that victory.

But USHPA's monoply is very strong. The outcome is not clear.

Clear enough to me. Just look at the blindingly obvious big picture trends.

I don't know if the native Americans could have held on to their land even if they were united. They had a lot of technology to catch up on. But I do know that their fragmentation sealed their fate.

Rubbish. Old World based industrial technology and power sealed their fate. Ditto for the Union against the Confederacy.

Make whatever excuses you like. They won't matter in the long run because history is mostly written by the winners.

Mostly. But u$hPa's really and justifiably scared shitless regarding people reading solid crash reports and analyses. So we'll do the quality stuff. And they can keep talking about their friends dying doing what they loved and not speculating about what went wrong out of respect for their fallen brothers and the feelings of friends and family members.

Jean Lake has racked up the better part of six thousand hits (5868 at the moment - to be precise). Divide by two to compensate for bots not recognized as bots.

[bobk]

We are making progress, and Dockweiler is a good sign.

Didn't answer my question about how many individuals were needed/used to achieve that victory.

Sorry. I missed it. It took 3 of us willing to actually go to the meetings (some of which were not public). But that's not the question. The question is how many people have to be involved in an organization so that you'll have 3 people available at the right place and the right time who can take off from work and don't have some other commitment. That multiplies the 3 by about 100. We've got about that number if we combine the Torrey Hawks, U.S. Hawks, and Friends of Dockweiler.

I don't know if the native Americans could have held on to their land even if they were united. They had a lot of technology to catch up on. But I do know that their fragmentation sealed their fate.

Rubbish. Old World based industrial technology and power sealed their fate.

Maybe you missed it, but I mentioned technology. Also, if united and organized, their numbers could have easily overwhelmed each and every little landing party. That would give them a lot of time to catch up on the technology.

Jean Lake has racked up the better part of six thousand hits (5868 at the moment - to be precise). Divide by two to compensate for bots not recognized as bots.

Let's make it 6,000 and divide by 2 for the bots. That's 3,000. But there are over 900 posts. Let's round that to 1,000. Every time each of those posts is made, the poster is likely to review it. That's about 1,000 hits. If you have two people who follow those posts, they'll each be generating about 1,000 hits as they follow each post. That's 3,000 right there with you and two followers. If any of them frequently re-read different pages, it's even worse. Sorry to burst your bubble.

[Tad Eareckson]

- I note you don't say:
-- three of you actually went to the meetings
-- more than one person at a time attended any one meeting
-- that one person - possibly over a longer period of time - couldn't have been effective in achieving the desired result

- So you have about three hundred individuals, all on board with the objective enough to do meetings, and within practical range. Congratulations.

Maybe you missed it, but I mentioned technology.

I didn't miss it.

Also, if united and organized, their numbers could have easily overwhelmed each and every little landing party.

The way the Europeans were always able to do against Viking raiders in the relevant era.

That would give them a lot of time to catch up on the technology.

Rubbish. Check out "Guns, Germs, and Steel" sometime. Look what the conquistadors were able to do with microscopic numbers of boots and hooves on the ground. And human societies and relationships don't and can't work on these broad-brush oversimplified models.

But there are over 900 posts.

There are over 86 posts. 87 to be precise.

Let's round that to 1,000.

Multiply the actual number by eleven and a half. OK.

Every time each of those posts is made, the poster is likely to review it.

- You should try that sometime, Bob. Also try checking for recent posts in the topic before you click submit.

- 83 of the 87 posts are mine. That's 95.4 percent. But of course after you've rounded down to 900 the percentage drops way down to 9.7.

- With this post 7836 of Kites Strings' 10490 total, 74.7 percent, are mine - for whatever that's worth, one way or another.

- So your assumption is that the poster hits submit, closes the window, then reopens it to review. OK...

- Got news for ya, Bob. The Board tends to remember when an individual has accessed a topic and not tick up on a reclick a short time later. I know for a fact that the counter can stay frozen even after I click to read somebody else's new post. Things don't seem to be real consistent/predictable but it IS a significant issue.

- I really avoid unnecessary/casual clicks myself 'cause I want as little artificial inflation as possible.

If you have two people who follow those posts...

I get about ten legitimate hits per post within a day of them going up. Over time they go the only way possible and legitimately increase but there's a MAJOR problem with illegitimate bot hits so the best one can get is a big ballpark feel.

But I also know we have a pretty big search engine footprint on our pet issues.

Any more math lessons? Maybe you could create a model to predict the average level at which a totally randomly timed instantaneous loss of 225 pounds of towline "pressure" increases the safety of a towing operation. Or the average time at which a locking out glider will pause its heading change while one effects the easy reach to one's Industry Standard release.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

You haven't burst shit. I haven't had much in the way of bubbles for decades.
---
Edit - 2017/10/07 19:30:0 UTC

Last two lines above got accidentally chopped off on my first effort.

[bobk]

Oops. You're right about my math being off by a factor of 10. I was looking at the "Bob Show" topic (currently showing 893 posts).

But you're both right and wrong about the click counter. I think it depends on whether you're logged in or not. If you're logged in, then I believe it will not double count. However I suspect it will bump the count when you view a topic with a new post that you haven't read. That would be a big multiplier for people logged in, but it might be more difficult to verify.

But if you're NOT logged in, every refresh bumps the counter. Try it yourself.

I note you don't say:
- three of you actually went to the meetings
- more than one person at a time attended any one meeting
- that one person - possibly over a longer period of time - couldn't have been effective in achieving the desired result

- Three of us actually went to meetings.
- More than one person at a time went to about half of the meetings.
- It would have been much harder with just one person. Just as on a forum, it's easy to attack and criticize one person. That's why sock puppets were invented on forums. They're much less effective in face-to-face meetings.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

I haven't had much in the way of bubbles for decades.

That's what this topic is about. USHPA's monopoly has been a "bubble killer". I'd like your help and the help of your members to work toward breaking that monopoly.

It won't happen by sniping at each other. It will take (as I've said many times) a willingness to take a disciplined approach to spreading the word and opening sites.

I think you've all gotten the message by now, and I think you've pretty much made up your minds. So just as in the other topic, I won't belabor it any further unless there's some new devolopment (as Dockweiler was).

Thanks.

[Tad Eareckson]

Bob Kuczewski - 2017/10/07 19:44:53 UTC

I was looking at the "Bob Show" topic (currently showing 893 posts).

And at the time you posted it was currently showing 881. So how did that get to be....

Bob Kuczewski - 2017/10/07 16:01:08 UTC

But there are over 900 posts...

...OVER nine hundred posts? (Which we then round to a thousand.)

And I know this:

That's 3,000 right there with you and two followers.

may be taken a bit out of context. But I don't want and hopefully don't have any...

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23813
Threaded bridle system

Jim Gaar - 2011/05/26 15:44:33 UTC

Beyond that I'm a Rooney follower...

...FOLLOWERS here - or anywhere else. The core mission of Kite Strings is hang glider pilot competence - which entails an understanding of aeronautical theory. I'm confident that I'm adequately qualified (and, hell, I have the credentials from u$hPa (for what that's worth)) to bring people like Zack up to my speed. And my hope is always that they'll catch any mistakes I've made / stuff I've gotten wrong such that we're all getting better as a TEAM. And that has happened fairly routinely.

And you have crud like:

http://ozreport.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=25129
Ridgerodent gone?

Sam Kellner - 2011/09/10 02:24:50 UTC

I was working up some harmony for Rooney Tunes.

And that's what you want.

http://www.ushawks.org/forum/faq.php
Frequently Asked Questions

Is there a Board of Directors for the US Hawks?
Not yet. The HGAA's early problems arose because different people wanted to take the organization in different directions. That created power stuggles which cost the HGAA some of its early leadership. For now, I'm going to take the US Hawks in the direction that I believe is right. If people want to go along, then they're welcome. If not, there are at least two other alternatives.

- My way or the highway.

- And do ya catch this, people of varying ages?

Why do we need another organization?
The need for choice on the national level has been clear for some time. The HGAA, for example, was originally formed to be more of a grass roots organization than USHPA. However, it was quickly overtaken by those who again concentrated power and shunned opposing viewpoints. So the US Hawks was formed to provide yet another alternative.

Just another ALTERNATIVE to the Tim Herr and Jack Axaopoulos Shows. Draw a straw, spin a bottle if ya can't make up your mind.

Kite Strings isn't an ALTERNATIVE to shit. The Big Three - Tim Herr, Jack Straub, Bob Kuczewski - deviate from the party line and you're gone. Don't worry, we'll have some pretense of legitimacy.

Kite Strings presents itself up front as a dictatorship but:

- we don't really have any problems worth mentioning 'cause aeronautical theory isn't subject to opinion.

- virtually all participating, contributing members have actual power close or equal to what the Dictator has. A dictatorship in name only.

But you're both right and wrong about the click counter.

I think I've already said that.

I think...

You THINK.

...it depends on whether you're logged in or not.

I'm ALWAYS logged in. (Every now and then I find that I've been bumped out but I'm back in within a few seconds.

If you're logged in, then I believe...

Steve has written to me:

Steve Davy - 2017/10/07 19:38:55 UTC

If you start a thread and you're logged in then you can click on it and not drive up the view count. Also, once you are in any thread you can go from page to page without driving up the view count.

The Board tends to remember when an individual has accessed a topic and not tick up on a reclick a short time later.

I have not found that to be true, and am almost certain that is incorrect.

But if you're NOT logged in, every refresh bumps the counter.

I dunno. I think I've found that not always to be the case on other forums.

Try it yourself.

If people wanna experiment please use the topic:

http://www.kitestrings.org/topic4.html
test

currently on the last/oldest page, so as to not inflate legitimate topics.

This is all academic though 'cause of the unregistered bot attack issue - which is huge. With a gun to my head I'd say 33 percent inflation. Really upsets me. But...

I always keep my most recent view of this page:

http://www.kitestrings.org/forum2.html
General

open. So when I wanna check for new activity I open a new one. So when there's a new post in one of the first page / most recently active 25 topics plus "Welcome" I'll be able to see and record the hits the topic had when I last looked and the figure at that next instant.

And if you toggle back and forth between the two pages you can see the few modest increases in topics which are getting viewed. And when you see jumps in ALL topics they're gonna be substantial and you'll know we've been or are being hit by an unregistered bot attack.

Then if you're logged in as a Moderator you can go to:

http://www.kitestrings.org/viewonline.php?sg=1
Who is online

and see something like:

Guest IP: 164.132.161.27
Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; AhrefsBot/5.2; +http://ahrefs.com/robot/)
Index page
2017/10/08 16:07:14 UTC

If it's a bot you don't recognize - we have 67 of them registered to date - you can harvest the entry and check it in the ACP. If there's no match that's your culprit and you can manually register it and stop it from doing any more inflation damage.

I first figured out what was going on and learned how to deal with it a bit shy of three years ago with SEMrush - which had been tearing the crap outta us at increasingly frequent intervals.

If you're just logged in as a member you'd just see something like:

Bing [Bot]
Index page
2017/10/08 17:08:57 UTC

but that much might be enough to start on to get a fix in place.

Sorry for the geek stuff, hope this answers a question from Steve from way back that I never got back to him on. (Sorry 'bout that.)

Response to be continued.

[Tad Eareckson]

Bob Kuczewski - 2017/10/07 19:44:53 UTC

Just as on a forum, it's easy to attack and criticize one person.

So what was the motivation for attacks and criticism in those meetings?

That's why sock puppets were invented on forums.

Like what you insinuated Steve Davy was a bit under three years ago as justification for stifling his Bob Show access. Here I check registrants' screen names and email addresses to see if they're likely legitimate aviation oriented individuals. And if they do I click them in. And if they don't I ignore them. (Often they're identifiable as spammers.) And I don't seem to be having any problems with that approach.

They're much less effective in face-to-face meetings.

They're not all that effective online either. Anybody with half a brain or better can identify them for what they are in a New York minute. If they're operating counter to the Living Room's owner they're gonna get as quickly vaporized as legitimate opposition is. If they're creations of the Living Room's owner then why are you participating in the discussion in that forum?

I'd like your help and the help of your members to work toward breaking that monopoly.

- Sure. It's a total no brainer legitimate issue.

- So how much help have you and your members given Kite Strings on any of its total no brainer legitimate issues? How 'bout when you were on the Board while u$hPa was gearing up to attack my credibility, piss all over all of my issues, and end my flying career? Let's get Dennis Pagen to try to talk some sense into him, bring him back into the band of brothers. Then if he still insists on being a total asshole we can get on with attacking his credibility, pissing all over all of his issues, ending his flying career, preventing him from doing any serious damage to the sport.

It won't happen by sniping at each other. It will take (as I've said many times) a willingness to take a disciplined approach to spreading the word and opening sites.

And then I can come and fly Dockweiler. And you'll be standing on the bike path behind launch with a bullhorn warning everybody about the dangerous child molester down there perfecting his flare timing, making sure that they kept any and all people of varying ages - up to 25 for good measure - well outside of the hundred yard danger zone. Just like you did on The Bob Show, at Grebloville, here. Same tactic Davis, Rooney, Ridgely, other u$hPa operatives used. (Ever wonder why the late great Orion Price DIDN'T use it? And that it was the ONLY tactic he didn't use?)

And what fun that would be for me.

I think you've all gotten the message by now, and I think you've pretty much made up your minds. So just as in the other topic, I won't belabor it any further unless there's some new devolopment (as Dockweiler was).

If you don't get any more out of line than you have so far on this session I could see leaving your wire connected indefinitely.

[bobk]

Bob Kuczewski - 2017/10/07 19:44:53 UTC

I was looking at the "Bob Show" topic (currently showing 893 posts).

And at the time you posted it was currently showing 881. So how did that get to be....
...OVER nine hundred posts?

That's easy. I looked at the number of pages which was showing 90 and multiplied by 10. The difference between 893 or 881 or 901 is irrelevent when you're going to round to 1000 for easy math. As you've mentioned (bots), there are sufficient unknowns in the equation to make the llast digit or two irrelevent.

But you're again diverting from the topic of breaking USHPA's monopoly. I hope they show their appreciation with a nice award this year.

Just another ALTERNATIVE to the Tim Herr and Jack Axaopoulos Shows. Draw a straw, spin a bottle if ya can't make up your mind.

Kite Strings isn't an ALTERNATIVE to shit. The Big Three - Tim Herr, Jack Straub, Bob Kuczewski

Gee, we've made "the big three"? I'll have to pass out bonuses to our trial board members!!

Once again, you're diverting from the topic of breaking USHPA's monopoly. Maybe they'll throw in a signed copy of "Towing Aloft" with your award.

[bobk]

I've read your entire post, but this is the section I want to focus on:

I'd like your help and the help of your members to work toward breaking that monopoly.

- Sure. It's a total no brainer legitimate issue

Let's stick to that. I'll give you a call...