What's wrong with the Air Force?

[HU&W 832]

1 hour ago, ViperMan said:

That guy went to Harvard? Seriously? With some of the arguments I've seen from him, that's pretty surprising.

Ever since he sold his blog to Bright Mountain Media, I think he's been using ghost writers.  There are 3-4 distinct writing styles, a literary voice if you will, with differing sentence structure and word choice.  Tony is definitely still writing.  I think one of the writers is a disgruntled retired SNCO.  There's also at least one other; more sedate, but less educated than Tony.

Edited July 7, 2017 by HU&W

[MDDieselPilot 44]

1 hour ago, HU&W said:

Ever since he sold his blog to Bright Mountain Media, I think he's been using ghost writers.  There are 3-4 distinct writing styles, a literary voice if you will, with differing sentence structure and word choice.  Tony is definitely still writing.  I think one of the writers is a disgruntled retired SNCO.  There's also at least one other; more sedate, but less educated than Tony.

I've noticed this.  Tony's articles (are sometimes) written at a higher reading level with some complex ideas.  I've read other articles that honestly sound like a poorly educated airman just bitching about the AF with no discernible point, supporting ideas, etc.

 

2 hours ago, ViperMan said:

That guy went to Harvard? Seriously? With some of the arguments I've seen from him, that's pretty surprising.

Harvard Law after retirement.. His FB profile says Amazon manager (or something similar) which seems like an odd move post-Harvard law.  It may or may not be accurate.  I don't particularly care to talk to him, otherwise I'd just ask what he's up to.

[ViperMan 295]

4 hours ago, HU&W said:

Ever since he sold his blog to Bright Mountain Media, I think he's been using ghost writers.  There are 3-4 distinct writing styles, a literary voice if you will, with differing sentence structure and word choice.  Tony is definitely still writing.  I think one of the writers is a disgruntled retired SNCO.  There's also at least one other; more sedate, but less educated than Tony.

Which of the four who doesn't know jack $hit about the F-16 wrote the article on the Thunderbird mishap?

[GlassEmpty 19]

Tony Carr sold out as of late, clearly. His website is proof, but we've covered this ad nauseam. It's all about money and hits, so he doesn't care if it falls on deaf ears. I've been privy to know the inside facts of two of his stories and he just lobs mud on a wall trying to see what sticks. IRREGARDLESS, can we get back to sport bitching about how weak the nonners have been lately, continuing to close finance/Comm/fss early for training on thursday's instead of talking about Tony Carr? Unless Tony has an article about the keyboard warriors in those units... I'd enjoy another Nobel Prize worthy piece of investigative journalism from the man himself then.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[sqwatch 439]

. IRREGARDLESS,

It wouldn't be so painful if it wasn't in all caps.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=irregardless&amp=true&defid=1408380


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BFM this 507]

2 hours ago, sqwatch said:

It wouldn't be so painful if it wasn't in all caps.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=irregardless&amp=true&defid=1408380


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Irregardless (Siri auto-completed, btw), if the word gets used enough, it will gain normalcy.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/normalcy

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless

Edited July 7, 2017 by BFM this

[Vetter 206]

I think he fell victim to the libtard, brain rot of a liberal institution of higher learning.

[GlassEmpty 19]

I think he fell victim to the libtard, brain rot of a liberal institution of higher learning.

It was pure sarcasm to a completely overused and nonexistent term. Your meter is broken.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[F16Deuce 57]

11 hours ago, ViperMan said:

Which of the four who doesn't know jack $hit about the F-16 wrote the article on the Thunderbird mishap?

Exactly 

[Vetter 206]

8 hours ago, GlassEmpty said:

 

 

It was pure sarcasm to a completely overused and nonexistent term. Your meter is broken.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

I was talking about JQP.

[GlassEmpty 19]

I was talking about JQP.

Oh...that. Yea that makes more sense. Apologies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moose 21]

TC here. Some fairly large judgements in the comments above. I won't go defensive and address them all, but feel free to ask questions if you're actually curious. 

Where applicable, thanks for the feedback. Fly safe.

[ViperStud 327]

11 minutes ago, Moose said:

TC here. Some fairly large judgements in the comments above. I won't go defensive and address them all, but feel free to ask questions if you're actually curious. 

Where applicable, thanks for the feedback. Fly safe.

TC, for what it's worth I look at you the same way I look at Welsh's stint as CSAF. In the beginning, there was so much hope. As time went on, the hope never materialized. Welsh eventually sold out. You eventually stopped prioritizing the vendetta against shit leadership and, instead, started caring about website traffic and shitty writing for the sake of said traffic. 

 

What happened?  Did you go all-in with a new job and need to outsource JQP?  If so, realize that your brand would have been better served by stepping away rather than delegating it to people who don't quite get it. 

[Moose 21]

1 hour ago, ViperStud said:

TC, for what it's worth I look at you the same way I look at Welsh's stint as CSAF. In the beginning, there was so much hope. As time went on, the hope never materialized. Welsh eventually sold out. You eventually stopped prioritizing the vendetta against shit leadership and, instead, started caring about website traffic and shitty writing for the sake of said traffic. 

 

What happened?  Did you go all-in with a new job and need to outsource JQP?  If so, realize that your brand would have been better served by stepping away rather than delegating it to people who don't quite get it. 

I suppose that's a fair take, even if I don't see it that way. We got some huge wins and moved the needle consistently for three solid years. We continue to get wins occasionally, but two things have changed. The first is that I can't personally dedicate the time to the blog that I was able to commit from '13-'16 (because as you intuit, I went to work) and have therefore grown to rely on others. The second is that I believe the USAF is genuinely trying to turn things around. As opposed to the season of darkness, when I felt Welsh and James needed to be called out on every valid example that came around the bend because they didn't even have the right intent, I'm interested in giving Goldfein and Wilson a bit of space and time to pursue their valid objectives.

There was never a shift away from pursuing the vendetta against shit leadership. In fact, I caught hell for pursuing that vendetta further than many felt was wise or constructive. Likewise, I never shifted to making editorial decisions for the sake of generating clicks. Of course I want people to visit the blog, but it's because I want them to read what I'm writing. I don't get paid by the click and no one edits my work or decides what I will publish. I don't write click-bait headlines and I don't (purposely) bury leads. My writing is too clunky and complex to ever prevail in a click-for-cash environment. Honestly, if I wanted to get rich online, I'd roll with cat videos or a meme generator ... not a military affairs website only interesting to a tiny sliver of the population.

Entering into business to make the site self-sustaining was a tough call, but on balance the right one. The site is still doing good things and the USAF still has to keep it in the cross-check. If it tars my image with some of you guys for the time being, I can live with that.

Edit to add: meant to say that yes, there have been missteps and stories I wish I hadn't written or permitted others to publish. My response above shouldn't be taken as a claim that everything's been done perfectly. The intent has been right, but not always the execution.

Edited July 8, 2017 by Moose
Words

[Steve C 17]

3 hours ago, Moose said:

The site is still doing good things... 

The last straw for me was when you decided to shit on some random OSS CC for his PT policy. At that point it was obvious you had run out of interesting topics to bitch about.

[GlassEmpty 19]

5 hours ago, Steve C said:

The last straw for me was when you decided to shit on some random OSS CC for his PT policy. At that point it was obvious you had run out of interesting topics to bitch about.

 

Not only random, but that guy is actually an great dude from all the IP's I talked to there. Everyone was happy to work for him and he was friendly as $h!t. It's like TC hasn't gotten over the Laughlin drama from the previous regime.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Edited July 8, 2017 by GlassEmpty
I don't spell too good.

[Duck 1,640]

I thought the PT program was bullshit. But then again I am a fatty who only scores in the 80s. No wasted effort here!


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[xaarman 191]

A lot of things wouldn't have gotten done without JQP. Remember the mold problem at AUAB? Or the Laughlin IP issues? Those alone make me thankful for the JQP readership. While I don't always agree with the conclusions, I read the articles and will stay subscribed for a long time. 

[tac airlifter 1,122]

5 hours ago, Moose said:

I suppose that's a fair take, even if I don't see it that way. 

TC, that's a valid and thoughtful reply.  Thanks.

I don't agree with everything you write, but on the whole you've had a positive impact on the service by forcing some discussions into the light and making powerful folks uncomfortable for their foolish decisions.  

Some constructive criticism: stay away from articles villifying commanders based on a single email.  Those commanders might be wrong, or they might be right.  It's impossible to know without context, and articles lacking context diminish the credibility of your conclusions.  You do much better on stories like the Laughlin debacle where you've investigated both sides, or attacking the say-do gap at higher levels.

 

[Moose 21]

4 hours ago, Steve C said:

The last straw for me was when you decided to shit on some random OSS CC for his PT policy. At that point it was obvious you had run out of interesting topics to bitch about.

We just have a difference of opinion about the substance and importance of that article. Sorry you feel that way, but no apologies for the story itself. While I'm sure that CC has a fan club, his policy was punishing airmen who met the USAF fitness standard. It was worthy of a callout and was fact-driven. And the guy is a commander, not a random anonymous henchman who can expect zero scrutiny. It's OK to critique what he is doing with the authority he's been granted, and we don't have to agree about it.

My one regret on that piece was not using a few more words to make it clear many CCs were/are doing similar things. Shouldn't be up to Britt Warren to carry all of the burden for a practice that exists in many other locations.

[Moose 21]

4 hours ago, GlassEmpty said:

 

Not only random, but that guy is actually an great dude from all the IPs I talked to there. Everyone was happy to work for him and he was friendly as shit. It's like TV hasn't gotten over the Laughlin drama from the previous regime.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Is "great dude" really the test you want to roll with? Mark Welsh was widely regarded as a great dude. James Post too. Brian Hastings -- great dude according to many people. Britt Warren can be a great dude overall and still be dead wrong to punish people for exceeding fitness standards but falling short of his pet standard.

As for Laughlin ... I don't think I'll ever be over Macho Grande.

[Moose 21]

2 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

Some constructive criticism: stay away from articles villifying commanders based on a single email.  Those commanders might be wrong, or they might be right.  It's impossible to know without context, and articles lacking context diminish the credibility of your conclusions.  You do much better on stories like the Laughlin debacle where you've investigated both sides, or attacking the say-do gap at higher levels.

 

This is totally fair. If I'm pushing stories that leave readers with the impression of inductive reasoning based on a single random email, I'm missing the mark. Appreciate the input.

[Duck 1,640]

I say keep it up. Thanks for being a voice for those that have been told for so long "you volunteered", as if by volunteering I waived my ability to use common sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[ViperStud 327]

3 hours ago, Moose said:

 James Post too.

I've never met a single person who thought this. He was my wing CC at Shaw and was universally hated. Enlisted would openly insult him in front of officers. I heard the same from bros up in AK as well. He pulled the same shenanigans, trying to get a light bar on his Wing CC cruiser so he could pull people over, trying to ruin careers of anyone who questioned him, etc.

I know my post earlier didn't make this clear TC, but I echo tac airlifter's sentiments. Despite my issues with some of your content, you've been a net positive and in some cases really made a difference. I'm glad someone established enough of a presence to get inside senior leadership's OODA loop. Keep it up. 

[Duck 1,640]

TC, any idea on what's going on with the 08 Majors Board results? Rumors are something about stripping school selects/candidates off the board results. Seems strange this would happen within the last two weeks of the board being released causing them to push back the public release date.

Could this possibly be in response to Capt Byrnes promotion article that you shared?


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums