Why No Activity on this Board?

I'm wondering why there hasn't been more activity on this board.

Two things come to mind.

1. One is that the word hasn't gotten out about the availablity of a board where you can say what you think and post anonymously.

The primary way to get the word out is for those of you who are reading it to make other Secret Service people, active and retired aware of the fact that it exists.

2. The other is the fear of some active people that if they post something that is unpopular with management there might be unhappy consequences. Well, anything is possible, but you should be aware that the owners of the board have been quite successful in court rebuffing the attempts of one Sheriff to obtain the IP addresses of posters for the purpose of imposing discipline.

The board Sysop posted this message on another string:

"In reference to a lack of postings due to the HCSO Sheriff attempting to obtian IP addresses, I would hope by now that no one would question our commitment to keep this information confidential. We pay approximately $2,000 a month in attorney fees to protect the HCSO deputies. That's not something we have to do, but we do it because we think it's the right thing to do. That's also why we have Moderators on every Message Board. Apparently the Courts agree with us because we've won 3 major battles in front of 2 different judges against the HCSO Sheriff and we are currently scheduled to appear before the 2nd District Court of Appeals for Oral Arguments on June 20th. Thanks to Luke Lirot, the First Amendment and prior case law, we are now creating New Case Law that protects You!"

YOU are encouraged to use the board. Use it to suggest things that would improve conditions for active personnel. Use it to communicate with retirees about social events, etc.

It's your board - find a constructive use for it.

:!:

Two Words... SECRET SERVICE...

key word secret

No, the real answer is that they have a private, passworded board that is not available to the public.

The board you are reading is more for interaction with the public, but there hasn't been much public interest.

Huuummm....wonder who created this topic? Only three (3) replies....though I might refresh.

I suspect with the changes, departures, etc., taking place you may soon be asking this same question again?

Happy Trails......ADIOS__!!!! ROY

Huuummm....wonder who created this topic? Only three (3) replies....though I might refresh.

I suspect with the changes, departures, etc., taking place you may soon be asking this same question again?

Happy Trails......ADIOS__!!!! ROY

Roy this board was doing very well before you and your cohorts arrived and "Chances are" it will continue to do well after you leave - Goodbye.

Don't be deceived. This board was created on May 5, 2006. The post about a slow start in posting was May 29, 2006. That's a period of less than one month, over two years ago. Since that time the board has had several thousand visits more than the pathetic performance of the Former Agent's Board.

The ole boy's board will probably never catch up.

Wonder why the pathetic performance on this forum? Old Boy

Wonder why the pathetic performance on this forum? Old Boy

I thought you were gone. Too bad you just can't resist mocking this forum or the posters on it. If you consider the performance on this forum pathetic than take a look at the FAA forum it is comatose. Five threads in the past week. Sorry Old Boy as usual you are wrong again. Go back to sleep.

[quote="Old Boy":1x0dlwms]PLOP

I thought you were gone. Too bad you just can't resist mocking this forum or the posters on it. If you consider the performance on this forum pathetic than take a look at the FAA forum it is comatose. Five threads in the past week. Sorry Old Boy as usual you are wrong again. Go back to sleep.[/quote:1x0dlwms]

Don't worry about it. The board owners love having the boost in activity. The more hits the board receives the more they are able to charge advertisers.

I wonder if the advertisers on the FAA site have any idea how very, very few hits are received on that site and realize that they aren't getting their money's worth.

They would do better to move their advertising over here where there are millions of hits monthly. Besides which, most of the hits over there are not potential customers of the advertisers; just federal employees or retired federal employees. A wide cross section of the public reads this board.

Shhhhh. Don't tell the advertisers! :shock:

It's not about the number of threads but more importantly the content of the postings. If you did not agree you would not bother to log in everday on the FAA web site. Just think you only have to pay $75 annually to log in. I am sure everyone is looking forward to your next update on the thread count? However, what does that have to do with the pathetic performance on this forum. Rawhide

It's not about the number of threads but more importantly the content of the postings. If you did not agree you would not bother to log in everday on the FAA web site. Just think you only have to pay $75 annually to log in. I am sure everyone is looking forward to your next update on the thread count? However, what does that have to do with the pathetic performance on this forum. Rawhide

Rawhide who do you think you're fooling. All of your postings on this forum are obviously for the purpose of identifying some poster unkinown to you whom you do not agree with. Kepp trying to defend the lack of postings on Oldstar and attacking the postings on this forum. Anyone with common sense can figure you out. We all know who you are. Your postings on both this forum and Oldstar are so similar in content, grammar, spelling, nonsense etc. that your fingerprints and DNA are all over them. Why not do yourself a favor as someone earlier suggested and go back to sleep.

New Comer,

Maybe you should proof read your postings for spelling, etc. "uniknown" & "Kepp"
When you wake me with your negative comments...expect a possible response. Otherwise I prefer to ignore this forum...so keep that in mind. By the way...your suspicions of identity are incorrect. Rawhide

New Comer,

Maybe you should proof read your postings for spelling, etc. "uniknown" & "Kepp"
When you wake me with your negative comments...expect a possible response. Otherwise I prefer to ignore this forum...so keep that in mind. By the way...your suspicions of identity are incorrect. Rawhide

See common sense means you know nothing about my suspicions so you can't turthfully make the statement that my "suspicions of (your) identity are incorrect". Even if you signed your name I would not be more sure of your identity. Your postings here and on Oldstar are layovers on each other. I wish I could expect a common sense response. BTW you and 'The Professor should get together.

The Professor is on your side of the aisle. As I previously mentioned, your identity suspicions are incorrect. Coming from someone worthy of trust and confidence..."I am not a poster on the Oldstar." With that in mind....now what? Are going to claim that I am not being truthful. Don't expect any further responses.

The Professor is on your side of the aisle. As I previously mentioned, your identity suspicions are incorrect. Coming from someone worthy of trust and confidence..."I am not a poster on the Oldstar." With that in mind....now what? Are going to claim that I am not being truthful. Don't expect any further responses.

Again you don't know my suspicions of your identity so you can't claim they are incorrect. Yes I am claiming you are untruthful and are not worthy of trust and confidence. Go back to sleep with your associates.

.
.
.
PLOP

oink

Rawhide

What was that?

You mean the sound or the smell?

Both.

Just more of the same.

Was it from the horse droppings or from the piggi?

Doesn't matter. Like I said... just more of the same.

8)

This is why you feel more comfortable with this forum. Gives you the opportunity to express your immaturity....just more of the same! This is your way of creating board activity. Unlike the Oldstar where mature men and women focus on quality posting rather than quantity. It is clear that this forum is the best place for you and your cohorts.

New Comer: So, if you do in fact, know the identity of 'Rawhide" pull the trigger and identify him. But NO,----

Rawhide makes some good points. The FAA board has meaningful items of interest. This board is just for the "wanna-be" agents.

Very simple request: ID "Rawhide". buster1

New Comer: So, if you do in fact, know the identity of 'Rawhide" pull the trigger and identify him. But NO, ---

Rawhide makes some good points. The FAA board has meaningful items of interest. This board is just for the "wanna-be" agents.

Very simple request: ID "Rawhide". buster1

Sorry Bluster1, I don't know a - from a turkey radio. I haven't recently --- but if I had the opportunity ---, I certainly would do so. Everyone that needs to know the identifty of Rawhide knows his identity only too well. Another attempt at a trap on your part that failed as all the others have.

New Comer Again,

Can you explain what you are refering to with regard to the attempts of "trapping" by Buster1?
Please clarify.....Rawhide

New Comer Again,

Can you explain what you are refering to with regard to the attempts of "trapping" by Buster1?
Please clarify.....Rawhide

Rawhide, if you are any kind of investigator no explanation would be needed. Who are you kidding? Good try. Merry Christmas.

Rawhide: Sounds like New Comer doesn't have a clue or he/she would ID, Rawhide. Guess he/she can't be wrong if he/she doesn't name a name. Like so many of the SAs we worked with (Edited - mod 166) No Action). buster1

New Comer: So, if you do in fact, know the identity of 'Rawhide" pull the trigger and identify him. But NO, you sit back working your ham radio and directing the kiddies across the street.

Rawhide makes some good points. The FAA board has meaningful items of interest. This board is just for the "wanna-be" agents. Very simple request: ID "Rawhide". buster1

If you believe in your quote above why do you continue to be the most prolific poster on this board?

New Comer - Ask a question and I'll answer it, UNLIKE other posters on this site. Answer is simple. I refuse to let a few "wannabes" ruin the FAA especially when they won't post any suggestions that could make the FAA a better run organization. One of the malcontents brings up "just follow the by-laws" but when asked a question as to how did the FAA, if they did in fact violate said by-laws, make the FAA a worse organization? buster1

New Comer - Ask a question and I'll answer it, UNLIKE other posters on this site. Answer is simple. I refuse to let a few "wannabes" ruin the FAA especially when they won't post any suggestions that could make the FAA a better run organization. One of the malcontents brings up "just follow the by-laws" but when asked a question as to how did the FAA, if they did in fact violate said by-laws, make the FAA a worse organization? buster1

No matter how incompetent you may be, even you must admit as you have in previous postings on this forum that the FAA BOD has ignored numerous by-laws of the organization to suit stheir purposes. Any organization that continually violates its' own by-laws will certainly be a worse organization than one that abides by its' rules and regulations adopted over the course of many years for the betterment of the organization. If you don't understand something as basic as that, there is no hope for you.

New Comer again,

What do you think should be done???

New Comer again,

What do you think should be done???

A good start would be for the BOD to abide by FAA by-laws beginning now.
The BOD needs to show some transparency in their activities.
The BOD needs to file the appropriate reports as required by the by-laws and on a timely basis.
The BOD needs to consider the thoughts and suggestions of all members and not just the thoughts of BOD members.
The BOD needs to look at the RD setup and make a determination if it is a benefit to all members or a "choke point" in stifling open dialogue.
The BOD needs to consider term limits for its members, both officers and RD"s, limiting an individual to one two year term only.
The BOD needs to respond to the many questions posed by the membership such as posted by "Fair and Balanced" above.

I don't expect any of the above to be considered or done by the present BOD but perhaps in the future there may be hope.