Tom,Below is a private email to Jeremy "rightseater" Fletcher regarding a locked post in the Microsoft Flight forum. I have been a member for quite some time and have attended Avsim conventions in the past. I put up a controversial post in the Microsoft Flight forum, which was quickly locked by the Jeremy. Below is my response to Jeremy by private email. I ask you to reconsider Jeremy as a forum moderator, or at least, have a conversation with him about locking a forum post with valid, yet "NON PC" comments -- and more importantly, finishing it off with personal insults. Moderators should be above that.Sincerely,JoeInCT---To: Jeremy "rightseater" FletcherI don't understand why you didn't reply to my post publicly and make your arguments on merit. My opinions are:1) Microsoft makes an (obvious) effort at including women in the sim to the extent of it being overdone and not representative of the hobby. They are injecting the same sort of political correct as happens in the corporate world and in my opinion, this is embarrassing and corny. More important, THIS IS A VALID OPINION. Repeat, this is a valid opinion (nothing earth shaking in my opinion).2) There are great women pilots, but it is also a fact that there are many who have been passed up through the ranks faster than their male counterparts strictly because they are women. Anyone who doesn't see this sort of thing happening, especially in the areas predominatley dominated by men, is either not paying attention or not be honest with themselves. THIS IS A VALID OPINION. My friend and I have had many a conversation about women he has personally flown with that have been promoted through the ranks faster than their male counterparts that have no business being in the cockpit of a jetliner.3) The Hultgreen incident is a perfect example of PC run amok. She was passed up the ranks much faster than her male counterparts (fact) and made a rookie mistake (pressing the rudder to hurry a turn on base to final) killing herself in the process. Like it or not, this is a fact and THIS IS A VALID OPINION. To review: In my opinion, Microsoft is being corny with the level of women represented in the sim; political correctness has run amok and people have died as a result. All valid opinions and nothing earth shaking. And for that, you locked the forum and threw in a few personal insults toward me to boot. Great debaters debate. Poor ones call for the locking of the forum or worse, do it themselves. I did not personally attack or call anyone a name, other than perhaps a "feminist". Perhaps AVSIM needs to reconsider you as a moderator.And FYI, I own 3 businesses and 30 employees that work directly for me. A woman is my highest paid employee.Now, wouldn't it have been better to make all these points publicly on the forum??? FYI, I do plan to post a topic on the Hanger Chat forum about Moderators, my post, and you specifically - when I get a free moment. Please do voice your opinion, but please do not lock it.cc: Tom Allensworth

I'm glad you finally got around to throwing your fit on the public forums instead of continuing to address the matter through PM as we had been doing. Since you want to address the matter openly, I will oblige.You began a thread complaining that Microsoft was being corny by using female voices in FS. The thread continued with you taking a more and more sexist turn, eventually posting videos of women crashing aircraft to somehow illustrate your dillusional point of view. It was clear to everyone that all you cared about was making your derogatory view of women pilots known, and AVSIM is not the place for that. It's that simple. Sexism is not welcome here anymore than racism or any other ism. I highly doubt that you would make the same comments with supportive videos about black pilots, or asian pilots, or any other race or nationality, nor shall you be permitted to air your sexist point of view in the forums. Now you want to complain of my moderating because I removed your sexist thread. Go right ahead. If people think it is okay to ridicule women in these forums, than go ahead and let us know. But I don't think any reasonable person is going to agree with you that it should be acceptable here, or anywhere else for that matter.

Not throwing a fit at all. I love spirited debate. In fact, I was hoping for spirited responses.I did respond via PM (check your email) but wanted to ask Tom to reconsider your continued use as a moderator and Tom's account doesn't allow PMs. I continue to maintain my post was valid and would have been a GREAT and lively topic of conversation. I can't help but wonder if you have taken my criticism of the Navy pilot personally since you are ex-Navy. With regard to your comments..."You began a thread complaining that Microsoft was being corny by using female voices in FS." No, I said I thought that Microsoft was being corny by overusing women in the sim to the point it was embarrassingly PC (a valid comment - nothing earth shaking). "The thread continued with you taking a more and more sexist turn, eventually posting videos of women crashing aircraft to somehow illustrate your dillusional point of view."Not delusional at all. Have you even seen the videos or read the (real/leaked) accident reports? It is a well known fact that the Navy's first female pilot was passed up prematurely through the ranks and died as a result of her own actions. Not sure which part of that is delusional. If you hadn't locked the topic, we could have debated this point for point in the forum. It would have been GREAT, lively debate. But I guess it is just easier calling me names and locking the topic than debating point for point. As for the rest, I will let my post (above) speak for itself. I would much rather have this great, spirited debate on the forum, but since you locked it, that wont be possible, will it? And I was so looking forward to having women weigh in on the topic.Great debaters debate. Poor debaters hit the "report" button or lock the forum. Poor debaters also seek to define the permissible terms of discussion, in effect, rigging the debate.JoeInCT

"I did respond via PM (check your email) but wanted to ask Tom to reconsider your continued use as a moderator. I continue to maintain my post was valid and would have been a GREAT and lively topic of conversation. I can't help but wonder if you have taken my criticism of the Navy pilot personally since you are ex-Navy." 1) Tom doesn't condone sexism in the forums. Not only will he support my decision, which I know from my history with Tom, but he would also have equally supported had I chose to ban you, which I obviously did not. If you think Tom is going to remove my red letters because I removed a sexist thread, you're sorely mistaken.2) I don't care which branch or sector of pilot you criticize. You seem to forget that I joined the thread prior to you mentioning the Navy pilot. I would be equally disgusted, as were others, regardless of who you chose to use to illustrate your sexist point of view. Your sickening thread was removed after countless complaints from AVSIM members."Not delusional at all. Have you even seen the videos or read the (real/leaked) accident reports? It is a well known fact that the Navy's first female pilot was passed up prematurely through the ranks and died as a result of her own actions. Not sure which part of that is delusional. If you hadn't locked the topic, we could have debated this point for point in the forum. It would have been GREAT, lively debate. But I guess it is just easier calling me names and locking the topic than debating point for point."You neglect to comment on the undeniable proof I suggested you research that clearly proves your perception of female pilots wrong. And as for calling you names, what I actually said was that you were being uncivil and lacked class in that thread. Both facts, and both words taken directly from everyone else who participated. I stand by that, as will everyone who read your sexist comments and saw how you were trying to demean female pilots in that thread. "Great debaters debate. Poor debaters hit the "report" button or lock the forum. Poor debaters also seek to define the permissible terms of discussion, in effect, rigging the debate."Poor posters make sexist comments and then throw a fit when a moderator does what he has been asked by the owner of this site to do.......enforce the rules. I'm so confident of my decision that I have asked Tom to read your sexist thread and review my actions. I have no doubt whatsoever that Tom will agree with your fellow members here at AVSIM and classify your thread as sexist, out of line, and unacceptable for a forum that reaches all genders, races, religions, and nationalities. We will not accept sexism any more than racism here, and your thread was blatantly sexist and offensive to our female members. I'll be fair and give you the last word, should you choose to respond, but then this matter no longer needs to be wasting bandwith. Tom can chime in, which I hope he will.

Not throwing a fit at all. I love spirited debate. In fact, I was hoping for spirited responses.I did respond via PM (check your email) but wanted to ask Tom to reconsider your continued use as a moderator and Tom's account doesn't allow PMs. I continue to maintain my post was valid and would have been a GREAT and lively topic of conversation. I can't help but wonder if you have taken my criticism of the Navy pilot personally since you are ex-Navy. With regard to your comments..."You began a thread complaining that Microsoft was being corny by using female voices in FS." No, I said I thought that Microsoft was being corny by overusing women in the sim to the point it was embarrassingly PC (a valid comment - nothing earth shaking). "The thread continued with you taking a more and more sexist turn, eventually posting videos of women crashing aircraft to somehow illustrate your dillusional point of view."Not delusional at all. Have you even seen the videos or read the (real/leaked) accident reports? It is a well known fact that the Navy's first female pilot was passed up prematurely through the ranks and died as a result of her own actions. Not sure which part of that is delusional. If you hadn't locked the topic, we could have debated this point for point in the forum. It would have been GREAT, lively debate. But I guess it is just easier calling me names and locking the topic than debating point for point. As for the rest, I will let my post (above) speak for itself. I would much rather have this great, spirited debate on the forum, but since you locked it, that wont be possible, will it? And I was so looking forward to having women weigh in on the topic.Great debaters debate. Poor debaters hit the "report" button or lock the forum. Poor debaters also seek to define the permissible terms of discussion, in effect, rigging the debate.JoeInCT

IMHO your comments don't constitute debate, they constitute what is commonly called 'trolling'. The presence of women in aviation has been accepted since well before WWII and is increasing in the commercial and private pilot ranks every year. Women flew the bulk of combat and non-combat aircraft deliverys in WWII within and without the continental US, and contributed greatly thereby. Women are welcome in aviation and flight simming whether you personally like it or not. I think Jeremy was remarkably gracious in his response and actions and rather think Tom will come down on you much harder.DJ

Just one more thing and I am done... I find it interesting that you were a member of our fine military who's job it is to protect our freedoms & our Constitution (First Amendment included) yet you are so quick on the "censor" button. I relish debate, freedom, and diversity of thought and opinion (non PC included). I guess I need to accept that not everyone else does the same.JoeInCT

Just one more thing and I am done... I find it interesting that you were a member of our fine military who's job it is to protect our freedoms & our Constitution (First Amendment included) yet you are so quick on the "censor" button. I relish debate, freedom, and diversity of thought and opinion (non PC included). I guess I need to accept that not everyone else does the same.JoeInCT

That is the first time in this whole debate where I go from calling your comments disingenuous, to being a flat out lie. You know very well that the thread continued for quite some time before being removed. I was asked several times to remove it, but continued to let you spout your sexist comments against my better judgement. The thread was reported and I receive countless PMs asking for it's removal, yet I let it go until you chose to add another video to falsely illustrate a non-issue. Also, if you think I'm quick to censor anything, than you obviously don't follow these forums very well. Four times this year Tom has come in behind me and closed threads that I was actively involved in and chose to keep open. That's four times that the owner of this site felt I was being too generous. I'm almost certain there is a fifth one that I'm forgetting too, but that may have been from last year. Plus, if I was so quick to censor anything, this thread wouldn't be here, and I wouldn't have spent any time debating the issue with you through PM. Your thread was finally shut down because the complaints about it became overwhelming, and it was clear that the vast majority of readers were taking offense to your sexist comments. That decision was based on the rules that you agreed to when you created your account, in addition to the fact that you do not have the right to make sexist comments in this forum that encourages participation from people of all sexes, races, religions, etc. I am not about to let your non-existant right to say whatever you want offend thousands of others. Defending the first amendment also defends your inability to yell "fire" in a theatre or "bomb" on an airplane. There are limitations. Freedom of speech comes with resonsibility, and you failed miserably to be responsible in your sexist, anti-aviatrix comments. As the old saying goes, your freedom to swing your fists ends at the tip of my nose. You failed to appreciate the freedoms you have responsibly.

Just one more thing and I am done... I find it interesting that you were a member of our fine military who's job it is to protect our freedoms & our Constitution (First Amendment included) yet you are so quick on the "censor" button.

Why do you find it "interesting"? There is more to be said from that phrase then what you're willing to post, isn't there?I commend Jeremy for his service in the military and his efforts here at Avsim to keep the dialog reasonable. The same applies to the other Forum Administrators. But to allude to his military service as some precursor to expand what is and isn't allowed under the U.S. Constitution is bizarre. Your inference to having blanket privileges under the First Amendment is wrong. No where does the Constitution grant an individual the right to be heard. Most especially in a private forum, such as Avsim. When you became a member, no matter how long ago or how many socials you claim to have attended, you agreed to abide by the rules and decisions of those charged with keeping order.Bottom-line? You posted something that was offensive to reasonable people, in my opinion. It is not an issue of being "PC", it's about not making comments, that as a whole, the membership might find out of place. You were rebuked for your efforts and want to continue the matter in the hopes that you will be exonerated for your error. Isn't gonna happen.My third-party advice, which I don't believe you'll follow, is let it be. Keep pushing the matter and I'd be willing to bet some of the little money I have left that you will not like the outcome.

JoeInCT:you comment was, and continue to be, offensive.you have no 'right' to free speech on a private forum. you have a right, in the US, that the government cannot inhibit your free speech. (also note, that members of the military do not have an unlimited right to free speech.)the other side of 'free speech' is you must listen to others state you are wrong ... and in this case you are VERY wrong.--

You were rebuked for your efforts and want to continue the matter in the hopes that you will be exonerated for your error.

I'm still waiting for someone, specifically, to tell me what part of my arguments were wrong or respond qualitatively. Everyone is quick on the criticism, but short on any sort of specifics. Like I have said, it is easier to go straight to the name calling. ie. Sexist etc, than debate the merits. And perhaps Meshman, I am looking for someone to set me straight, rather than "be exonerated". But I do understand that this is not the sort of topic that people will talk about publicly AND honestly. It is usually one or the other. It is human nature to publicly act one way, and privately think another. I will limit my discussion on this to cocktail night with the boys (aka rw pilots) as this is not the place for it.But seriously, if you feel you have to reply, please think about including ONE specific refute to one of my points. Somehow, I doubt anyone will do this. It is much easier to "pile on" and call names. But I will have more respect for you if you do.

I'm still waiting for someone, specifically, to tell me what part of my arguments were wrong or respond qualitatively. Everyone is quick on the criticism, but short on any sort of specifics. Like I have said, it is easier to go straight to the name calling. ie. Sexist etc, than debate the merits.But I do understand that this is not the sort of topic that people will talk about publicly AND honestly. It is human nature to publicly act one way, and privately think another. I will limit my discussion on this to cocktail night with the boys (aka rw pilots) as this is not the place for it.But seriously, if you are going to reply to this, please think about including ONE specific refute to one of my points. Somehow, I doubt anyone will do this. It is much easier to "pile on" and call names. But I will have more respect for you if you do.

Wait a minute, your memory can't possibly be that bad. Your first point about no female sim enthusiasts was refuted with facts immediately after you posted it. I listed the names of female simmers on our staff, and others chimed in as well. One person even mentioned a female developer. Where you came up with the idea that there are no, or "virtually no" female simmers is beyond me. Not only do we have women who frequent this forum, as well as our friends over at Flightsim.com, but we even have female staffers, one being a senior reviewer. Plus, as shocking as this may be to you, not every simmer in the world comes to AVSIM or Flightsim.com. I'm certain that there are plenty who would rather use the sim than talk about it. My wife uses FSX, and the last time I checked, she is still female. I believe one of my fellow staffer's daughters is also an avid sim enthusiast. Several women members have contacted us regarding help with their accounts here at AVSIM. But what would I know about our members? After all, I only work with them every single day of the week.I also gave you two definitive examples of where your perception of females in aviation is completely warped, yet you chose to ignore those facts. One was reports from military brass, which I guess you've ignored since it doesn't fit your twisted view of women, and the other was a report accompanying a U.S. House bill, which again you never bothered to research and respond to. Both clearly showed that there is zero relation to aviation incidents and the gender of the pilot. Sure, there are several accidents with women at the helm, and there are countless more with men calling the shots. But once again, it appears that your "ad naseum" research ends every time you find, or fail to realize that you are wrong. You have been proven wrong, and the terms of use that you agreed to prove me right about removing that thread.With all your back peddling through your PMs to me, the fact of the matter remains that you made highly offensive comments regarding women in aviation and how Microsoft chooses to represent them. The only wrongdoing on my part was allowing that tripe to last as long as it did, and my only apologies are to the AVSIM members who read that garbage before I wised up and got rid of it like I was supposed to from the start. And I'm still waiting for the boss to reconsider me as a moderator over this. The only compaint I could possibly imagine him having with me is that I let it go on a lot longer than I should have.

ONE specific refute to one of my points.

there are no physical or mental difference between women and men that limits either from flying a modern transport or fighter jet. for fighter jets women's smaller size and more efficient use oxygen place them ahead of men. this is why women were talked about for the the early space missions ... but the hyper-sexist attitudes of the '50s and '60s killed the idea.when you look at the physical and mental profile that one must have to pilot a modern jet fighter the differences between men and women are almost zero.social issues and social expectations limit the abilities of most of the people in the world.--

The only compaint I could possibly imagine him having with me is that I let it go on a lot longer than I should have.

a lock of this and future threads on this specific topic wouldn't be a bad idea Jeremy.--

a lock of this and future threads on this specific topic wouldn't be a bad idea Jeremy.

Perhaps, but as I'm sure you know, and despite what JoeInCt would have you believe, I am actually one of the most liberal moderators in regards to locking threads. It is not an uncommon occurance for other mods, or even Tom to have to come along and lock a thread after I've chosen to allow it to continue. For some reason JoeInCt disputes that, and even chose to challenge my censoring, but everyone here who follows these forums knows that I am not a big fan of locking threads. In fact, I'm frequently criticized for NOT locking them. In this case, I have been accused of wrongdoing, and even had it suggested to Tom that my status as a moderator should be reconsidered. I think JoeInCt could go on for days and never come up with a single thing that I did wrong, or even anything that the masses disagree with in regards to how I handled the matter. That thread was extremely sexist and offensive to women, and if he wants to somehow convince himself otherwise, he is more than welcome to keep trying until Tom, Geof or David decide that enough is enough.

... I'm sure you know ... I am actually one of the most liberal moderators in regards to locking threads.

to be a moderator means having to make decisions ... most times moderating is like 'hearding cats' -

many can't take being at the sharp end of the stick. you do fine and are an asset to the FS community. --

Ugh. Not exactly the intellectual debate I was hoping to have. I've had enough. Bye.