It was opened on the 28th of February, so you are correct in assuming that it is not a full count comparison. I will give another of the same period.

Those are huge numbers. Granted, it is early days, but it will find it's proper place in the order of things as it developes. There are also a lot of new members, most of which have joined to share in the excitement of Flight.Kind regards,

deleted

I'm not sure why but I really take offence to people stating that there are 'Glaring omissions' in Flight. :oYes there is no Track IR support (yet). Yes, It would be nice to have and it would also be nice to have working toe brakes, but people forget that this game is aimed at folks who have never even heard of Track IR let alone own a set of rudder pedals.

Hi Tom.Obviously the forum is yours, and I am simply one of the many users, but sincerely I use to frequent many forums, only few of them about gaming, and this is probably the first time I notice a similar tendency by the moderators to attack some users that simply express their thoughts, without offending or writing something not educated. I am not directly connected with mad dog, actually I don't know him, but I am surprised by this sort of censorship. As I said previously I don't know if I am the only user that find strange this behaviour, but I suspect that a more relaxed climate would be beneficial for all, also for AVSIM reputation as a place for free and civil discussions.A.

"Attacking" is a prejorative word. It is not appropriate, and inaccurate. There is a back story to all things like this, and just because you are not privy to that, it does not render Stephen's post an 'attack'. It is also not censorship. It is fair warning, which has been repeated until such public action has been deemed necessary. The alternative is banning. And.. That WILL be the next step if the message by Stephan has not been heard and understood. I suggest that rather than characterizing our action as "Attacking", "Censorship", "Strange Behavior", ad nauseam, that you stop, smell the roses, and give us the benefit of your doubt.

I'm not sure why but I really take offence to people stating that there are 'Glaring omissions' in Flight

Me too... It smacks of an agenda, and I am really getting tired of it.

Well there does seem to be a small handful that it would seem have an agenda, I guess most forums will always have that - in my mind though, they are so outweighed by the vast majority of folks posting here in a very reasonable respectful way, that I just don't pay that much attention to them anymore.

that I just don't pay that much attention to them anymore.

Pretty much this.. It's cute and I giggle as I just scroll right by those posts.

Hahaha, with this thread, the MS FLIGHT activity is going up every minute.

Yes this tread has completely gone sideways.

One thing I really like in this forum, the vast majority of the posts/replies are in regards to the actual flying in the sim, sharing of experiences along with tips, rather than so many posts trying to troubleshoot issues, crashes to desktop, getting manageable fps, proper way to install in what order, etc etc...Now don't anyone go and take that as me putting down any particular forum, for I still frequent them and I still love and fly FSX. Just saying this is really a nice breath of fresh air.

"Attacking" is a prejorative word. It is not appropriate, and inaccurate. There is a back story to all things like this, and just because you are not privy to that, it does not render Stephen's post an 'attack'. It is also not censorship. It is fair warning, which has been repeated until such public action has been deemed necessary. The alternative is banning. And.. That WILL be the next step if the message by Stephan has not been heard and understood. I suggest that rather than characterizing our action as "Attacking", "Censorship", "Strange Behavior", ad nauseam, that you stop, smell the roses, and give us the benefit of your doubt.

Sorry, Tom, I think your site is a precious resource, but when I read some sentences like "If you post anything even remotely like this in this forum again you will be history. I promise.", I clearly see a direct attack.Anyway don't worry, I will not insist, because as I already wrote, the forum is yours, is not public, and the rules here, including eventual censorship, are made by you.I consider myself, for my possibilities, a free man, and I don't like that simple critical views, instead than be considered normal in a discussion forum, would recently be referred as some sort of "secret agenda".I would instead note that, by reading in this period several forums and sites talking about the new MS Flight, this is really the only one where the moderators seem so worried and aggressive toward negative views by the users. Probably you have your reasons for that; differently from some here, I don't like to think about agendas :-)A.

Sorry, Tom, I think your site is a precious resource, but when I read some sentences like "If you post anything even remotely like this in this forum again you will be history. I promise.", I clearly see a direct attack.

I would say it was a heavy warning rather than an attack.He's a moderator, show some respect. There's no need to publicly question his actions.

:Cry: :Cry: :Cry: the flight forum is more popular then the fsx forum?????? noooooo my ego..........it's boiling.....nothing will ever be better then my archaic flight simulator :Cry: :Cry:

So interesting to look back at this now that some time has passed...This morning:FSX 60 viewingFlight 40 viewingPMDG 182 viewing... I think it goes to show, the loyalties of most simmers lie with the PMDG's and add-on developers of the FS world... Where would any MSFS version be without the support of 3rd party devs? :Thinking:

This thread has truly run its course and can serve no real purpose anymore but to rub salt in old wounds. Closed.