Lufthansa

[Fritz]

It wasn't good or in the spirit of the forum that the comment made in a member's post was claimed to be hardly worth noting nor was the implication, without any evidence whatsoever, that the post might be intentionally misleading. Perhaps some members would do well to moderate their language.

[Clive]

OK, there was a misunderstanding. Let’s move on now.

[bill]

It wasn't good or in the spirit of the forum that the comment made in a member's post was claimed to be hardly worth noting nor was the implication, without any evidence whatsoever, that the post might be intentionally misleading. Perhaps some members would do well to moderate their language.

Hi Fritz,
It was me who skim-read your post and mistook it as the flights were going east, so apologies for that.That's why I asked for clarification. You've also explained there was no intent on your part to mislead, so, a misunderstanding has been resolved and it's all good, we move on. What I am interested in though is your last sentence about posters moderating their language. If you point me in the direction of some examples of this, I'll gladly moderate them. Ta.
p.s now we get back to Lufthansa.

[egpffqtv]

It wasn't good or in the spirit of the forum that the comment made in a member's post was claimed to be hardly worth noting nor was the implication, without any evidence whatsoever, that the post might be intentionally misleading. Perhaps some members would do well to moderate their language.

Hi Fritz,
It was me who skim-read your post and mistook it as the flights were going east, so apologies for that.That's why I asked for clarification. You've also explained there was no intent on your part to mislead, so, a misunderstanding has been resolved and it's all good, we move on. What I am interested in though is your last sentence about posters moderating their language. If you point me in the direction of some examples of this, I'll gladly moderate them. Ta.
p.s now we get back to Lufthansa.

I think Fritz may have been referring to this post but I could be mistaken.

What does that actually mean? Confused.

The afternoon flight number changes to align with the morning flight number, it's been on the schedule page since last year so not really a surprise it was changing

Not everyone reads these schedule posts or takes in every flight number sequence therein. IMHO that post came across as hostile but each to their own, everyone interprets posts differently.

[Fritz]

'Hardly an event worth noting'; dismissive and discourteous language. '....misleading....intentional'; accusatory language. Not the kind of language for one member to use towards another in a forum where we all have the same aim at heart.

I log in here regularly, often think of posting, have done so very rarely and almost regret doing so on this occasion. A lesson learned for sure.

[Clive]

'Hardly an event worth noting'; dismissive and discourteous language. '....misleading....intentional'; accusatory language. Not the kind of language for one member to use towards another in a forum where we all have the same aim at heart.

I log in here regularly, often think of posting, have done so very rarely and almost regret doing so on this occasion. A lesson learned for sure.

You should see the pelters I get. But discussion forums are all about opinions and we get differing ones, albeit with a shared passion for the primary subject.

The more people who post the better the debate will be, and sometimes we manage to get great and informative discussions so I’d commend everyone to take part and have a voice, but treat others with respect, even in disagreement, remembering we all want to see GLA reach its potential.

[FlyGLA]

'Hardly an event worth noting'; dismissive and discourteous language. '....misleading....intentional'; accusatory language. Not the kind of language for one member to use towards another in a forum where we all have the same aim at heart.

I log in here regularly, often think of posting, have done so very rarely and almost regret doing so on this occasion. A lesson learned for sure.

I can't believe this thread has managed 2 pages.

1. It's not worth noting. Would you, or anyone else for that matter, create a new dedicated thread because, for example, easyJet changed the flight number on one of their LGW-GLA rotations? I suspect not.

2. "....misleading....intentional"; Interesting edit to my comment. What I actually said was 'arguably misleading, whether intentional or not,' which is quite different from the version you edited it down to, with a very different meaning.

3. Are we really on page 2 of this nonsense?

[FlyGLA]

You should see the pelters I get. But discussion forums are all about opinions and we get differing ones, albeit with a shared passion for the primary subject.

The more people who post the better the debate will be, and sometimes we manage to get great and informative discussions so I’d commend everyone to take part and have a voice, but treat others with respect, even in disagreement, remembering we all want to see GLA reach its potential.

And that's just the pelters I've sent you . I totally agree Clive. I'm in disbelief that we're on page 2 of this thread . Welcome to the forum, Fritz! Feel free to join the discussion—I’m sure you're here for the same reason as most of us: to see GLA thrive. It would be great to hear your thoughts on the new ownership, so jump in and let’s move on from "Lufthansa Flight Number Gate".

[Fritz]

'Hardly an event worth noting'; dismissive and discourteous language. '....misleading....intentional'; accusatory language. Not the kind of language for one member to use towards another in a forum where we all have the same aim at heart.

I log in here regularly, often think of posting, have done so very rarely and almost regret doing so on this occasion. A lesson learned for sure.

I can't believe this thread has managed 2 pages.

1. It's not worth noting. Would you, or anyone else for that matter, create a new dedicated thread because, for example, easyJet changed the flight number on one of their LGW-GLA rotations? I suspect not.

2. "....misleading....intentional"; Interesting edit to my comment. What I actually said was 'arguably misleading, whether intentional or not,' which is quite different from the version you edited it down to, with a very different meaning.

3. Are we really on page 2 of this nonsense?

1. I don't know about anyone else and won't speculate. The fact is that I made a post on a subject relating to GLA and I don't think that it's up to you to question whether or not I should have done so.


2. The point is of course that you were implying that there could be an intention on my part to mislead. It's not clear what your motive for implying that is.


3. Judging by the number of times is taking up space we could even reach page 3. Oh and you're still being discourteous whatever your reason is.