dirkclod said:
And yet, the OP was appreciative of my post, the first reply in this thread ("thanks).
The subsequent whines from you and your ilk are sad, yet funny.
Return to home mode
- Thread starter Bertie Brits
- Start date
And yet, the OP was appreciative of my post, the first reply in this thread ("thanks).
The subsequent whines from you and your ilk are sad, yet funny.
kitari said:
Thank you for answering the question! I got upset by the total rudeness to a new member and to fellow members. So, I apologize for not answering your question.
Most of all, I hate the rude responses to your first post. You have seen the worse of us, but even so, most were defending your right to ask any question you wish, without a rude response. And, yes the member who made the rude post (and another) do NOT represent all of us.
To my fellow members, if you can't answer questions in a nice and welcoming manner, go to Off TOPIC or leave the forum.
You owe this new member an apology. In the meantime, I apologize for you.
Narrator said:
I apologize for my part.
I truly believe that everyone, even people who ask questions they could have researched, deserves respect.
My goal was nothing more than to remind people that this is supposed to be a forum for people to get help. I guess "tough love" is an approach and slapping people's hands on the way to providing an answer is one way of doing things... Just not my preferred way.
If I offended the OP or any others with my approach, I apologize.
Alex
dirkclod said:Is not no problem PhantomFanatic . I cut up here a lot and all know it but never to be rude and to just join and be so rude to people is not excusably . Now that's JMHO but if I had my wish [mod step in here ] This would only be 1 page
First, I feel I know you well and I wouldn't think you could even be rude, if you tried.
As for the moderator, I agree, but it might be difficult to monitor each and every thread. I don't have a clue how many moderators we have and what topics they are responsible for. Also, by letting this thread continue, we all defending the new member and made the point that there is no excuse for rude behavior.
So, with that in mind, the moderator might have done us a favor by allowing us to work this out. At the very least, the new member learned that we don't tolerate rudeness. However, I seriously doubt we changed the behavior of the guilty party.
Hello all - well, I read this entire string, just to see how it would turn out. I am a "newbie" as well (Phantom 2 V+) V2, flying since early November, 40+ flights, and truly enjoying the experience. I must acknowledge that there is QUITE a learning curve, but that is part of the fun of it. Lot's of material to read (my Phantom came with an outdated manual, so I learned from this forum to download the most recent one), lots of videos available to watch to understand how the Phantom operates, lots of software to download and install, just so you can ensure that your RC, Phantom, and batteries have the latest firmware, and serious attention needed to your pre-flight checklist in terms of GPS, home position, compass orientation, etc. OK, I know I am preaching to the choir here, but...
Nowhere in this string did I see anyone simply ask whether he was flying in Phantom mode, or NAZA mode. For me, NAZA mode, with IOC activated, has the huge advantage of Home Lock, so when you lose visual on your Phantom, you can bring your Phantom home at its current altitude, regardless of orientation,rather than RTH, wherein Phantom will attempt to go home at the pre-determined RTH altitude, whether that altitude is a good idea or not, and once you have your Phantom in view, you can simply return the S1 switch to the upper position and resume control, without having turned off your RC.
All that to say, this is a fascinating and fun technology, and who knows where it will take us. I see no reason to be rude or unhelpful to those that are plunging in, and seeking to learn.
Nowhere in this string did I see anyone simply ask whether he was flying in Phantom mode, or NAZA mode. For me, NAZA mode, with IOC activated, has the huge advantage of Home Lock, so when you lose visual on your Phantom, you can bring your Phantom home at its current altitude, regardless of orientation,rather than RTH, wherein Phantom will attempt to go home at the pre-determined RTH altitude, whether that altitude is a good idea or not, and once you have your Phantom in view, you can simply return the S1 switch to the upper position and resume control, without having turned off your RC.
All that to say, this is a fascinating and fun technology, and who knows where it will take us. I see no reason to be rude or unhelpful to those that are plunging in, and seeking to learn.
PhantomFanatic said:
I would love to hear from you as to why the phantom makes a good quad for a newbie?
I agree, no need to be a **** about it. Help the guy out and push him in the right direction. For all the folks on here who are self righteous about "newbies," perhaps a little humility would do you good.
Buckaye said:
I have said the same thing about reading the manual and gotten immediately jumped on. I long for the "good old days" when political correctness wasn't out of control and RTFM was a kind way of saying "do some research before asking the obvious." By telling someone to read the manual you are doing them a favor. People have to learn how to learn on their own rather than having everything spoon fed to them. Especially from the start in which case they may be damaged forever... Just my opinion, I could be wrong... :?
Perdidoflyer said:
I agree with your suggestion of using home lock to bring the Phantom back, but just wanted to point out one area of possible confusion. The RTH does not return at the pre-determined altitude unless that pre-determined altitude is higher than the current altitude. In cases where the current altitude is higher than the RTH altitude, the phantom will not descend during RTH. Could others please confirm this point? I have read this on the boards, but have not tested myself.
I'm glad I didn't have that attitude when raising and spoon feeding my daughters. They are grown and doing great. Not everyone learns at the same pace.
Monte55 said:
I will defend those who say "rtfm". When flying something that can potentially descend into a car on the interstate, or fall on a child in a playground, I think reading the manual one time over is the least we could ask. Flying one of these is a privilege with great responsibility, and reading and comprehending the manual should be a basic precursor to your first flight.
houstonpilot said:
All the more reason to diligently and politely answer any new-user question that is put to this group of more experienced flyers. How does it help to keep those poor children safe on that interstate playground by responding to a new-user question by saying "RTFM noob"? As in self-righteous Post #2 in this thread.
MacCool said:
I agree with you that courtesy is a more potent remedy than ridicule, but we should also point out the recklessness of piloting a large and potential dangerous quadcopter without a rudimentary understanding that can be obtained by reading the seven pages of flight instructions in the user pamphlet that accompanies it.
Acronyms like RTFM are fun to latch onto, but not always helpful. I've used it in jest before, bringing the new person into the joke. Better to welcome them than push them away where they'll do god-only-knows-what on their own. We aren't drill-sergeants here.
Yes we should point out the issues, but RTFM hardly does that, does it.
Yes we should point out the issues, but RTFM hardly does that, does it.
MacCool said:
Again, it's you and your whiny apologist ilk that are failing big time here.
The first reply (mine) did not simply tell the OP to RTFM. You're really confused. I also provided a link and cited the specific page with the answer to their very basic question. The OP even thanked me. Big difference.
The simple fact is that there is a vast repository of searchable knowledge provided by the manufacturer for their customers to access when they have a question about how their toy works.
It's called "the manual."
there are two valid conclusions here: Let's all be polite, and there's no excuse for not reading the manual when operating a tool that can easily cause death if falling on a person from great height, or interfering with fast-flowing traffic.
Similar threads
