11-22-2021, 07:46 AM
My two bob's worth. (FWIW).
I've no idea why I find the coy trend in signing off 'formal' letters with abbreviated forenames offensive; but I do. The standard 'Yours sincerely" is an old valediction, it assures the recipient that the letter is 'without wax' (popular) or, more correctly - 'pure'. Signing off implying that the missive is from 'your mate' Tim or Pip is ridiculous , especially when one is engaged, as in the Buckley case, mortal combat with a deceitful enemy.
There is one wrinkle to the Buckley matter which has not been mentioned, although many have quietly voiced their concerns, over a beer. It is worth a mention, if only to alert Buckley to what, in the opinion of many, he is really facing down. In country parlance, the mandarins are not feared of the Bull, but of the calf. A Buckley win could open the gates to 'other' acts of pure malice being re-examined. Some of the evidence collected over the years paints a bleak picture. Taken individually, as in the Buckley matter, they may be defended and strung out over a long period of time, eventually loosing public support and interest. However, IF the Buckley matter ever reaches the stage where a public inquiry into complaints against the regulator may be openly heard; then the backlash against the successive governments who turned a blind eye and deaf ear to some outrageous action taken against operators and individuals would be significant; not to mention expensive.
Of course, this is highly unlikely (in the extreme) to occur. Many serious players have, at a political level, thought to reveal the unpleasant truth of how the management of aviation has been 'enforced' and the tactics, worthy of an Eastern Bloc system have been allowed; in the name of 'safety'. The bipartisan sheep safe in the yard, protected by fierce guard dogs; off leash and uncontrolled. Ever see a politician with a whistle try to call 'em off? Nah, didn't think so.
I've no idea why I find the coy trend in signing off 'formal' letters with abbreviated forenames offensive; but I do. The standard 'Yours sincerely" is an old valediction, it assures the recipient that the letter is 'without wax' (popular) or, more correctly - 'pure'. Signing off implying that the missive is from 'your mate' Tim or Pip is ridiculous , especially when one is engaged, as in the Buckley case, mortal combat with a deceitful enemy.
There is one wrinkle to the Buckley matter which has not been mentioned, although many have quietly voiced their concerns, over a beer. It is worth a mention, if only to alert Buckley to what, in the opinion of many, he is really facing down. In country parlance, the mandarins are not feared of the Bull, but of the calf. A Buckley win could open the gates to 'other' acts of pure malice being re-examined. Some of the evidence collected over the years paints a bleak picture. Taken individually, as in the Buckley matter, they may be defended and strung out over a long period of time, eventually loosing public support and interest. However, IF the Buckley matter ever reaches the stage where a public inquiry into complaints against the regulator may be openly heard; then the backlash against the successive governments who turned a blind eye and deaf ear to some outrageous action taken against operators and individuals would be significant; not to mention expensive.
Of course, this is highly unlikely (in the extreme) to occur. Many serious players have, at a political level, thought to reveal the unpleasant truth of how the management of aviation has been 'enforced' and the tactics, worthy of an Eastern Bloc system have been allowed; in the name of 'safety'. The bipartisan sheep safe in the yard, protected by fierce guard dogs; off leash and uncontrolled. Ever see a politician with a whistle try to call 'em off? Nah, didn't think so.