Re:FAA safety engineer goes public to slam agency’s oversigh...
by dotancohen on Sunday March 07, 2021 @03:30PM
(#26379483)
Actually, pointing out similar actions in peers of the accused is a valid method to demonstrate that such actions are not misconduct. Or, if we still insist on calling these actions misconduct, then a double standard has been demonstrated.
That said, GGP post did not point out similar actions. Airbus did not risk passengers' lives. That is the issue here: public safety.
Re:FAA safety engineer goes public to slam agency’s oversigh...
by xwolfi on Sunday March 07, 2021 @07:02PM
(#26381004)
But ofc there s a double standard as long as Boeing kills and deflects and Airbus stays silent with no history.
Doesnt mean Boeing shouldnt restructure or disappear.
Re:FAA safety engineer goes public to slam agency’s oversigh...
by avereveard on Sunday March 07, 2021 @02:07PM
(#26378718)
> by changing the subject to focus on someone else’s misconduct
and how is highlighting airbus misconduct not a textbook example of this?
you even linked the explanation sentence, but did you read it?
Re:FAA safety engineer goes public to slam agency’s oversigh...
by dataflow on Sunday March 07, 2021 @02:19PM
(#26378827)
If you read the entirety of what I wrote in all my comments here it should be fairly obvious how. You seem very keen to start a fight though, and I'm not sure I'm up for a match here, so I'll leave it at this.
> A conversational tactic in which a person responds to an argument or attack by changing the subject to focus on someone else’s misconduct, implying that all criticism is invalid because no one is completely blameless
> Excusing your mistakes with whataboutism is not the same as defending your record.
This was emphatically not what I was doing.