Fredsplace thread about CPO Academy

[BMCS Mike Ellis]

I don't get on there much, but as soon as I did tonight I came across a person, apparently an "honorable E7" (whatever that is) repeating some negative thoughts that "someone else told him" about the Academy.

I couldn't help but reply. The persons identity has been hidden, and he claims it's for his own protection from "big brother". Jeez

The users name is AssAssMan. I say, Chief, come out in the open in an appropriate location (how about here for starters) and ask the appropriate audience (fellow CPO's) those same questions.

I posted under my name, pirate50. I hope a few other assist our fellow Chief on his quest for information.

Here's the link: http://forums.military.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=78919038&f=415197802&m=3280013241001&r=5650033241001#5650033241001

[AMTCS Rick Bolton]

I replied also. I must say I have my doubts about this individual being a Chief.

[YNCM Doug Squires (Ret)]

It's got to be a troll. No one else can be that stupid.

[AMTCM John Long]

I had submitted a package a couple of times before I got picked up to go at the last minute to New London. My experience with it.....much of the training I had previously received via other CG or College training. The only negatives that come to mind are the Bob Mowat course was a challenging thing to sit thru and the berthing heat was either hot or hotter. We had to keep the windows and doors open most of the time to vent the heat out.

Overall I had a good experience. I met some great folks I still keep in touch with today. I never heard anyone at the school try to quell opinions. Just the opposite actually.

I know one of the reasons for the push to get everyone to go is so the MPCOCG can expand leadership training to the junior folks. A little tough to ask for more training money for junior folks if we can't fill the existing seats with senior folks.

[MECM Steven Lowry]

It's got to be a troll. No one else can be that stupid.

I agree and wouldn't waste my time feeding the troll. Although I would have a few choice words to feed him.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

I know this guy, who knows this guy, who talked to this guy, who heard it from his brother..........
Go to the CPOACAD and find out for yourself. There is no gag order. They ask for your feedback. You have to provide a critique of the course prior to graduation. The Chiefs who run "Our" Academy want to hear everything negative you see out there to continually improve the course for the people who come after you.
It's "Our" Academy, for "Us". If you want to do the Chiefly thing, attend, and help fix any problems that you see. The Chiefs out there will welcome your input.
The big brother passage summed it all up for me. Complaining about something you have no personal knowledge about in a public forum, but not wanting to put your name to it...... not really honorable at all. If you're really worried up big brother, try confirming your story, or keeping it to yourself.

[BMCM Bruce Bradley]

Wow is this the same Stu Slesh I used to read a couple of years ago discussing the CPO Academy. Man did you bring back a couple of gallon jugs of the Kool-Aid from your class?

Now maybe the AAM should drop you a line and you can set him straight...

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Same Guy....same stance. I was never going to go because the Coast Guard told me I didn't have to. It wasn't a requirement for me to advance. The Coast Guard changed their stance on that. They realized the importance of the course, and the benefit it could provide for anyone who attends. They also have a better way of passing the word on what the course is about. The first thing I would tell AAM is to change his screen name to something that someone else might be able to apply some amount of credibility to. Right now it's more like 1/2AM.

You could go back and read what I wrote about attending, before , during , and after I went. Then think about something that the CPOACAD teaches out there........... embrace vocal resisters. Take the people who are resistant to change and show them why those changes need to take place. Get them on your side, and their voice can carry that new support.

I went because I was told to go. I was told to put up or shut up. You'd have to call Vegas and ask about the odds of me shutting up,...... but going seemed to be the easier way out. I drank the diet SOBE while I was out there......no Kool-Aid for me. The course is like many other things in the service....... some people get more out of it than others...... and some people need it more than others. Everyone could get something out of this.....if they want to. Anyone who honestly thinks that they have a bunch of Chiefs telling other Chiefs that they're not allowed to give an honest account of what they experienced out there, needs to get out of the Service tomorrow. Anyone who attended the course and can honestly say that it was a waste of five weeks and they learned nothing,....has also outlived their usefulness to the Service,...and needs to get out.

Stand by for the Bob quote......... When you're green you're growing, and when you're ripe, you rot............ When you no longer have anything left to learn.....move on, and let someone else wear the Anchor.

[AMTCM John Long]

Stand by for the Bob quote......... When you're green you're growing, and when you're ripe, you rot............ When you no longer have anything left to learn.....move on, and let someone else wear the Anchor.


Geez...you sure that wasn't a Zima you were drinking out there??:p

[BMCM Bruce Bradley]

Okay Stu I guess I've been trying to get you to seperate the apples from the oranges without asking the 2 seperate questions. I agree with you and have also supported the decision that you and others made in the past to not attend, because it wasn't required. As long as it was a choice members were entitled to make it. But you were among one of the most vocal resistors that I had encountered for reasons that all knew because you told us, numerous times.

So now that you have been, I'll ask you the same 2 questions that I've been trying to get an answer to. The first I know the answer to more or less, was the training worth it? The second is was your prior view not on target? Meaning, can members find value in training that is not mandatory. You had in the past pretty much slammed the CPO Academy as not worth your time because the service didn't have a requirement to attend and thus it was of no value to you or needed for any of your assignments. So would going earlier in your career have been a good thing and might it have helped you in a situation that you encountered prior to attending?

Okay that was more than 2.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

Would you like me to pass you some salt for your crow Stu?

Trust me, it is much better eating when it is warm.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Same Guy....same stance. I was never going to go because the Coast Guard told me I didn't have to. It wasn't a requirement for me to advance. The Coast Guard changed their stance on that. They realized the importance of the course, and the benefit it could provide for anyone who attends. They also have a better way of passing the word on what the course is about.

OK, I did not attend because it did not exist. However, I had imput of what it should be. Unfortunately, my comments were not taken to heart.

Stu, I appears you have learned to let the CG do your thinking. Look at the highlighted comments in your post. Where is all that self-thinking I've read about?

You went only because you found you could not advance. I am of the belief this is the primary motivator for most attending. How did the Coast Guard decide it was important but not important enough to make it voluntary?

So, what is the course about? It is more than one learns at a PO1? After all, that is the place to learn. If you haven't learned it by the time you make PO1 a school is not going to intercede and suddenly make you a CPO. Then again, the CCTI is supposed to do that.

I'm confused. What was it that changed Stu's mind? The fear he could not advance? Not much of reason for someone who had, evidently, stuck by his guns and said he did not need it. Is this an ethical shift? Are ethics taught at the school? Then again, ethics should be in place will before making E-7.

I would probably gone to the school mostly because I took every opportunity to attend schools. I used to get out the old school catalogs and apply whether the unit, or I, needed it or not.

For the purpose of full disclosure, I have been to Petaluma and looked around. My complaint would be that it sits in the middle of a hay field instead of next to the sea.

[BMC John Phillips III]

Far be it for me to rush to BMCM Slesh's defense, but I do recall those discussions as well. I also recall some private discussions he and I had prior to his attending. What I drew from both was not that he didn't need to go because they couldn't teach him anything, it was more of a case of he was far advanced enough in his career and being a Chief that given the option, he'd give his seat up to a younger Chief. And at that point, the CG had given him that option.

I have to tell you that if it were not for the advancement requirement, I would have been hesitant to sign up too, but I did and after having attended (and not drinking any koolaid) I stand by my statement of it being the best CG School I have ever attended. I also would have signed up for the school before they required me to, because I rather go at my accord than someone elses.

But Bill, as far as the advancing goes, you've got that wrong, that wasn't the reason he attended. And why does a Chief that supports CG Policy always anger you so? Are you so diluted in your Chief's should stand up against what they see as being wrong that you expect us to challenge everything and see all policy as being wrong? Shouldn't a strong CG Chief support policies that are in place and work to improve policies they don't agree with? You know, like the policy that all Chiefs should attend the CPO Academy? Another thing that I don't get is, if they don't have the training at PO1, then it's too late to give it to them as Chiefs? How about this, how about they have on the job training/experience at PO1 and just in case they didn't we make sure so that we don't have any 1/2AM Chiefs out there running around posting silly shit on military.com?

Oh and I rarely post during the work day, but this is definitely work-related discussion and I had most of it done before lunch was over ;)

[HSC Chris Fly]

People have an idea of what the CPO Academy is before they attend from what they think, read, or have been told. I have no problem what that, it is human nature. A lot of people I've talked to that haven't went have the idea that the Academy is going to cram down your throat how to be a good Coastie or a good CPO, try and make you fall in line with what the CG expects of you. I did not feel any of that at all. I felt the Academy was an excellant mix of Socialogy, History, English, Psychology and a little of how the CG is supposed to work. Like any program or class, the student gleams from it what they desire. A lot of my classmates desired they came to the Academy to "re-blue", as they had lost a little of why they came in the CG. Others (like me) came to the Academy because of the opportunity and challenge of learning more about being a leader. I don't think anyone in the CG, including the Commandant and MCPO-CG, is the perfect leader and we always could use some instruction and review. I'm sure the Academy is not perfect, the school MC and instructors agree, but they are always asking for ways to make it better. If you think it will suck, then attend and let them know what needs to be changed. Of course we had 1 or 2 guys who were only there because they had to be. But, even those guys admitted to coming away with something usefull at the end of 5 weeks.

As far as the jacka$$ of the other forum, he obviously has never been and has no idea what he is talking about. I couldn't even bring myself to respond to his post as many others have already said what I was thinking. Until you have been to the Academy and can give an educated opinion at it, I don't think you have any ground to bash it.

Just my .02,
Chris

"Champions are born and then unmade" - Bob Mowad
Bob Rules and the kool aid was excellant!

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Bill...Stu went to the Academy as a Master Chief. It had nothing to do with advancing. I know why he decided to go, but don't want to speak for him.

He's u/w this week, but I'm sure as soon as he gets connectivity he'll answer your questions.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Bruce, there's plenty of benefit to any training that you want to attend. I've never put in for a school I wasn't required to attend before I went to the CPOACAD. I attended that before the policy actually came down saying it was going to be mandatory for everyone.
I plan on attended CAPSTONE up in New London, which isn't mandatory for me, but I have selfish reasons to attend. I've been operational my entire career, and never wanted to leave the unit I was attached to for training I wasn't required to take. There were units I didn't leave....while on Leave. Since the birth of my son I wouldn't volunteer to leave home for five days, let alone five weeks, for something wasn't required of me. I wish I had attended the CPOACAD right after I made E-7. I wouldn't have had the family to worry about while I was out there.

Bill, I attended the CPOACAD as a BMCM. There was no room left to advance. I can't go higher. There was no fear. The Coast Guard has always told me what was required of me. I've always tried to live by the standard they set. I still question the things that make no sense to me, but support the decisions of the people appointed above me. I swore an oath to that.

Jim, I'd bet it tastes like chicken, warm or cold. I don't see where that applies here. I never said there was nothing out there for me to learn. I said I wouldn't go because it wasn't required of me. Someone wrote a message that said that those of us who were grandfathered in needed to set an example and attend. I volunteered to go, because it was explained to me that it was the right thing to do. I got more out of the experience than many others in my class. I got to see the future of the Coast Guard, and spend five weeks with them.

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

Stu, I had the same stance as you in regards to the Chief's Academy, but your decision to attend along with my GREAT friend MSTCS Dave McClintock's input to not only attend the CPOACAD but also go through the CCTI was huge. I was not let down by going through the CCTI process as I know that I won't be disappointed in what to expect from the CPOACAD. LIke you, he never had to go, but if he had not retired, he knew that his time would come and he was willing to go, even if he didn't learn something, he would have taught something! Which is why I have so much heartburn with folks that want to bash the CPOACAD. If one knows everything, then this is the perfect time to TEACH something to us less knowing!

I have always respected both of you, even though I have never personnally met you. But I know that you know Dave all the same (especially since you were a driving force to have him go through the CCTI)! I know that if he says a guy is good in his opinion, I'll have the same opinion.

[ETCS John Zidek]

I am headed out to Petaluma for the 27 Oct Class I will let you guys know my thoughts when I get back.

ETC "Z"

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Both Mike and John, you won't be disappointed. There's plenty of opportunities out there to take advantage of. And by all means tell people if you find things that you don't agree with.
They could even have taught, or at least shown, Dave some things. And Dave could have shown everyone some of the best qualities of being a Chief. I know he taught me alot.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Bill, I attended the CPOACAD as a BMCM. There was no room left to advance. I can't go higher. There was no fear. The Coast Guard has always told me what was required of me. I've always tried to live by the standard they set. I still question the things that make no sense to me, but support the decisions of the people appointed above me. I swore an oath to that. .

Having the rate information in your post would have been helpful. Your previous post gave the impression you still had room to move up in the enlisted ranks. You wrote, "I was never going to go because the Coast Guard told me I didn't have to. It wasn't a requirement for me to advance." Someone not knowing your background could only take the remark as one who was grandfathered from the school but still had movement upward.

I am befuzzled by you later comment that you always do what the Coast Guard 'requires' you to do unless it does not make 'sense' to you. If you always do as told then why question? I suppose you mistyped and meant to used "don't understand" instead of "make no sense." These are different things.

Was not doing those things that do not make sense part of the school?

Frankly, a MCPO going to the school is akin to a degreed instructor being placed in a grade school class as a student. At some point that person will become a disrupting factor especially if the only reason they are there is to "impart" their so-called wisdom to the students outside the curricula of the school. If they want some people do they should hire some retirees to sit on a bench under a tree where students may approach and listen. As a boy I learned much from the old guys sitting around the court house whittlin' and spittin'. Then again this was also done aboard ship. That is where I learned while splicing line and all were not CPOs.

One reason the school is needed is the lack of cultural interaction in the Coast Guard brought on by a declining fleet. The cultural universals of the Coast Guard are practically gone. In its place a cultural of regulatory requirement. As Stu says, he does what is required to do. Requirement satisfaction in now the culture. Perhaps this is why people do not want to go to the school. It is seen as ticket punching and has not projected itself as being a place where people will be part of something greater than themselves.

The Coast Guard needs to learn again that its CPOs must be trained to act as individuals and not part of the collective regulatory culture.

I am, at present, involved in co-teaching a course on Amphibious Warfare from 1000 to Vietnam. Teaching at the university level means we can explore the differences and causes of events. Many times the differences are from cultural shifts within the military services of the world. For example, it was not until after the Napoleonic Wars that professional military schools came to be and shortly afterward the invention of the steam printing press that allowed mass production of written text spreading knowledge from numerous sources. The codes of this training was not to do simply what was required at the time but to explore and improve.

Improvement is a key purpose of a CPO and if one only does what one is required there is no improvement. This is why I attempted to get some discussion of the proposed 1000 ship fleet. The Coast Guard will be involved at some point. If the CPOs are not ready to be involved then the JOs certainly will be.

[BMC John Phillips III]

Frankly, a MCPO going to the school is akin to a degreed instructor being placed in a grade school class as a student. At some point that person will become a disrupting factor especially if the only reason they are there is to "impart" their so-called wisdom to the students outside the curricula of the school.

Bill, this is where you not having been to the school comes in to play. The instructors are primarily facilitators/discussion-topic navigators, the experience of the class plays greatly into the chemistry and learning experience of the class. They go over that first day by adding up everyones time in - which in a class of 50 or more, will always be greater than the saltiest of sailors Bill, including you.

For example, it was not until after the Napoleonic Wars that professional military schools came to be and shortly afterward the invention of the steam printing press that allowed mass production of written text spreading knowledge from numerous sources. The codes of this training was not to do simply what was required at the time but to explore and improve.

And I guarantee you there were people who already considered themselves military professionals and they didn't see the need to attend.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

At some point that person will become a disrupting factor especially if the only reason they are there is to "impart" their so-called wisdom to the students outside the curricula of the school.

It's funny that you said this, because this is how you're viewed (by a large number of people) on this board. You might be on to something...

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

Improvement is a key purpose of a CPO...

By "improvement" do you mean change? As in with the times, and all the new technology that allows us to be much more efficient and accomplish much more work in the same 110 hours per week that you worked?

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

It's funny that you said this, because this is how you're viewed (by a large number of people) on this board. You might be on to something...

Deane, You are presuming that I really care what a bunch of anonymous people think of me. You imply that group-think is the way people operate today. It is what people think of you that guides you actions. We could go back to the discussion of the individually thinking CPO.

The quote you used was what the instructors may think. John is correct. The instructor is the guide for the class but if he, or she, merely lets people talk without making course corrections then it is little more than a mess deck BS session.

By "improvement" do you mean change? As in with the times, and all the new technology that allows us to be much more efficient and accomplish much more work in the same 110 hours per week that you worked?

Improvement does not necessarily mean change. Improving your reading and writing skills does not mean you will change.

Why would anyone working 110 hours a week want to accomplish more work? It does not sound as if technology is helping but adding more tasking. From what many have written here and other places the E-Coast Guard has increased the time to do simple administrative tasks thereby adding hours to work. Beside, I never punched a time clock (well, except on a roving patrol).

Technology has been shown to increase work hours. There is a statement from the turn of the 20th century relating to the training of officers for the Royal Navy, "The best economy of the materiel is obtained by the efficiency of the personnel."

When you can say that technology has reduced your work time that would be efficiency. I know technology has increased the work load of our students. We expect them to use available resources in their research. The availability of primary materials increases each year and with it the expectation it be used.

I suppose having to perform more in the same time is an improvement for the Coast Guard but is it for the individual?

For John who wrote "And I guarantee you there were people who already considered themselves military professionals and they didn't see the need to attend."

Considering themselves as being "military professionals" and being that are two different animals. Have we not seen MCPOs on this board who claim it is proper to use incorrect Service terminology? That is not being a professional.

[BMCS Burt Ford]

Deane, You are presuming that I really care what a bunch of anonymous people think of me. You imply that group-think is the way people operate today. It is what people think of you that guides you actions. We could go back to the discussion of the individually thinking CPO.

What anominity Bill? Our names are right out there for you to see. There is no anominity here.

I am not sure how long you have been out of the CG but to continually degrade the chiefs here is not very professional. If you are as educated as you claim to be then you should reliaze that creating hostile environments only leads to unproductive conversation especially when conversing with such a closed minded person. What chiefs do now is no less important than
what you claim they did in your era. Welcome back.

Sorry chiefs, i can only ignore so long.

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

"For example, it was not until after the Napoleonic Wars that professional military schools came to be"

Bill
I'm not out to stir a new pot or hijack a thread but did not both Arthur Wesly and Naboleon Buona Parte attend professional military academys while they were quite young? I'm pretty sure Bonaparte attended a school of artillery prior to anyone even really knowing who he was. I don't recall if Wesly attended a military academy or if he just had his commision purchased for him and he just figured things out on his own. I know his older brother was a big "help" in his career financially until after his time in India.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

What anominity Bill? Our names are right out there for you to see. There is no anominity here.

There is much "anominity" here. Probably some of the same one people on PCP who never said a word but emailed their complaints to each other.

Thanks for the welcome back but I am still mystified why I was gone in the first place.

I am not sure how long you have been out of the CG but to continually degrade the chiefs here is not very professional. If you are as educated as you claim to be then you should reliaze that creating hostile environments only leads to unproductive conversation especially when conversing with such a closed minded person. What chiefs do now is no less important than
what you claim they did in your era. Welcome back.

See there ya go. Calling my comments degrading indicates you are not reading but looking at the person. You say I create a "hostile environment" but you should recognize a counter argument or at least something different from the group think. I thought the CPO Academy did this as well? Did you call those instructors degrading or hostile? I agree. I do correspond with closed minded people but that does not mean I should stop. It only means that I should continue making my points in the hope that some will come toward the light of reason. I have written on the point of importance just being CPOs. After all, I only want CPOs to be CPOs and not JO clones.

Pat, I suppose you meant Arthur Wellesley, the 1st Duke of Wellington. If you note he rose to prominence in the Napoleonic wars to a general's rank. As with most of his peers, he learned his trade OJT as did old Nappy.

One thing to remember is that schools and academia are things done by the military during times of peace when they are bored and want something to do.

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

Bill
Yes I was talking about the Duke of Wellington

Wellington was born The Honourable Arthur Wesley at the then 4 Merrion Street, Dublin opposite the then Royal College of Science now government buildings. He spent most of his childhood at Dangan Catsle 5km north of Summerhill on the Trim road. He was the third of five surviving sons of Garret Wesley, 1st Earl of Mornington. His date of birth is the first of May 1769. (His baptismal font was donated to St. Nahi's Church, Dundrum, in 1914.) His biographers follow the contemporary newspaper evidence in ascribing it to 1 May 1769.[1] His family changed the spelling of their surname to Wellesley, which his oldest brother considered the ancient and proper spelling, in 1798.



He attended Etton so he did not have any Military Academy experience.

As far as Napolean goes

Napoleon's noble, moderately affluent background and family connections afforded him greater opportunities to study than were available to a typical Corsican of the time. On 15 May 1779, at age nine, Napoleon was admitted to a French military school at Brienne-le-Château, a small town near Troyes

then

Upon graduation from Brienne in 1784, Bonaparte was admitted to the elite École Royale Militaire in Paris, where he completed the two-year course of study in only one year.

So basically there were Military academy's prior to the Napoleanic Wars. Some of us do read.:) I just had to do a little research online since my books are at home.

[AMTCM John Long]

Darn Pat....are you studing history from the 17th century? Your rapping that stuff off like CDR Data on Star Trek.

[BMCS Burt Ford]

There is much "anominity" here. Probably some of the same one people on PCP who never said a word but emailed their complaints to each other.

See there ya go. Calling my comments degrading indicates you are not reading but looking at the person. You say I create a "hostile environment" but you should recognize a counter argument or at least something different from the group think. I thought the CPO Academy did this as well? Did you call those instructors degrading or hostile? I agree. I do correspond with closed minded people but that does not mean I should stop. It only means that I should continue making my points in the hope that some will come toward the light of reason. I have written on the point of importance just being CPOs. After all, I only want CPOs to be CPOs and not JO clones. /QUOTE]


Who on this site has ever responded toyou that did not have there name on the thread? No One. Maybe you missed it but our names are displayed in the upper left hand corner of every post.


[QUOTE=GMCM Bill Wells (Ret);22581]I thought the CPO Academy did this as well? Did you call those instructors degrading or hostile?

If you never went to the CPOACAD do not try and interpret anything from there. Why would I call them hostile? They have never talked about how bad the CPOs are today. You do it in almost every post and at least once a day.

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

Just so you know....

The thread you are talking about is on Military.com..... that is NOT Fredsplace...

Fred is the site manager of Fredsplace.org, which Military.com now owns....

Ok, you can resume your arguements... ;)

Wray.... :cool:

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

If you never went to the CPOACAD do not try and interpret anything from there. Why would I call them hostile? They have never talked about how bad the CPOs are today. You do it in almost every post and at least once a day.

Burt trying to speak reason to someone that doesn't want to hear reason is pointless. Personnally, I don't see the merit in anyone talking to someone that degrades the Chiefs of "today". I tried being social....the thing I learned from Bill really quick is that he doesn't engage in conversations when you side with him. He only picks apart a post if you bash or disagree with him. Look at his replies.

There was a noticable decline in posts while Bill was on one of his many banned timeframes, and to be honest, there was no drama. I'd rather have boring times than drama. I have not seen any positive that he has provided. Let me put the bullet in MY HEAD and Admin, please remove my profile from this board.....I'M DONE!

[BMCS Dennis Endicott (Ret)]

"Let me put the bullet in MY HEAD and Admin, please remove my profile from this board.....I'M DONE!"

That's not about Bill. That's about you. Chiefs don't quit. Ever.

[ETC Joe Jester (Ret)]

I agree Dennis.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

Mike,
If you have nothing to contribute, then don't. If you have something to contribute, then do. If you want to remove your name from this site, then please do so because you don't like the site or feel that you have nothing to contibute or gain from it. Don't remove your name because you don't like a person on it. That just fuels the fire. What do you do when you are at a unit where you don't like someone in your COC? If someone pisses you off, it is because you let them do so. You choose to read the comments. You choose to take offense. You choose to argue or not to argue. Personally, I think there are some people that post here that have diarrhea of the mouth (or fingers in this case), but that is just my opinion. I am sure there are some that think the same of me. Your choice, but don't blame your decision on someone else.

[BMC John Phillips III]

The instructors are primarily facilitators/discussion-topic navigators
John is correct. The instructor is the guide for the class but if he, or she, merely lets people talk without making course corrections then it is little more than a mess deck BS session.

Bill, if you read my post again, you will see that I described the instructors as topic navigators....what I meant by that is that they kept discussion on track so there is/was very little mess deck BS.

Just so you know....

it's arguments ;)

and I always refer to the site as military.com, not Fred's. I have to admit, it kind of annoys me to see it referred to as Fredsplace too, but not nearly as much as people using E10 bothers you ;) ala your post on the Mike Vick thread.

[AMTCM John Long]

and I always refer to the site as military.com, not Fred's. I have to admit, it kind of annoys me to see it referred to as Fredsplace too, but not nearly as much as people using E10 bothers you ;) ala your post on the Mike Vick thread.


Off topic but I had to chuckle at that......I still call it Fred's from time to time because that's what it was when I signed on back in mid 1990-something. Maybe it's a subconcious tribute to the originator???? ;)

Ok....back on....

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

Let me put the bullet in MY HEAD and Admin, please remove my profile from this board.....I'M DONE

Pretty childish in my book... and, I don't think Mike is the first to do this.. I believe someone else did it, not too long ago, and perhaps for the same reason.. (but..he came back) Is this the way Chief's handle pressure now days? Quit? Run? Ignor? Is Mike a "new" Chief? I think I just saw his name in my latest "Chief" magazine as a new member, but I could be wrong.. don't have the magazine here to check.

JP --> Yeah, the E-10 bothers me, but not like it did years ago..... it is obvious there is no E-10 "paygrade" as documented by any payscale. If those in today's CG want to use that term, despite it's inaccuracy, so be it...

Wray.. :cool:
P.S. Thanks for the spelling correction... my error for fast typing and no proof reading.

[HSC Chris Fly]

Well, I'll always call it Fredsplace (the forum) just like I'll always call Sear's Point but it's proper name, Sear's Point! :D

It's funny what people decide to hold on to. I choose to hold onto Fredsplace while others seem to hold onto what they wish the CG was then....

Chris, hoping to make E10 someday. (sorry, had to do it!)

Now back on track...

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

Darn Pat....are you studing history from the 17th century? Your rapping that stuff off like CDR Data on Star Trek

I'm by no means an expert but I have read a lot of military history. The Napoleanic era is not one of my stronger areas but I have read a book or two. I'm not really an expert in any particular era but I still enjoy my history.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Burt trying to speak reason to someone that doesn't want to hear reason is pointless. Personnally, I don't see the merit in anyone talking to someone that degrades the Chiefs of "today". I tried being social....the thing I learned from Bill really quick is that he doesn't engage in conversations when you side with him. He only picks apart a post if you bash or disagree with him. Look at his replies.

There was a noticable decline in posts while Bill was on one of his many banned timeframes, and to be honest, there was no drama. I'd rather have boring times than drama. I have not seen any positive that he has provided. Let me put the bullet in MY HEAD and Admin, please remove my profile from this board.....I'M DONE!

Shakespeare once wrote that "Life is but a stage" and we, the people, are but players. With people comes drama and I suppose the meaning Michael is using here it emotionalism. He is being very emotional therefore--dramatic.

Before Michael bites the bullet I would like to see his argument on how I "degrade" the current CPO corps. Offering observations and comments may be construed as "degradation" to some but the board's title is "The Unvarnished Truth." Considering real varnish ( I preferred Japan Varnish) is used little these days (especially by MSTs) we may have to shift to some water based conversation.

I am not so sure Burt was speaking (writing) reason nor has anyone actually engaged me in any conversation that I would consider reasonable. I have seen attacks and accusations but little in the way of reason. Michael tries to use reason when he notes that I do not engage those who may agree with my position. Hmmmm. I suppose that the art of debate is not taught at the CPO Academy. Of course, I do not argue with those agreeing. There would be no point. I do offer expansion of a points if asked by this group. Otherwise it is a waste of time to merely agree with agreement -- as is often done here. You only think Burt's comments were "reason" because you agreed with them. However, if you were to read with a critical eye you may change your mind.

Quotes are fair game in a discussion. My posts have also been picked and pruned but that is OK. Most are taken out of context. This is an easy tactic to use. In fairness, I used Michael's entire post.


Now, perhaps we should discuss what caliber projectile you wish to use. Weapons is an area of expertise of mine.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Bill, if you read my post again, you will see that I described the instructors as topic navigators....what I meant by that is that they kept discussion on track so there is/was very little mess deck BS.
.

John, I know. I am currently doing it two days a week at present. The impression got from the talk of classroom activities was that there was free-range uncontrolled discussion.

Since there are a variety of people in my class (two of whom are former Marines fresh from Iraq) I still use a bit of mess deck BS. It illustrates points especially in a military history course. Besides, I think I learned more by listening to the old salts than in most schools. Unfortunately, the culture no longer subscribes to learning from the institutional knowledge base.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

Off topic but I had to chuckle at that......I still call it Fred's from time to time because that's what it was when I signed on back in mid 1990-something. Maybe it's a subconcious tribute to the originator???? ;)


John, I am a plankowner of Fred's Place. You see how plankowners are treated. Heck, I did not get a hat either.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

[QUOTE]


Who on this site has ever responded toyou that did not have there name on the thread? No One. Maybe you missed it but our names are displayed in the upper left hand corner of every post.

Burt, That is the point. People do not respond. They take the back door approach and email moderators both here and formerly at military.com It not the people who are upfront but those who work in the shadows. I suppose that part of the core values was missed at the school, at least, by some.


If you never went to the CPOACAD do not try and interpret anything from there. Why would I call them hostile? They have never talked about how bad the CPOs are today. You do it in almost every post and at least once a day.

I responded to your comment that my comments created a "hostile environment" but similar comments at the CPO Academy do not. Perhaps they should spend more time on the problems within the CPO corps than on the positives. Keying on the positives will produce no constructive change. Frankly, I do not think the CPO corps reads enough especially in this period of history. I've known CPOs from the 1930s who were far greater read than today. It does not matter whether the books and other materials are in hard copy or on line. I spent an hour or so yesterday reading some great material on Google Books. They are doing a great job. Go to their site and do a search for "Revenue Cutter Service." Not all topics will be about the RCS but there are plenty that are.

Try Shakespeare's Henry V as a start. It has some great military leadership principles involved.

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

John, I am a plankowner of Fred's Place. You see how plankowners are treated. Heck, I did not get a hat either

Bill, I don't think I would loose any sleep over it... He won't let me post on the BB either... all because I informed some lady from Jersey about the rules of posting (which are useless) and tried to get her a better area to post her message (CG license plates for Jersey)....

Fredsplace still has a lot to offer, (announcements, reunion hall, etc...) it's too bad he won't get his membership (the crew) numbers realistic... I think he'd be lucky if he had half the number... and a "comic strip"? Oh Please.....

Wray... :cool:

[BMCS Dennis Endicott (Ret)]

I like the comic strip.

[AMTCM John Long]

Bill,

Off topic...

I'm not a Fred's plankowner...just signed on early the first time. My profile got messed up and I had to re-register a few years later.

Go to the CG History thread>WWII Pics. What kind of machine gun is that on the Loening amphib?

John

[ETC Joe Jester (Ret)]

Comic strips? Whose needs comic strips when you can read the forums. :D

I usually go straight to the comics [opinions] when I open the newspaper. I swear some people must be on the same mailing list as they parrot things I've seen in the forums. It doesn't matter which city I'm in when I read their local paper, those comics are the same.

[BMC John Phillips III]

JP --> Yeah, the E-10 bothers me, but not like it did years ago..... it is obvious there is no E-10 "paygrade" as documented by any payscale. If those in today's CG want to use that term, despite it's inaccuracy, so be it...

Wray.. :cool:
P.S. Thanks for the spelling correction... my error for fast typing and no proof reading.

Wray, it was a 50/50 joke, half on you, half on me, I have a reputation for correcting spelling errors and such - so I try to live up to that. The other 50 was geared at your error in correcting someone else. Either way, it seems as though you took it in the good natured way that I intended ;)

If continuing to refer to it as "Fredsplace" is a subconscious tribute to his creating the site, I would think that respectable, but if continuing to call it that is a reflection of someones inability to accept change, that's where I get annoyed by it I guess. Either way, I wouldn't have even mentioned it if you hadn't ;)

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Shakespeare once wrote that "Life is but a stage" and we, the people, are but players. Yeah, but Getty Lee sang it better........ we don't have to read because we have more access to other forms of media. More people read when there was no television. If the Chief's of the 1930s had TVO and Wii, they wouldn't have still be reading by candlelight.

Before Michael bites the bullet I would like to see his argument on how I "degrade" the current CPO corps. Offering observations and comments may be construed as "degradation" to some but the board's title is "The Unvarnished Truth." Considering real varnish ( I preferred Japan Varnish) is used little these days (especially by MSTs) we may have to shift to some water based conversation. Why especially by MSTs? Why would you have ever choosen that rating?

I am not so sure Burt was speaking (writing) reason nor has anyone actually engaged me in any conversation that I would consider reasonable. I have seen attacks and accusations but little in the way of reason. Michael tries to use reason when he notes that I do not engage those who may agree with my position. Hmmmm. I suppose that the art of debate is not taught at the CPO Academy. People can't engage you in a conversation, you don't listen to their side. That's what Mike was saying, there can't be a conversation if you're in it. And what's this........What a shock....... another shot at the CPOACAD. Bill, one of the problems is that you don't see the reason. And you only see the attacks on you, never the attacks you throw out there.

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

Mike,
If you have nothing to contribute, then don't. If you have something to contribute, then do. If you want to remove your name from this site, then please do so because you don't like the site or feel that you have nothing to contibute or gain from it. Don't remove your name because you don't like a person on it. That just fuels the fire. What do you do when you are at a unit where you don't like someone in your COC? If someone pisses you off, it is because you let them do so. You choose to read the comments. You choose to take offense. You choose to argue or not to argue. Personally, I think there are some people that post here that have diarrhea of the mouth (or fingers in this case), but that is just my opinion. I am sure there are some that think the same of me. Your choice, but don't blame your decision on someone else.


Jim thanks for the eye-opening arguement. I agree with parts of your post but not all of it (look at what I made bold faced). If you and the others that don't know me knew me the way that others do, you would say that I'm not the one in the corner (of the mess) to keep my mouth shut....if I don't like you or someone in my mess, or you said something that I didn't agree with, you'd hear from me! This is part of my point. We have ROE that I must abide by to stay in good standings with this mess. It has gotten to a point that I feel that there are folks in this virtual mess that are just trying to be a cancer! I don't like it. I'm voicing my opinion.

I've been a member of this site for over 2 years and I respond when I feel that I have something "positive" to say or I have an opinion on it. I don't have an opinion on every topic! But some things I have a strong opinion on, and at times I've shown emotion (as some put it, but I wouldn't call it drama). I'm not as educated as most on this board, nor have I ever said that I was....but if you want to talk to me, TALK TO ME and NOT down to me!

I've gotten many phone calls and emails saying that I was 'right on the money and that I shouldn't let these guys push me around'. I responded by saying that I wrote what I felt and that I didn't feel that anyone pushed me around. I just don't like the way I see this site going, and I felt it necessary to say something. Some call it dramatic...I saw it as something to open some eyes.

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

Before Michael bites the bullet I would like to see his argument on how I "degrade" the current CPO corps. Offering observations and comments may be construed as "degradation" to some but the board's title is "The Unvarnished Truth." Considering real varnish ( I preferred Japan Varnish) is used little these days (especially by MSTs) we may have to shift to some water based conversation. Why especially by MSTs? Why would you have ever choosen that rating?

Good question Stu! I'll bet that was a "shot at the MST rating" or better yet, ME?

I apoligize to the mess, I should have said that "put a bullet in my head, I'm done with HIM"!

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

I appreciate your post Mike, and I am glad that you are still here to post it. This site NEEDS people like you that are willing to call things like they see them. The ROE basically say, "don't shoot the messenger", but if you have a problem with the message, fire away. If the messenger takes that as a personnal attack, then that is on them. Admin will wear the stripes in this case and throw the flag if things get out of control. Quite frankly, I am a little tired of people urinating in our pool, but I imagine once the polution gets bad enough, the pool will be cleaned again. Give a child enough matches and he will burn himself. Just be patient.

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

Jim, no one that knows me will ever call me a "yes" man. I don't give into the "Company Man" thing. I wasn't a big supporter of the "you have to attend the CPOACAD", because it wasn't a required thing.

Now that it is, I'm going in 3 weeks. Does that make me a yes man? I would say NO. I signed up when I knew I had no choice. If someone was an E-9 and wanted to retire at 30 years, with still 2 plus years on active, I would bet they would sign up as well. Why bad mouth something that they have never attended, and then bad mouth those that support it, I don't understand.

Those that don't understand, stop talking about it, unless you go for yourselves and find that there is no merit!

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

People can call me a company man all they want. I've spent all of my adult life in this company or one of it's sister services. I'll be a company man until my oath ends. Once I no longer work for the company, once my obligations end, I won't care what the rest of the men do.
The times must have changed........ I'm sure that back in the day, people were advanced for refusing to follow orders.

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

Pretty childish in my book... and, I don't think Mike is the first to do this.. I believe someone else did it, not too long ago, and perhaps for the same reason.. (but..he came back) Is this the way Chief's handle pressure now days? Quit? Run? Ignor? Is Mike a "new" Chief? I think I just saw his name in my latest "Chief" magazine as a new member, but I could be wrong.. don't have the magazine here to check.


Is one bad apple = to pressure? Not in my book. Am I a new Chief? NO...you want to know ask me? Do me a favor, and don't past judgements on something that you read a magazine. Your book that you are referring to is the CPOA Magazine. I got my anchor over 2 1/2 years ago.....I recently signed up for the CPOA!

This Chief doesn't run from anything unless it is bigger and has bigger teeth than me!:D

[ETCS John Zidek]

Rule #1 if your head will fit in it's mouth, don't mess with it.

Everything else should be poked with a stick every once in awhile just to make sure it's still alive. [Evil Grin]
:D
Sometimes you just need to rattle the cage.

There is nothing like a heated discussion to get the old blood pumping.

"Z"

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

Am I a new Chief? NO...you want to know ask me? Do me a favor, and don't past judgements on something that you read a magazine. Your book that you are referring to is the CPOA Magazine. I got my anchor over 2 1/2 years ago.....I recently signed up for the CPOA!

This Chief doesn't run from anything unless it is bigger and has bigger teeth than me!

Mike,
I would have asked you , but YOU said YOU wanted your profile removed.. you were done! ... I just took you at your word.

As for being a new Chief, Yes, I did just see your name in my latest Chief Magazine, so I guess you just joined the CPOA.. It does not tell me you DOR.

Welcome to the CPOA.

Wray... :cool:

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

"Pretty childish in my book... and, I don't think Mike is the first to do this.. I believe someone else did it, not too long ago, and perhaps for the same reason.. (but..he came back) Is this the way Chief's handle pressure now days? Quit? Run? Ignor? Is Mike a "new" Chief? I think I just saw his name in my latest "Chief" magazine as a new member, but I could be wrong.. don't have the magazine here to check.


Mike, I think you better re-read my post... where did I "pass judgements" on you? The question mark after "Is Mike a new Chief?" indicates a question.. not a statement/judgement.

you went on to say....

"Your book that you are referring to is the CPOA Magazine."

I believe that is exactly what I said... perhaps, as a new member of the CPOA, you do not know that the name of the CPOA Magazine is called "The Chief"..

"I got my anchor over 2 1/2 years ago....." Now how would I know that.... once again... just a simple question.. you better learn how to read, & lighten up...

Wray... :cool:

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

Wray, thanks for the welcome, but might I suggest something?

With a double post regarding the same issue, you might want to listen to your own advice and "lighten up". You were right, thanks for pointing that out, it is called "The Chief". I was too lazy to turn around in my chair to verify that. Now I'm a little more smarter regarding it. Thanks for the education.

But you made an assumption based on something you read in the 'The Chief' magazine. I also read in the same magazine that there was Senior and Master Chief's as new members. But I can assume that they are not new Chief's!

I would love for this thread to get back on track!

[BMC John Phillips III]

I'd love for this thread to just go away ;) I mean consider what it was started over?

[AMTCM John Long]

But you made an assumption based on something you read in the 'The Chief' magazine. I also read in the same magazine that there was Senior and Master Chief's as new members. But I can assume that they are not new Chief's!

Mike,

Once when I was in the middle of a PCS move, my CPOA renewal notice came due and I missed it. After I got to the new place and realized what happend sometime later, I paid up and they re-listed me under new member even though I was previously a member. Could be the same scenerio for the folks you mentioned.

John

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

MSTC Michael Schmidtke said:

There was a noticable decline in posts while Bill was on one of his many banned timeframes, and to be honest, there was no drama. I'd rather have boring times than drama. I have not seen any positive that he has provided. Let me put the bullet in MY HEAD and Admin, please remove my profile from this board.....I'M DONE!

I take it this was just a childish over-reaction... I don't think he ever left like Ian did.... Michael seems to be going strong...

Out of curiosity, how many people have ADMIN authority on this board? Seems like a lot...

Wray....:cool:

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Wray...to answer your question:

Dennis owns the board.
Stu is the COTM.
Burt, Steve C, and Ian are moderators.

Why do you say it seems like there are a lot???

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

Just seems like everytime I see something deleted, or someone banned, it is by a different person.... that's all...

Like I said.. just curious..

Wray... :cool:

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Wray...do a quick count since you joined and count how many people have been banned and how many posts have been deleted.

I think your just trying to stir the pot...unnecessarily.

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

Deane,
As I said , it was just a question.. I have seen several posts edited, usually Bill's... I think the only one I know banned was Bill.... and as for deleted posts, hard to say, they are not there any longer, so how could I count them?

Yes, it is not very important info.. as I said, just curious... sorry.

Wray.. :cool:

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

MSTC Michael Schmidtke said:.............



Holy crap Wray, did I hit a nerve with you? You have quoted my post not once, not twice but 3 times now. I think that I'm over it, the question is.....are you?:confused:

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

Mike, yes I did quote your post.... you didn't strike a nerve with me, I was trying to strike one with you, concerning your childish post. Apparently it was just a meaningless, irrational statement, which you later regretted, and asked the moderators to ignor since you are still here posting.

I think you and I have said enough about this, so no need to respond. After 3 attempts, you never did address your comment, I see no point in saying any more about this......

Wray... :cool:

[BMCS Ian McVicker]

Wray, I left after letting my emotions get the better of me which was a mistake, which must be an internet forum issue with me because I'm a much better debater in person. After a little reflection (and swallowing my pride) I came back. I did not delete Michael's user, giving him a chance to calm down and realize what I saw as a mistake. It was not long after that Bill ended up shooting himself in the foot once again anyway.

There are four of us in Admin, which works out pretty well for us. I'm not sure of Steve's schedule, but Stu and I can be underway for a week or more at a time, ( I just got back from two weeks), and Burt's trips out to the islands to wave at the Russians can take as long as two weeks. We're not always monitoring the board, so four of us keeps pretty good coverage.

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

Thanks for that Ian, I appreciated it.:D

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

Mike, yes I did quote your post.... you didn't strike a nerve with me, I was trying to strike one with you, concerning your childish post. Apparently it was just a meaningless, irrational statement, which you later regretted, and asked the moderators to ignor since you are still here posting.

I think you and I have said enough about this, so no need to respond. After 3 attempts, you never did address your comment, I see no point in saying any more about this......

Wray... :cool:

Funny, if you were trying to strike my nerve, then why not ask me the question directly? How is quoting my post 3 times going to strike my nerve? By putting it the way you did, I'm sorry, but you come off VERY CHILDISH (IMO, like you were afraid to ask me directly)! If you have a question for me, ask it! Don't pussy-foot around something!

And I agree with Deane that you are just trying to stir the pot. The only difference between you and Bill is that Bill isn't afraid to come out and ask the question or question an individual. For that I respect him a hell of a lot more!:eek:

I don't expect a reply from you since you said that "there isn't any point in saying any more about this"....but I'm not really sure what "this" is talking about? Ask if you want...or don't ask, no skin off my a$$ either way!:D

[BMC John Phillips III]

So I was diving the other day and I caught like 7 lobster, but I threw the 7th one back cause he was too small - well that and you are only allowed to keep 6.

I posted a picture in the photos section.

[BMCS Ian McVicker]

Nice diversion John...I'm guessing this topics pretty much dead.

[BMC John Phillips III]

Well the lobsters definitely are ;)

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

So I was diving the other day and I caught like 7 lobster, but I threw the 7th one back cause he was too small - well that and you are only allowed to keep 6.

I posted a picture in the photos section.

I'm sure JP that your post was intended to do what it did to me...and just make me shake my head and chuckle....nice job!:p