Discussion in 'Hangar Flying' started by mcrae0104, Jun 1, 2019.
FAA has free safety webinars. But I always forget to watch live and can't find any archives.
Not to beat a dead horse but how is the EAA taking responsibility? That claim you're making doesn't seem valid. They are a association that produces information, zero liability. They are under zero obligation to any non members.
I guess I'm not sold on that idea of yours.
Did EAA make a bad choice? Maybe.
The free content stuff is starting to come to a end. It worked for a couple decades but that ship has sailed. Forums are going pay to play too. It keeps the Riff Raff out and produces a better experience for serious members
Thank you, that’s very generous of you. I’m sure that you could ask the EAA to keep your credit card on file so that anyone wanting access to the videos can get a free paid-for membership.
Indeed the horse feels dead because we have been confusing can with should.
Can the EAA hide content intended by their creators to be free. Yes in fact for now they have.
Is the EAA entitled to. I say not in my world. I demand higher standards of behavior from organizing bodies, politicians or representatives than I do individuals. I am sure many also expect more from leaders. Some say no way they can do what ever they want.
Should EAA hide content intended to be free and remain free is the question. This is a moral question and in aviation a troubling safety culture leadership dilemma.
I know content creators are understandably upset about this decision by EAA and are reaching out to Jack and Dave personally, as have I, to have this rolled back. I would encourage anyone who feels this move is a mistake to do the same.
You are spot on here, especially as we come to the bottom of the meta-data mine. It bodes well for smaller groups to be naturally funded and a mini-boom in the tech sector as well.
If EAA really really want to start charging for this content then, with the agreement of the expert volunteer base and the membership maybe they could introduce that for new content but not the stuff that was produced with the intention of being free for all and to remain free for all. I would still say don't be silly you just don't need to do that as they cost you nothing and are your best advertising resource. I know a number of the contributors would not agree to even this either.
EAA do so much very good work, it is just with this call they have had a total shocker.
Seems the whole discussion is based on $40 per year dues/membership. Think about that! $40 in a very expensive hobby/pastime. EAA membership gives you a magazine with good info (well worth the $40), a class website with all the Info at your fingertips, the EAA convention, and political advocacy. ALL for $40. That's cheap! It's also Voluntary!
If intellectual content was intended to be freely decimated by it's creator, there are many ways to accomplish that very thing. God Bless them for the donation to the public.
But let's not attempt to force the rest to donate their time and efforts for free. They deserve compensation for their efforts and hard work.
If they require members join to use the EAA forum it will just die. Hardly used now.
I liked it when the videos were public access, but I fully accept EAA’s rights to restrict access to members only. I would prefer them to be public, but that is not my decision. My only argument to EAA would be that if they make the content available to all, then there will be those that see the value and choose to pay for a membership to support the organization or to gain access to other benefits.
As far as the wishes of the presenters, the best compromise I can think of is to query those people and ask them if they want their videos in front or behind the firewall, and place them according to their wishes. I’m sure that more than a few of them support the EAA and would agree to their efforts to use them behind the firewall to boost membership. They (the featured experts) also know that they can easily record another that could be placed on a free streaming website, but those sites are fading as storage and streaming an increasing amount of videos is becoming more expensive to do.
To address the comment that EAA might be held responsible for accidents because of mistakes in building that might have been addressed and corrected by watching a video, that is faulty logic. The EAA can certainly educate builders, but it does not bear the onus of THEIR building mistakes. There is plenty of accessible knowledge of safe building techniques out there that a neophyte builder can tap into, including other builders and FAR 43.13. If restricting the videos puts EAA at fault, then every one of us with that knowledge (including those arguing against the EAA’s move) can be held responsible if we did not also publish a publicly accessible how-to video.
Below is the response that I got from the EAA to my questions:
What was the reasoning behind the decision to begin requiring EAA membership to view the how to webinars?
Are the videos the property of the EAA?
Thanks for the turn of the EAA response.
I appreciate their reasoning, but still disagree with their course of action. I hope they'll come to see that putting the videos online >does< benefit current members and encourage new ones. As an intermediate step, making many of the most popular videos free can serve to leave the porch light turned on for those interested in homebuilding and looking for information. It will make the EAA site visible to search engines and attract newcomers. Videos on the basics, videos that whet the appetite for more, videos showcasing what can be done by a determined amateur builder, flight safety topics, etc can all be out there for folks to see. The stuff behind the paywall will be of interest to those who have the greatest interest and would be most willing to part with $40/year (how to swage a control cable termination, etc).
Swaging a cable is a good example. Am I willing to pay $40 to learn how not to kill myself? Seems a small price, and it comes with a magazine subscription and a discount at Oshkosh to boot!
BJ, 50 years? Ya old coot.
I like pay to play. I spend money on a membership every year and it only makes sense that I should receive more benefits than someone who spends nothing.
I like the fact that I can tell people about all the great benefits that membership has.
By the way, have any of you current EAA members watched the lastest video? It's really good!!!!!
*Drops the mic*
I can't remember the last time I have been on the EAA web site. Been a member since 1974. Can't start a new chapter in this state, state will not grant a non-profit organization as required by the EAA. Been there and tried that. 6 lawyers said forgot about it, it will not happen.
I had 32 people signed up to be a member in the chapter.
So just incorporate in an adjacent state with a PO Box and hold your meetings in West Virginia.
(I see lots of aircraft across the country registered to New Jersey LLC’s.)
Thankfully there are other sources as well. https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=swaging+aircraft+cable
Never thought about that, just 8 air miles from the Ohio river inside WV. Yes, also lots of aircraft registered to LLC's in Del.
The concept that monetizing a forum or tips and tricks site with a paywall will either 1) Keep the quality of content high, or 2) "keep the riffraff out" is ridiculous. The content is already being produced at no cost. Do a Youtube search on nearly ANY subject aviation related, and content comes pouring out. People LIKE to share and have their ideas be seen by AS WIDE AN AUDIENCE as possible. As to number two, well...lets just say without ideas in from all corners of the realm, everybody in your little circle jerk is gonna be thinking JUST LIKE YOU. And that is just sad. Ten years ago, if you told us some kid was gonna be flying around in a multicopter he made from racing drone parts, I'd have thought you were nuts. But there he is on you tube, cheap radio control transmitter in hand strapped to a chair, flying around a farm field. Really doubt he's an EAA member though.
I had a guy call me last week with marketing and insurance questions about an ULTRALIGHT twin rotor concept he and another Toronto Engineering grad student had designed and were pitching to Bay area investors. He found me online. I mentioned the Canadian EAA. He had no idea it existed. The club is getting exclusive fellas, and that just strokes some peoples' egos! The question is not whether the EAA has the right to do this--they do. the question is not whether they CAN do this. They can. The question is whether or not they SHOULD do this. Do they NEED to? It was free exposure.
I wouldn't choose the kind of people that made that decision for a friend. If they were already a friend, I'd want them to tell me why they wanted to control the info. To keep it EXCLUSIVE? ehhh... Nor would I want to support them with my money. But it is the kind of decision I EXPECT out of the EAA. Which is why I am not a member.
Flow and Vigilant1 are ethically and morally correct in their position.
I'm getting surgery in a few days. Right before typing this I talked to a buddy that builds airplanes. He gives free hangar space to a couple of youngsters for their ultralights. Told him to pick up and keep about ten grand worth of building Equipment if anything happens, then find someone to GIVE it to when it is his time. 15 years ago that call would have been to the local chapter of the EAA.
Now I don't trust them to do the right thing.
Maybe Tom Bodett should be asked to do a Hints for Homebuilders episode.
The chapters are a completely different thing than the national organization. They are made up of the local grassroots members. If given to a chapter, it would most likely be used in the desired manner. If National has an issue with that (most likely due to liability), then they would still support the intent but recommend the members form a separate (second) group not under the the EAA banner to fulfill the other mission like has been done with numerous chapter aircraft build projects once they are flying.
It doesn’t have to go to a chapter, but to strike the individual chapters off your list for consideration is unjustified. Get to know the local chapters... you should be able to find some that you would trust to continue that mission.
Ok, so we'll put you down as a NO?
I want to say thank you to all the folks that put their heart into this discussion, including the folks that, (incorrectly) ;-) disagreed with mine and others moral position.
I have to say I did feel physical sick when I thought that fellow aviators would not have free and unencumbered access to Gordon Penner's stall spin material that he is just so generous in sharing and states clearly in his webinars how he want's us all to be ambassadors for this information and yet here was the organizing body that I respect so highly locking it down.
This thread has helped me gather some more clarity on what it is that I found so wrong about this move. So thanks again all.
To clear up some left over tangents: The below has never been the issue that was so sickening, in my mind.
It wouldn't matter what the obstruction was for instance, money, membership, filling out a long and detailed questionnaire, access only from US based IP addresses, having to prove you can shoot a 2" group from 300 yards off the elbows... Focusing on the obstruction it's self was a distraction and kept missing the heart of the matter.
Which is simply should we tolerate far reaching leaders in our industry locking down content of experts that are passionate about ensuring it is freely available and remains that way. And also should certain types of information in Aviation be sacrosanct, NTSB reports etc. and if so where do we draw the line.
It looks like EAA are getting the message and in fairness this move was probably really meant for the Hints for Homebuilders content not the Mike Busch, Gordon Penner and Professor Paul Schuch webinars.
I see that all of the archived content is still freely available on the old site.
Dillpickle, thank you too. If they roll back access to at least the webinars I will trust them again.
Separate names with a comma.