By: charliehunt
- 8th July 2015 at 13:34Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You seem to have conveniently ignored the comments posted by several members about freeloaders enjoying the benefits of what those who pay help to provide.
No of course that day will never come but surely it's the principle which is important. A criteria of modern life sadly and widely lost.
By: Meddle
- 8th July 2015 at 14:13Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
From Google:
The tragedy of the commons is a term, originally used by Garrett Hardin, to denote a situation where individuals acting independently and rationally according to each's self-interest behave contrary to the best interests of the whole group by depleting some common resource.
By: AlanR
- 8th July 2015 at 14:24Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You seem to have conveniently ignored the comments posted by several members about freeloaders enjoying the benefits of what those who pay help to provide.
No not ignored, conveniently or otherwise.
The views I express are mine, I'm sorry I don't go along (or agree) with the views of everyone else.
By: charliehunt
- 8th July 2015 at 14:31Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Since all of our views are our own for people to accept or not your remark "I really don't understand why so many are getting so hot under the collar about people watching a display from outside of the airfield" is rather irrelevant isn't it? Some agree with you and some don't. Those who don't have given their reasons, which you don't agree with so there is little more to understand.
By: Agent K
- 8th July 2015 at 15:30Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
From Google:
The tragedy of the commons is a term, originally used by Garrett Hardin, to denote a situation where individuals acting independently and rationally according to each's self-interest behave contrary to the best interests of the whole group by depleting some common resource.
By: Mike meteor
- 8th July 2015 at 15:31Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Agree with you, Charlie.
It's still, (mostly), a free country, so I live and let live, but to a degree there is in me a sense of resentment that I have coughed up the hard earned to see the show while others haven't. I know my own views but life's too short to get steamed up over it. End of the day, I have the small satisfaction of knowing that my funds have made a tiny contribution to what I enjoy seeing.
By: John Green
- 8th July 2015 at 16:00Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
From Google:
The tragedy of the commons is a term, originally used by Garrett Hardin, to denote a situation where individuals acting independently and rationally according to each's self-interest behave contrary to the best interests of the whole group by depleting some common resource.
By: hampden98
- 8th July 2015 at 19:23Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If a person stands outside an airshow venue and watches a display that's a positive for historic aviation.
One more person that has enjoyed the day, enjoyed the aircraft and taken away something positive. At a later date if only a small percentage
of these people are encouraged to attend or support their local airfield then that's got to be a good thing.
The day we should worry is when no one stands outside, no one takes interest, no one cares.
By: Creaking Door
- 8th July 2015 at 20:13Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
One more person that has enjoyed the day, enjoyed the aircraft and taken...
...lots of photographs with their camera and their big expensive lenses! :rolleyes:
Yes, I can understand a fairly local novice to the airshow scene 'happening' upon an airshow but you can't expect those that routinely cross the country, with hundreds of pounds worth of camera equipment, to suddenly develop more of an interest in historic aviation (and more of a social conscience) and start paying to photograph the aircraft from inside the airshow (or at least make a donation of equivalent value).
By: Bob
- 8th July 2015 at 22:01Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If Big Beautiful Doll had gone in, a few hundred feet to the left, maybe the question of members of the public viewing from outside the fence would be a thing of the past?...
By: AlanR
- 8th July 2015 at 22:47Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If Big Beautiful Doll had gone in, a few hundred feet to the left, maybe the question of members of the public viewing from outside the fence would be a thing of the past?...
Although an accident is more likely to take place within an airfield boundary. Perhaps they should also close the M11 during
the course of an airshow, just in case ?
By: mike currill
- 9th July 2015 at 06:35Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If a person stands outside an airshow venue and watches a display that's a positive for historic aviation.
One more person that has enjoyed the day, enjoyed the aircraft and taken away something positive. At a later date if only a small percentage
of these people are encouraged to attend or support their local airfield then that's got to be a good thing.
The day we should worry is when no one stands outside, no one takes interest, no one cares.
That is a very good point of view. Though I have never stood outside an airshow I am happy to say that my interest in aviation was started by attending an airshow and I've never looked back. My late parents never realised how gratefull I was, and still am, to them for taking me to that first one.
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 8th July 2015 at 13:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You seem to have conveniently ignored the comments posted by several members about freeloaders enjoying the benefits of what those who pay help to provide.
No of course that day will never come but surely it's the principle which is important. A criteria of modern life sadly and widely lost.
Posts: 1,613
By: Meddle - 8th July 2015 at 14:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
From Google:
The tragedy of the commons is a term, originally used by Garrett Hardin, to denote a situation where individuals acting independently and rationally according to each's self-interest behave contrary to the best interests of the whole group by depleting some common resource.
Posts: 4,996
By: AlanR - 8th July 2015 at 14:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No not ignored, conveniently or otherwise.
The views I express are mine, I'm sorry I don't go along (or agree) with the views of everyone else.
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 8th July 2015 at 14:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Since all of our views are our own for people to accept or not your remark "I really don't understand why so many are getting so hot under the collar about people watching a display from outside of the airfield" is rather irrelevant isn't it? Some agree with you and some don't. Those who don't have given their reasons, which you don't agree with so there is little more to understand.
Posts: 963
By: Agent K - 8th July 2015 at 15:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How very nicely and succinctly put.
Posts: 197
By: Mike meteor - 8th July 2015 at 15:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Agree with you, Charlie.
It's still, (mostly), a free country, so I live and let live, but to a degree there is in me a sense of resentment that I have coughed up the hard earned to see the show while others haven't. I know my own views but life's too short to get steamed up over it. End of the day, I have the small satisfaction of knowing that my funds have made a tiny contribution to what I enjoy seeing.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 8th July 2015 at 16:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Bit like the EU and its members ?
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 8th July 2015 at 16:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That very concise summary is rather a simplification of a complex theory.
http://faculty.wwu.edu/gmyers/esssa/Hardin.html
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 8th July 2015 at 16:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I don't think anybody's getting 'steamed up' over it; this is a discussion forum...
...somebody asked the question, others have given their views.
Posts: 4,996
By: AlanR - 8th July 2015 at 16:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Quite :)
Posts: 1,613
By: Meddle - 8th July 2015 at 16:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What is the common resource in this scenario? I can see it applying to fish stocks in the North Sea, to give one example.
Posts: 6,535
By: John Green - 8th July 2015 at 17:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Spot on ! But, also as a matter of general principle. You could include the euro of current renown !
Posts: 2,536
By: hampden98 - 8th July 2015 at 19:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If a person stands outside an airshow venue and watches a display that's a positive for historic aviation.
One more person that has enjoyed the day, enjoyed the aircraft and taken away something positive. At a later date if only a small percentage
of these people are encouraged to attend or support their local airfield then that's got to be a good thing.
The day we should worry is when no one stands outside, no one takes interest, no one cares.
Posts: 9,739
By: Creaking Door - 8th July 2015 at 20:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
...lots of photographs with their camera and their big expensive lenses! :rolleyes:
Yes, I can understand a fairly local novice to the airshow scene 'happening' upon an airshow but you can't expect those that routinely cross the country, with hundreds of pounds worth of camera equipment, to suddenly develop more of an interest in historic aviation (and more of a social conscience) and start paying to photograph the aircraft from inside the airshow (or at least make a donation of equivalent value).
Posts: 3,566
By: Bob - 8th July 2015 at 22:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If Big Beautiful Doll had gone in, a few hundred feet to the left, maybe the question of members of the public viewing from outside the fence would be a thing of the past?...
Posts: 4,996
By: AlanR - 8th July 2015 at 22:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Although an accident is more likely to take place within an airfield boundary. Perhaps they should also close the M11 during
the course of an airshow, just in case ?
Posts: 3,566
By: Bob - 8th July 2015 at 23:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Oh, best close the M23 (Gatwick), M25 (Heathrow), M11 (Stansted), A45 (Coventry) etc etc as they all have more traffic than Duxford... :D
Posts: 8,505
By: mike currill - 9th July 2015 at 06:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That is a very good point of view. Though I have never stood outside an airshow I am happy to say that my interest in aviation was started by attending an airshow and I've never looked back. My late parents never realised how gratefull I was, and still am, to them for taking me to that first one.Posts: 8,505
By: mike currill - 9th July 2015 at 06:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Now we're getting silly but carry on, I'm enjoying this discussion.
Posts: 11,141
By: charliehunt - 9th July 2015 at 07:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It flowed easily from the preceding post!;)