Stolen Valor Act ruled Unconstitutional

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just_A_Mom said:
I noticed this too.

Isn't it amazing how two combat veterans from different generations and branches of service have similar points of view and experiences?
Wow.
Click to expand...

You should actually be amazed that two aviators can agree on anything.
 
While reading these posts, I'm watching the "Thunderbirds" live here in Cheyenne. I hope those aviators are agreeing on what they're talking about. LOL!!! :shake:
 
OK, folks . . . here's the deal:

The purpose of this board is to discuss Academy and military news. We generally allow greater freedom to veer off topic on these boards than, for example, the individual SA boards or DODMERB board, provided people play nicely in the sandpile.

Unfortunately, what started as a legitimate -- and largely civil -- debate has started to turn ugly and that won't be permitted to continue.

Thus, IF someone wants to return to the original discussion on the Stolen Valor Act and keep it there, feel free to do so.

If you want to discuss MREs or other topics unrelated to the Stolen Valor Act, take that discussion elsewhere.

If there is EVEN ONE more post that attacks or denigrates another member, the thread will immediately be locked without any further warning.

In the meantime, I will now take time away from my day job to edit all of the personal attacks on this thread. Folks, trust me, I REALLY HAVE BETTER THINGS TO DO WITH MY TIME.

That is all.
 
Pima said:
As a parent, this site was invaluable while we went through the process. I, for one want it to be that for future cadets.
Click to expand...

Well, though it remains off the topic of the thread, I think this raises an important issue and is worthy of discussion (though, admittedly perhaps better in another thread). Nonetheless, I will use this post to raise what I consider a fundamental question? What is the purpose of this forum?

Is there a mission statement? Is there more than one purpose? Are they prioritized?

Does this forum exists for the sole purpose of helping kids get into a SA (or other commissioning source, perhaps)? If that is the case, the forum probably should be renamed the Service Academy Admissions Forum (or U.S. Military Commissioning Source Admissions Forum), but that is fine. In such a forum, topics should be limited to those which directly aid those seeking a commission in the military. Great.

If this forum is intended to serve, not only that purpose, but also some other purposes, such as offering a place for graduates, parents, and others with an interest in the academies to gather and discuss topics they find of interest (which may be of no interest to candidates and of no help in their gaining admission), then that is a different matter altogether.

When I first came here, I essentially asked that question in my "introduction" thread. I was assured that this forum served more than one purpose and that there was a place for chat among grads. In response to my question, an administrator sent me a PM, which asked me specifically how this forum could be made to better serve the needs and interests of SA grads. I have held off on responding to that PM until I had a greater sense of this place and its participants.

From what I gather from recent posts, the majority of long-time participants here (at least the most vocal) would like to see that it stay essentially as a parents club, dedicated almost exclusively to the topic of admissions. They seem to want the image of the SAs, the services they represent, and those who serve in them to be what appears in recruiting material. If my sense is correct, I, for one, bow to the will of the people.
 
Gray Hog, I will take your question one step further: who gets a voice? In my time here, which admittedly is mostly in the USMA section, I have done my best to present my views from the standpoint of a public-school-educated USMA graduate, active duty officer, as I feel it has provided me with useful knowledge. I would submit that Gray Hog's point about the parents club mentality is well founded. Additionally, it seems to me that there is an air of "personal club" mentality as well, and that there are some folks see this as a site where only certain folks deserve a voice and their word is final. I think we do the site and the applicants a great disservice.

Now, in accordance with the mod's instructions, I will ask this: At what point does stolen valor stop? What if a parent claimed to be a USMA grad on this forum and said he received the Legion of Merit or the DSC but did not. Would that not do the same damage as wearing those medals to a parade, at least as far as we have defined damages in this thread?
 
I think this thread has run its course and it is therefore locked.

The site's policy regarding thread topic changes is that we don't typically mind when a thread experiences a minor change of course after the original topic is well discussed. For instance, a thread about a particular military job turning into a discussion about officer jobs as a whole. However, random thread changes are generally frowned upon.

We are here to serve all of our members, from candidates to be to SA grads, ROTC grads and the general military population. We are always looking for new ways to better serve those groups. That said, the above policy on thread topics applies to everyone equally and does not mean that threads can veer off topic for certain members but not for others.

If our members would like a place to have some very OT discussions such as those presented in this thread regarding MREs and their predecessors, we can designate a thread in the Off Topic forum for such a purpose.

-TN
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top