Seems I cant post a subject without being removed? Thats a shame. As stated earlier, Flightaware is a great site and my question was answered by Dami.
Flightaware people watchers must be pretty bored to remove a post that is not a problem in any way, shape, or form…
Sounds like blitzer.
What Mark did was appropriate. You had your question answered in the first reply. (Including this one.) That’s pretty good. Most of my threads don’t get totally answered in the first 5 replies.
To answer your question, mostly no.
Yes, it is (until this thread is locked) a problem in every way, shape, or form…
This is the second topic of yours that is utterly pointless and serves no purpose. Why do you feel the need to keep commenting in new threads about how your original topic got answered? We got it, we all read it.
Time to be quiet until you have something valuable to say.
Part one was answered. I respect mduell’s response and understand his reasoning behind a complete block.
Part two is a mystery to me and everyone else.
Part three brings up a good point if not in a very superficial and somewhat shallow way.
The point being what can / cannot be discussed in these forums. To date the discussions have been wide ranging and very informative. Of course there is an edicate to follow, just like everywhere else in life. However, I hope that discussion is not stiffled because of the acceptability of the topic. Is the posting of celebreties rides acceptable? Government flights other than military? Flight patterns in and out of major airports?
I am in no way defending julested, I just see a window of posibilities which might make these discussion forums less open to discussion. Maybe I’m making too much of this?
I understand, just as usual, I need to have thicker skin.
Still dont think it needed to be locked though.
Thanks for the replys. I appreciate it.
By the way,777 boy, I always have something valuable to say.
Doesn’t sound like it to me. Also sounds like you have a serious case of smug.
And it’s Mr. 777 to you.
Alright, show’s over folks. I’d hate to have to lock this thread and prompt a “Flight tracking 4” rebuttal.
[quote=“Newark777”]
That’s Mr. Cessna 750 [seven-fifty] to you. …not CCX or CitationX! 
I’ll give julested a Jr. rating in humor. Dave, you have an apprentice.
Yeah, really! 
(I’m still waiting for your 50th post.)
ETA for nugget's 50th post approx 20 days iff posting 0.10 posts per day. Scheduled for December 1st, 2006.
Was the the “WAAAAbulance” I just heard go by?
This reminds me of an ex-girlfriend. She said she was never rude and always helpful and she let others know that. She was, by the way, neither!
The plural of reply is replies.
The subject of your non-sentance is missing! Let’s try… "This reminds me of an ex-girlfriend.
I love the edit button in this forum. In other words, I fixed the sentence.
The me is implied in the inital post and somewhat redundant in the edited version.
“This reminds of an ex-girlfriend” can stand by itself just as readily as “This is reminiscent of an ex-girlfriend”.
In either instance it can be read as a given that the author (Dami) is referring to an ex-girlfriend of his and a memory of his.
But I quoted your original post. 
(I paraphrased JHEM since I couldn’t find his version of it.)
I have learned alot from these forums. From Dami and many others. Be thick skinned and dont take it personal like I did. I assume that Newark777 flys those big boys, maybe not. My best friend out here in Denver flys those babies out of DEN/DIA Either way, 1984 Big Brother was watching for sure from his post in TX at the Flightaware headqurters.
Therfore I kept my mouth shut after he slammed the door last night.
As long as we’re getting grammatical…
It was the object of the verb ‘reminds’ that was initially missing.
The subject has always been there. “This”
Can I file a motion to rename the subject of this discussion “The Thread that Refused to Die?” 
2nd…
Do we need to vote aye or nay or can we just do it by acclamation?
Move consensus…