Stephane Malbos (SM) and his hang gliding sphere
Posted: Fri May 31, 2013 9:02 amThe intent of this topic is to explore the effects on the history of hang gliding brought about by the action, inaction, and blocking of Stephane Malbos (SM). Invited is a full exploration of the hang gliding sphere of Stephane Malbos. Ask questions. Record text. See what he published; see what he got right and what he got wrong on HG history matters. Discuss what he seems to be avoiding in order to hold tight to early opinions. Write to him on HG matters that interest you; bring the colors here for examination. He apparently likes to sell HG books. But with power of position and pen, what is he doing with the power? Does he block whole strands of hang glider history just to thrust a narrow flat view upon his readers? Let's put his hang gliding sphere up on the table in clear view, so that future scholar may help sort out the effects of pride, prejudice, abuse of power, as well as redeeming gems of service and expression. Ever humans are a mixed bag; the mix escapes no one; the mix adds color and adventure, but sometimes challenge.
The issue of a defacement of the history of hang gliding invention space gives me motivation to work for a healing and correction; during the process many positive gems surface; during the work and effort, there will be cool lights that give consolation. This topic thread is aiming to bring more joy and good to hang gliding history; uncovering the poor may let riches arrive to that poor field, so that the future will be more rich for all. There is joy in finding and seeing more clear that which is giving pain, as then there is a better chance at pulling out the puncturing thorn and begin the process of forming new better and tougher skin. The Face of HG has many scars and some open wounds; the scars tell of interest and battle giving character to our dear sport; the open wounds are just part of the current process toward another future scar medal of process.
Malbos is thought by some to be a player in a current open wound to the face and heart of hang gliding invention creativity space; I am with such opinion and I am willing to work openly on the matter until the wound scars over and some enduring settling occurs. I am not satisfied yet with just warning others of the GH Test; rather, there is work to be done on the SM Test also. The two tests challenge test takers to discern what might be untenable in the strong and loud claiming of global mechanical invention of something that was globally mechanically already invented and in the public domain; the GH-SM-JD camp want to simply state ownership of such for JD and pretend to prove such by having their audience look at other issues off the paramount mechanical invention claim.
I invite no one to respect supposed authority on the issue; rather, I invite careful scholarship, careful logic, and high respect for mechanical invention spaces. The Face of Hang Glider Mechanical Invention within hang gliding history will, I believe, affect creative people's glancing quotient; how we in hang gliding treat the invention space very well might encourage or deter creative people from giving their glance to our craft needs. If in the hang gliding community all mechanical matters are sent to one non-mechanical inventor as some god-point of invention (even though that point person has lateral positive merits), then creative people might go elsewhere with their talents where there is some chance at being respected in fair balance. Right now the clout of a low-scrutinizing FAI and its CIVL arm combined with low-bar scrutinizing national orgs have permitted a set of untenables to ride high and firm; some of those untenables may well be deeply injuring persons of the past, present, and future. The trace of the GH-pushed over-claiming has a significant record for scholars to follow; the correction and healing might take years, decades, or centuries; or correction and healing might not take place and the hang gliding community will have the scars and non-healing open wounds. I personally envision that strong thinkers and leaders will rise up and help move the slumbering into actions that will bring correctives.
Follow SM's blocking influences as he thrusted himself in a process that keeps a flat face to the invention space of hang gliders. Tracing his text and decisions in office is invited.
Follow his statements; examine them; discuss them. He is welcome to post his comments herein. State facts. Also give opinions without personal attacks; aim to support posted opinion.
There seems to be controversy surrounding potential conflict of interest actions by SM; this topic thread includes an exploratory suspicion that needs exploration of the timing and placement of insertions into local HGFA in Australia, carrying personal interests into the nomination process while being an officer of the FAI-CIVL. As the GH-for-JD campaign blossomed, some rash untenables were tiring many in the HGFA. GH stepped up his game, which was fine, but the carrying of untenable claims that would end up injuring JD and injuring the face of hang gliding was not fine for some awake onlookers. Stephane publicly refused to help make a timeline of his actions and the texts and moves he made; the asking for accountability was retorted with "blathering paranoia" to requests, rather than respecting the sincere scholarship surrounding the historical effort; he uses his office clout to block careful scholarship conversation over his stepping. What is not clear is what the FAI really wants of their officers as regards recusing themselves when an officer has vested interests; protecting statements in one's book might be a matter for recusing SM from a process that cemented some untenables at the high FAI level.
So, in tiny or large ways, consider being part of the SM project here.
==================
The issue of a defacement of the history of hang gliding invention space gives me motivation to work for a healing and correction; during the process many positive gems surface; during the work and effort, there will be cool lights that give consolation. This topic thread is aiming to bring more joy and good to hang gliding history; uncovering the poor may let riches arrive to that poor field, so that the future will be more rich for all. There is joy in finding and seeing more clear that which is giving pain, as then there is a better chance at pulling out the puncturing thorn and begin the process of forming new better and tougher skin. The Face of HG has many scars and some open wounds; the scars tell of interest and battle giving character to our dear sport; the open wounds are just part of the current process toward another future scar medal of process.
Malbos is thought by some to be a player in a current open wound to the face and heart of hang gliding invention creativity space; I am with such opinion and I am willing to work openly on the matter until the wound scars over and some enduring settling occurs. I am not satisfied yet with just warning others of the GH Test; rather, there is work to be done on the SM Test also. The two tests challenge test takers to discern what might be untenable in the strong and loud claiming of global mechanical invention of something that was globally mechanically already invented and in the public domain; the GH-SM-JD camp want to simply state ownership of such for JD and pretend to prove such by having their audience look at other issues off the paramount mechanical invention claim.
I invite no one to respect supposed authority on the issue; rather, I invite careful scholarship, careful logic, and high respect for mechanical invention spaces. The Face of Hang Glider Mechanical Invention within hang gliding history will, I believe, affect creative people's glancing quotient; how we in hang gliding treat the invention space very well might encourage or deter creative people from giving their glance to our craft needs. If in the hang gliding community all mechanical matters are sent to one non-mechanical inventor as some god-point of invention (even though that point person has lateral positive merits), then creative people might go elsewhere with their talents where there is some chance at being respected in fair balance. Right now the clout of a low-scrutinizing FAI and its CIVL arm combined with low-bar scrutinizing national orgs have permitted a set of untenables to ride high and firm; some of those untenables may well be deeply injuring persons of the past, present, and future. The trace of the GH-pushed over-claiming has a significant record for scholars to follow; the correction and healing might take years, decades, or centuries; or correction and healing might not take place and the hang gliding community will have the scars and non-healing open wounds. I personally envision that strong thinkers and leaders will rise up and help move the slumbering into actions that will bring correctives.
Follow SM's blocking influences as he thrusted himself in a process that keeps a flat face to the invention space of hang gliders. Tracing his text and decisions in office is invited.
Follow his statements; examine them; discuss them. He is welcome to post his comments herein. State facts. Also give opinions without personal attacks; aim to support posted opinion.
There seems to be controversy surrounding potential conflict of interest actions by SM; this topic thread includes an exploratory suspicion that needs exploration of the timing and placement of insertions into local HGFA in Australia, carrying personal interests into the nomination process while being an officer of the FAI-CIVL. As the GH-for-JD campaign blossomed, some rash untenables were tiring many in the HGFA. GH stepped up his game, which was fine, but the carrying of untenable claims that would end up injuring JD and injuring the face of hang gliding was not fine for some awake onlookers. Stephane publicly refused to help make a timeline of his actions and the texts and moves he made; the asking for accountability was retorted with "blathering paranoia" to requests, rather than respecting the sincere scholarship surrounding the historical effort; he uses his office clout to block careful scholarship conversation over his stepping. What is not clear is what the FAI really wants of their officers as regards recusing themselves when an officer has vested interests; protecting statements in one's book might be a matter for recusing SM from a process that cemented some untenables at the high FAI level.
So, in tiny or large ways, consider being part of the SM project here.
==================
Joe Faust wrote:SM :: Stephane MalbosStephane Malbos wrote:…there is nothing I can do…
You could get more professional and help correct the defacement of hang glider invention flows by abuse of "inventor" at the top and head and heart of our hang gliding community. Your abuse of "American heritage" dictionary at the level of impact that you helped to cement has injuries to JD, to the public domain, and to creative people of the past, present, and future. You could help give rich wrinkle to the flat face you push as regards the very important craft mechanical-invention sector of our sport. It might take your learning and respecting flows neglected. There are things you can do, SM. Innocent incompletes and errors may be replaced with higher completions and correctives; meanwhile, in the process there can be positive blessings for you and many others.
You could choose to be part of the correction process; you are able to be active in such process; it is hoped that you will do more; thank you for your service to now in your mixed bag (as every human has mixed bags); there is evident need for your talents to be placed at the service of correctives.
~Joe Faust