• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

New Hooters pics from Mad Dog . . . .

Seems like we've been back and forth on this issue over the years. On one hand, I think there might be some value in determining whether the individual is a fat or unkempt slob. Even though an individual's PFA status is listed, we all know people who can pass the PFA, but still look like a complete disaster in khakis. On the other hand, people can read all kinds of other things into someone's personal appearance that shouldn't have a bearing on whether a board selects them for promotion. My sense is that the latter outweighs the former in terms of a fair and consistent promotion process.
 
so you still have to have a current photo in your record, but it won't be displayed on the screen...? I'm guessing it's for quick reaction press releases.
 
so you still have to have a current photo in your record, but it won't be displayed on the screen...? I'm guessing it's for quick reaction press releases.

Yeah, that caught my eye too. I suppose so they have at least one visual record you exist?
 
We should have a friendly bet on when it gets changed back again to the old way. Whoever guesses closest wins internet bragging rights, nothing more. My guess is July 2017 (random guess).
 
This is really gonna hurt those whose plan for collecting separation pay involved tropical whites and Magnum, P.I. mustaches.

Unfortunately that isn't even an authorized uniform anymore, though that would likely be more helpful to the cause of any Magnum wannabes trying to get FOS'd.
 
We must finally be getting close to our diversity goals...

Or I'm just a conspiracy theorist.
 
On one hand, I think there might be some value in determining whether the individual is a fat or unkempt slob. Even though an individual's PFA status is listed, we all know people who can pass the PFA, but still look like a complete disaster in khakis.
One might think (hope?) that would be annotated in Block 35 Military Bearing/Character where a 1.0 is described as, in part, consistently unsatisfactory appearance. Do character and military bearing belong grouped together? Do the individual performance traits really mean anything, or are they just a there to provide numbers that are used to manufacture a bell curve? Those are questions that I'd be interested in seeing addressed. In the absence of a critical look at improving the utility/truthfulness of the existing document, I believe there is currently an avenue for CO's to address the person you described sans photo - if they choose to use it.

Glad the photo is gone. It created unnecessary skepticism in an already wounded program.
 
Do the individual performance traits really mean anything, or are they just a there to provide numbers that are used to manufacture a bell curve?
Does that system provide a reliable means for the RS to convey their opinion to members of a screen/election board? I would argue that it does, but we digress.
 
Are there any plans to change the fit rep system to something even remotely modern or at least update NAVFIT98 prior to its 20yr anniversary?
 
1) boooooooo clickbait
2) full length photo still necessary for when NCIS has to pull you, your classified info, and your bag of cash off an airplane bound for [insert foriegn adversary nation or obscure tiny paradise sans extradition treaty here]
 
1) boooooooo clickbait
2) full length photo still necessary for when NCIS has to pull you, your classified info, and your bag of cash off an airplane bound for [insert foriegn adversary nation or obscure tiny paradise sans extradition treaty here]
For the marine corps, no photo means they give you a bag of cash and you fly the airplane. Oh damn, I forgot to send one in.
 
Back
Top