"where in God's name are you going?"

[iskyfly]

Laziness, complacency = bad habits. I am left to wonder what other non standard practices he performs when PIC.

This is a cheap shot,

Opinion.

[iskyfly]

The fact is the AIM is a suggestion, the word "should" shows that it is not mandatory.

oh I get it... Lets just discard / ignore whatever parts of AIM that doesn't suite us.

As a controller I have no problem, with 2.4 for 8, 

I'm pretty confident that the FAA and NATCA would not endorse the use of non standard phraseology.

In fact... wait a minute.... From NATCA themselves in regards to ATC / Pilot Communication Issues;

The conversational communications in some of these events may indicate a possible drift from using standard phraseology. However, it’s important to use prescribed phraseology so that each party’s intentions are clear.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/artcc/chicago/symposium/recap/media/NATCA.pdf

All pilots will find the Pilot/Controller Glossary very helpful in learning what certain words or phrases mean. Good phraseology enhances safety and is the mark of a professional pilot. Jargon, chatter, and "CB" slang have
no place in ATC communications. The Pilot/Controller Glossary is the same glossary used in FAA Order JO
7110.65, Air Traffic Control. We recommend that it be studied and reviewed from time to time to sharpen your
communication skills.

[notaperfectpilot]

but is it jargon, slang, or CB chatter? Who says that abbreviating your altitude report to save radio time is not good phraseology? It properly conveys the right information, doesn't it? Also, when a controller tells you to contact ground .9r does that mean that he is lazy or complacent? I think that this is nitpicking here....

[dave]

Wow, this thread is spinning out of control.  Kind of off topic now so I'm locking it.

As to standard phraseology, there is no doubt about what proper phraseology is.  It is well-defined.  But it is also common knowledge that both pilots and controllers use short-cut phraseology, especially in busy airspace.  And most of that slightly non-standard phraseology seldom compromises safety.  This is also well-known, especially in the busy TRACONs.  Still not relevant to this post at all.  Feel free to debate it in another thread.  And as to judging a pilot (or a controller) by the use of such phraseology - well, that one dimension gives a very myopic view.  You need to look at quite a bit more than that to make such a snap judgment about one's competency.