No matter how many in here complain about novices flying, acting entitled to wreck novices, stack them, and not teach them is inapprorpriate at any time.
Dilley'B your heart is in the right place, but you haven't made an argument for this position, and lecturing people about their obligations without actually providing a compelling argument for those obligations is really, really likely to piss them off.
Where does this obligation come from? The game will have problems if experienced players don't teach novices, sure. That doesn't mean there is an obligation on more experienced players. Obligations can be created in various ways, for example Muse could be paying people to teach novices, that would certainly imply an obligation. Is Muse paying more experienced players to teach? Have more experienced players given some commitment to teach? Why was I not invited to that super secret meeting? Were there doughnuts at this super secret meeting?
When I created a clan specifically for teaching novices you could certainly argue I created an obligation for myself to teach them as long as I kept it going, but that is hardly the universal obligation you are talking about. I would suggest it is in most experienced players best interest to teach novices as best we can, but again that isn't an obligation.
As for stacking, a few things would help there. One is not splitting ships when they are returned to matchmaker. Another would be the option to have a lobby without scramble. If I'm playing with 6 friends then I want to play with those six friends. I'm happy for the MM to throw me into a tough game, but I want to play with my friends. Given my win/loss statistics in competitive I don't think the accusation that I'm playing the game for the winning high is going to stick.
Otherwise, some folks have said that locking pilot for 100 matches is excessive. If it were a hard lock (one which couldn't be unlocked with minimal effort) I would agree. In fact I think any hard lock would be excessive and as I suggested, unfair on people who buy the 4-packs. The point is to establish the idea in the novices mind that being a pilot is taking on responsibilities. I've flown under pilots with 60 matches that were more fun to fly with than ones with 600 because they embraced that responsibility, but at the moment you are asking Joe Q. Public to think unprompted and while entertaining fantasies of sky pirating, good luck with that.
Blackened has said that novice behaviour isn't as bad as some make out, I think that depends on where we are talking. I rarely have problems with novice engineers. Most seem to pick that role because they figure it will be the best one to start out with. Novice gunners are usually okay so long as you only get one of them, generally because most of the time the only thing a novice gunner needs to do to not irritate me is shoot the thing I tell them to with the gun I tell them to. Novice pilots on the other hand, I'd say 70% are a problem. To test this I made a note of what players irritated me and in what positions for an evening play session. 7 games total so not the greatest sample size. One novice engineer ignored their pilot, one novice gunner ignored their pilot, and six out of ten novice pilots ignored the advice they were given by co-pilots or experienced crew. Of course there is a bit of selection bias here, I was engineering and it hard to act like a idiot ignoring orders if the pilot isn't giving any as was often the case, but I really think that is beside the point.
So Blackened may have a point, maybe we don't have an asshat novice problem. Maybe, and I say this as a pilot and noted asshat myself, the pilots slot attracts asshats and that distorts our view of the novices. I still don't think that changes the fact that there is a problem here which could do with addressing.