FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - Question 14: Supporting No Hope Motions
View Single Post
Old Nov 5, 2008, 1:32 pm
  #14  
nsx
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist; United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 21,586
Originally Posted by RichMSN
In the absence of a public read-only version of the private board, the only way to communicate that a motion has been considered is by a vote.
RichMSN, thanks for your post. I hope there is a way around this.

For example, couldn't a TB member just post a proposal for discussion in the public forum, then discuss it in the private forum, then post in the public forum that support appears insufficient to proceed?

I understand a rule against sharing the contents of private forum discussions, but isn't it OK to share the mere fact that the discussions of a particular issue have occurred? If not, I'll start a list of things to fix and put this on it...

Preceding the formal proposal with a discussion of a draft proposal in the public forum should be the norm. That process will show everyone whether the proposal has overwhelming support or whether there is substantial opposition. In the latter case, I can understand that proponents would want to publicly identify opponents on the TB, so that voters would know who to vote against next time. But you have to admit, this makes holding a vote a very political act.

To the extent that this limitation is real and is not repaired, and to the extent that posting a draft for public comment does not provide sufficient information, I accept your point that making a "no hope" motion can serve as a communication tool. But it's communicating political information. I doubt that the value of this communication would outweigh the damage to the TB's collegiality.

Why am I so hung up about politicization of the TalkBoard? Because politicians work to defeat their opponents. Committee members work as a team. The TalkBoard needs to be more of a committee and less political.

To the voters, I say: If you believe that the TalkBoard should be first and foremost about winning on your issue, I would prefer that you not vote at all or at least that you not vote for me. Because I don't want to be on that kind of TalkBoard. I want a TalkBoard made of team players who know how to cooperate to get things done.
nsx is offline