nsx

IMHO, post count is used more for ego building than it is reader assessment of a poster's credibility. Post count is a competitive game. The competitive aspect is IMHO what creates the passion on selecting the rules of the game. Changing the rules creates winners and losers.

I have to decide yes or no on the current proposal, to count an OMNI post as 1 or 0. So I am asking myself: Is an OMNI post on average worth more or less than half of a travel forum post?

This is a tricky question. From a business perspective, FT is supported by advertisements. Ad revenue is roughly proportional to total page views, and page views are roughly proportional to total posts (actual posts, not the displayed counts). Counting posts can prompt more posts and more page views, helping support FT financially.

(Before you respond that maximizing page views would require OMNI to be an open forum, consider the possibility that fewer people might participate in an open forum than the current limited access forum.)

From a content perspective, it's hard to argue with the proposition that travel forum posts are more valuable than OMNI posts. Without OMNI, FT would still be FT. Without travel forums, FT would be just another board.

Is it fair for people who post mostly in OMNI to win the post count game over people who post mostly in travel forums? Probably not, given that FT is about travel.

If, as others have recommended, posting games are moved to their own forum with those posts not counted, I would support counting posts in OMNI-fluff (OMNI minus P/R). I can see an average value of more than 0.5 there. OMNI P/R? Not so much. Travel Safety and Security, also not so much. So my preferred setup would have three non-counted forums: Games, TSA discussion, and OMNI P/R. (I would be in favor of counting Coupon Connection posts.)

As to lounge threads, I think those posts have more than 0.5 average value because they are made by a small community of friends who have a single travel forum in common.

The current proposal is not very close to my preferred structure. I am leaning toward voting no and working on a new proposal along the lines I just described. If our TalkBoard members are sufficiently flexible, perhaps that could achieve consensus. I know several of us were very much on the fence on this vote. A proposal somewhere between 1 and 0 might be able to succeed.

Let's face it: if we can't achieve consensus this issue will return again and again. I'd like to do it right. Ideally we can get it done this year.