This is the strangest of forums - and from recent history, it is a complicated forum to use. Of the past 26 topics showing over a two week period, 4 have padlocks and 9 have moved. This is not a commentary on moderation. It is a commentary on the forum's purposefulness, when it has become clear that many posters are clearly confused about what belongs there, what doesn't, what the posting guidelines are, and what happens when the posts aren't in compliance. I have to admit that I'm not 100% sure. Almost any bit of news is either related to an airline, or hotel, or a place, and would have another home. As a current snapshot with 50% of what is showing over the past two weeks either in the wrong place or not belonging at all, I raise this question.
jspira
Nov 10, 11, 10:20 pm
There's a Travel News forum? :)
All kidding aside, I fully agree with your comments and assessment.
tom911
Nov 11, 11, 2:41 am
It is a commentary on the forum's purposefulness, when it has become clear that many posters are clearly confused about what belongs there, what doesn't, what the posting guidelines are, and what happens when the posts aren't in compliance.
It does look, to some extent, that the Talk Board policy on where to post is actually being followed, even though the moderators can pretty much do what they want as it relates to news items. Some of our new members, or even new moderators, might want to read over this thread:
On 23 Aug 2005, the following policy regarding news article posting in the forums was passed by the TalkBoard by a vote of 7-0-2:
1. News articles referencing a specific airline/hotel/car rental/location/airport belong in the specific forum.
2. General news stories on the travel industry (including Randy Petersen references!) that are not associated with individual programs belong in Newstand, as do major news stories (accidents, bankruptcies, etc.)
3. Where a news article meets the qualifications cited in both paragraphs 1 and 2 it may be cross-posted in Newstand and the specific forum. If moderators see that cross-posted threads are continuing to duplicate each other (as opposed to taking their own paths) they will have the option of merging the threads into the forum they consider most appropriate.
I don't post there any longer because of the policy, which I can't recall Talk Board voting on, that commentary is required if you post an article. I was a regular poster there until the rules changed.
Tom in the Lufthansa Lounge at DUS
Moderator2
Nov 11, 11, 5:12 am
What stays open/closed, or moved, ultimately is a moderation decision. The TalkBoard does not have supervisorial control of that team.
Dovster
Nov 11, 11, 11:00 pm
What stays open/closed, or moved, ultimately is a moderation decision. The TalkBoard does not have supervisorial control of that team.
This has an interesting history, the exact history of which I do not feel free to post.
Randy, for the reasons I can not reveal here, was unhappy with moderation on that forum and asked TalkBoard to come up with a specific rule as to what can and can not be placed in the forum. The result was the policy quoted above.
As Moderator2 correctly points out, TalkBoard does not have supervisory control of moderation, so we are left with the rather absurd situation that:
a. The FT Host wanted TB, not moderators, to decide what can be placed on this forum.
b. TB did exactly that.
c. Because TB does not have supervisory control of moderation, whoever moderates the forum at a particular time (and that has changed over the years) actually decides what is acceptable there and what is not.
That is a perfect example of what I meant in another TB Topics thread when I posted recently that until TB can convince Carol that it should have overall supervisory control of moderation, it will remain a eunuch.
tcook052
Nov 11, 11, 11:21 pm
c. Because TB does not have supervisory control of moderation, whoever moderates the forum at a particular time (and that has changed over the years) actually decides what is acceptable there and what is not.
Regardless of the wording in a policy isn't it always going to be left to someone's discretion about where some topics should go or not go?
But if TB were to be given supervisory control over moderation, which FWIW I don't favor, who would judge the judgement of the Mod. action in question? TB president? And if so wouldn't that be simply replacing one person's discretion for another's? Would we openly debate specific Mod. decisions on this forum? And if so how would that impact volunteer Mod. morale and would fewer step forward to subject themselves to a much greater degree of scrutiny?
Like video replay in sports it can only work when it doesn't interfere with the game itself. That is, of course, merely MHO and YMMV.
Dovster
Nov 11, 11, 11:39 pm
But if TB were to be given supervisory control over moderation, which FWIW I don't favor, who would judge the judgement of the Mod. action in question? TB president? And if so wouldn't that be simply replacing one person's discretion for another's? Would we openly debate specific Mod. decisions on this forum? And if so how would that impact volunteer Mod. morale and would fewer step forward to subject themselves to a much greater degree of scrutiny?
TB, as I would like to see it, would not get involved in a particular decision but rather on a wider basis.
If there were a number of complaints about a particular moderator, TB would review his actions and decide whether or not he should retain his position.
If a moderator were to institute a rule on his forum which TB felt over-reached his authority or violated the TOS, it would be able to veto that rule.
If a moderator refused to enforce a particular segment of the TOS on his forum, TB might give him the choice of enforcing it or being removed.
Quite honestly, the morale of the 70+ moderators is less important to me than the morale of the thousands of general members. These members, of course, have no way to even publicly express their unhappiness with a specific situation if it involves moderation. They do, however, have the ability to vote out a TB member who ignores what they see to be a problem.
tcook052
Nov 12, 11, 12:19 am
TB, as I would like to see it, would not get involved in a particular decision but rather on a wider basis.
If there were a number of complaints about a particular moderator, TB would review his actions and decide whether or not he should retain his position.
If a moderator were to institute a rule on his forum which TB felt over-reached his authority or violated the TOS, it would be able to veto that rule.
If a moderator refused to enforce a particular segment of the TOS on his forum, TB might give him the choice of enforcing it or being removed.
All this would mean of course an updating of the TB Guildines spelling out when and where TB can or would act and granting it this special veto power, potentially a tall order considering a recent TB couldn't come to an agreement on what an absention meant for a long period of time.
The FT Host would presumably have a total veto that could override a TB action or decision if she felt it wasn't in the best interest of FT.
MHO is that TB involving itself so directly in the daily working of all forums changes it's mandate completely from one of an advisory role to more administrative, a role that would possibly require much more investment of time from members who again are volunteers. I'm okay with the way things are and believe only minor changes need be made rather than wholesale renovations.
Quite honestly, the morale of the 70+ moderators is less important to me than the morale of the thousands of general members. These members, of course, have no way to even publicly express their unhappiness with a specific situation if it involves moderation.
There is a fine line between publicly expressing one's unhappiness with a Mod. decision and axe grinding and again were members to be allowed to bring those concerns here in the open it would ultimately be left to someone and their discretion as to where that line lies and whether a member has crossed it. IMHO Mod.'s should spend time actually moderating rather debating decisions made in their best judgement.
PVDtoDEL
Nov 12, 11, 12:38 am
Firstly, regardless of TalkBoard's lack of authority to supervise moderators, I'm having trouble understanding how this proposal to close a forum and/or make a rule about what can be posted there is an issue? I'm pretty sure TB has the authority to do both things...
As for TB having authority over moderators, I think I would prefer TB having the responsibility to recommend courses of action to Carol, who can then go and carry out what she thinks is a good idea. This process would presumably be private...
Dovster
Nov 12, 11, 12:47 am
The FT Host would presumably have a total veto that could override a TB action or decision if she felt it wasn't in the best interest of FT.
As for TB having authority over moderators, I think I would prefer TB having the responsibility to recommend courses of action to Carol, who can then go and carry out what she thinks is a good idea.
In every case -- including the routine establishment of a forum -- TB can only make recommendations to the FT Host. I am not advocating a change in that.
What I am advocating is that TB be allowed to make such recommendations in regards to moderation. Randy would not allow TB to do so but I am hoping that Carol would be open to this.
Obviously, if she felt that a particular TB recommendation was not a good one she would be free to reject it.
SkiAdcock
Nov 12, 11, 8:51 am
I believe the OP when he said he didn't want this thread to be about moderation (which some have now made it about :rolleyes:), but instead wanted input on the forum itself, what it's supposed to be, relevance, whether it stays open/closed.
Those items are indeed under TB purview, whereas moderation is not.
So if folk would like to discuss moderation, they can contact the Community Director, as has been established even from Randy's time. This thread is not for that.
If they'd like to discuss the topic on hand - ie, the forum, - then this thread is the place to do so.
Speaking for myself, I prefer the thread stay on topic.
Cheers.
Dovster
Nov 12, 11, 9:33 am
Sharon, my posts have not been about moderation. You will find nothing in them which said that the moderation on this issue has been either good or bad.
My posts have been about TalkBoard's purview -- and whether it should, or should not, include moderation.
Do you feel that FlyerTalk would be harmed if Carol were to receive recommendations from TalkBoard on moderation (keeping in mind that TalkBoard is the only body which is chosen by the membership)?
Eastbay1K
Nov 12, 11, 9:33 am
I believe the OP when he said he didn't want this thread to be about moderation (which some have now made it about :rolleyes:), but instead wanted input on the forum itself, what it's supposed to be, relevance, whether it stays open/closed.
Those items are indeed under TB purview, whereas moderation is not.
So if folk would like to discuss moderation, they can contact the Community Director, as has been established even from Randy's time. This thread is not for that.
If they'd like to discuss the topic on hand - ie, the forum, - then this thread is the place to do so.
Speaking for myself, I prefer the thread stay on topic.
Cheers.
Thanks for the focus. The backstory (which I was not aware of) has been helpful, however. (As active as I've been on FT for the past 12 years, I've mostly stayed out of the political and organizational side.)
Clearly, the forum's current state of affairs is misunderstood and misused (unintentionally) by a fair percentage of posters, no matter how the current state of affairs came to be.
goalie
Nov 12, 11, 10:07 am
Thanks for the focus. The backstory (which I was not aware of) has been helpful, however. (As active as I've been on FT for the past 12 years, I've mostly stayed out of the political and organizational side.)
Clearly, the forum's current state of affairs is misunderstood and misused (unintentionally) by a fair percentage of posters, no matter how the current state of affairs came to be.Pretty much it in a nutshell ^ however I do think that there is a need for a Travel News forum as there are travel related news items which are not "forum" specific. Yes, there are those which are forum specific which imho, posters place in Travel News because they are not active/subscribed to/a member of the forum/program where the post should go (and is probably already under discussion in that forum) but there still should be a Travel News forum tho folks do need to be "reminded" as to how to post a news article.
nerd
Nov 12, 11, 12:43 pm
I believe the OP when he said he didn't want this thread to be about moderation (which some have now made it about :rolleyes:), but instead wanted input on the forum itself, what it's supposed to be, relevance, whether it stays open/closed. Why the rolleyes?
The OP said he didn't want this thread to be about moderation, but it's impossible to separate from the issue that's been brought up. Let's include it in the discussion. ^
cblaisd
Nov 12, 11, 5:00 pm
I'm very grateful to tom911 and Dovster for the reminders of the "legislative history" around what is appropriate for the forum and what is best put elsewhere. I was aware, of course, of the intent that Travel News (formerly Newsstand) be for the discussion of "general travel news" but did not have the exact citation expressing the TalkBoard's wishes re.
I'm glad that the forum guidelines (which are simple and which I've added to today for some clarity, I hope) clearly do express the intent of the TalkBoard in its long-ago consideration of this matter as well as the TOS's requirement that copyrighted materials be re-capped (i.e., discussed in the poster's own words) rather than simply copied verbatim.
There is other history around the forum, as Dovster points out, but that really isn't germane to the present situation, nor would it be helpful or kind to rehearse.
One very helpful exchange I had with a member eventuated in the practice that any thread that is moved to the correct forum will have a 30-day re-direct left in Travel News so as to be more helpful to the members who might wish to follow a story that they first learn of there. My thanks to that member for a well-reasoned win-win suggestion -- and I'm always open to hearing such civil and thoughtful suggestions directly. Thanks!
cblaisd
(Moderator, Travel News)
kokonutz
Nov 12, 11, 8:07 pm
TB, as I would like to see it, would not get involved in a particular decision but rather on a wider basis.
If there were a number of complaints about a particular moderator, TB would review his actions and decide whether or not he should retain his position.
If a moderator were to institute a rule on his forum which TB felt over-reached his authority or violated the TOS, it would be able to veto that rule.
If a moderator refused to enforce a particular segment of the TOS on his forum, TB might give him the choice of enforcing it or being removed.
Quite honestly, the morale of the 70+ moderators is less important to me than the morale of the thousands of general members. These members, of course, have no way to even publicly express their unhappiness with a specific situation if it involves moderation. They do, however, have the ability to vote out a TB member who ignores what they see to be a problem.
Your post contains a lot of merit. Clearly if the TB is tasked with creating forums it should have a say in what goes on in those forums.
'Because that's the way it has always been done' is the flat out worst reason to do anything ever.
It's a newish day on FT under newish management. It's not a cult of personality anymore.
And the number one thing posters have always asked for is moderation that is accountable to the posters.
The TB, imho, should make any and every recommendation to the CD that it sees as in the best interests of FT. If the CD doesn't like it, so be it. She's The Man, so to speak.
The policy that led to the OP is an excellent start, and should be emulated for all forums. TB input on mega-threads would be a welcome second step.
GUWonder
Nov 13, 11, 10:27 am
And the number one thing posters have always asked for is moderation that is accountable to the posters.
Really? I am not sure how I would ever arrive at the conclusion that it is the number one thing for which posters on FT have always asked.
The policy that led to the OP is an excellent start, and should be emulated for all forums. TB input on mega-threads would be a welcome second step.
I agree, for Travel News -- as it has been headed in recent months not years -- seems an exercise in artificial desertification.
Eastbay1K
Nov 13, 11, 10:43 am
Your post contains a lot of merit. Clearly if the TB is tasked with creating forums it should have a say in what goes on in those forums.
'Because that's the way it has always been done' is the flat out worst reason to do anything ever.
It's a newish day on FT under newish management. It's not a cult of personality anymore.
And the number one thing posters have always asked for is moderation that is accountable to the posters.
The TB, imho, should make any and every recommendation to the CD that it sees as in the best interests of FT. If the CD doesn't like it, so be it. She's The Man, so to speak.
The policy that led to the OP is an excellent start, and should be emulated for all forums. TB input on mega-threads would be a welcome second step.
^ Well, I did have one further comment about your post that I found surprising. The TB, imho ... that little "h" - :p
SkiAdcock
Nov 13, 11, 1:47 pm
My posts have been about TalkBoard's purview -- and whether it should, or should not, include moderation.
Since '03 when I joined FT, moderation has never been part of TB's purview. Randy (and now Carol) reiterated that a gazillion times.
This thread is about Newstand.
Cheers.
kokonutz
Nov 14, 11, 7:05 am
Since '03 when I joined FT, moderation has never been part of TB's purview. Randy (and now Carol) reiterated that a gazillion times.
This thread is about Newstand.
Cheers.
But the above-stated policy demonstrates that there is a difference between 'moderation' and 'specific forum rules.' The precedent was set.
That the TB has not created more specific forum rules is on the TB, and on the knee-jerk reaction of many on the TB that things are 'off limits moderation' that are actually not.
Finally, and to 'go there,' WHY in the world is there this iron curtain between moderators and the poster responsiveness. Randy could never articulate a coherent rationale and I still have yet to see one.
^ Well, I did have one further comment about your post that I found surprising. The TB, imho ... that little "h" - :pMy wife is a pretty strong woman. She was looking over my shoulder as I was typing an email not long ago and I put IMHO in it.
She said, is that really your honest opinion?
I said, um, that doesn't mean 'in my honest opinion, it means in my humble opinion.'
She said, 'oh, please, don't be silly, humble is not in my vocabulary.' :D
SkiAdcock
Nov 14, 11, 7:31 am
My wife is a pretty strong woman. She was looking over my shoulder as I was typing an email not long ago and I put IMHO in it.
She said, is that really your honest opinion?
I said, um, that doesn't mean 'in my honest opinion, it means in my humble opinion.'
She said, 'oh, please, don't be silly, humble is not in my vocabulary.' :D
:D :D
Cheers.
Dovster
Nov 14, 11, 7:37 am
She said, 'oh, please, don't be silly, humble is not in my vocabulary.' :D
I call "bull" on this.
I am certain she said, "'oh, please, don't be silly, humble is not in your vocabulary."
CPRich
Nov 14, 11, 8:58 am
I support just closing it. I created a new thread assuming an existing thread would be closed, given recent history on providing direct quotes from a news source. Since they were merged together, supporting OP's note that it is a "complicated forum to use." and "that many posters are clearly confused about what belongs there, what doesn't, what the posting guidelines are, and what happens when the posts aren't in compliance.", this leads me to agree that it should just be killed.
Eastbay1K
Nov 14, 11, 12:03 pm
I support just closing it. I created a new thread assuming an existing thread would be closed, given recent history on providing direct quotes from a news source. Since they were merged together, supporting OP's note that it is a "complicated forum to use." and "that many posters are clearly confused about what belongs there, what doesn't, what the posting guidelines are, and what happens when the posts aren't in compliance.", this leads me to agree that it should just be killed.
As it stands now, it might as well be wrapped up into Travel Buzz, with a caveat on posting too much verbatim for copyright concerns.
cblaisd
Dec 11, 11, 3:36 pm
Despite what feels like contradictory complaints that too many things are moved and too few things are moved, I would aver that there continues to be a need for a forum where general travel news (not flogging blogs) stories can be discussed and which are non-airline/hotel/geography-specific.
Despite what feels like contradictory complaints that too many things are moved and too few things are moved, I would aver that there continues to be a need for a forum where general travel news (not flogging blogs) stories can be discussed and which are non-airline/hotel/geography-specific.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/travel-news/1272205-where-airliners-go-die-just-rest-while.html
Weird. I thought I posted earlier today that I had started a thread about this in the private TB forum. I guess I forgot to hit submit reply or something.
Anyway, I posted the following in the TB private forum today:
Is it time to close 'Travel News?'
Proposal/suggestion/question/debate: Should Travel News be eliminated/refocused?
The forum appears to be redundant to the program or destination forums that exist on FT. I think it ought to be closed.
I also posted this in regard to cblaisd's notion above:
That's a very small number of stories [that don't fit into a specific FT forum]. FT is pretty comprehensive.
What few of those there are belong in travelbuzz.
Kagehitokiri
Dec 22, 11, 10:53 pm
removed
Ancien Maestro
Dec 26, 11, 10:51 pm
Perhaps the Travel News forum can be redefined, based on the changing relevancy..
Definitely, at the face of its name, it would be important that a forum such as Travel News stay in existence, so that FT would remain relevant..
Is there a News travel tracker that could automatically feed into the forum, and corresponding comments made in accordance to each article? The forum could become a reference database with ongoing discussions..
tom911
Dec 28, 11, 6:15 pm
Is there a News travel tracker that could automatically feed into the forum, and corresponding comments made in accordance to each article?
Like a dedicated google news feed? I'd be interested in the forum moderator's take on that. It would become a very busy forum overnight compared to what it is now.
goalie
Dec 28, 11, 6:48 pm
Is there a News travel tracker that could automatically feed into the forum, and corresponding comments made in accordance to each article?
Like a dedicated google news feed? I'd be interested in the forum moderator's take on that. It would become a very busy forum overnight compared to what it is now.THAT is a brilliant idea! ^
Ancien Maestro
Dec 28, 11, 9:40 pm
THAT is a brilliant idea! ^
asteriks* - It would put tcook052 out of a job..:D
The benefits are that FTers would never miss out on a mainline news story that is relevant to the day..
and would put FT on the map in terms of up to date relevance..
jspira
Dec 29, 11, 9:22 am
It all depends how much news one wants here and how it is (or is not) curated.
Frequent Business Traveler just added a travel news section and there are literally hundreds if not thousands of news releases some days. Most donīt merit a mention but a few do and are relevant for both FBT and possibly for FT.
If FT wanted, we could help out here perhaps.
Eastbay1K
Jan 28, 13, 7:58 pm
I'm going to revive this to see if this has any traction. The forum has most of its topics either moved or locked.
The past two days consist of nothing more than 1 locked topic and two moved topics. The pattern is chronic.
I ask the TB to consider moving the content of this forum to Travel Buzz and tossing the forum.