TalkBoard Topics - Is Talkboard willing to reconsider MR access (again)?

The last TB considered this issue in the past term, but in the end no changes were made despite a measure passing:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/town-hall-official-talkboard-voting-decisions/1099231-motion-passed-mileage-run-access-logged-members-only-restriction.html
then being rescinded:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/town-hall-official-talkboard-voting-decisions/1103851-vote-passed-rescind-recent-vote-restricting-access-mileage-run-forum.html
and eventually being shot down:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/town-hall-official-talkboard-voting-decisions/1104718-vote-failed-access-restriction-mileage-run-discussion-forum.html

In truth, this is a tricky subject and I am rather sure there is no perfect solution. However, nothing has really improved by keeping the status quo. We still get threads that have more arguing over if a fare belongs in the Trick-It thread or bashing the OP for posting in the MR deals:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-deals/1310553-dl-sea-mad-305-ai-rt.html

While access restrictions were considered last time, I do not see the need to restict thinking to just that. Some of the clutter/bickering could be removed by a clear mandate regarding what a Trick-It fare is (e.g. x1,x3,OJ,DOH to remove YQ) versus an MR deal (e.g. low CPM fares, error fares, making use of creative routings). It might also alleviate some of the Tricks migrating into the MR deals forum, which in some ways has become a graveyard for tricks.

The next step is to try and keep all fares alive for a bit longer. Access restrictions were considered last time, and perhaps that is still a possible solution. While I feel that MR Deals and MR Discussions should be open fora, having some restrictions to the Trick-It thread (or realistically its own forum) could keep them around longer. I am quite sure that posters will still code their x3 and x1, but fares like the SEA-MAD could be protected a bit longer. The fare can always be brought out to the open fora once a fare reaches AFWD, blogs, etc.

Finally there is the "community spirit" of the Trick-It thread...or lack of:p. There are some wonderfully smart people there that work hard coming up with new tricks. I would like to see TB take the initiative to try and protect some of their work while also trying to make the Trick-It thread more open and welcoming. I came to Flyertalk to find good fares and for the community spirit...both of these fail (tricks get hidden, the spirit is lacking) in how the Trick-It thread operates. Something seems wrong when the most viewed thread in the MR fora goes against how the rest of FT works.

With all that being said, is it time to reconsider things again? Is TB happy with the status quo? Are there better solutions?

I'm happy with the status quo.

Restricting knowledge & information is not, and should not be, what FlyerTalk is about, IMHO.

Isn't that (i.e. restricting knowledge through coding) exactly what is happening in the Trick-It thread? I am also noticing more and more threads where many, if not a majority, of the posts are complaining that the OP posted the thread in MR Deals rather than hiding it in the Trick-It thread.

The Trick-It thread dominates the MR fora yet operates against the value of FT you stated. Perhaps the whole MR fora don't need overhauls, but last year it was enough of an issue to bring several votes through TB. If TB can address Post Count on a yearly basis, why not revisit the MR access proposals again:p.

I'm happy with the status quo.

My sentiments exactly when it comes to the deal forums here.

Isn't that (i.e. restricting knowledge through coding) exactly what is happening in the Trick-It thread?

While I don't personally like anything that forces members to jump through any kind of hoop to be able to get ahold of deals that others are able to achieve, my understanding is that it is at least possible to read the information in that thread and be able to decipher exactly what the "tricks" are and how to translate posts in that thread so that they are usable. I don't know whether my description here is accurate or not, as I've never stepped foot into the thread, but based on descriptions I've seen here in the TB forum, that's my interpretation of what goes on in there.

That said, what exactly would be gained for the FT membership on the whole by restricting MR deals to members with x posts, or just logged-in members, or or or.... ? I know these would at least keep Google bots and the like out, but I'm not sure who else we need to safeguard those deals against.

Thing is, by the time a mistake fare is posted on FT, either in a restricted forum or not, the ship has pretty much sailed. Mistake fares are better fodder for listservs, imho.

That said, sure, why not create a restricted forum for them....although of course there are long-time FTers who work for the companies that set fares and formulas so would be perfectly eligible to hang out in even the most restricted forums...@:-)

Thing is, by the time a mistake fare is posted on FT, either in a restricted forum or not, the ship has pretty much sailed. Mistake fares are better fodder for listservs, imho.

That said, sure, why not create a restricted forum for them....although of course there are long-time FTers who work for the companies that set fares and formulas so would be perfectly eligible to hang out in even the most restricted forums...@:-)

Bolding mine... That is the issue with restricting access, or even making it so that one would need to be logged in to view the forum. Unless company representatives are barred from viewing the forum, there are many who would meet the criteria for access.

Bolding mine... That is the issue with restricting access, or even making it so that one would need to be logged in to view the forum. Unless company representatives are barred from viewing the forum, there are many who would meet the criteria for access.

And it's not just the obvious company reps you would have to keep out. There are folks who work for the contractors to the airlines that set fares and calculate fare formulas who are Evangelists here.

IOW, there is no way you are going to have anything resembling 'keeping them alive longer' on FT.

While I don't personally like anything that forces members to jump through any kind of hoop to be able to get ahold of deals that others are able to achieve, my understanding is that it is at least possible to read the information in that thread and be able to decipher exactly what the "tricks" are and how to translate posts in that thread so that they are usable. I don't know whether my description here is accurate or not, as I've never stepped foot into the thread, but based on descriptions I've seen here in the TB forum, that's my interpretation of what goes on in there.

I would ask you to take a look at the Trick-It thread and see if you feel the same. The thread is somewhat managable if you already know the tricks. With that being said, I appreciate the fact that the posters do make efforts to code deals as they die quickly in MR deals.


That said, what exactly would be gained for the FT membership on the whole by restricting MR deals to members with x posts, or just logged-in members, or or or.... ? I know these would at least keep Google bots and the like out, but I'm not sure who else we need to safeguard those deals against.

Restricing MR Deals would not gain anything. What about creating a restricted forum for error fares and tricks? I was thinking more along the lines of creating a protected sandbox, whether it is from Google Bots or lurkers is up to how any restrictions would be set. I do not see any restrictions preventing tricks/fares from being closed, but perhaps it keeps deals alive a bit longer or creates a place for people to be a bit more open.

Error fares and low CPM routings are somewhat a thing of the past. Some of the best deals involve a lack of YQ and the community (i.e. registered posters) might benefit more from this if it could be made to work.

IOW, there is no way you are going to have anything resembling 'keeping them alive longer' on FT.

So Koko is for keeping the status quo:confused:;):p?

Looking at your sig, think of my proposal as wondering if the Trick-It tread (and when tricks spill into MR Deals) is really working for FT and it could be improved. It does not seem to pass the litmus tests for community spirit and sharing.

So Koko is for keeping the status quo:confused:;):p?

Lol.

I THINK my position is: I'm for leaving MR the way it is. If the fare is one that is being legitimately offered, then no worries letting everyone in on a good mileage run deal is what MR is and ought to be all about!

IF folks want a restricted place for 'really good deals' or 'too good to be true deals' or 'mistakes and tricks' (or whatever euphemism) I'd support it, but I don't think it will keep the deals or tricks alive any longer than they are now.

One contractor to the airlines told me that they are well aware of the fuel dumps, for example, and can and do shut them down from time to time...but only when the airlines are willing to pay for them to do so. ;)

I looked back in the past thread (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/866063-vote-complete-motion-failed-restrict-access-mileage-run-deals-logged-users.html) when this issue was last discussed and there are a lot of good points for both sides. I just have had this feeling that FT has still not figured out how to handle this best. I agree that all legit fares and routings should be posted for everyone to use. However, I do feel that some discretion would be helpful for tricks and error fares. OMNI and CC survived access restictions, so why can't something in MR?

One contractor to the airlines told me that they are well aware of the fuel dumps, for example, and can and do shut them down from time to time...but only when the airlines are willing to pay for them to do so. ;)

I can believe this and recall that this was the case for the AFWD inncident. I am not worried about contractors and company reps as they are a great addition to FT. Airlines can tolerate error fares and such when they are not causing major damage but are willing to close them off quickly when abused. I am more curious if we can find a solution to bots (to begin with). Last year was a difficult year for me as I had 2 FD itineraries cancelled and an error fare almost cancelled. I am willing to try anything that decreases the odds of this happening.

I would ask you to take a look at the Trick-It thread and see if you feel the same. The thread is somewhat managable if you already know the tricks. With that being said, I appreciate the fact that the posters do make efforts to code deals as they die quickly in MR deals.

Okay, I took a quick (~10-15 minutes) look in there, and it looks like I've seen some people ask for a cheap fare from point A to point B, someone replies with a fare and some code language to help the person requesting the information find the fare, and it is possible, via PM, to get specific language on how to do it if necessary. Is that a fair summary of how that thread works? Obviously it's a very big thread, so I didn't read every single page.

Restricing MR Deals would not gain anything. What about creating a restricted forum for error fares and tricks? I was thinking more along the lines of creating a protected sandbox, whether it is from Google Bots or lurkers is up to how any restrictions would be set. I do not see any restrictions preventing tricks/fares from being closed, but perhaps it keeps deals alive a bit longer or creates a place for people to be a bit more open.

I still don't see this as being a viable plan for keeping deals active longer. Anyone on FT who can currently access MR/MR Discussion would be able to access the new forum if they want to, and that includes travelers, company reps, or anyone else. Let's face it, even with an x days membership or y posts restriction, it's not that hard to reach those amounts.

I really think you're living in a dream world if you think that everyone who would/could have access to such a restricted forum would only be in it for the greater good of FT members getting great fares and not for their own (or their company's) personal gain. And nobody would ever know if there are members in there that aren't looking out for the greater good, I'm afraid. :(

Thing is, by the time a mistake fare is posted on FT, either in a restricted forum or not, the ship has pretty much sailed. Mistake fares are better fodder for listservs, imho.

That said, sure, why not create a restricted forum for them....although of course there are long-time FTers who work for the companies that set fares and formulas so would be perfectly eligible to hang out in even the most restricted forums...@:-)
Is creating a new forum the way to go as we all know that mistake fares (and "super deal fares for that mater) will (imho) inevitably be posted first in the "regular deals" forums and then have to be moved. Just a thought but I would be in favor of restricting access to the M/R deals forum to having to be logged in

Okay, I took a quick (~10-15 minutes) look in there, and it looks like I've seen some people ask for a cheap fare from point A to point B, someone replies with a fare and some code language to help the person requesting the information find the fare, and it is possible, via PM, to get specific language on how to do it if necessary. Is that a fair summary of how that thread works? Obviously it's a very big thread, so I didn't read every single page.

The thread has its ups and downs. Go back a few pages earlier and you will find several mod interventions and edits among all of the C2-C3 codes. PMs are likely the way to go but newbies have complained in the past of getting ignored. Heck, several posters clearly indicate no PMs as I am sure they are getting bombared with questions (and I don't blame them).

Go back a few years and you will find that many posts contained cities and routes (minus the tricks) and you could get help within the thread. IMO, the more things have become coded the more they have become popular and drawn more attention.


I still don't see this as being a viable plan for keeping deals active longer. Anyone on FT who can currently access MR/MR Discussion would be able to access the new forum if they want to, and that includes travelers, company reps, or anyone else. Let's face it, even with an x days membership or y posts restriction, it's not that hard to reach those amounts.

Yet we still did this to CC and OMNI. Has it hurt FT that much? I purposely did not make a clear proposal as I this is a topic that really needs some thought. I just don't feel that the status quo works for error fares and tricks. At one point TB voted in favor for this access restrictions (and quickly changed it back) and I believe the mods of the MR forum asked something similar as well, so I do not think I am unrealistic that a change could be useful.

Is creating a new forum the way to go as we all know that mistake fares (and "super deal fares for that mater) will (imho) inevitably be posted first in the "regular deals" forums and then have to be moved. Just a thought but I would be in favor of restricting access to the M/R deals forum to having to be logged in

Many of the TATL and TPAC deals in the MR Deals are missing YQ. Look at the thread I originally posted...almost all of the discussion is based on where the thread should be placed:rolleyes: (I think it is even noted around post #130). Posters are already at the point of discussing if where the thread should be moved sans any restrictions:eek::eek:.

Any legit deals (low CPMs, favorable fare routings, etc.) should be open to everyone as they can call an airline without issue. I would prefer having error fares or tricked fares that make it out of the Trick-It thread somewhat protected from members outside FT (but lurking) that might not understand not to call the airlines or spread the news to everyone. It's not perfect, but I feel it would be better than what we currently have.

The situation on the TrickIt forum is a bit ... choppy; with merged in threads upsetting reading patterns; the usual bi-weekly argument about openness and closedness... and while the forum being open to searching does help those of us research; having the single thread actually be its own forum (with other MR deals in parallel, that might not get picked up by bloggers immediately...) would do a lot to at least _try_ to restore FT's place for this kind of information.

On a personal note; I think 180/180 is too restrictive; since a) I would fall outside that range; and I've found that part of FT to be quite helpful, and b) it's a progression. Moving to 90/90 or even login only; and observing the effects (along with a possible new forum) might do a lot to increase the trust.

Here's my draft proposal for comments:

The TalkBoard would like to reduce visibility of perishable Mileage Run Deals content to search engines and non-members of FlyerTalk, therefore:

The TalkBoard recommends that the Mileage Run Deals forum and its sub-forum Mileage Run Discussion be masked from users who are not registered and logged in.

Here's my draft proposal for comments:The TalkBoard would like to reduce visibility of perishable Mileage Run Deals content to search engines and non-members of FlyerTalk, therefore:

The TalkBoard recommends that the Mileage Run Deals forum and its sub-forum Mileage Run Discussion be masked from users who are not registered and logged in.Which I like ^

If this goes to proposal, I'm 99.9% sure I will be voting against it.

My main reasons:

1) Restricting information isn't what I believe FlyerTalk is about. I don't believe that was the founder's intention when it was created. Further, I do not believe that many of us would have the status we have and the miles that we have and the experiences we have had if we didn't spend time on FlyerTalk exploring forums, like the Mileage Run Deals forum, before joining. One can only talk about Miles/Points so much - Mileage Run Deals is part of the "meat" of FlyerTalk, IMHO.

2) As someone that often refers people to visit FlyerTalk and even sends links to non-FlyerTalk friends, I do think it's ridiculous to attempt to make join & log in to experience what this community has to offer.

3) With the exception of newbies, anyone this is trying to block out, won't actually be blocked out - this accomplishes nothing, IMHO.

If this goes to proposal, I'm 99.9% sure I will be voting against it.Personally, I don't think it is ridiculous at all to ask some to have an account and log in if you want to visit certain parts of FT (or even a majority of it.) I don't think it is a hardship to ask that of people. Though I'm not saying we have to go down that path either.

But with that said, I think your 3rd point hits the nail right on. If the purpose of adding a login restriction here is to keep out certain other groups, I agree this really doesn't address that at all.

3) With the exception of newbies, anyone this is trying to block out, won't actually be blocked out - this accomplishes nothing, IMHO.

Its main purpose is to exclude search engines and automated deal scrapers. Blocking of non-registered newbies is an undesirable side effect, not an objective.

Personally, I don't think it is ridiculous at all to ask some to have an account and log in if you want to visit certain parts of FT (or even a majority of it.) I don't think it is a hardship to ask that of people. Though I'm not saying we have to go down that path either.

But with that said, I think your 3rd point hits the nail right on. If the purpose of adding a login restriction here is to keep out certain other groups, I agree this really doesn't address that at all.Agreed on it not being a hardship at all to creating an account and logging in (and that is good for both F/t ^ I/B) and as to point #3, nsx hits it on the head below

Its main purpose is to exclude search engines and automated deal scrapers. Blocking of non-registered newbies is an undesirable side effect, not an objective.Agreed ^

Its main purpose is to exclude search engines and automated deal scrapers. Blocking of non-registered newbies is an undesirable side effect, not an objective.

You seriously think people who process boards to scrape deals can scan the MR board automatically for error fares?

Virtually no one's first post is in the Mileage Run Deals forum, so adding a login requirement wouldn't hurt anyone. If fact it might encourage some of the 131 guests (as compared to 85 members) who are currently viewing the forum to sign up and start posting. As the debate recently went - content is the life blood of FT. Encouraging people to register is the first step in building that content.

Virtually no one's first post is in the Mileage Run Deals forum, so adding a login requirement wouldn't hurt anyone. If fact it might encourage some of the 131 guests (as compared to 85 members) who are currently viewing the forum to sign up and start posting. As the debate recently went - content is the life blood of FT. Encouraging people to register is the first step in building that content.

+1, which is why I'd support a log-in requirement.

Cheers.

Virtually no one's first post is in the Mileage Run Deals forum, so adding a login requirement wouldn't hurt anyone.

This may be true.

However, I would venture to say that many people who lurk on FlyerTalk come here, see that forum, and that may be part of what convinces them to stick around (and eventually join) versus a bunch of people debating warm nuts in United or something of that nature.

Many people's first posts are in the Mileage Run Discussion forum - which, this proposal, would harm.

Many people's first posts are in the Mileage Run Discussion forum - which, this proposal, would harm.

Proof of this statement, especially when you're saying 'many'?

Cheers.

Proof of this statement, especially when you're saying 'many'?

Cheers.

First time poster & first post here -

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-discussion/1314136-searching-layover-airports.html

But what I meant was that many people have some of their first posts in threads they start in that forum (not necessarily their first ever posts, like the above thread).

This thread starter is at 18 posts as of now -
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-discussion/1314190-credit-missed-leg-trip.html

This one is currently at 29 posts as of now - http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-discussion/1314190-credit-missed-leg-trip.html

44 posts here - http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-discussion/1313379-mr-help-needed-please.html

20 here - http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-discussion/1311499-kayak-com-explore-menu-month-flex.html

And that's just on the first page...today...

Many of the thread starters in the MR Discussions forum have less than 150 posts...sure, they may not be brand-spanking-new members, but relatively new members who are likely, IMHO, sticking around and potentially joined and stayed because of the info in MR Deals & MR Discussion...and these are just the thread starters...

First time poster & first post here -

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-discussion/1314136-searching-layover-airports.html

But what I meant was that many people have some of their first posts in threads they start in that forum (not necessarily their first ever posts, like the above thread).

This thread starter is at 18 posts as of now -
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-discussion/1314190-credit-missed-leg-trip.html

This one is currently at 29 posts as of now - http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-discussion/1314190-credit-missed-leg-trip.html

44 posts here - http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-discussion/1313379-mr-help-needed-please.html

20 here - http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-discussion/1311499-kayak-com-explore-menu-month-flex.html

And that's just on the first page...today...

Many of the thread starters in the MR Discussions forum have less than 150 posts...sure, they may not be brand-spanking-new members, but relatively new members who are likely, IMHO, sticking around and potentially joined and stayed because of the info in MR Deals & MR Discussion...and these are just the thread starters...

About the only people that make their first thread in the Mileage Run Deals do so erroneously. None of the above should be posted in the MR Deals forum and many should not be posted in MR Discussion.

First thread: Has nothing to do with MRs, rather a question about hidden city ticketing.
Second thread: A general question about mileage accrual
Third thread: A request for a volunteer TA to construct an MR (against rules of MR Deals and MR Discussion forum)
Fourth thread: Blog advertisement

You're seriously using these threads as examples of newbies contributing helpful, properly categorized information to FT?? :confused: :confused: If these newbies hadn't seen the MR Deals forum, there would have been a higher chance they would have posted in the correct forum!

Invariably the crap that I have to skip thru in MR Deals are threads started by new posters:
joe57777 (2 posts) - Airlines Vouchers (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-deals/1309598-airline-vouchers.html) - "Hello to everyone! I am new to this site and I want to ask anyone if they know where I can buy airline vouchers and or frequent flyer miles?"
flymanbeast (200 posts) - Need to go to russia for cheap (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-deals/1310512-need-go-russia-cheap.html) - "I need to go to krasandor in russia to meet a friend(female (: ) . Is there anyway to get cheaper prices then now by stalking it? its 600$ right now from spain.Would it be cheaper to take from countries around spain?"
inglis (8 posts) - looking for cheap flight from vancouver to sydney (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/mileage-run-deals/1310627-looking-cheap-flight-vancouver-sydney.html) - "I am looking for cheap flights from vancouver,canada to sydney (Australia) . leaving last week of june and returning early August. Any suggestions on buying?"

I think with tcook onboard the MR mod team*, those kinds of posts are getting cleaned up more quickly and don't end up on my RSS feed (which is absurdly behind the times--any vbulletin tweaks that could make those things more real-time?). Last time we had this discussion, I posted a list of newbie irrelevant threads as long as my arm (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/1286233-should-login-required-access-mistake-fares-2.html#post17587623) that had been posted to MR Deals in the last 3 days.

I'm still waiting for a single example of a person's first post being a killer MR Deal. Ok, the bar is too high. Let's just say, an <4 cpm MR. Ok, still too high: how about just a fare (rather than a request for one to be found) in the MR Deals forum at all?

(I thought I'd better read my own first FT posts for perspective. It's quite amusing, actually! For the record here's my first post (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileage-plus-pre-merger/113379-list-uniteds-consolidators-related-discussion-updated-aug-2010-a-post12952931.html#post12952931). I must admit while I had good knowledge in some areas, I was quite moronic in others (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/american-aadvantage/1026756-200k-aa-miles-burn-more-come.html#post12974277)! :D )

* Not at all pointing fingers at other MR mods. I know the rush of unsustainable energy that often accompanies a new role! :cool: Furthermore, more mods means quicker spam cleanup all around, doesn't matter who the most recent addition was.

Right or wrong - and I think I could argue that MR Discussion has become the defacto place for anything that has to with how to book any kind of trip & that it's not really, and hasn't been for quite some time, true mileage run discussions - it's been booking and rules discussion because there's no other place to have that) - folks are writing there & mods aren't moving things...and I also am guessing that other members, who are answering the questions aren't RBPing it.

That said, one of my first posts in the MR Forum (which I used to moderate many moons ago), was about booking a mileage run through priceline's bidding site (which we all know doesn't actually earn miles) :D

Still...doesn't change my mind on this...I can't tell you how many people I've either met on a plane or met at a cocktail party or whereever that I've suggested they check out the Mileage Run forum on FlyerTalk - and if I'm doing, I'm sure countless others are as well...I've got 6 referrals on my statistics page...no idea who they are...but I'm sure the main reason they joined & put me as the one who referred them to FT was because I suggested they look into the MR forum.

Sorry...just don't see it & will vote against this motion if it goes to vote.

Still...doesn't change my mind on this...I can't tell you how many people I've either met on a plane or met at a cocktail party or whereever that I've suggested they check out the Mileage Run forum on FlyerTalk - and if I'm doing, I'm sure countless others are as well...I've got 6 referrals on my statistics page...no idea who they are...but I'm sure the main reason they joined & put me as the one who referred them to FT was because I suggested they look into the MR forum.

That's a different reason than the sentence Sharon asked you on to provide proof of:
Many people's first posts are in the Mileage Run Discussion forum - which, this proposal, would harm.

For the record, I believe the first paragraph of yours that I quoted in this post is a legit reason. I often link to MR Deals threads on Facebook, which brings new folks to FT (though I'm not aware of a single person that stayed to become an FT member; they've all just booked the deal and never visited again, to my knowledge). (Often in the heat of a mistake fare, my friends are better served by getting the raw FT feed than trying to get info through me via FB comments.) However, the heat of a mistake fare would not be nearly as hot if MR Deals required registration.

Despite agreeing there are certain disadvantages to requiring registration, I believe the benefits outweigh the downsides.

As in every area of life, power is preceded by knowledge and responsibility. (Spiderman's uncle had it right.) The reason FD gurus don't hand $300 RTWs to newbies is that they don't have the depth of knowledge to not kill it. They may be ever so well-meaning (or ever so selfish), but their lack of knowledge alone disqualifies them. The same goes for eye-popping double-dipping tricks and promo stacking (of the sort that allowed me to pick up 1mm DL miles at under 2/10 CPM a few weeks ago). To me, these kinds of restrictions are not being cold and hostile to beginners, it's simply for their own good and the sustainability of the community as a whole. I'm a relative newcomer to FT (signed up in 2009) and I've scaled the ladder by hard work, being helpful to others, and building relationships (despite having never been at one of the magical DOs yet!). I've found folks to be very helpful (and that includes the people that get the worst rap for being the most secretive) if I put real effort into finding deals and being helpful to them in return (or rather to start with). There is a clear hierarchy of secrecy: Step by step FT/blog posts with screenshots, abbreviation-dense FT posts, coded FT posts (Trick it), private lists and forums, and finally one-on-one sharing based upon trusted relationships. All these levels are interdependent. The existence of each level depends on the levels on either side of the continuum. The fact that you may find yourself at a certain level does not mean rejection by the more secret levels; I've found the process of moving up the levels of secrecy to be a very egalitarian meritocracy. Furthermore, my experience with the people at the top of the hierarchy of secrecy is that they're glad to help newbies on the newbie level of help. (There are simply different appropriate venues for different types of deals.) As a person builds their basic travel knowledge, they automatically move up the scale. If they're friendly, they may receive a few boosts along the way. (I'm very, very loyal to two FT members that gave me two key boosts along the way. I still watch out for MRs or deals for their specific travel habits and send them their way.)

Obviously FT (IMHO) can never attain the highest levels of that hierarchy of secrecy. However, it can make itself more relevant and central to the travel world by vertically integrating its way up that secrecy ladder in small steps. Requiring registration is a step in the right direction. Having 180/180 requirements would be another. Even OPs having thread-level control over their threads as being Google, registered user, 90/90, 180/180, or FT Evangelist, I believe would have some merit.

No matter what FT does, those further levels of secrecy will exist because they are inherently necessary for the sustainability of the community. FT's choice is whether it wants to be a part of that or whether they want to let the ad revenue and page views and expert community members go elsewhere.