#2191
MileageUpdate , Mar 28, 2013 3:19 pm
Nov 6, 2018my translation for that Avis email is this:
Dear Sir, Too many people used this coupon so we here at Avis reached our threshold to do something about it. You see when a handful of people were working us we werent to be bothered but now a couple 100-1,000 reservations were made and it has our attention. Proving that not everything can be shared with a huge number of hackers.
Dear Sir, Too many people used this coupon so we here at Avis reached our threshold to do something about it. You see when a handful of people were working us we werent to be bothered but now a couple 100-1,000 reservations were made and it has our attention. Proving that not everything can be shared with a huge number of hackers.
#2192
Quote:
Yeah, I know a bunch were canceled. That doesn't mean that earlier reservations weren't honored.Originally Posted by Bored_Russian
Boom, here comes the boom, ready or not ..
Quote:
So saying, "The Frugal Travel Guy blog loves affiliates more than information," is OK but "Frugal Travel Guy loves affiliates more than information" is not? It gets mighty squirrely when someone has their brand as their username. Trying to enforce that rule is a losing battle, particularly when the net result of the statement is the same.Originally Posted by saacman5033
As stated, yes I think that violates the TOS as it is defamatory and it challenges a member directly, not their point of view or blog content. I do think the statement could be reworded thoughtfully to convey the intended meaning without attacking the member directly.
I know the ToS pretty well having enforced them for a few years. Y'all are painting yourselves into a corner here. It isn't going to help anyone or anything.
#2193
saacman5033 , Mar 28, 2013 4:59 pm
Quote:
The point of my argument was not to encourage tiptoeing the line by adding "blog", .com, etc when referring to a blog. I'd like to challenge each of us to avoid the line completely by disagreeing in a manner that is as respectful as possible. Emphasizing that were talking about the blog could be used to ensure that theres no mistake in topic of discussion. You're exactly right that the whole issue is squirrelly and I'd just encourage everyone to avoid the line altogether. Originally Posted by sbm12
So saying, "The Frugal Travel Guy blog loves affiliates more than information," is OK but "Frugal Travel Guy loves affiliates more than information" is not? It gets mighty squirrely when someone has their brand as their username. Trying to enforce that rule is a losing battle, particularly when the net result of the statement is the same.
And no, the statement as reworded above is still not appropriate IMO.
#2194
Quote:
And no, the statement as reworded above is still not appropriate IMO.
"avoid the line altogether" - what does that mean exactly? That would seem to require not saying anything negative or in disagreement about any blog post. Originally Posted by saacman5033
The point of my argument was not to encourage tiptoeing the line by adding "blog", .com, etc when referring to a blog. I'd like to challenge each of us to avoid the line completely by disagreeing in a manner that is as respectful as possible. Emphasizing that were talking about the blog could be used to ensure that theres no mistake in topic of discussion. You're exactly right that the whole issue is squirrelly and I'd just encourage everyone to avoid the line altogether. And no, the statement as reworded above is still not appropriate IMO.
So we have uncountable numbers of threads and posts that are highly critical (and sometimes more than that) as to airlines, hotels, rental car companies, mainstream media and their authors, etc. That's OK because they're big companies or whatever the rationale is....but politely criticizing a blog post (however one references it) is a violation? Why?
#2195
Quote:
I asked exact same question to Mia. Unfortunately he/she did not answer. Originally Posted by 84fiero
So we have uncountable numbers of threads and posts that are highly critical (and sometimes more than that) as to airlines, hotels, rental car companies, mainstream media and their authors, etc. That's OK because they're big companies or whatever the rationale is....but politely criticizing a blog post (however one references it) is a violation? Why?
Basically saying anything other than praise about blog(er) is a violation.
BTW, I noticed TGP Blog had post about Avis car rental deal and it did not have one single credit card link in it! ^ <- (good thing).
Proof below:
http://thepointsguy.com/2013/03/amaz...als-from-avis/
#2196
Quote:
Dear Sir, Too many people used this coupon so we here at Avis reached our threshold to do something about it. You see when a handful of people were working us we werent to be bothered but now a couple 100-1,000 reservations were made and it has our attention. Proving that not everything can be shared with a huge number of hackers.
But wait, arenn't they supposed to try harder" Originally Posted by MileageUpdate
my translation for that Avis email is this:Dear Sir, Too many people used this coupon so we here at Avis reached our threshold to do something about it. You see when a handful of people were working us we werent to be bothered but now a couple 100-1,000 reservations were made and it has our attention. Proving that not everything can be shared with a huge number of hackers.
#2197
Quote:
So we have uncountable numbers of threads and posts that are highly critical (and sometimes more than that) as to airlines, hotels, rental car companies, mainstream media and their authors, etc. That's OK because they're big companies or whatever the rationale is....but politely criticizing a blog post (however one references it) is a violation? Why?
You know what would be better than playing a game of 'avoid the line?'Originally Posted by 84fiero
"avoid the line altogether" - what does that mean exactly? That would seem to require not saying anything negative or in disagreement about any blog post. So we have uncountable numbers of threads and posts that are highly critical (and sometimes more than that) as to airlines, hotels, rental car companies, mainstream media and their authors, etc. That's OK because they're big companies or whatever the rationale is....but politely criticizing a blog post (however one references it) is a violation? Why?
A new forum for points and miles blogs as a member of the 'Sub-Forums : Miles&Points' family for the general discussion of the various commercial points and miles service providers collectively known as 'points and miles blogs' as well as the content provided by these commercial service providers.
If only someone on the TalkBoard would make a motion to that end....
#2199
why don't you guys just create your own site where you can all drown in each other's hatred and vitriol against bloggers? it would be such a great place. no moderation, just ...... moan all you can manage. which appears to be quite a lot
#2200
Quote:
Replace "bloggers" with "United" and you have the FlyerTalk Mileage Plus forum; probably the most popular forum on FlyerTalk! Originally Posted by ma91pmh
why don't you guys just create your own site where you can all drown in each other's hatred and vitriol against bloggers? it would be such a great place. no moderation, just ...... moan all you can manage. which appears to be quite a lot
Look at it this way: with a blogger forum, if you don't like the conversation you can avoid the forum altogether.
#2201
belfordrocks , Mar 28, 2013 7:30 pm
Quote:
Yet you have no problem with the behaviour that triggers the reaction Originally Posted by ma91pmh
why don't you guys just create your own site where you can all drown in each other's hatred and vitriol against bloggers? it would be such a great place. no moderation, just ...... moan all you can manage. which appears to be quite a lot
#2202
Quote:
Look at it this way: with a blogger forum, if you don't like the conversation you can avoid the forum altogether.
If you don't like the blogs, you can avoid them tooOriginally Posted by kokonutz
Replace "bloggers" with "United" and you have the FlyerTalk Mileage Plus forum; probably the most popular forum on FlyerTalk! Look at it this way: with a blogger forum, if you don't like the conversation you can avoid the forum altogether.
Quote:
Keep rolling those eyes. I can learn to adapt to the world I live in without constantly bemoaning what might have beenOriginally Posted by belfordrocks
Yet you have no problem with the behaviour that triggers the reaction
#2203
Quote:
And no, the statement as reworded above is still not appropriate IMO.
What about that phrase was disrespectful? And is the "IMO" there you speaking as a member or as a moderator?Originally Posted by saacman5033
The point of my argument was not to encourage tiptoeing the line by adding "blog", .com, etc when referring to a blog. I'd like to challenge each of us to avoid the line completely by disagreeing in a manner that is as respectful as possible. ...And no, the statement as reworded above is still not appropriate IMO.
If it is not possible to discuss both the positive and negative aspects of a topic then this becomes worthless as a venue. Using moderation to push an agenda by only allowing one side of a discussion is a bad play. I strongly urge you to reconsider that plan.
#2204
belfordrocks , Mar 28, 2013 8:14 pm
Quote:
If you choose to tolerate this dreck, that's your prerogative. Others may feel differently.Originally Posted by ma91pmh
Keep rolling those eyes. I can learn to adapt to the world I live in without constantly bemoaning what might have been
#2205
Thank you saacman5033, this helps a lot. Is this how moderator Mia feels? Or is he in another level entirely? Are we supposed to adapt to each moderator's biases? I don't want to be thinking too much before I post something. It violates my principles of freedom of expression so I am doing something to protest...lurking
Quote:
Why the need for name-calling whether the person in question is part of a big corporation or not, FTer or not? In any case, it is appropriate to thoughtfully and respectfully disagree with a blog's content or a blogger's point of view but not attack other members. Certainly there will be some grey area, but why not err on the side of respectfulness towards others?
Literally true so no, as stated I don't see that as a TOS violation
As stated, yes I think that violates the TOS as it is defamatory and it challenges a member directly, not their point of view or blog content. I do think the statement could be reworded thoughtfully to convey the intended meaning without attacking the member directly.
I don't see why you couldn't say something along the lines of:
"I can't believe this morning's post on blogger123.com highlighted deal XYZ. Seems like a sure way to kill the deal"
Maybe this seems a little silly in response to a post that could be read as hyperbole but I'm hoping we can keep discussion here respectful in what can be a very touchy subject.
Originally Posted by saacman5033
I think we can all keep posts within the TOS if a little effort is made.Why the need for name-calling whether the person in question is part of a big corporation or not, FTer or not? In any case, it is appropriate to thoughtfully and respectfully disagree with a blog's content or a blogger's point of view but not attack other members. Certainly there will be some grey area, but why not err on the side of respectfulness towards others?
Literally true so no, as stated I don't see that as a TOS violation
As stated, yes I think that violates the TOS as it is defamatory and it challenges a member directly, not their point of view or blog content. I do think the statement could be reworded thoughtfully to convey the intended meaning without attacking the member directly.
I don't see why you couldn't say something along the lines of:
"I can't believe this morning's post on blogger123.com highlighted deal XYZ. Seems like a sure way to kill the deal"
Maybe this seems a little silly in response to a post that could be read as hyperbole but I'm hoping we can keep discussion here respectful in what can be a very touchy subject.