What is the most useful frequent flyer blog?
Mar 28, 2013, 3:19 pm
#2191
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 167
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.
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.
Mar 28, 2013, 3:56 pm
#2192
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
Yeah, I know a bunch were canceled. That doesn't mean that earlier reservations weren't honored.
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.
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.
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.
Last edited by sbm12; Mar 28, 2013 at 4:02 pm
Mar 28, 2013, 4:59 pm
#2193
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: HNL
Posts: 781
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.
Mar 28, 2013, 5:15 pm
#2194
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South Park, CO
Programs: Tegridy Elite
Posts: 5,678
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.
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?
Mar 28, 2013, 5:40 pm
#2195
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: 1A with Dom Perignon
Programs: Platinum Sky Pimp
Posts: 86
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/
Mar 28, 2013, 5:52 pm
#2196
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: ORD
Programs: US Air, UA BA LH AI DELTA MARRIOTT CHOICE SGP
Posts: 9,883
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.
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.
Mar 28, 2013, 7:18 pm
#2197
Original Member, Ambassador: External Miles and Points Resources
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in LIMA, PERU
Posts: 58,585
"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?
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....
Mar 28, 2013, 7:20 pm
#2198
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: SEA
Posts: 1,887
No surprise Avis is not honoring. The "revelation" of the coupon by blogger X was nothing more than a shameless publicity stunt and attention grab.
Mar 28, 2013, 7:22 pm
#2199
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: RDU
Programs: A few
Posts: 5,499
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
Last edited by saacman5033; Mar 28, 2013 at 10:12 pm Reason: avoiding language filter
Mar 28, 2013, 7:26 pm
#2200
Original Member, Ambassador: External Miles and Points Resources
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in LIMA, PERU
Posts: 58,585
Look at it this way: with a blogger forum, if you don't like the conversation you can avoid the forum altogether.
Last edited by saacman5033; Mar 28, 2013 at 10:13 pm Reason: Edit quoted post
Mar 28, 2013, 7:30 pm
#2201
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 5,439
Last edited by saacman5033; Mar 28, 2013 at 10:13 pm Reason: Edit quoted post
Mar 28, 2013, 7:36 pm
#2202
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: RDU
Programs: A few
Posts: 5,499
Keep rolling those eyes. I can learn to adapt to the world I live in without constantly bemoaning what might have been
Mar 28, 2013, 8:05 pm
#2203
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: PSM
Posts: 69,232
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.
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.
Last edited by sbm12; Mar 28, 2013 at 8:11 pm
Mar 28, 2013, 9:49 pm
#2205
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Programs: Airline Free Agent, Fairmont Lifetime Platinum, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton Honors Diamond
Posts: 3,041
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
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.
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.
