RichMSN

I don't think I was wanting to talk about moderators. I have never been on the wrong side of moderators or moderation.

I am interested in talking about anything relevant regarding the future of FT. Moderation is a part of FT, so it wouldn't surprise me if the topic came up -- I'm not going to avoid a topic either here or on the private board. If you aren't interested in a particular opinion I have, that's OK. Many people in my life are disinterested in what I have to say, too.

Brian

I'm sorry, Carol, but this business policy of FT exists at the pleasure of the membership, who votes with their time and energy in participating or not participating here.

If you elect to censor the speech chosen by the membership for opaque reasons, you may find that speech going elsewhere, out of your ability to control it.

Given the very small percentage of TB voters relative to the total number of members, you already have a business problem regarding engagement. Your noblesse oblige in "allowing" free speech to exist notwithstanding, the membership will discuss what it wishes. The only choice is where. Frankly, I find the notion that you are "allowing" reasonable and non-defamatory speech to exist offensive.

Sometimes the only available role for a leader is to follow the will of the people. You may want to reconsider your reasoning on these issues.

Censorship itself is very "last year." Flyertalk Spring, anyone? Am I being "very clear?"

Kagehitokiri

i recall seeing moderation (of discussion of FT moderators) elsewhere

Dovster

Carol, I am genuinely curious -- what possible objection could you have to getting input from the only member-elected body vis-a-vis moderation?

TB is an advisory body. The most it could do is give you its advice on this subject (or, for that matter, any other subject). Why would you object to hearing a different viewpoint?

I realize that you were both a moderator and a senior moderator before becoming Community Director. You, however, must keep in mind that you have two primary obligations now. One is to IB, and that is to increase the posts (and thus the views and advertising click throughs) on FT. The second is to the general membership, and that is to give them the environment they want. Fortunately, the two go hand-in-hand. A membership which is happy with FT is a membership which will post more.

Any obligation you may feel to 80+ members who are moderators must take a very poor third place to the other two.

I am not saying that every recommendation TB will make to you will automatically be a good one, but in the final analysis it is the only one which can make any claim at all to represent the general membership. Shouldn't that, in itself, make you want to know how it feels about every issue, including moderation?

There have been statements made in this thread that the low voter turnout means that TB does not truly represent the general membership. There is, admittedly, quite a bit of truth in that. It is, on the other hand, a closed circle: Voter turnout is low because most members do not care about the very limited purview that TB has. In turn, the low turnout is seen as a reason to keep the purview restricted.

Remove all restrictions on what TB can discuss and recommend, and give serious consideration to those recommendations, and voter turnout will skyrocket. You will wind up with a TB that truly represents the 8,000 or so members who make 90% of FT's posts.

Jenbel

That's quite a claim, but I suppose it suits what you want to believe.

Dovster

Really? How excited to you think that most members get about whether or not Royal Jordanian has its own forum or what internal rules TB sets for itself?

For any particular airline, I would guess a maximum of 50 -- and for TB's internal rules probably closer to 20.

Jenbel

And why do you think endless wrangling about moderation would be of any more interest?

Kagehitokiri

logic problem

if TB did more, more would know/care about it

related - those are two reasons (of many) for low turnout - awareness and interest

what is the point of discussing potential discussions between TB and other parties before TB has passed a vote on new changes for TB? the majority of TB has to agree re changes.

seanthepilot

An interesting conversation about the elephant in the room.

Flyertalk pretends it is accountable to its members through the TB elections. But, the policy of FT is often being hashed out among the moderator ranks. This discussion is not about moderation, but the incestuous role that they have been given to determine FT policy.

The sessions remind me of brainstorming sessions. Theoretically, some of the issues brought to the moderator ranks should be brought up for discussion amongst the entire membership. However, the OMNIesque manner in which they would then be discussed makes this avenue all but impossible. So, the only way to hash out some ideas is within the closed fora... it`s a result of the very unique nature of how FT discussions are.

But that they also dictate policy, are self-appointed, have no terms, are accountable only to themselves, and are the ones who decide the extent of their roles on FT.

Whereas the membership elects a board who just happens to be different than the policy making machine. I think it`s a facade, evolved through in good faith, of good people, with good motives. Moderators should moderate. Talk board should be responsible for policy making & decisions. Unfortunately the 80-100 that make up the moderators represents a diverse forum which is ripe for idea creation. It`s a problem, of design, where the solutions that have evolved contradicts the design and infrastructure of the organizational chart and the accountibilty that is (promised and) represented to the members.

nsx

Me too. That discussion does not harm FT in any way, since it does not waste the time and energy of people who are reading FT. @:-)

Only if the TalkBoard really screwed up and broke a major part of a website that currently does a great job of serving its members.

Can you think of another website that provides any role at all for member-elected representatives? I can't.

Not always but often. Why? Because many (most?) policies are questions of how best to serve members while maintaining feasibility. Feasibility tends to be a question of whether it's reasonable to ask volunteer moderators to enforce the policy. It's natural to consult moderators when an increase in their workload is part of the package. Often the feasibility question is the primary challenge.

For example, consider the recent split of Travel Safety and Security. I don't know how the TalkBoard could have made an informed decision on this split without becoming deeply involved in questions of how difficult a particular structure would be to moderate. If you can show me a way that the TalkBoard could have addressed this actual issue, that would be the best possible starting argument in favor of a TalkBoard with expanded scope. (Note: the TS/S split was recommended to Carol by a small committee of moderators who volunteered to study the issue. Three members of the TalkBoard were on the committee.)

Anyone can bring an issue to the attention of the Community Director or TalkBoard members at any time. Our PM mailboxes are open and we read the messages. Good ideas are considered wherever they come from. Sure, moderators are accustomed to sending messages to Carol, and we tend to see problems before they become obvious to everyone, so maybe we are more likely to send her ideas. Also, our proposals are more likely to address feasibility questions. However if you have a good idea that's easy to implement, you won't find the door closed to you.

DeaconFlyer

I like how the tune has changed from "The CD is very responsive" to "The CD will read your message and will respond if they think the idea is good AND its easy to implement."

Is a simple reply to much to ask?

kellio33

His statement represents many more people than you want to believe.

I've been around here for 5 or 6 years..but look at my post count. Can you guess why it is so low?

It's because it just doesn't matter. Nothing will change. Why should I invest my time and knowledge in a board that is so unwelcoming? There will be no change.

kellio33

Good point. Is TB even necessary? Maybe it should be put back in the hands of IB.

Canarsie

Personally, I like “outside the box” thinking. I tend to think that way myself.

You explain what you propose to do and why you intend to implement what you propose, but in my opinion you have not clearly provided your overall vision of the end result.

Let us say for a moment that you were given carte blanche to implement every single one of your ideas and your vision becomes a reality. What would FlyerTalk look like and how would it operate as a result that is an improvement over FlyerTalk in its current iteration?

Please share what you believe will be — or, at least, what you would like to see as — the overall result of your vision of an improved FlyerTalk, as well as how everyone involved with FlyerTalk will benefit, from its owners to its members.

BadgerBoi

^ (and I dare say no more...)