Recommendations for TB Election
#16
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: Gold, plat, diamond and more
Posts: 3,360
I would like to see an interactive election forum where the members could ask follow up questions of the candidates. I would have enjoyed the chance to ask some candidates follow-up questions in the election forum, and I do see some interaction among candidates there, but members do not have the opportunity to ask candidates to expand on their answers.
I would also like to see a rule that those candidates that don't participate in the public election forum be removed from the ballot prior to voting.
I would also like to see a rule that those candidates that don't participate in the public election forum be removed from the ballot prior to voting.
#17
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: Gold, plat, diamond and more
Posts: 3,360
"SECTION 3: BOARD ORGANIZATION
...
B. Election/Selection
i. TalkBoard Members
...
c. Campaigning is restricted to the current year's TalkBoard Election forum and members' signature lines. In order to respect the privacy of all members, campaigning by the TalkBoard candidates may not be done via mass usage of the FlyerTalk Private Message system or via mass-mailed FlyerTalk email campaigns. Any TalkBoard candidate found to be mass-emailing via the FlyerTalk email system or abusing the FlyerTalk Private Message or Social Networking system for the purpose of campaigning will be removed from the ballot by the FlyerTalk Host and will not be eligible to run in that year's TalkBoard elections."
First it doesnt include the motion which passed and which was included in my link, neither does it match the info CS sent to candidates. So I still maintain its hard to find.
Second it doesnt make fully sense. As first sentence limits campaigning to TB election forum and signature as a postive limitation, while second sentence has a negative limitation where its listing where campaigning is not allowed. If the two parts are read separate they can lead to very different results. If they are read together the latter is totally redundant.
But as the latter is most specific, its the best guide line as lex specialis.
Stating an opinion in an open thread on a hot topic, despite not being discussed for months, is not campaigning.
Agreed on that one. Let the discussion start, and new TB to draft improvements.
#18
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: back to my roots in Scotland!
Programs: Tamsin - what else is there to say?
Posts: 47,843
I'll say (again ) I like the rules how they are. FT is about points and travel, not politics. You've put out a platform, you've answered questions from the floor about what you consider important to FT and we have your posts to judge you by. There's nothing to stop anyone asking by PM if they want more information. Let's not turn this into a hoopla.
And, knowing FT of old, and TB of old, I'm sure any attempt to run discussions between members and candidates would turn very acrimonious, which means the mods would have to step in, which means some candidates (or members) would then cry about censorship because they have not been able to get their digs and their jabs in, and I feel sorry for anyone having to try and manage that since they'll be to blame.
Lets leave it as a relatively low key event, and remember FT is about points and miles, not politics.
And, knowing FT of old, and TB of old, I'm sure any attempt to run discussions between members and candidates would turn very acrimonious, which means the mods would have to step in, which means some candidates (or members) would then cry about censorship because they have not been able to get their digs and their jabs in, and I feel sorry for anyone having to try and manage that since they'll be to blame.
Lets leave it as a relatively low key event, and remember FT is about points and miles, not politics.
#19
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 1999
Programs: Marriott Lifetime Titanium
Posts: 15,322
I'll say (again ) I like the rules how they are. FT is about points and travel, not politics. You've put out a platform, you've answered questions from the floor about what you consider important to FT and we have your posts to judge you by. There's nothing to stop anyone asking by PM if they want more information. Let's not turn this into a hoopla.
And, knowing FT of old, and TB of old, I'm sure any attempt to run discussions between members and candidates would turn very acrimonious, which means the mods would have to step in, which means some candidates (or members) would then cry about censorship because they have not been able to get their digs and their jabs in, and I feel sorry for anyone having to try and manage that since they'll be to blame.
Lets leave it as a relatively low key event, and remember FT is about points and miles, not politics.
And, knowing FT of old, and TB of old, I'm sure any attempt to run discussions between members and candidates would turn very acrimonious, which means the mods would have to step in, which means some candidates (or members) would then cry about censorship because they have not been able to get their digs and their jabs in, and I feel sorry for anyone having to try and manage that since they'll be to blame.
Lets leave it as a relatively low key event, and remember FT is about points and miles, not politics.
--------------
I fully believe that the members of TalkBoard *not* up for re-election (or not running) in a given year should be the ones moderating the debates -- and that the debates should be open to dialogue between the candidates and general members. I'd prefer the candidates to be able to say what they want and when they want -- I'd like to see the rules relaxed dramatically -- but since the rules are what the rules are, I'd also like to see them be followed so that the playing field is level.
It's the TB guidelines and rules that need to be followed here -- these generally have nothing to do with TOS violations. Nothing posted or deleted have anything to do with the FT TOS. It should be the TB members with no skin in the election moderating this discussion, IMO, with a very light hand.
Maybe something to think about when the new TB is seated.
#20
Suspended
Original Poster
Join Date: Sep 2009
Programs: Gold, plat, diamond and more
Posts: 3,360
I fully believe that the members of TalkBoard *not* up for re-election (or not running) in a given year should be the ones moderating the debates -- and that the debates should be open to dialogue between the candidates and general members. I'd prefer the candidates to be able to say what they want and when they want -- I'd like to see the rules relaxed dramatically -- ...
#21
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 1999
Programs: Marriott Lifetime Titanium
Posts: 15,322
And no, I'm not campaigning. Who knows whether I will even run (or be alive) next November?
#22
Moderator: Avianca, Travel Photography, Travel Technology & USA
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Far western edge of the La-La Land City limits
Programs: Emeritus VIP Fromins Deli Encino grandfathered successor program - UA MM & HH Diamond
Posts: 3,722
I would suggest to TB (due to the timing, likely the new TB) to have a look into the "rules" for election.
I did read the headlines for all TB votes for the last years to find the current rules. This is the last vote I found;
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/town-...-election.html
Before I propose improvements, is this the current version? I saw a link yesterday on this forum but either Im blind or its redacted?
I did read the headlines for all TB votes for the last years to find the current rules. This is the last vote I found;
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/town-...-election.html
Before I propose improvements, is this the current version? I saw a link yesterday on this forum but either Im blind or its redacted?