Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Community > TalkBoard Topics
Reload this Page >

Voting Ended - Motion Failed: "Formalizing a Friendly Amendment process"

Voting Ended - Motion Failed: "Formalizing a Friendly Amendment process"

 
Old Mar 27, 2015, 7:12 pm
  #151  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
If we "screwed up the motion," then tell us what's wrong with it. I'm rather perplexed by these vague criticisms. Are you suggesting that there should not be a process for amending motions or that the process laid out in our motion is flawed? If it's flawed, then what's wrong with it?

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Old Mar 27, 2015, 8:41 pm
  #152  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 50,972
Originally Posted by goalie
And I still see this as "we screwed up the motion so let's find an easy way out to safe face" vs simply voting the motion down, taking the good parts of the motion along with member feedback as applicable and getting it right with a new and better motion
Ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!
kipper is offline  
Old Mar 27, 2015, 8:58 pm
  #153  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
I'm still waiting for a description of the problem.

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Old Mar 27, 2015, 11:19 pm
  #154  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: PHX
Programs: US,HH
Posts: 636
I doubt you'll get one. It's a pretty simple concept and some people seem to have a agenda.

Like I said earlier, this isn't the United Nations. If there is this much angst, then I question the sincerity of the objectors.

People are human. People make mistakes, or miss a point. Big deal. Allow them to correct this easily. They are volunteers and the amount of patience they have, and time I see them putting on on something that truly has minimal impact on our lives is crazy.
kellio33 is offline  
Old Mar 28, 2015, 4:58 am
  #155  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 50,972
Originally Posted by bdschobel
I'm still waiting for a description of the problem.

Bruce
The problem is if TB screws up a motion, they may be in a hurry to amend it during voting, and any amendment may still have issues. This friendly amendment process doesn't allow for additional discussion time, where issues with the amendment might be discovered, and addressed.

I understand that some have accused TB of not doing anything, but passing flawed motions and hoping that the CD doesn't implement them for a while doesn't seem like that's a great idea either. Hence, my thoughts that flawed motions should be voted down, reworked, and then proposed as new motions, with a new voting period, etc.
kipper is offline  
Old Mar 28, 2015, 10:21 am
  #156  
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,866
Originally Posted by bdschobel
If we "screwed up the motion," then tell us what's wrong with it. I'm rather perplexed by these vague criticisms. Are you suggesting that there should not be a process for amending motions or that the process laid out in our motion is flawed? If it's flawed, then what's wrong with it?

Bruce
I'm not saying TB screwed up a specific motion but rather that this appears to be a "this is what we'll do if we screw up a motion" as opposed to what I said about voting it down and re-doing it. Example-a motion is made and seconded and during the voting period a member brings up in public discussion a valid point/issue which everyone overlooked and which is critical to the motion and based on this the current motion would cause more harm than good. At this point it's to late to table the motion so it should be voted down, the overlooked point should be re-written into a new motion and the new motion, along with any concerns/issues/questions it brings should be then publicly discussed to make sure nothing else is overlooked. Now mind you that this is a hypothetical but hypotheticals "sometimes have a habit of happening". or for a better explanation fo what I'm trying to say, see kipper's post below

Originally Posted by kipper
The problem is if TB screws up a motion, they may be in a hurry to amend it during voting, and any amendment may still have issues. This friendly amendment process doesn't allow for additional discussion time, where issues with the amendment might be discovered, and addressed.

I understand that some have accused TB of not doing anything, but passing flawed motions and hoping that the CD doesn't implement them for a while doesn't seem like that's a great idea either. Hence, my thoughts that flawed motions should be voted down, reworked, and then proposed as new motions, with a new voting period, etc.
^^^
goalie is offline  
Old Mar 28, 2015, 2:29 pm
  #157  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,498
If we get a good suggestion during the public-comment period, this allows us to incorporate it immediately. It does not imply that anybody "screwed up" anything. Jeez.

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Old Mar 31, 2015, 12:55 pm
  #158  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Formerly HPN, but then DCA and IAD for a while, and now back to HPN!
Programs: Honestly, I've been out of the travel game so long that I'm not even sure. Maybe Marriott Gold?
Posts: 10,677
I voted "no" based on feedback from goalie and kipper and others who said similar things. As much as I want to have confidence that good common sense would prevail regarding "friendly amendments", I think that permitting them is a slippery slope and could leave too much open to interpretation/opinion.

I feel more comfortable killing an imperfect motion and starting over rather than trying to amend one on the fly.
dchristiva is offline  
Old Mar 31, 2015, 2:33 pm
  #159  
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,866
Originally Posted by dchristiva
I voted "no" based on feedback from goalie and kipper and others who said similar things. As much as I want to have confidence that good common sense would prevail regarding "friendly amendments", I think that permitting them is a slippery slope and could leave too much open to interpretation/opinion.

I feel more comfortable killing an imperfect motion and starting over rather than trying to amend one on the fly.
Thank you ^
goalie is offline  
Old Mar 31, 2015, 6:30 pm
  #160  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 50,972
Originally Posted by dchristiva
I voted "no" based on feedback from goalie and kipper and others who said similar things. As much as I want to have confidence that good common sense would prevail regarding "friendly amendments", I think that permitting them is a slippery slope and could leave too much open to interpretation/opinion.

I feel more comfortable killing an imperfect motion and starting over rather than trying to amend one on the fly.
Thank you! ^
kipper is offline  
Old Mar 31, 2015, 10:19 pm
  #161  
Moderator: Hilton Honors forums
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Marietta, Georgia, United States
Posts: 24,988
Originally Posted by dchristiva
I voted "no" based on feedback from goalie and kipper and others who said similar things. As much as I want to have confidence that good common sense would prevail regarding "friendly amendments", I think that permitting them is a slippery slope and could leave too much open to interpretation/opinion.

I feel more comfortable killing an imperfect motion and starting over rather than trying to amend one on the fly.
I similarly agree and voted “no” as well — and that is no April Fool’s Day joke.

It is not like members of the TalkBoard are inundated and vote on several issues every single day; so taking the time to vote down a flawed motion to craft a better one serves the best interests of FlyerTalk members, in my opinion.
Canarsie is offline  
Old Apr 1, 2015, 1:29 am
  #162  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 50,972
Originally Posted by Canarsie
I similarly agree and voted no as well and that is no April Fools Day joke.

It is not like members of the TalkBoard are inundated and vote on several issues every single day; so taking the time to vote down a flawed motion to craft a better one serves the best interests of FlyerTalk members, in my opinion.
Thank you! ^
kipper is offline  
Old Apr 1, 2015, 3:15 am
  #163  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: LHR
Programs: DL DM 2MM, BA Bronze, Various Hotels
Posts: 10,187
Another "no" vote here. I support taking the time to go through and make sure a motion is as accurate as possible before voting.

Apologies for the delay in doing so; I've been away for Navy Reserve duties and then recovering with being away from my life for 2 weeks.
rwoman is offline  
Old Apr 1, 2015, 9:51 am
  #164  
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 28,866
Originally Posted by Canarsie
I similarly agree and voted no as well and that is no April Fools Day joke.

It is not like members of the TalkBoard are inundated and vote on several issues every single day; so taking the time to vote down a flawed motion to craft a better one serves the best interests of FlyerTalk members, in my opinion.
Thank you ^

Originally Posted by rwoman
Another "no" vote here. I support taking the time to go through and make sure a motion is as accurate as possible before voting.

Apologies for the delay in doing so; I've been away for Navy Reserve duties and then recovering with being away from my life for 2 weeks.
Thank you (redux) ^
goalie is offline  
Old Apr 1, 2015, 10:12 am
  #165  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Programs: UALifetimePremierGold, Marriott LifetimeTitanium
Posts: 71,007
Originally Posted by Canarsie

It is not like members of the TalkBoard are inundated and vote on several issues every single day; so taking the time to vote down a flawed motion to craft a better one serves the best interests of FlyerTalk members, in my opinion.
Which has been done in the past on TB btw. Not often, but it's happened.

BTW - no idea if this will pass or not, but I think common sense should dictate that typos do not need motions voted down nor friendly amendments.

Cheers.
SkiAdcock is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.