I was one who applauded RP with the CC TO. I hope it sticks for a while longer and this is from someone who used CC quite often. It was part of my daily viewing routine through FT. Yet IMHO, this forum had taken a drastic turn for the worse in the last 2 years +/-. I've been on here (CC) since 2001 and the tone of the posting in general is quite nasty. For the first four or five years, it was so pleasant and friendly.. The last few have been anything but that.. yes there are some nice posts but overall.. its a business plain and simple
I am not denying that I myself could change my tone either, I could, I should and will have too if the revamped CC is indeed changed. On that note, I think the T/O needs to stay until RP has sufficient time to make the proper adjustments and vett them to the right people.. i'm assuming his mods and maybe in another thread prior to opening the show back up.. on that note.. here are some comments from my readings of the first four pages.. sheesh.. no work for me this a.m.
Finally, I DO see Gift Cards as a very large part of the problem. What i'm reading is those that do not see it that way are in most cases, the users of GCs to complete transactions.
Originally Posted by
Randy Petersen
and no one said they were. What i am saying is that i want the uncivilness of certain conversations to be thrown out with the bath water. Best way to look at this is pretend you've been on a biz trip and the next time up on FT you might have missed entirely that the forum was closed for a brief moment. Thanks for understanding.
Since this is the owners biggest concern, it belongs at the top
As my opening paragraph states, this forum has gone from the friendliest of places to a flat out business of buying and selling; even those giving things often appear to be making sure that they are using the word Karma just so that everyone knows it.. I know its not all but thats the feeling I get from some posters. they will then come back and throw these posts out when they are seeking a freebie. Sometimes its more than a coincidence.. it then starts to get nasty
Originally Posted by
cepheid
CC is and always was open only at Randy's discretion. Considering that CC enables, and even encourages, people to violate the T&Cs of pretty much every airline/hotel/etc. program, Randy and FT/IB may have a substantial legal (civil, not criminal) liability exposure... the fact that Randy has allowed CC to expand and prosper (and, perhaps, devolve) for so long speaks volumes. I'm happy to give him any benefit of the doubt.
great post ^
Originally Posted by
dhammer53
Figure out a way to solve this problem, and we'll be on our way to the friendlier forum of yesterday.
Maybe a sticky. Maybe an e mail to Flyertalkers.
No posting to a thread unless you plan on participating in a transaction with the original poster. Clarification questions would be allowed.
dh
not sure a sticky is helpful.. those seem to get "forgotten" real fast
its still easy to fake an interest in a transaction.. even clarifications can be made to get ones point across, what i'm saying is that I do not see this as a solution
Originally Posted by
xanthuos
BINGO +1.
I've had this happen on trades I've put forth for NW/DL miles. I've offered a GC in the amount of $250-$300 in exchange for a 25k award and had this poo-poo'd by posters who criticized my valuation. I certainly wasn't trying to take advantage of anyone, as I was transparent in what I was offering and what I was hoping for in return, but these self-appointed "good samaritans" took it upon themselves to post in the topic and negatively criticize the post. To some people, NW/DL miles have very little value. It's up to THEM, not 3rd parties, to decide what they would like to receive in exchange for those miles.
I'm not commenting on this particular deal as much as I am the point of the post. I do think that posts where there appears to be a big inequity in the W vs H, comments need to be made for two reasons. 1. first and foremost, once a trade gets commenced at a certain deal, there becomes an expectation that it is the going rate. I know there are exceptions to every rule like soon to be expiring VIP's or SWUs.. now that transactions are reported, its easy to see what the latest trade went for.. and worse off.. people could use this trade completed forum to manipulate prices.. but thats another topic.. 2. with the 90 post/90 day rule.. a lot of newbies come on and I've seen them make bad offers.. and they do like to be told that they would be better off changing their offers.. or vice versa.. they may be taken advantage of by many of our pros.
Originally Posted by
beaubo
Might be helpful to have a sticky with trade RANGES of the most popular instruments, just to provide some context about avoiding lowballing or markupping:
Some examples arbitrary, for illustration only....
UA SWU: 20-30K miles
AA VIPOW: 15-25K miles
if you continue to allow GCs....
UA miles= 1.5-2. cents
DL Miles 1.0-1.5 cents
Also, might be helpful to provide some popular published exchange rates for context:
1 SPG= 3 Amex
1 AA= 2 HH
1 SPG= 1.25 miles in many program per 20K
Point is, that there will be less of a need for third parties to critique trading offers if CC already has a reasonable (though certainly not exhaustive) reference point. Maybe the reference point could be a locked first post and have it be the gateway post to the proposed CC Discussion thread. The gateway thread could be updated and amended based on CC Discussion post feedback.
I whole heartedly disagree.. there is too much variance.. see my example for expiring SWU's or VIPs above.. its been tried a couple of times.. search CC for the hotel point valuation thread that never took off
Originally Posted by
Raffles
A couple of thoughts from someone who has only ever used CC to trade a few vouchers but who would be worse off if it did not reappear:
1. Gift cards = cash (especially as you can sell most gift cards on ebay for 90%+ of face), cash = selling something, selling something = going against the spirit of CC and indeed the T&C's of all airline and hotel programmes. It should be stopped.
2. Perhaps the entry requirements need to be tightend up, although the '90 days' rule is helpful and cannot be abused by post padding
3. It is difficult to put a value on what is 'fair' in terms of a trade. I'm in Basel next week and the only major chain is a hugely expensive Hilton. Its a city where I would potentially have traded a disproportionate number of other points (say 60k Priority Club) in return for 30k Hilton - others may have seen the trade as unfair to me but actually it would have been perfect in that scenario. It is also relatively easy for a newcomer to CC to search for similar trades to get a view of what is and is not reasonable.
4. There should be a rule that there should no third parties involved in any trade. If I do a deal with you to book a hotel room for you, it must be for you - I don't want to be booking for a random third person I don't know because the other side of the trade has resold my offer of a room for something else.
But CC should remain in some form, if only for people to give away stuff they don't need.
I agree (bold my emphasis).. GC's are a major problem
i agree with 1-3.. i only agree with four if its put in the original post seeking something for a 3rd party.. or in the original post wanting for a 3rd party.. i just got my son 3P. he's not old enough to be on FT.. so technically i would not have been able to do that trade
Originally Posted by
UCBeau
I have read through this thread and it's quite an interesting debate. I have a few thoughts based on what I've witnessed as an infrequent CC
user but a frequent CC
browser.
1. Adjust the T&C's to require a specific trade request/requirement per thread, to eliminate the "H: 50k UA, W:? or W: AA/DL/IB/BA/HH/SPG/3P" type threads. By having a clear
want and a clearly defined
thing to trade, I think this might clean up the forum by ensuring people want to trade something for something, so you have a true "swap-meet" type forum.
2. Change the T&C's so that 3rd party commentary within the thread isn't allowed, that way you keep the often catty comments and sniping out of the thread. The OP will either get a response to his/her trade request or not, it depends on who sees the thread. It won't be up to self-appointed FT CC Cops/FBI/OSS types to determine what the "right" trade amounts are.
3. Eliminate the "W:_________ H: Karma/A flower/Peace and happiness" threads. Specify that if you
want something, you need to just keep browsing CC instead of posting a thread that only invites controversy, as what seems to have happened a lot lately. The people who have things to gift/give away are of course encouraged to post threads as always.
Anyways just my $.02. I had planned to use the CC this week so I was pretty bummed out when I saw it had been placed on temporary hold, but Randy has every right to do what he sees as best for the FT community. No one's forcing any of us to come here and post. Sometimes I believe that is forgotten around here. Have a nice day
I agree the W:? or everything in the book things need to go. That will be tough though when at least one mod has come out and said that he prefers this for various reasons.
Nothing is more annoying than W: H: Karma.. that Karma thread was great.. kudos to whomever started it.. Although I do think that thread along with the low ball thread played significant roles in closing this baby down.
Originally Posted by
cepheid
Read the commentary in the appropriate threads; the only one open right now is in the
TB forum, but when CC re-opens, there are at least 2 threads with relevant commentary. I am
far from being the only one to defend these threads, I'm merely the most vocal.
yes you are LOL.. i am/was too.. I think those threads were great places for both sides to vett their opinions. I hope those type don't disappear
Originally Posted by
KathyWdrf
I'm sorry, but your post, in a way, actually epitomizes exactly what is WRONG with CC.
You snottily suggest that people who "want something yet offer nothing" be "relegated" to a single thread. In other words, the beggars are just garbage and should be treated as such.
The reality is, sometimes such people might happen to be long-time members who have contributed massively to FT, in terms of knowledge and other things -- organizing FT dinners might be just one example.
The fact that someone who supposedly "offers nothing" should be treated as a second-class citizen on CC is a symptom of the over-commercialization of that forum. I have given away several things of value privately (i.e., by direct communication via e-mail with various FTers I know), but would not want to offer them on CC for a variety of reasons, one of which is the unpleasant commercialism there. How about the spirit of just gifting something rather than always seeking to maximize monetary value? @:-)
And frankly, most of the trades on CC do violate the T&Cs of the various programs. But gifting things, in many/most cases, does not! It depends on whether the things gifted are allowed to be transferred, of course. (And I don't mean "mutual gifting," which in fact is a trade.)
I personally am in the beggers need their own box forum.. say all you want about posting information elsewhere and being a productive member of FT. That goes for the vast majority of regular posters. CC is a unique animal (so is omni) that vastly differs from the rest of the forums. Hosting a few dinners or working on a wiki etc IMHO should not play much of a role in this.. others believe otherwise and so be it.. thats my two cents.. the begger subforum would be a huge additions
matter of fact, if I could make two changes that I think would help civility..
1. No GC's.. it eliminates that option.. and discussions about it
2. Free stuff forum... sub forum.. it would allow those who want to see who is giving stuff away for free to be easily identified.. it would be easy for the beggers to find the stuff they want.. and as a later post describes the MR sub forum for additional benefits
however I completely agree with you that the commercialization has caused this attitude and the lack of civility on the board.
Originally Posted by
dgwright99
Here is my 2 cents:
I don't understand the reasoning behind closing CC during the period of re-evaluation; what value does it add to that process ? I went to CC this morning to offer an instrument which is expiring in a few days, and find that there is now no way that I can offer this even for free to the FT community (given the TOS prohibition on offering things for free elsewhere on FT - which I believe is misguided). Whatever problems existed on CC, have existed for months/years, and a few days more (while changes are formulated) is surely not going to make a difference (though I'll accept the remote possibility that some kind of ultimatum may have been received from an airline/hotel - though in that case this could surely have been disclosed in vague/general terms).
I use CC regularly - 5-10 mutual giftings per year, but not IMO excessively. I use CC when I have something that I don't want/need and occasionally if I need something that I don't ahve. I periodically give away things that are of modest value that I can't use - SPG50, 10% off codes, expiring UGs, etc.
I strongly disagree with those who are suggesting mandating that something specific should be requested or offered. If I have a SWU that I know I'm not going to use, but don't have a specific or immediate need, it seems to me quite reasonable to indicate that I can be very flexible in considering different types of instrument. Similarly, where I have a specific need, I usually have a very wide array of things that I could gift in return. I do agree that some indication of expected "value" should be included - eg offering a SWU in exchange for 25k miles on one of several airlines or a comparable equivalent.
I strongly disagree with those who would limit "unfair"(sic) offers. There are very many occasions where a specific situation makes unusual "exchange rates" (sorry, I can't think of another way to express that) a fair (or even great) gifting for both partys. It is not reasonable for moderators to be put in the position of second-guessing the relative "value" of specific giftings to the specific parties at any specific time.
I sympathize with the concern about the increasing prevelence of GCs. I suspect that this is in part due to the economy - in tough times, there will be people who are sitting on heaps of miles who find themselves in a tough spot, and are tempted to use GC gifting as a way to monetize their miles. While I sympathize with the predicament of anybody in such a situation, this is precisely what CC is NOT about. GCs can be easily sold on eBay without violating T&Cs, so those who have unwanted GCs have alternatives. Although I have gifted GCs (that I already owned) on CC in exchange for instruments that I needed, proscribing GCs as an option would reduce the appearance of "cash trading" that has grown in recent months. GCs in this respect are different from (say) ticket credits, as in most cases it is not going to be possible to easily acquire such credits fee-free.
I'd support a CC "Karma" sub-forum in principle, though I see a risk of it attracting a fringe element who were motivated by getting something for nothing; a requirement to make a minimum number of offers each year to keep access could address that - but could be unduly burdensome to administer. I also believe that the TOS should be changed to allow offering (not seeking) of items to give away on the appropriate forums. Especially on smaller forums where there is a strong sub-community dynamic, the ability to offer expiring coupons on that forum strengthens the community aspect that is at the core of what FT should be all about.
I agree with the suggestion to separate out discussion into a sub-forum. Similarly, limiting CC posting to OPs, and not allowing follow-up (other than from the OP) could address many of the concerens about CC deviating from it's mission. A convention of optionally posting the gifting terms in the closing post would help newer or infrequent users of CC to get a good idea of what was the normal "valuation" in giftings.
I couldn't disagree more (bold my emphasis) with this post than any other on this thread. It is for these reasons that we have the uncivility. If not all, a great deal of it.. that would be my take after 8 years on the forum.
Originally Posted by
kokonutz
Call me the old-timer curmudgeon in the corner if you must, but I do have to say that it is my opinion that the spirit and purpose of CC was perverted some time ago.
'Back in the day' I would go into CC and offer up upgrades, Premier Associate status, stuff like that, that I couldn't use. Offered them as in: 'can anyone use these?'
But some time ago, 'sharing the wealth' became 'barter town.' Trades of like-valued instruments became the norm. Folk like me stopped going to CC and instead now share expiring certificates and free status bumps and so forth off-FT.
It doesn't surprise me at all that the CC further evolved into a wink-wink open marketplace of buying and selling upgrades, miles, gift cards, whatever. That's what unregulated markets do: gravitate toward maximum profit as folks compete for the best 'deal' and to 'make the most.'
I knew CC had gone haywire when a good friend of mine said she didn't mind not requalifying for 1k this year because 'I can always just go on CC and buy SWUs.'
So the fundamental question to me is what CC is meant to be.
If it is to return to its original purpose, building a sense of community and generosity among FTers then trades, much less buying and selling, have to be disallowed completely. But it may be too late for that. And the community too large.
If it is going to be a marketplace then it will require strict regulation and heavy-handed control. Many of the 'trades' and 'buying and selling' that go on on CC are blatant or wink-wink violations of the various programs' T&Cs. That's simply not right and can't be allowed. Some of the suggestions about post count, feedback and disallowing pure cash/gift card transactions would have to be implemented and strictly enforced.
The way I would lean, however, is that the quaint original purpose of CC is anachronistic at this point in the evolution of FT, and that the time and trouble involved in making CC a well-regulated marketplace is well beyond a reasonable time investment to expect from unpaid moderators...especially as others make a 'profit' from the marketplace they regulate. My thinking is that the time for CC on FT may well have passed.
There is always eBay and craigslist for those who want/need to barter/buy/sell miles, points and certificates. @:-)
Pigs must be flying, it must be a cold day in he** b/c I am totally in agreement with Koko here
you want to buy/sell.. go to ebay.. it wouldn't surprise me if one of the reason you do it here is that you think you won't get caught by the airlines as much..
However I agree that if RP decides that he wants CC to be something different.. a marketplace for example.. make the right changes to the t&c's and make it pro g/c, cash etc.. and let the markets set the prices.. I hope he doesn't but if so I can adjust my m-o as well.
Originally Posted by
beaubo
The Mileage Run sub-forum (MR Discussion) has demonstrated tangible value in providing:
* providing a healthy outlet for MR-related posts and threads that are not specifically deal-related.
* protecting the deal-related threads in the primary MR forum with only non-editorial posts (ie- posts that assist with routing, booking, fares, other logistics, etc.), so users can read through a thread on a relatively streamlined basis
* a learning tool to help newbies and other OT posters to better understand how the primary forum works.
* from a Mod perspective, since the subforum posting parameters are so essentially wide, there is minimal editing, RBPs to handle.
I think the subforum idea can offer CC the same parallel benefits with no appreciable downside.
I do too.. i'm keeping my fingers crossed that we go this route
once again, thanks RP for the timeout, its well deserved and needed..