The TB's structure is set up to make it very difficult to do even simple things. I know, because a few years ago I took the lead in writing down the
TB guidelines out of the various precedents and traditions that the TalkBoard used to operate under.
Given that other power structures in FT (ie, the moderator corps and/or ad-hoc committees convened to address FT issue) do not suffer from this inherent inefficiency it only makes sense that management would prefer to defer to those power structures in examining and working on 'problems.' This has led to some decisions being taken on what appears to be an ad hoc basis.
IMHO, the TalkBoard is being marginalized into irrelevancy by it's inefficiency. Since the TB is meant to the the voice of the posters and vox populi vox Dei, I think we need to re-evaluate how to make the TB both a more efficient voice and also expand participation in the Board.
In order to achieve efficiency, the first step might be to reduce the requirements for the TB to make a recommendation from 2/3 vote to simple majority vote. Requiring a 2/3 majority to make a recommendation places an incredibly high barrier to decision-making. Frankly If I were the Community Director I would not want to work with a body that requires near-consensus to fix problems because it's just not efficient. Would you? Simply majority vote requirements will immediately make the TB more efficient and a better resource for the CD to address problems as they arise and improve FlyerTalk.
Another step might be to create a TB committee process, such that committees could be set up and charged with examining some of the systemic issues that FT faces. By dividing the work perhaps we can work more deeply and efficiently.
I believe that these committees would work best if they were led by TB members as Chairmen, but populated by any and all FT members who cared to volunteer for that committee. These would not be standing committees, but committees created to address issues that require long-term, sustained examination and discussion. This would vastly expand the number of volunteers who get to have a more formal collaborative input into both the day-to-day as well as the strategic direction of FlyerTalk.
The TB and/or CD could come up with specific committees, but I would think they might over time address issues such as:
technology
moderator best practices
TOS review and revision
forum opening/closing standards
forum 'crisis' management
The Committees could constructively explore issues in greater depth than 9 TB members with limited time can, and could make recommendations to the TB who would then decide whether make those recommendations to the CD.
This may sound like a lot of bureaucracy, but I think in practice it's just going to mean having more people have a more formal opportunity for input. Apparently something similar took place regarding the decision to split the Travel Safety and Security forum and that process worked well enough on an ad hoc basis....but it could have worked just as well within the structure of a more efficient TalkBoard instead of being done on an ad hoc basis.
Anyway, those are a couple of my suggestions for de-marginalizing the TB, for going after the big-picture issues facing FlyerTalk and making the TalkBoard process a better voice for the posters by creating more opportunities for collaborative input into the management of FlyerTalk.
Hopefully other posters have other ideas that we can talk about too.
Because frankly the other options of continuing to limp along like a neutered puppy, or shutting the TB down and ceding what little input the TB has left to those who are assuming more and more of that authority in the absence of TB's ability to wield that authority efficiently. Neither of those options is particularly appealing to me and imho are not in the best interests of FlyerTalk.