This thread is prompted by, and in response to, this statement by Squeakr:

(Bolding added.)

which statement appeared in this thread.

As I recall, I have e-mailed Squeakr regarding her moderation efforts, exactly twice. In both instances she had closed/moved UA threads which were, IMHO, appropriately placed, not duplicates of current threads, and of real interest to me as a UA 1k flyer. While I did, and still do, disagree with her actions, I made every effort to make certain that my private e-mails to her regarding her actions were clear, factual and polite, and in no way personal, so her above accusation appears to be totally inappropriate to me.

In response to closing this thread, I sent Squeakr the following two e-mails.

"Hi Squeakr,

I don't understand this moderation:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum50/HTML/023241.html

UA flyers were politey discussing a valuable UA issue, and you elected to close the thread.

I am curious what your reasoning was in this instance?

Thanks, Punki"

At this point there was a response from Squeakr, to which I replied:

"Hi Squeakr,

Oh goodness, where on earth did you get the idea that I don't like Moderation. I am a huge advocate of Moderation and would very much like to see far more aggressive moderation, particularly when it comes to flaming, bating and all other types of attacks.

I do, however, think that threads should only be closed and/or moved when there is no possible justification to leave them open and/or keep them in their original position.

The thread in question was a wonderful thread. One in which I was very interested.
It was exactly specific to UA and not to any other fora.

I can understand closing one thread if there are two identical threads on the exact same subject active on the first page or so, but that did not appear to be the case in this instance. Closing a thread simply because the subject has been previously discussed is simply not reasonable. If that were a reasonable criteria, 95% of all threads on the board would have to be shut down which would make FlyerTalk totally unappealing.

I am sorry, but your reasons are still unclear to me. Did I miss a duplicate?
Would you please be so kind as to elaborate?

Thank you, Punki"

Sarcastically insulting??

I also e-mailed her regarding this thread.

"Hi Squeakr,

This:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum50/HTML/022813.html

type of thread movement is, IMHO, both unnecessary and disruptive. The original
poster was obviously interested in Star Awards using UA points and, therefore, properly located his/her post in UA where he/she would get responses from those familiar with using UA points.

To move it to Star Alliance (without even providing a link), where the original poster is receiving irrelevant feedback, does not appear to be very beneficial.

This is exactly the type of situation to which I refer when I ask that the FT moderation policy be tweaked to provide that, "If there is a logical reason to leave a post where it is, leave it alone". It would appear that the current policy
is that, "If there is any slight justification for moving a thread, move it,"
which is both clumsy and disruptive.

As lomatopo pointed out, it appears as though you simply moved the post when you saw the word "Star" without really reading the thread and thinking about the content and intent of the original poster.

This is the kind of activity that makes people think, "Trigger Happy Moderator".

I look forward to hearing from you. I do, BTW, think that this type of moderation
activity should be publicly posted in Randy Only and politely discussed to get community feedback, but since the concensus of opinion is that the Moderator first be contacted privately, so I am first trying that course of action.

Thanks,

Punki"

Squeakr responded privately to that e-mail, and also made this public response on the thread which had been moved to Star Alliance:

(Bolding added)

This quote appears in this Star Alliance thread.

I thereafter sent her this e-mail:

"Hi Squeakr,

I sincerely apologize for any offense you took from my original e-mail. I assure
that none was intended. I actually reread it twice to make certain that it contained
nothing personal and was focused solely on the moderation in question and FT moderation policy in general. Obviously, lomatopo, Attorney28, and I had no way of knowing that you were unfamiliar with variables in the Star Alliance awards programs. Assuming that you did understand the program and the post, your closing and moving of the post did appear frivolous.

Beyond that, I really do think it would be beneficial to the both the Moderators
and the moderation process if the guidelines were adjusted to provide that posts
be left alone if there is any justification for so doing. It would be wonderful
if a polite, logical discussion of this issue could occur, but, sadly, there is
a small group who always manage to hi-jack any moderation thread, making a good discussion impossible.

Again, sorry if my e-mail upset you.

Thanks, Punki"

I realize that all inperpretation is subjective, but I truly do fail to see how anyone could characterize these e-mails as "shockingly unfirendly".

I am beginning to suspect that the standard here is that any FlyerTalker questioning this Moderator's actions is "wrong", no matter how justified the question might be and no matter how politely the question is phrased, even when the FlyerTalker apologizes for any unintended offense the Moderator migh have taken. On the other hand, anything this Moderator chooses to post is "right" no matter how personal, inaccurate or rude the moderator's post might be.

The sad thing is that type of behavior on the part of some few moderators reflects poorly on the truly excellent job that many moderators do.

OBTW, I do believe I will in the future skip the "private e-mail" step with this particular moderator.



[This message has been edited by Punki (edited Feb 01, 2004).]