Old Aug 12, 16, 7:20 am
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NYC
Posts: 69,035
Originally Posted by 84fiero View Post
If there is a cesspool that reflects poorly on FT and has no value added, it's OMNI PR.
I agree, but that's not what this discussion is about.
Originally Posted by RTW1 View Post
This is all starting to sound like censorship to me. Moderate the post that are considered to be against the T&C's, but don't use arguments that it doesn't add value (based on some subjective personal scale) or that it might be insulting for members personally (these are not simple members, they run a business, and most are not even active here). It's a slippery slope if personal feelings about the value of content would determine the fate of a forum.
Your theoretical "freedom of speech" is a red herring. And the fate of all fora here is decided by feelings of the elected leaders as to the value the content therein presents. There are plenty of discussions which are not T&C violations which don't add value to the community and have no purpose being hosted or maintained here.

But I'll go back to the point I made above: What is the value add that the conversations there bring to FT and the broader frequent flyer community?
  • If one wants to know about good CC offers and what the best value is there is a whole forum (which is very active and tremendously useful) dedicated to such. Do we need a second forum pointing out the bad offers advertised by others?
  • The back and forth over how to spell a blog name is a ridiculously petty, veiled way to attack the author of that blog. And, again, to what end?
  • Is Las Vegas a great place to vacation with kids? Again, there's a whole forum dedicated to such discussions (two, really) and the conversation would be well managed in either of those.
  • I believe there is value in the conversations about meetups and events related to miles & points but those survived pretty well in CBuzz until bickering over who was sponsoring them and who might be profiting from them came into play. Easily resolved to keep some of the more valuable EM&PR content alive on FT.
  • A discussion about why a program made changes to its rules is easily handled in that program's forum rather than in EM&PR.

I'm not surprised to hear that the moderation was relatively light; as a frequent visitor to the train wreck I saw that first hand. I believe that the case simply because the few regulars have been around FT long enough that they know how to write posts within the letter of the rules, not because the discussion follows the spirit of the T&C or the sense of community FT should be promoting.

This thread is almost certainly going to play out the same as that forum: A handful shouting loudly that their views are so important that FT MUST give them a place to be heard. And the rest of the community ignoring the shouting because they've realized it is all just noise.

Last edited by sbm12; Aug 12, 16 at 7:39 am
sbm12 is offline