Originally Posted by Dovster

Since making the above post this morning, in which I talked about two motions which TB passed without outside input or prior publication, I have thought long and hard about talking about two other motions.

Both of these are motions from the past, both were the ideas of TB members, neither had any input from the FlyerTalk public, and both failed.

The reason I was hesitant to mention them is that I thought they did not show TB in a very good light. The reason that I decided, in the end, to discuss them is that I felt that TB's rejection of them does do it credit and -- more importantly -- demonstrates that with the removal of the gag order there have been no repetitions of such actions.

Yes, I do credit the lifting of the gag order with that. Today, every TalkBoard member knows that if he makes a motion every other TB member is free to go public with it. Indeed, I believe that if any TalkBoard member had judged the three minute extension of editing time as harshly as I judge the two motions I will mention, they would not have simply voted against them but also have publicized the issue in this forum.

The first motion was made shortly after the Nov 2004 TB elections -- but before the newly-elected members had assumed office.

The motion was to ask Randy to appoint a particular candidate who had not gotten elected to the TB -- in other words, putting TB's opinion ahead of that of the FlyerTalk membership. Not only was it worded so as to bar the newly-elected members from voting on it but we were not even allowed to have our positions on it placed before TB. (At that time, we were given read-only access to the forum.)

The motion failed to get a 2/3rds majority and thus did not pass. Indeed, Randy later ruled it "unconstitutional". It was thus never reported anywhere.

A second motion was even more disgusting. It would have abolished one of our long-established forums simply because of the prejudice of one TB member. It would, indeed, never have found anyone to second it except another TB member -- who opposed the motion -- wanted it to be opened to public scrutiny.

I am happy to say that in this case, every single member of TB, except the one who made the motion, voted against it. The originator sought to have the motion withdrawn, and when this was not allowed, did not vote. The motion was eventually decided to be faulty on a technicality and it, too, was never reported.

No, I am not giving any more details about these motions nor am I going to say who made them. It is not my purpose to embarrass them at this late date.

My purpose is simply what I said above -- to show that the removal of the gag order on TB members has accomplished much of what the membership wants as far as transparency is concerned.

Yes, minor issues such as a three-minute extension of editing time may well be passed without any TB member mentioning it here, but I very much doubt that either of the motions I discussed would have gone without mention.

The TB members who opposed these motions would not have seen them as minor technical changes but as major -- and very harmful -- changes to FlyerTalk. I can not, for the life of me, imagine them remaining quiet about them while they still believed there was even a tiny chance of them passing.