There are several folks across the boards who have already made themselves de facto "ambassadors" with their welcoming spirit, their hospitality, and their enthusiasm for new members and their sometimes oft-answered questions.

These folks know who they are, are a real asset to FT, and may or may not be the same ones that an "Ambassador" program would choose.

In any case, I expect those folks that I refer to will continue exhibiting the best of FlyerTalk whether they get a title and a long application and vetting process.

On the other hand, I suspect of the folks who will sign up to be considered as "Ambassadors" through the TalkBoard Vetting Program, more than a few will be folks who in fact do not display the kind of spirit that our "natural ambassadors" display, and will be signing up instead to make some sort of alleged political point.

As to the whole proposal, then: remind me what it is that is broke that needs fixing?

As to your question: Sure, the easiest and best way to have "Ambassadors" should Randy think that such a title is helpful/necessary, is for Randy to appoint them with counsel from the moderators -- they know who are the genuinely helpful folks and who are the snarky ones.