I have been following the proposals for an Ambassador programme with great interest. I believe there is plenty good intent but unfortunately none of the proposals pitched for discussion thus far appear to me as if they can be implemented as workable solutions.
On the forum which I volunteer time to moderate, we have many, many helpful individuals who share the task of welcoming and providing assistance to new members. These members do this not because they have been appointed to undertake this task, rather because they are good hearted people and want to make a positive contribution to our community. This part of the knowledge transfer is key to the spirit of Flyertalk. So, as I read these proposals, I look for signs which may bring benefits to our community and thus far, I cannot say with any conviction that the appointment of ambassadors actually adds to what we have at the moment, certainly not on the BA forum. To me, it would be a fruitless introduction of unnecessary bureaucracy that serves little to further promote good behaviour, civility and community helpfulness, which I understand are the key aims behind this. The part about attracting new members, I confess is more than a little lost on me.
Originally Posted by
Punki
IMHO, the original proposal was elegantly simple: "If you want to be an Ambassador, tell a TalkBoard member. They will check with the moderator of the forum in question and if you are not a known axe murderer or a serial spammer, they will take a vote and in all likelihood you will become an Ambassador. If you screw up big time once you are on the job, you will most probably get fired".
I accept this may be your humble opinion now, but to be fair, it does differ fundamentally from the original proposal as it was drafted.