TechnoTourist

I have a surprising good memory for inane details and am good with search engines so don't have much trouble finding things. I also read a lot of the discussion and can usually remember how to find previously viewed posts. That said the suggestion to have some threads that cover all the credit cards for topics that are not specific to a particular issuer makes sense as some of the threads have a very narrow focus and people often use the more generic one (or even a similar but incorrect thread) Couple examples:

There is a thread for status extension (started by the announcement email) but none for Status Bonus or premium CC rollover so if I wanted to ask "Do SQM/SQS accrued via status bonus get rolled over?" I have multiple places to ask, none of them perfect so I'd use the generic "Aeroplan Program" thread even though the status extension one has more relevant details.

There is also a thread for EQD (also from the announcement email) and it contains posts that are referring to status bonus, not EQD as the poster did not know the difference. Perhaps we can have 1 thread all non-flying status earning.

The AQD/SDQ not posting thread (which is a holdover from old AE where is was not uncommon for AQM/AQS to post without AQD) also now has plenty of people who are seeing missing segments (no SQM/SQS or SQD) but there are also similar posts in the generic Aeroplan.com issues thread. Maybe time to retire the old AQD/SQD thread and start a new one for "missing flight activity".

Just my $0.02

Adam Smith

@24left I really don't care where the bifurcation occurs, as long as it doesn't require me or @tcook052 to sit at a computer for 5 hours selecting post after post, so I'm throwing it out to you and others in the community for suggestions as to what point would be most logical. The plated meals thing seemed logical, but since (a) I haven't flown AC much lately and (b) I don't care that much about meals when I do, I'm not the best equipped to make that determination. If starting from January 1 is most logical, that works. If there was a big shift in meal service as of December 1 or March 1, that's also fine (subject to seeing how many posts any of those choices would involve). And it's fine if the international and domestic meal threads have different start dates based on some logical starting point too.

Or maybe it's better to launch the new threads with a brand new post with some detailed info? I don't think anyone has commented on the value of having threads kicked off with a purposeful, in-depth post as opposed to just whatever post happened to be the first post in an existing thread after the bifurcation date... (Other than the cow not liking that the latter has caused him to be the "author" of a particular thread on the UA forum)

Remember that Internet Brands doesn't pay me to say stuff like this, but have you tried the forum search since they introduced the Threadloom search? I still usually use the Google, but I've found the forum search tool to be much improved in recent times. But I'd be interested to hear how others are finding it (if they've been using it, or if they feel like giving it a go).

@TechnoTourist thanks for your contribution

I acknowledge that the 2020 Aeroplan thread has become an easy place to go, and sort of understand why, but I think that fact is also rendering it not very effective (questions that have nothing at all to do with the program revamp frequently get asked there), which is why I think we'd like to move it towards the retirement home as we develop better places to store information/have discussions.

There is in fact a thread dedicated to CC rollover benefits: Aeroplan Credit Card Rollover Benefits

When you mention "Status Bonus", are you referring to the extra Aeroplan miles that are a select privilege on the annual elite status benefits? Those also have a dedicated thread: 2021 AC Status Privileges

Or are you talking about the "Status Qualification Boosts", i.e. extra SQM/SQS provided from spending on premium CCs? If so, true that there's no thread on that, although I'm not sure that topic merits one as it's relatively straightforward. But that's the kind of thing that might fit in a CC benefits overview thread that was common to the three card issuers, if it's not worth having its own thread (although a question about whether those roll over would fit perfectly in the existing rollover thread). But does it get too confusing to have:

• A master benefits thread
• A rollover thread
• A TD thread
• A CIBC thread
• An Amex thread

... all as sources of info related to the credit cards? (I don't know the answer, which is why I'm asking the question).

I'd like to better understand what you're saying here. When you say "all non-flying status earning", would that mean that ESQ, and CC rollovers, and CC status boost would be better off in one thread, from your perspective?

I'm having a hard time seeing how those all go together. The two CC ones, possibly (discussed above), but ESQ doesn't require any Aeroplan credit card at all. ESQ can be earned through flying that doesn't earn enough SQD to qualify for status the regular way, Aeroplan eStore, retail partners like Starbucks, car rentals, etc... Most people qualifying through ESQ will probably have a credit card, but someone only qualifying for 25K through ESQ isn't going to get much benefit out of the rollover/status boost. Meanwhile, the rollover and status boost are primarily useful to those who are qualifying for higher status through their flying, which means they have essentially no use for ESQ. So it seems like those are topics that pretty naturally belong in different threads.

But if you have a different angle, I'd be happy to hear it.

A good point, and one I was just mulling over tonight.

canadiancow

I've used it recently, and the only time I find it particularly useful is when I'm searching for a specific thread title, or thread posted by a specific person.

It's much better than Google for "find the threads started by canadiancow in the AC forum with 'downgrade' in the title".

It's much worse for pretty much everything else (like if I don't know what thread something was posted in or who posted it).

Adam Smith

Good points. I've found the ability to use filters to be nice, which Google doesn't have, but as I think about it, I've usually been searching for something I already know is around here somewhere.

yyzgigi

The incident thread is definitely a good example of one that I usually just miss all the content, but to be honest most people don’t start new threads on those so less likely to see a merged thread. I think the details of the program change is one where there was a lot of very specific elements that had the potential for more specific discussion that I recall seeing merged. .

I don’t mind the merging of specific questions that have already been answered like seating and meals being merged it is when there are specific nuances or what feel only tangentially related that it gets more grey that is frustrating to find a thread has been merged into a big thread, particularly if there are multiple conversations going on and you’re catching up.

Symmetre

To be 100% honest the first time I ever looked at any of the stickies was today. Normally I immediately scroll right past them since, on most boards I visit, the stickies all tend to be about old, out-of-date stuff.

How about combining content that is to be retained into a single sticky folder at the top ... call it INFORMATION LIBRARY or something else along those lines ... and populate that with the saved stickies and split-off archive threads (i.e. North America Meal Service from 2009)? If nothing else it would take up less space.

EDIT --> Wikis too! OMG there are a pile of them. Can they not be combined into a single "WIKIs" sticky?

TechnoTourist

My hypothetical question was about the intersection of "Status Qualification Boosts", "Premium CC rollover" and "2021 status extension". There are multiple places where you find parts of the answer, take this (very helpful) reply in the 2021 status extension thread https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/33140991-post33.html It combines "Premium CC rollover" and "2021 status extension" elements and could conceivably live in either the "CC rollover benefits" thread or the "2021 status extension" thread. If I add in a 3rd dimension (Status Qualification Boosts) it's unclear where I should post my question and even less likely that someone will find the answer later.

Do we need a separate thread for Premium CC rollover if we have posts like the above in the "2021 status extension" thread? I'm not sure that Black vs slate is better than TD vs CIBC vs AMEX either, just thinking out loud.

This was another example that (the difference between EQD and status qualification boosts) might seem clear to someone who spends a lot of time on the forum and reviews the AE T&C and announcements as they change. This post https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/33245887-post25.html (and my reply) suggests that it's not clear for everyone. From your perspective they are very different, but from the perspective of someone who hasn't flown in a year is now seeing a bunch of AE activity related to their CC spend they are similar. (Yes, I know EQD does not require a CC, but is unlikely to accrue 100K points via Starbucks).

My summary is that having some threads with a slightly broader focus might make it easier to post and find things that don't fit the narrow definitions on some of today's threads.

bid.shader

I think this says a lot about how challenging it will be to change the culture here, if that's what is desired. The users of the AC forum use it in the way that they demonstrate - when your most active users say they don't read stickies, then that tells you how challenging it will be to start using stickies, for example. Basically the risk is when you make a change in this regard it will either (a) take time for users to adapt their usage patterns or (b) the membership will evolve as perhaps some long time high usage members find the forum less useful with the new structure and visit less, while new users become more active.

Overall I think you will be hard pressed to get any meaningful agreement on what is "best" in terms of organization and I agree with the other posters that spoke about the ideas of why we are here and what role a forum plays vs a wiki, for example. I think the market has to decide, somewhat - if we have stickies that are not being used anymore, then unstick them and let them die (part of the problem with stickies being ignored is when dead threads are kept at the top, becoming "something to skip past to get to the new stuff"). For the problem of having too many threads and for the people complaining of too much moderation - is it possible to have a more lightly moderated sub forum where users can have a bit more flexibility?

Overall I think the forum is useful and well moderated, with a really knowledgeable group of users. I doubt massive changes are needed really.

RangerNS

Well, one possible outcome of a conversation like this is the people jump platforms. I'm not suggesting that is our first resort, or even something I'm considering at all. Somewhat before that we could push FT admins to implement policy or technical change. Or we the people note a gripe with the larger platform, and move on. Now, there are threads of thought that might not be productive, but we should be allowed to at least note that and snuff it out; we don't need to preemptively forbid ideas in a brainstorming session.

I just now clicked "New Thread"; it does not require a prefix. Perhaps the tech could demand some prefix, and treat the further requirements differently. A setting might be easy for a site admin to change, but more might require code changes.[1]


Either or. Something different :P

I'm thinking the UX of bugzilla, or the support front end of Jira. When you type in a subject/title, it does a search for related issues, or KB articles or whatever. Whereas some people might always search first for an existing bug or kb article, most people do not. Everyone does not some of the time. So the UX more or less forces you to do that as one posts the duplicate item. But if one selected "Question:" prefix, then there could be a popup of the FAQ wikis and threads and the "transnational" type thread.

Or maybe people would just ignore and post a top thread, anyway. Ż\_(ツ)_/Ż

Maybe I mean two things.

For wiki: everything is still a thread, I guess? You go to wikipedia, the main thing is the article. Discussion is in a different tab. Confluence, or corporate support sites, the article or KB is the main thing, the discussion is down at the bottom. The nature of VB is that everything is a discussion thread.

For stickies: they are visually distinct. And my eyes skip down to what is the important part. Related, right now the 4th thread is an add. I have to work hard to see that, its missing a thread icon, missing reply and view counts. My eyes just skip over it, (like the gorilla wandering through the basketball players). Also, stickies tend not to change, so I wouldn't notice if its bold or not bold (unread/read). I notice what is at the top of the normal thread section (fresh content).


Per my loose thesis, the medium here is a forum, for discussion. I'd not call the VB UX highly optimized, but every design choice was made with the view that its a discussion forum. Redirecting people to simply read the FAQ, or read and edit a wiki is an uphill battle, especially as those artifacts are shoehorned into forum constructs. I keep coming back to that in my mind, I know its not helpful.




[1] I spent several years as a VB "developer", hacking up an even earlier version for corporate purposes. I know how complicated such a change would be. The LOE is "impossible", but I've done impossible things to VB before.

Adam Smith

I need to issue a correction to my earlier post re mechanics of moving posts. I’ve just noticed a tiny little arrow that has some additional moderator options, including selecting all posts on a page. Not sure whether that’s new or I’ve just never noticed it in the ~6 months I’ve been doing this. But @tcook052 didn’t correct me earlier, so either it’s new or easy to miss! So it is possible to move a larger volume of posts without it being onerous, time-wise. There’s still a limit, but maybe it’s a few hundred as opposed to a few dozen.

@yyzgigi I think there was a time that having one large thread on the revamp was helpful. In the early days when everything was getting announced, there was so much new information arriving at once, plus links to many blog posts and articles that discussed the new program in its entirety, it probably made sense to have that in one place. I’m not sure when exactly was the right time to start splitting things off; possibly sooner than it started to happen.

So let’s say we agree with you in principle, the question becomes how do we improve things going forward? We’re trying to create dedicated threads for specific topics out of that thread, and if you have ideas for other things currently lumped in there that deserve their own thread, plus let us know which.

More importantly, if you see other topics that you (and I say “you” in the general sense of anyone, not just yyzgigi) feel are only “tangentially related” in the same thread that would be better in their own thread, or should be moved another, please let us know. For the time being, this thread is open for that purpose. Long-term, you can either use the “Alert a moderator to this post” function to send us a note (when you hit that button, it will send you to a page where you can type in comments before sending, such as “I think this should have its own thread”) or send us a PM or e-mail.

We don’t necessarily read every thread or every post, but we do read all of our PMs/e-mails and post alerts, and are happy to engage in constructive dialogue. That doesn’t mean we’ll agree with everything or implement everything that’s suggested, but we’re always open to feedback. (I hope that this thread serves as evidence of that, along with some of the actions that are coming out of it).

@Symmetre, thanks for joining the discusson What’s a “sticky folder” in your mind? Is it just an improved version of the current FAQ thread?

Not sure I follow this. Are you suggesting that we eliminate thread-by-thread wikis, and instead put that content into a sticky post or multiple stickies? Or is it simply for the FAQ/forum dashboard/whatever we call it to flag when certain threads it lists contain wikis? For example, a link to the refunds thread might be listed as “Master thread Air Canada Refunds vs credits; Class action lawsuit filed (includes WIKI)”?

I think I generally understand where you’re coming from (I’ve not quoted the rest to save space): the more topics that proliferate, the greater the chances that something could fit in multiple places, and that can be confusing. Your first example, absolutely, could be legitimately posted in either thread. The second one, I think is just the case of someone not understanding a new benefit, which can happen from time to time.

The challenge, as I see it, is that while you’re asking for threads to be more consolidated, we have quite a few people saying there are too many large threads and it’s hard to follow (e.g. two posts up from yours); these seem like a good example of something that is “tangentially related” - @yyzgigi, I’m curious to get your opinion on this one.

(I acknowledge that it’s possible for both things to be true at the same time; for instance, the moderators could merge every post on both meals and 787 seats into the same thread, while allowing hundreds of threads on eUpgrades to proliferate, but I don’t think we’re that inconsistent on the whole)

Would having a general Q&A / newbie lounge type thread address your concern at all? A place for people to post questions that were broad or when they didn’t know where to go, and either get a response directing them to the right place, or perhaps having the mods move the post to the right thread?

I’ll also reiterate that if you see something that you think should be combined with something else, please let us know (post report, PM, e-mail). In the case of ESQ and rollovers, I’m inclined to disagree and leave those topics separate, but everything is considered case-by-case, and there may well be some other topics that would be better off merged.

@bid.shader, thank you for your contribution. We’re happy to be getting input from those who don’t post frequently as well as those who do

I don’t think we’re trying to change the culture, necessarily. We’re trying to figure out whether the organization of the forum can be improved to better suit what the users are looking for. Almost trying to change the forum to better fit the culture.

So, for example, if people generally hate stickies, we don’t want to try to create a bunch of new stickies (or makes stickies of existing threads). I don’t know that we’ll eliminate them entirely, because the one current sticky does seem to get a pretty large number of views for a locked thread with a very small number of posts, which suggests that it does get consulted fairly often (possibly mostly by lurkers).

As a finance guy, I like your concept of letting the market decide. In a sense, that’s what we’re trying to do here, because there isn’t a really good way for the market to reveal itself. Since we only have one sticky thread, most threads fall off the front page by themselves. But even a thread falling off the front page (or back a few pages) doesn’t mean it has lost its usefulness. Someone starting a new thread may have simply not bothered to look for the old one, or may not have looked very hard, so a thread’s position isn’t necessarily indicative of whether it’s still a good thread. Heck, a couple months ago, someone started a new thread on an AC announcement from that day, when an existing thread from ~6 hours earlier (with a bunch of replies) was the top thread on the board.

In the same vein, this thread has seen some fairly consistent feedback against the long-running meal threads. But even before COVID dramatically cut both travel and meal service, I don’t remember there being a ton of new threads posted on that topic, which one could argue would be a sign that a thread has run its course. So I don't feel like activity (or lack thereof) in a given thread, or number of topics, is a very good indicator of what the market wants.

Perhaps this is less like a financial market, and what we’re doing here is more akin to conducting opinion polling on legislation. I’m sure that we’ll reach “meaningful agreement” on everything (or anything), but I do think we have gotten some useful feedback.

On the subject of too many (or too few) threads, I think the answer is trying to come up with better ways to organize things and keeping threads to an appropriate size, which is what we’re trying to get feedback on through this thread.

With regards to moderation in general, we already have a forum lounge thread for people to discuss things that aren’t related to AC. If people disagree with specific moderator decisions, they’re free to reach out to us via PM or e-mail. But this is also a place where there are irreconcilable differences. Some people complain when off topic posts get deleted (or a mod note get posted asking to get back on topic), while others complain about discussions that are off topic to the threads they’re in. We’re never going to be able to please everyone, and there are always going to be people who feel the forum is too heavily moderated as well as those who feel there’s not enough moderation. The goal is to achieve an appropriate balance.

I have wondered whether a thread could be created like “Discuss your non-AC travels” for people to post about, say, TPE hotels (continuing my earlier example). But I’m skeptical of that for a couple of reasons.

There are some people who feel they should be able to post whatever they want, wherever they want, whenever they want. They will be annoyed if their posts on TPE hotels in the 787 thread get moved to the non-AC travels thread. Beyond making the forum a complete free-for-all (which is not the case for any of FlyerTalk – even OMNI/PR has rules and moderators), there will be no pleasing those people.

This is meant to be the Air Canada forum. It’s not supposed to be the place for in-depth discussions on TPE hotels, Canadian quarantine rules, or the WestJet lounge at YYC. There are other fora for those things – one of the great strengths of FT is that there is information, and knowledgeable people, on such a vast array of subjects. So where does one draw the line? Is it okay for the AC forum to have a 10-post discussion about TPE hotels in this hypothetical thread? How about 20? 50? 100? At a certain point, is it not unfair to people searching for information on those topics in the correct places to be deprived of the knowledge that’s accumulating in the AC forum? Because someone looking for information on the WS lounge is almost certainly not going to come to the AC forum’s non-AC travels thread looking for it unless they’re already an AC regular.

If someone can come up with an intelligent framework for making such a thread work (i.e. a concrete, forward-looking suggestion), I’m happy to listen to the reasoning, but I’m struggling to see how it doesn’t eventually come back to some element of moderator discretion, which inevitably causes disagreement, and would seem to render the exercise pointless. (And I don’t know how @tcook052 feels about this concept at all).

But again, if someone ever disagrees with a decision to move a post, merge a thread, request to move on from an off topic discussion, etc, they’re welcome to contact the moderators via PM or e-mail.

The whole purpose of this conversation is to find out how to make the board more useful to people, so I would hope that we’re not driving anyone away

We’re not forbidding ideas; this is meant to be a fairly open conversation about forum organization, but this is still an FT thread, meaning normal rules still apply:

• No personal attacks
• It’s not a venue for taking potshots at the moderators
• Commercial posts are not allowed
• etc

As long as those boundaries are respected, have at ‘er*.

To avoid this becoming another super-lengthy post from me, I’m not going to quote the rest of your post, but you raise some very interesting points, some far beyond my technical expertise.

The one idea that seems like it might be easy to implement would be having stickies permanently in bold. For the anti-sticky crowd, would having stickies permanently in bold help draw them to your attention? Or is the problem that the sticky is always at the top and that lack of movement leads one to slide past it? What about changing the title of the sticky(ies) from time to time, would that help? What about a different font colour for stickies?

I think the one that intrigues me most in terms of usability is the Wikipedia-type tab concept, but I’m not sure how interested IB would be in that. Do you think that making wikis always fully visible so that one has to scroll past them make them any more useful? Or does the ability to jump straight to the last post render that somewhat ineffective?


*I will note that my and @tcook052’s ability to implement some of the more fundamental changes that you’re pondering is nil. The most we could do is flag this thread for the Community Director/IB staff. A thread in the tech forum that gained broad support for the concepts might be a better way of pushing for fundamental change.But no issues with continuing the discussion here for now.

24left

@Adam Smith

I am neither pro-sticky nor anti-sticky. However, on many of the other FT airline forums that I read, they are helpful, are actively managed and people post.

I am willig to create the topics/content (links to threads) for a sticky called "How to navigate AC FT" (or how to find stuff). I am willing to do the work... as a volunteer as well ... and post the suggested format in this thread where others can add comments to the format. If fellow participants are interested, let me know.

I think you know that "despite" AC's size as an airline, AC FT has very "active" posting activity. (It also has some different demographics). I don't think about the regular customers here who either know how to navigate, but I always think more of those who show up when they have a problem and can't figure out where we hide stuff.
.

flamengo

GREAT idea! I am SE MM, and know a fair amount about how to optimize my travel experience. But I still end up having some pretty basic questions about eUpgrading etc. I think that many of the very regular posters on here over-estimate how much regular people on this site know, and maybe don’t realize just having quick and easy ways of finding out even basic information would be totally useful to a large proportion of people who spend time on here.

Adam Smith

Thanks for volunteering @Bohemian1 has already volunteered to update the FAQ thread.. Are you thinking of something different or pitching in on that? Don't want anyone wasting time on duplicated efforts...

By no means my idea, just something borrowed from other boards

And how does that rank for you compared to a really high-quality, up-to-date FAQ/dashboard thread (the BA one might be a good example)? Would a thread like that eliminate need for a basic Q&A one? Or would a Q&A still be useful? Does a great Q&A thread render a FAQ/dashboard not very necessary?

Bohemian1

If there is a potential overlap, I'd be happy to work with 24left . Two heads are almost always better than one.

Symmetre

@Adam Smith re post #40

Apologies for the lack of clarity in my post ... this is what happens when you surf FT for a brain break in between suffering an endless stream of Webex and Teams meetings.

Sticky Folder --> yes, essentially a reform of the current FAQ thread, perhaps with things like the seating info, earnings charts, reward charts and such set up as their own sub-threads within the sticky rather than just posts farther down a single continuous stream, so the info is quicker to access and easier to find. Scrolling through all that stuff on a phone is brutal ... much faster/easier if there was a contents page type of thing at the top so you can just jump directly to the section of interest.

Wikis --> as I logged on today there are something like 11 wiki threads on the first page alone. I'm not proposing they be eliminated as individual threads ... rather, is it possible to set it up so that when a wiki thread is created, a direct link to it also appears on some kind of master wiki list that would perhaps be part of the FAQ section? There's some really good info in those various wiki threads, it would be helpful to have a way of making them easier to find once posting activity subsides and they drop off the first page or two.

I don't know the first thing about coding or if that's possible within the FT framework, but you asked for ideas ... making it easier to find some of that content would probably be helpful to both new site visitors and jaded old grumps like me alike.