svpii, thank you for starting this thread and doing a great job with this proposal.

Re: Jailer's discussion for duties of UAC, I see the items 1 and sometimes 2 as being primary duties of Moderators, and not a committee. Actions on these things are required much quicker than can be handled by committee. The committee perhaps could be the moderator of the Hot Debate forum, and could move back any thread from the hot debate forum to the original, ie. acting as a de-facto appeal board for those who disagree with the moderator.
Re: thread locking, we on FT have been very lucky that only rarely have things been necessary to lock, on other boards it isnt so, sometimes some idiot posts threads that are pure vulgarity/violence/crap with no actual content purpose other than to swear at everyone on the forum, things like this must be blocked immediately by moderators with powers to close threads, and move them to perhaps a trash bin thread, there, after 24 hours, the thread would be deleted absent someone objecting to its closure/deletion (someone besides the Original Poster). Also, because of the above, moderators should have power to suspend immediately any poster for 24 hours, sufficient time for the committee (or perhaps subcommittee) to life ban - subject to reversal by Randy. Obviously, there are standards to be set before a moderator or the committee would so act.
Normal users, ie those around more than a few hours would not be treated as drastically, this is only for the persons coming to spam/vandalize/etc the FT community, and I would add, I don't think this has ever happened, in my mind no thread I have read up to today would qualify for such treatment, so please dont think this is utter censorship... I just cant give a good example because it would all appear as **** **** **** **** etc. But, I have seen boards were posters posted exclusively 4 letter words just to inflame those on the boards, and I pray this never happens here.

Other than this exceptional event, moderators should never lock threads, but move them to the hot debate room (perhaps 2 moderators would be req'd to agree to lockdown threads even in my example above).

I like the Hot Debate Board, title and all. I like making sure there is a link in the original thread to the hot debate thread.

I also agree with the KISS principle. As such I think the 25 person comittee is perhaps big but, being this is not only an internet community but also one that travels a lot, it might need to be that big in order to get enough people to make a quorum, which should be perhaps 9-12? How about 66% for instituting suspension or rocommending expulsion.
I thank everyone for their thoughts on this thread and the commitment it shows to keep this commumity from falling into utter chaos and self destructing. Jailer Said: "It occurs to me that we really are a fairly homogeneous group (I don’t anticipate that the AA people will call for a Jihad against the United folks). " --- HE is right, we may be a motley group gathering from all parts of the world, but we have a common interest in miles, travels, and the things that make miles and travel important to us. Let's try to get a system in place to handle the "problems" of late, and then get back as quickly as possible to that which brought each of us here in the first place.

cheers.
TG

[This message has been edited by tummyg (edited 03-05-2001).]

Thanks TG for taking the time to contribute your thoughts. After reading Jailer's comments, I came to the same conclusion as did you regarding the size of the UAC - given our travel schedules, a size that is bigger than what might otherwise be desirable might be required in order to get a quorum.

I also agree that the specific limits and responsibilities of moderators will have to be fully fleshed out. This will obviously require Randy's input, so a lot of the "how" specifics I believe are best tabled until we have the benefit of his input on the "what". That doesn't mean we don't make our personal concepts known in this thread - but they will end up as a separate schedule reflecting member input regarding methods when the proposal is in its final form.

Thanks again. I can't help but believe that others have input they're hoping someone else will deliver. I would like to avoid a situation where valid points go unaddressed, so please take the time to contribute to this proposal by Wednesday morning.

jailer: I suggest you read birdstrike's extremely well written thread at http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum...L/000324.html.

doc: No one is ever going to be able to come up with a complete set of guidelines for behavior that governs every single circumstance or situation that might happen here. Moderators will have to make a judgement call occasionally. That's why it's important for moderators to have a private area where they can discuss issues among themselves. Moderation tends to promote self government by consensus, and there will be decisions you may well disagree with.

Just as in the US, where we are governed by the rule of law, the body of laws can't cover every single situation. There are decisions on interpreting laws that I personally disagree with. But overall, the system works and it's a decent place to live.

I think it's important that the moderators come from the community. I believe you have stated elsewhere to the effect that it's a big job and not enough people will want to do it. We've never put out a call for moderators that I know of, so you don't know that. I specifically think they should not come from Randy's company, as that would throw too large of an onus on him. Suppose he hired a couple of full time moderators; would his cost of doing business in having a board be justified any more? They should definitely be from the community, people who are interested in the welfare of this board, and who would be willing to take a half an hour to an hour a day to look after it, and to work in consultation with Randy's people. I want to make Randy's life easier by filtering a lot of the griping before it ever gets to him.

I support the idea of moderators at leat for the board Buzz, General TravelTalk and the
FlyerTalk Community.
One point to think about is time zones, as an
European I would not like to wait 8-16 hours for my postings to show, so I think there
should be a group a moderators at different
locations, enablin near realtime moderation.

As stated earlier the automatic PC-language
feature at most amuses me, but I think it is
unnecessary. As PC is mostly an NA thing, but this is an international board.

Peter-42, I don't think any envisions a review of posts BEFORE they're are posted..

svpii - I could only even contemplate moderators who act after a posting has been made (and then grudgingly), but in many moderated usenet groups, posts are pre-moderated (i.e. before they are displayed). I assume that is what Peter was referring to.

[This message has been edited by james (edited 03-05-2001).]

Kudos to you for trying to find a solution to FT's ills.

For the most part I have ignored most of the more heated threads, so perhaps I'm missing something ... but my question is this ... have the actual problems been identified (and I'm not referring to a person here) and does your proposal address them?

From what I have read it seems many people find the problems to be:

a) inaccurate posts
b) abundance of posts by individual poster
c) boasting within posts
d) repeating what the poster's already posted

It seems to me, your suggestions perhaps address issues that are not related to the problems many are complaining about, but I could certainly be wrong.

Would a moderator prevent someone from patting him/herself on the back? Would he limit the amount of times someone could post a day? Would moderators have to know the details of each promotion/offer/mileage program to make sure posters are providing accurate information?

While vulgarity and attacks can clearly be controlled and stopped, lack of manners cannot. And if the only thing we can really eliminate is attacks, it seems there might be a less complicated solution.

[This message has been edited by letiole (edited 03-05-2001).]

"...Moderators will have to make a judgement call occasionally..."

Absolutely, just as laws need to be interpreted! Yet, we should surely have the guidelines/laws first, and then also the wise folks willing to interpret and enforce them, IMHO!

"...That's why it's important for moderators to have a private area where they can discuss issues among themselves. Moderation tends to promote self government by consensus, and there will be decisions you may well disagree with..."

Yes, perhaps so! I trust your judgement in general!

"...I believe you have stated elsewhere to the effect that it's a big job and not enough people will want to do it..."

Yes and no!

Yes, it's a really big job! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/eek.gif

Perhaps a bit too big for me! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

No, I never stated that not enough others would be willing! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

I just prefer personally to be as totally impartial and even somewhat detached from the "governing" and as a moderator, if I'd ever have benn asked and were to have accepted, it would be rather difficult and perhaps impossible! FWIW, I don't want to be a police officer, a judge, or president either! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Moderator(s) should be extremely careful to only address real problems! There must be great care to insure NO personal bias.

Who will they be? How are these moderators to be selected? What do they do? What are the specifically stated guidelines? What would Randy & Co do, if anything, in realtion to them?

Again, this can sometimes be an extraordinarily tough job at times, just as it will likely prove to be effortless and even boring at other times. An impartial, effective moderator is a fine idea, but no moderator is still a better choice than a less than objective, ineffective one.

"...and to work in consultation with Randy's people. I want to make Randy's life easier by filtering a lot of the griping before it ever gets to him..."

We may well actually agree on this more than we disagree. I felt that if there are to be moderators that they should perhaps be on Randy's staff and be truly "official". That they have clout and are respected is the issue. I too would love to help ease things for Randy! yet, I don't know about just a half hour or so per day! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Recall what Randy had said earlier regarding moderators:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum97/HTML/000324.html

Letiole - Thanks for your input. I think DGolds said it best in his most recent post on this thread - No one is ever going to be able to come up with a complete set of guidelines for behavior that governs every single circumstance or situation that might happen here. As you state, it is an unrealistic task to govern manners. While this proposal would not fairly be characterized as a "baby step", I believe it is a first step. I would hope that w/ some reinforced structure and a prevailing atmosphere of refocusing on our strengths - information and community - perhaps some of these ills will be secondarily mitigated. However, that is something that cannot be addressed in policy or procedure very efficiently.

Consider every reasonably controlled environment you've ever been in - schools, corporations, girl scouts, the military, and even the church. Even in those environments where principles of behavior are usually well articulated, there are always individuals who are into self-aggrandizement, constant reiteration of their own comments, and who apparently believe that volume of comment is a substitute for substance of comment. We grin and bear them there and I believe we can do so here http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

I believe we want to keep policies and procedures at a level that cause the least restriction on personal freedoms while effecting a structure that facilitates a quicker response to significant issues that do arise.

Is this a satisfactory response to your questions?

Why is this discussion taking place in the abstract?

A little competition can be a very good thing! Do you think UA1ks would be enjoying SWUs if AA did not offer similar?

I'd love to see a moderated alternative to FT. Maybe it would be better. Maybe it would be worse. Most likely, as with FF programs, some would gravitate toward one while others would prefer the other. But IME, a little competition never hurt any venture.

OK Kokonutz, you've confused me http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/confused.gif

I don't believe this is abstract - I'm trying to develop a tangible proposal for Randy's review. Geez - the furthest thing from my mind is developing a mirror site with the only variance being moderators. I think that would be WAY too confusing - not to mention redundant expense.

Which is not to say I don't appreciate your comment about competition. I have no ownership of the site, thus I'm not invested either financially or emotionally in driving FT toward some kind of preeminent status in the world of travel-oriented bulletin boards. I am, however, invested in applying the resources I have to reenergize FT - it's where friends like you reside!

Thanks James, I (using the internet for 10 years now), combine the word moderator with the meaning it has in the usenet, in which the moderator has to acknowledge every post
(I know there are bypasses, but thats the theory).

With the ease of getting e-mail addresses from the likes of Yahoo and Hotmail. Having an e-mail verification is not the best idea. If we really want to verify that a handle is legit (and not one thought of spur of the moment to just slam somebody) I would propose a snail mail verification process.

You sign up and provide an e-mail address as well as a mailing address.

None of this information is passed out or sold in any way without the express permission of the person signing up.

The person signing up is allowed to lurk but not post (of course you don't have to sign up to just lurk).

A password is supplied to the person via snail mail and once the person receives this password they are allowed to post and can change things (like the password) in their profile.

The mailing costs would be minimal using postal bulk rate mailing as I am sure the people at FlyerTalk are already using for other mailings.

Just an idea that would discourage quick sign ups with the sole intent to cause problems or to slam people.

such a bulk-rate snail mail would take between 4 - 6 weeks from North America to the swiss Alps and it might never arrive in some (other) remote places of this FlyerTalk-world.

reconsidered.

[This message has been edited by james (edited 03-05-2001).]