When a "Time Out" is not a Time Out
 

Over the past week, Randy has reviewed a number of threads and determined several FTers have been personally abusing others, and driving those threads in directions not intended. This has resulted in a "Time Out" being given to at least three of the most virulent offenders.

No one takes pleasure in seeing another member of our Community placed in this position. We have all written, from time to time, words that may have veered off course and/or personally hurt or offended other FTers, intentionally or unintentionally. I myself, plead guilty, and have been reminded by Randy of such transgressions.

The question here is: Can one continue to have as a member of this Community, someone who ignores their "Time Out" and returns in the guise of a newbie, only to continue their same assaults on others in the Community?

On Thursday evening, a FTer was given a "Time Out", in part for personal insults he hurled continuously at me, as well as a couple of others who post regularly on the AC Forum. Within hours, it appears that this same individual had returned using a new Username [an obvious reference to this decision?] -- no ID is contained in the new user profile, only the initial registration date coinciding with Randy's decision -- and continued as if nothing had transpired.

In at least one thread last week, this FTer counselled others to continue to book Back-to-Back tickets, even after it was posted that government authorities had ruled these were are violation of tarrifs in Canada, and that airlines catching their customers doing this could bar these FFers from the carrier for life. Such posts not only reflect a disregard for the laws of a country, but a disregard for the welfare of other FTers. This person's postings under a new Username, are a demonstration of a similar disregard of the rules and conventions of the FT Community, and an insult to each of us, and partiucularly to Randy.

I therefore am formally requesting an investigation to confirm that these two Usernames belong to the same person, and if this is the case, then appropriate actions taken. What those actions should be, I leave up to a general discussion on this thread, to FT Board, or to Randy himself.

I really do appologize for raising this matter, particularly at this time of year. But I feel I have little option. A also feel Community is the appropriate place to conduct this discussion, as we all should be clear what "citizenship" in FT entails, our responsibilities as well as our rights.

[This message has been edited by Shareholder (edited 12-21-2002).]

Shareholder,

I hope you have made Randy and his team aware of your concerns. Only he and his staff can investigate multiple handles and IP addresses.

The FT Board cannot do this.

William

If airlines want to ban customers for life then that is their perogative. I can think of no other industry that would ban paying customers. If I purchase and pay for a service I will use it how I like. Declaring "back to backs" as illegal is absurd.

Please ignore Shareholder. He is just upset that many of the regulars on the AC Forum have decided to challenge some of his statements and ask for links / evidence to support those statements. Unfortunately the many requests for proof have gone unheeded. In the past there were personal attacks against SH, but I haven't seen that since Randy P., warning.

Life in the AC forum is actually very quiet right now - dare not post too much or you will be reported.

<Yawn>

Well MapleLeaf, I'll disagree with you. you can post all you want of FlyerTalk as some members have successfully done. It's only when you try and take things into your own hands does your posting privilege get cut short. For some - it's only after one or two posts on flyerTalk, for others it comes after thousands of posts. It only comes when your posting behavior draws my attention. I don't take action on the advice of every member, and the moderators know this. I do look things over and try and balance my response for what is ultimately right for FlyerTalk.

As for Shareholders comments, I'd rather see these types of comments in a personal email to me, but he chose his own way of expressing himself and as long as it doesn't flame an individual member, then it's within our guidelines.

But shareholder does make a good point. When i find out that a member has tried to circumvent a time out - I will suspend them again and usually throw away the key for a length of time. I know that there are some members on this board who think they are too clever to get caught.......that's their first mistake. Let's see who the next mouse will be?

Probably enough comments for this thread. I'd suggest we all have calm and bright....

What is this, preschool? "Johnny's teasing me. Johnny said a bad word. Boo hoo."

The discussion of back to back tickets is nothing new on FlyerTalk, and has been debated by members on several airline fora. So I don't see why one member should "pay the price" for discussing a very common topic. I was not aware that discussing back to back tickets are a violation of FT rules. Perhaps Randy could clarify that for us.

Shareholder, if you had a problem with someone discussing back to back tickets in a particular thread, why not make your views known there rather than starting a whole new discussion on this thread? It would make more sense to me. But what do I know, I welcome a difference of opinions including yours. Perhaps you should adopt a similar attitude and then we could all get back to discussing the various airline topics at hand. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

From:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum5/HTML/007682.html

"They also use a 763 daily,sometimes the int'l version, on AC123/126 YYZ-YEG-YYZ"

Hmm, wonder how TARNISHED GOODS knows that, being from Quebec and all? That was the route and flights PARNEL always posts about. Not to mention the hockey thread he has also just started [real "on-subject " that one].

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum5/HTML/007691.html

Just further confirms to me -- and others I've heard from -- that someone who was given a "Time Out" has thumbed his nose at the FT Community and RP, and gone about things under his own twisted sense of entitlement.

As for doing this "in public", had I emailed Randy directly, I would have been accused of doing this "behind PARNEL's back". That I do it this way, and I am accused of "bearing a grudge". You two just don't get it, so there is little point in discussing it further with either of you, ML or FA.



[This message has been edited by Shareholder (edited 12-23-2002).]

I'm not accusing you of "bearing a grudge". I'm simply asking you why you didn't make your views known about being offended by the discussion of back to back tickets in that particular thread rather than commenting about it here. And you still haven't answered my question. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

FA, I posted the following in that thread:

"In response to which I posted the CTC decision on B-t-B which makes it rather clear that in the domestic situation as described, AC does not tolerate such ticketing..".

Not to mention:

"Finally, Parnel, can you please refrain from your potty language when you respond to me here. Hardly a day goes by when you don't resort to such slurs and it gets tiresome. Such name calling is definitely in breach of FT guidelines. When you lack anything substantive to say, can you do nothing more than hurl adjectives at me that would make the children on South Park blush."

The result: Within a few days of posting this request, the man called me an "AH" in a post he made.

As for ML making charges against my posts being unresearched and undocumented, and thus wishing to know my exact sources for everything I post, I can only say for the record that I spent three summers working as an agent at AC res in Toronto, so have some idea of these matters. I was also AC marketing rep at my university for two years when those posts existed. As a shareholder of the company, I read the annual and quarterly reports which discuss strategies and plans for service enhancements, and attend as many shareholder meetings as possible where -- as Rob knows first hand -- questions from the floor are fielded by AC execs. When I post on FT, and there are no immediate references available, I draw on this collected knowledge base and first hand experience with the company to develop my arguments and respond to specific questions.

Now, let's return this thread to its subject, and the propriety of a member of our Community signing back on when they have been given a Time Out.

How many years ago was that? Things have changed in the AC and airline world drastically and unless that was in the last year or two, I would think that knowledge is vastly outdated.

As to the topic at hand. If the person on a timeout is indeed posting under a new name, then RP should remove him. My limited understanding of technology tells me that can be traced through IP addresses and the like. If not, then we need to refrain from making accusations against either of the 2 parties.

[This message has been edited by MapleLeaf (edited 12-23-2002).]

That does not address your latest disturbance:

Parnel did not counsel others to do back-to-back ticketing. He simply stated that he personally knew people who have done it through Air Canada and they didn't mind it. Other members provided advice on how to do a back-to-back ticket, yet you don't seem to have a problem with it. All I'm saying is that if you feel the continued discussion of back-to-back tickets is a "disregard for the laws of the country and the welfare of other FTers", then why don't you say so in that thread?

I'd suggest you all take this conversation off-line or to private email. To the hundreds of thousands of other users of FlyerTalk - none of you are making any points with us. We'd rather read a post about miles, points and travel.

With a great deal of respect to Randy - this is his board. He can do what he wants. Some may not like it, but he owes nothing to anyone.

This is no different than going to a neighbors house for a drink. If he decides you can not put your feet on the coffee table, you can either put them down, or leave. It is that simple.

We appreciate Randy and all he has done. You may not agree with everything he has done, but how many people do you agree with 100%?

Thanks Randy and Happy Holidays.

Could not have said it better myself.