GadgetFreak

I just noticed this thread, I tend to not read the more "political" forums on a frequent basis it at all. I have to say I am really saddened by this. Among those 14 who were warned or timed out are 4 of my favorite posters. My determination of favorite is based on what I have seen as a willingness and ability to share information and contribute to my ability and that of the community to understand and benefit from airline programs in the most cost beneficial way. I suspect that I dont include more of those noted in my lists of favorites only because I dont fly on the carriers that they post on. Much of my reaction to these threads has been a negative reaction to what I see in some people (and no, not just one person) as a belief that we should not benefit from these programs and quite frankly a contempt for those of us who strive to keep travel costs down. They seem intent on coming on and telling us that its about time we are getting what we deserve. I think several of those who were banned or warned had this happen because of the passion they feel for the purpose of FT and their strong reactions that resulted. Personally, I am a firm believer in evolution and would let those people post and those who disagree respond. Alternately, I would have probably taken a position and enforced it.

However, this is Randy's game and I am quite grateful he provides it as I have found it tremndously useful. I also recognize the resources he commits to it and the need for him to police it as he feels fits with his view of its purpose. Given that, I think he has gone to great lengths to fairly impose measures that would try to damp the excesses as he saw fit. I would not have been fair I suspect.

In any case, I hope that when this is over those who return will continue to contribute to FT in the way that they have in the past.

wingless

I agree! Kathy you are such a trouble maker.

KathyWdrf

Kathy

UALOneKPlus

That's it!! 30 days time out for you too, young lady!!

Randy Petersen

Thanks GagetFreak. Yes, I've been most patient with some of these members and like you, count some of them among my favorite to read and are well aware of their contributions to FlyerTalk. It was because of this that I decided to ask an impartial view (others not associated with FlyerTalk) of a series of posts to determine who is not playing fair when it comes to living up to the code of good behavior here on FT. Absolutely no bias in this decision - simply black and white.

Some will be back, others just seem to have difficulty with the idea we're not interested in their opinions about other members, only about the content on FT.

Here's a stange factoid: In the estimated 96 time outs I've given members of FT all related to posting practices (flaming, etc.) only 6 of them have ever thought they were wrong and apologized. The other 90 all wanted to point out everything else than their own posting and thought they were innocent.

FFMilesJunkie

6 honest assessments out of 90 is not bad. It's probably a better ratio than a state trooper gets to the question "Do you know how fast you were going?"



Hopefully the flames will settle down so you can get back to doing something other than being the FT state trooper.

GadgetFreak

Obviously people who have not read "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas". The advice was something like as soon as you see the red lights, floor it and put on your signal that you are pulling over. At the first exit pull off abruptly and get out of your car license in hand. When they finally get to you they will be very agitated, possibly even drawing their weapon. Remain calm yourself and always smile, say that you were indeed speeding, in fact you are a criminal and deserve whatever the officer thinks is the appropriate punishment because you are really sorry for such terrible behavior"

birdstrike

OT, but oh well.

My wife got a ticket awhile back for crossing the double yellow lines to get around a line of cars blocking the entrance to the left turn lane at an intersection. It was only for a car length or two and there was no opposing traffic.

So the cop pulls her over and asks her if she knew what she had done. He was absolutely floored when she told him I gather it is not common for traffic offenders to admit they know they were breaking the law.

She got the ticket anyway

anonplz

A related practice which amuses me is the apology-which-is-not-an-apology, i.e., "Oh, OKAY! For the greater good of FT, I'm sorry (am I such a great, magnaminous person or what?)."

dallasflyer

That is a very interesting fact Randy, as I seem to have found that the average FTer that I have met or associated with are very honest. They must have felt that what they were doing was right, even though it may have violated the TOS, which is wrong. Very Interesting. I think I am one of the ninety.

------------------
dallasflyer, Let's put the fun back in FlyerTalk!

gleff

I think Flyertalk is lots of fun!

GadgetFreak

I even thought the threads that were causing the trouble were fun. I would never complain about what someone put in a thread, as long as I could take my shots. Unfortunately, that would very rapidly turn into chaos take away from the purpose of Flyertalk, but I would think it was fun!

RustyC

I missed this one, too. I guess I have mixed feelings about it. FT would be a much poorer place without the malcontents. Some people obviously have an axe to grind against some airline(s) or FF program(s) (even possibly a vendetta), but often they'll back it with good information.

It's like looking up seller feedback on eBay; people want the overall impression, but they're also really looking for the neutrals and negatives because those comments are especially likely to have something of value. Take away the ability to post the bad with the good, and the exercise becomes worthless.

That said, I think ego sometimes gets in the way and discussions of issues can degenerate into personal attacks. I assume that's why this action was taken; I certainly hope it wasn't just because some people were seen as too "negative" (see previous paragraph; I hope the impartial jury didn't have any corporate motivational trainers on it!)

As for the ego part, usually that manifests itself in feeling like you have to post too frequently to defend your point of view in a thread when the salient points have mostly been made. Some of the stuff that gets said when things get too heated loses focus on the issue at hand.

wtsmith

That reminds me of my departed mother's story. She was very ill with a malignant tumor, and all of us in the family didn’t know exactly what to do to help her. So rather than solicit the advice of her doctor or her specialists (the ones that would be most familiar with her case), we decided to ask three unbiased junior nurses for their opinion. While familiar with malignant tumors in general, none of them had any prior dealing with my mother or her case or the environment in which she lived, and thus were (in our opinion) able to simply read her condition without the history of her case and make their judgments based upon the general guidelines of medical good practices and the spirit of quality care...and not any of the determining factors.

She died.

GoodKarmaGuy

getting on soapbox and pushing KathyWdrf to one side

Yeah... and the guy/gal who says, "Well, IF I was wrong, I am sorry." Or, "IF I hurt you I am sorry."

Huh? Don't you know?

I also believe that it is a bit self-righteous to decide that violating the TOS is allowed if you believe you are right. Haha. Oh please.

*Whew*

getting off soapbox and making room for KathyWdrf again

All that said, many thanks to Randy. Flyertalk rocks!

------------------
Just trying to keep up with the gals in the trailer park next door.

[This message has been edited by GoodKarmaGuy (edited 10-06-2003).]