hfly

The point which is ignored by those which are just stopping in at the DL board is that many of us do not want more for less. Personally of several hundred DL flights over the last ten years, less than 4 have been less than M internationally, and less than 2 have been less than Q domestically. For that matter many have been full Y's, I's, D's, A's, even a some J's and F's. There are a lot of other people on this board in a similar situation, and have stated as much not only recently, but over the years as well.

That's the thing that certain interloper idiots don't get. Even if people are spending top dollar, they are getting screwed (Yeah, get to PM twice as fast, but with less than half the benefits).

Had certain parties read what is written on this board carefully, rather than read a post or two and assume that everything revolved around those posts, they would have a better understanding and not continue their idiocy.

RSSrsvp

hfly, your math is incorrect. next year PM's will receive 20-25% of the domestic upgrades that they are receiving currently. It is even worst than you make it out to be.

ak

Is this really necessary?


[This message has been edited by ak (edited 08-18-2003).]

JRF

I think it is, the DL board has become almost a waste of reading. Those who defend DL to no end. Either there are several posters with many mutiple handles or many people are just dirt stupid.

vasantn

People (you know who you are), we need to calm down here. Let's not threaten posters who disagree with the majority point of view. This reflects extremely poorly on the members of this board. We can welcome dissenting opinions or ignore them -- our choice. We should not feel so threatened by them that we descend into irrationality. We certainly should not be creating new rules of behavior because we don't like what someone has to say or the way in which it is said. Why is it that "Uncle Leo is evil" is encouraged but "It's easier to blame big, bad Delta" is deemed to be offensive?

I find this kind of witch-hunt, first with FrequencyFlyer and now with avek00, really distasteful. If you don't like the message, ignore it! But don't threaten to curtail the messenger's freedom of speech.

------------------
Vasant

ak

Frankly, with all due respect, I think it is not. Statements like "That's the thing that certain interloper idiots don't get" or "...many people are just dirt stupid" are totally uncalled for IMO.

Paging any available DL moderator to this thread. Thanks.



[This message has been edited by ak (edited 08-18-2003).]

B747-437B

Alas, this has been the case in the Delta forum for almost a year now. Anyone who doesn't toe the anti-Delta line is harassed, moderated out and even subjected to occasional death threats until they either surrender to the views of the lynchmob or leave the forum altogether. What a shame.


[This message has been edited by B747-437B (edited 08-19-2003).]

B747-437B

With all due respect Rssrsvp, I didn't realize that the moderator position made you a judge as to what constitutes fact, especially when you have made your anti-Delta position extremely clear via your active participation in the Save Skymiles movement. You are hardly an objective judge of the situation.

For what its worth, avek is saying now exactly what I have been saying since December - namely that there is a smaller pie to go around and hence Delta is recalculating how large a slice everyone gets. Some folks will benefit and others will not. Delta is betting that they will profit more as a result of pleasing the former group. That is the simple economic reality.

I am quite frankly DISGUSTED that a moderator would use their position to try and silence a poster from sharing their perfectly civil views on this subject. I know that you are better than that, but it appears that the emotion of the anti-Delta lynchmob rhetoric has clouded your judgement here.

Dovster

I can't agree that there is an anti-Delta lynchmob mentality here.

I think that most of the people who post like Delta, want to continue flying with it, and are frustrated to find that Delta is making some bad business decisions which are hurtful to both the airline and its best customers.

Note that I did not use the word "loyal". I don't think that an airline has any more right to expect its customers (and that's what passengers are) to be loyal than does any other business.

McDonald's won't start crying that its patrons are disloyal if it starts giving smaller hamburgers and charging higher prices for them. The food chain will understand that is the reason that people will be going to Burger King.

If Macy's charges 25% more for the same cosmetics than does Gimbel's, it, too, will understand why people are going to the competition.

Delta will not lose me as a passenger because of its FF "enhancements". I will, however, not take my medallion status into consideration when booking. I am GM, get very little benefit from it, and don't see that as of January I would get much more by being PM.

If, in the past, I wanted a direct flight from TLV to EWR I probably would have booked with Delta. The flight would have been operated by El Al but my ticket would have been a Delta codeshare. If this meant I spent a little more, I would have considered the medallion status as being worth it.

Not today. Today I will comparison shop between Delta and El Al. I will be getting on the same plane, so why should I pay even a dollar more?

I will also look at Continental and see what its schedule is and how much it wants for the flight.

This does not make me "anti-Delta." It makes me "pro-me."

Would I be better off if my Medallion status really had some value? Yes.

Would DELTA be better off if it gave me reasonable value for directing all my business to it? I think it would.

This is what I meant by "bad business decisions which are hurtful to both the airline and its best customers."

BertBamboo

The moderators on this forum actively promote the anti-Delta agenda and stifle some posters who offer counter arguments.

To argue that Delta has made a serious mistake in its FF policies is fine. But to threaten and name call those posters who disagree, and tolerate others who do the same, is grave abuse of the moderators' authority and position. It should not be tolerated.

Moderation of the forum is fine, but it must be objective and fair.

RSSrsvp

Sean, I resent the insinuation that the moderators are biased, and have harassed pro-DL posters as a result. That statement of yours is so far from the truth, it is totally ridiculous. Your lynch-mob characterization coupled with a statement about death threats is totally uncalled for. We all know that these "death threats" have absolutely noting to do with the moderators and the manner that they have policed the board. However, you have implied that they do, in the manner that you made your statement.

An apology from you is owed to the four moderators on the board. You should be ashamed of yourself (a fellow moderator) to engage in this type of character assassination.

RSSrsvp

To all of the opponents of moderation, the level of moderation on this board is far lower than many of the other forums on FT. One would only have to take a look at MilesBuzz and the number of locked threads present to see a true comparison. The vast majority of threads that have been closed have been due to the fact that they were not DL related and were moved as per Randy's guidelines to the moderators. There have been a few closed for the use of obscenities or another obvious violation of the TOS.

There have been several trolls that have attempted to disrupt the board, and in case you haven't noticed, one of the worst of these recent offenders has not been seen for a few weeks now. Bert, do you feel that trolls should be allowed to post and disrupt any FT board they wish at will?


As for avek00, it is public record of what type of chaos and flaming resulted from his posting behavior on the UA & AA boards. He himself had started a thread on Randy's board in an attempt defuse the negative reaction to his actions. Bert, please take the time to read that 2 page thread, and email me to discuss this further.

The four moderators on this board have made a unanimous decision to prevent this behavior from happening here. We will not allow cross posting which is a clear violation of FT's TOS. In addition, when a person trolls and makes knowingly false statements with the sole purpose of trying to provoke board members, that will be dealt with also. It is our job to prevent flame wars, and that will be our sole motivation when we do act. In addition, if offensive posts are made, they will be deleted.

Finally, I agree that name calling is uncalled for, and request that all members refrain from these actions.

BertBamboo

You're way off base here Rssrsvp. Your response to Sean is simply another example of your unwillingness to tolerate positions counter to your own.

Sean certainly does not owe you an apology.

Rather, it is you and the other moderators who should resign to allow the appointment of impartial and objective moderators to the position.

RSSrsvp

Sean, are you now saying that avek00 statements about DL raising the mileage threshold are indeed fact, when he himself has acknowledged that it is an unsubstantiated statement.

One could argue that because of your totally pro-DL views you are also biased in your comments. It would be all to easy for one to make an argument that you are far from objective in your remarks. It would be like the pot calling the kettle black.

hfly

Bert,

747 knows exactly what my stanc is here as does mikey.

I have never utterered an "evil Leo" statement, nor have I been totally negative on DL for a long time (not that I am not unhappy with what has been going on, but I believe that some of the rants that have been showing up on the board are counter-productive to our efforts).

What Mikey and the other moderators are trying to avoid is much of the idiocy that AVEK has engendered on other boards. Just last week he made a provocative statement, defended it and then admitted that it was a fabrication done mostly for effect. Many of his posts seem to be more suited to airliners.net, rather than here.