You hit the nail on the head:

Airlines/hotels pay for good coverage.

FT needs to be balanced and is no lobbyist for the airlines. That's exactly the reason why the airlines pay for it: they are looking for good coverage.

Mods should stay out of discussions in general and should stop thinking they are inofficial PR people for the airline/hotel they are covering.

Anybody who reads the Southwest forum knows that I have no problem speaking out when Southwest behaves badly toward customers. I operate on the assumption that decisions are hotly debated within a company. I want FT to add weight to the customers' side of each of these arguments. I sincerely believe that customer-friendly decisions are most often the right decisions for the company.

Have any of the bad decisions been reversed? No. But I believe that subsequent decisions may have been favorably affected.

Would a moderator ever advocate the company line over the interest of customers and the long-term interest of the company itself? Not that I've ever heard of and not that I could imagine. PM me if you wish to enlighten me with examples.

The ASA in the UK has taken a clear stand on bloggers taking comps: http://www.asa.org.uk/News-resources...and-blogs.aspx

As did the FTC: http://www.blogher.com/must-read-ftc...rules-bloggers

A former colleague runs an outfit which provides a 'collaborative platform, that enable brands to activate consumers in brand advocates, thus creating credible experienced-based word-of-mouth' ;) There is a ton of money being made around this in the FMCG industry, moms recommending a certain brand of diapers/creams/candy via their blogs is big business. Our hobby is a very very small niche with very educated frugal consumers. Money can only be made via credit card referrals... the only other viable business plan here is probably to host a bouquet of blogs and offer consultancy services to travel providers on how to leverage your brand or loyalty programme in the new media.

Are you saying that Randy is at the top of a blog pyramid scheme!? ;):D

I don't think most people would assume rules are put into place solely as a result of actual abuse. Even if some folks did, so what? That shouldn't be the deciding factor.

[QUOTE=Jasper2009;22135779]@84fiero: Keep in mind it wasn't me, but nsx who mentioned the bold part - I don't know if this actually occurs with any regularity, and hadn't thought it would have - but I wouldn't know.

It's not a slam towards mods or what they do. I have to disclose financial information as part of my job, to allow management and oversight officials to determine if any potential appearance of conflict exists. I don't take it as a personal slight.

In some forums they quite readily lock threads, edit and delete posts. I've never heard of those actions being reviewed or overruled by anyone. And from what I've gathered their judgment is a large factor in banning decisions. Of course, since such proceedings are forbidden from discussion, I don't know how I would make a fair estimation of what actually does occur behind the scenes. So I'd have no way of know if I am overestimating or not!;)

What harm does it do to make such a disclosure? Wouldn't it make for better transparency rather than hearing about things through rumor, innuendo, and discussion on other boards?

I am aware and others are as well.

EDIT: I missed the posts that answered my original question on the Moderator Good Practices document. Since we're not allowed to know what it says, its existence is irrelevant to members. I can't fathom why it's not publicly available to members, though.

Frankly, it's all this secrecy surrounding anything mod-related that probably exacerbates people's concerns.

I didn't take any of the comments upthread as sanctimonious and certainly didn't intend mine that way. It's not a criticism of the work done to ask "what goes on behind the scenes?" "does FT have a policy about such matters? - if so, what is it; if not, why not?" You guys may be volunteers but FT is a for-profit business.

Sorry, I still don't know which event or thread you are referring to.

MommyPoints went to Keystone for a comp-ed ski trip last year. Didn't even bother reading about her latest ski trip because I assumed it was comp-ed.

And frankly, Texans should ski in Texas.

Yes it is. But members pay nothing to join and the site is for informational purposes. Internet Brands as the owner has no obligation to disclose anything and I for one totally agree with this. Its their gold, they get to make the rules.

Having a business relationship does not provide general immunity for violations of legal or employment restrictions on the acceptance of "gifts" in the form of travel expenses/travel expense reimbursement.

People are influenced by gifts or even "gifts" in the form of travel expense/reimbursement -- partial or otherwise; however, not all are. It has impacted this place.

I read her blog posts. They have useful information and the info aligns a fair amount with my own knowledge -- and I would like to think that I can't be bought by industry suppliers to the extent that I would stand up for them and against a consumer because of that. [Mind you, I have had previous business relationships with various industry suppliers, some of which are on the receiving end of my most critical posts. My sig on FT is a sign of that, and my business relationship with DL on the B2B side was always great.] If posts critical of a travel industry supplier were being censored or getting someone put on warning/watch lists of some sort, then I'd have more substantial concern about the influence of the industry suppliers and those receiving the "freebies". That would go for bloggers, BB/forum/social network "management"/"management favorites", and even for frequent regular posters on BBs/forums/social networks.

Well, apparently past experience on the subject still holds true!

I wasn't aware that Internet Brands controlled the Talkboard, the moderator team, their conduct, rules (including undisclosed "good practices" document), etc.

Well technically they do. They are the ultimate owners of FT, the Community Director reports to Internet Brands, the Mods are accountable to the CD. They (IB) can set the conduct requirements and rules anyway they like...the fact that they choose to take a hands off approach proves that the existing management approach works.

If IB does control those things, then all the more reason (I had the impression that TB and its denizens operated mostly hands-off from IB in general). I don't see how IB's current choice of approach "proves" anything. In fact some occurrences over the past couple years might call that into question. But it doesn't really matter as it seems the "blue wall" is in place. Heck, some folks, including our beloved kokonutz, have asked simply for the mod practices document to be made public and even that has never gotten traction.

Back to our regularly scheduled blogger analysis...

I'm an enemy of secrecy and censorship and there's plenty of that here. True that this board and IB are not public institutions and can therefore set their own rules - but to waste energy pretending it isn't censored, or claiming that everything is "well-judged," is a waste of readers' time and we all know it. All mods should accept that by taking the position, they occupy a situation of public mistrust to a greater or lesser degree. It surprises me when they don't seem to understand this.

What amuses me of course is that despite the cloud of secrecy surrounding the mods and their actions - which they may protest till the cows come home but since it's all self-referential with no corroboration, the readership will be skeptical - are all known, in full, to the NSA. Muahahaha! And therefore, one interesting mechanism to force reveal would be to file FOIA wrt national intelligence agencies on "Internet Brands" and "Flyertalk." It is so entertaining, it might be worth spending an hour drafting the document.

Allah akhbar!

You can add The Points Guy to the list:

http://youtu.be/rHaLCmrS7r8

I had the opportunity to team up with SPG and American Express to film a video around Miami with TPG canine mascot Miles about why I love the city and also some tips on Maximizing your SPG points- check it out here:


Shoot, he should really just have Starwood and Amex sponsor every one of his stays that he reviews knowing that his photo editing skills is limited to Instagram filters and blurry iPhone photos: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/exter...rite-offs.html I don't think I can recall any recent negative reviews he's posted of a Starwood property?