Closing down the "IN THE NEWS" threads?
Mar 2, 2000 | 12:37 pm
#46
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 1999
Posts: 444
There are some very intersesting points being made here, so I'll drop my two cents in the bucket --
My real heartburn with this issue is the public nature of the "CEASE AND DESIST" order that was issued---it should have been a private matter or the concern should have been directed to the good folks at FT---
I do not want to participate in a "community" where individuals feel the need to dictate "community standards or morality" --- again this goes back to the public nature of the warning - I feel that using the word "warning" is a bit euphemistic- let's face it, it was a threat to go to the AP bureau chief --- one that I will not comment on the maturity of -- certainly one could counter that they would approach AP headquarters and question whether the person issuing the order had the authority to speak for AP or to engage AP's name in such a threatening public fashion --- to do such would only send us futher into the morass which we are headed --- I love a spirited debate, as much as I love the personal touches that many FT'ers add to their posts --- it lightens the stress of frequent business travel, adds a human touch, and personalizes FT --
This is fairly simple --- if certain posts, topics, and/or contributors upset individuals - DON'T PLAY - bypass those areas and or individuals --- there is no need to attempt to "disgrace" or punish them publicly -- It is a simple fact that there are several members who don't like how much FT has grown -- so, as with any board of size and substance, cliques tend to form -- the same people responding to the same people over and over and certain members ostracized or excluded -- and you rarely see the cliques respond to new members or offering advice to the "newbies" until they have "MEMBER" status or XXXX number of posts --- This happens and I hope that it does not proliferate -- Which brings to me my final point --- the potential that FT'ers will move their "policing" to other arenas such as the coupon connection --- I have really enjoyed helping FT'ers who have needed upgrades, coupons, etc. and I feel that I have been generous BUT I will "cease and desist" helping others if a coupon gestapo comes into existence etc. -- Additionally, there have been some very forthright FT'ers who have shared ways "to beat the system" and their advice is valuable to all of us --- I just shudder at the thought that one of our community would "run and tell" -- let's remember that airlines take their rules and regulations as seriously as AP and some of what we discuss isn't necessarily kosher ---
I hope that we use this debate to contribute to growing in a positive fashion - kazman
My real heartburn with this issue is the public nature of the "CEASE AND DESIST" order that was issued---it should have been a private matter or the concern should have been directed to the good folks at FT---
I do not want to participate in a "community" where individuals feel the need to dictate "community standards or morality" --- again this goes back to the public nature of the warning - I feel that using the word "warning" is a bit euphemistic- let's face it, it was a threat to go to the AP bureau chief --- one that I will not comment on the maturity of -- certainly one could counter that they would approach AP headquarters and question whether the person issuing the order had the authority to speak for AP or to engage AP's name in such a threatening public fashion --- to do such would only send us futher into the morass which we are headed --- I love a spirited debate, as much as I love the personal touches that many FT'ers add to their posts --- it lightens the stress of frequent business travel, adds a human touch, and personalizes FT --
This is fairly simple --- if certain posts, topics, and/or contributors upset individuals - DON'T PLAY - bypass those areas and or individuals --- there is no need to attempt to "disgrace" or punish them publicly -- It is a simple fact that there are several members who don't like how much FT has grown -- so, as with any board of size and substance, cliques tend to form -- the same people responding to the same people over and over and certain members ostracized or excluded -- and you rarely see the cliques respond to new members or offering advice to the "newbies" until they have "MEMBER" status or XXXX number of posts --- This happens and I hope that it does not proliferate -- Which brings to me my final point --- the potential that FT'ers will move their "policing" to other arenas such as the coupon connection --- I have really enjoyed helping FT'ers who have needed upgrades, coupons, etc. and I feel that I have been generous BUT I will "cease and desist" helping others if a coupon gestapo comes into existence etc. -- Additionally, there have been some very forthright FT'ers who have shared ways "to beat the system" and their advice is valuable to all of us --- I just shudder at the thought that one of our community would "run and tell" -- let's remember that airlines take their rules and regulations as seriously as AP and some of what we discuss isn't necessarily kosher ---
I hope that we use this debate to contribute to growing in a positive fashion - kazman
Mar 2, 2000 | 12:50 pm
#47
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: YVR
Programs: ACSEMM QRGold SPGLifetimePlat FairmontPlat | TalkBoard Founding Member
Posts: 8,969
essxjay - where do you get off typing such stupid and trivial threats to doc on a public board? do you not have anything better to do? get a life! this is simply a chat board where we exchange ideas, stories and NEWS...this is so harmless it is unreal.
also, the board wasn't 'news' it was on 'general traveltalk'....where i have reposted the entire AP article along with a link to the where i 1st read it....let the lawyers find me...
dorian
also, the board wasn't 'news' it was on 'general traveltalk'....where i have reposted the entire AP article along with a link to the where i 1st read it....let the lawyers find me...
dorian
Mar 2, 2000 | 12:59 pm
#49
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: See pitflyer
Posts: 1,620
I respectfully disagree with djlawman. It is not in my interest either way if the board keeps running or not. It is a great resource and I'm glad Inside Flyer hosts it. If it shuts down, either from Inside Flyer or an outside force such as the law, no skin off my back. I'd just go somewhere else. The Internet will survive and another resource will take its place.
Unless I signed a contract with InsideFlyer which included this bulletin board, I have no interest in it either way. They are king, queen, god, whatever. If they are worried about lawsuits, they should set rules and regulations, tell all of us including doc what to post and what not to post. Otherwise, this community moderation is a crock. nathan detroit has tried the same sort of thing and we see how that went.
[This message has been edited by dg1 (edited 03-02-2000).]
Unless I signed a contract with InsideFlyer which included this bulletin board, I have no interest in it either way. They are king, queen, god, whatever. If they are worried about lawsuits, they should set rules and regulations, tell all of us including doc what to post and what not to post. Otherwise, this community moderation is a crock. nathan detroit has tried the same sort of thing and we see how that went.
[This message has been edited by dg1 (edited 03-02-2000).]
Mar 2, 2000 | 1:02 pm
#50
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in KOH LANTA,THAILAND!
Posts: 61,895
You do have to admit: FT looks more and more like a typical internet bulletin board every day (at least outside the specific airline forums) 
Mar 2, 2000 | 1:10 pm
#51
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Texas, U.S.A.
Posts: 19,523
Kazman, I don't agree 100%
I personally don't subscribe to this exclusionary clique theory. I and can state for an absoulute fact that a vast majority of members on this board go out of their way to answer the questions and welcome "newbies" regardless of how many posts they have! The generosity and time some devote to their fellow "newbie" frequent flyers is worthy of thanks beyond our ability to give it, IMHO!
Care to be more specific of just who makes up the "clique" that ignores "newbies?" I would really like to know, as I've been here for some time and I've never noticed it.
I'm very, very sorry you feel this way. And very sorry I had to take this public and off topic, but you do not list an email address in your profile.
[This message has been edited by PremEx (edited 03-02-2000).]
and you rarely see the cliques respond to new members or offering advice to the "newbies" until they have "MEMBER" status or XXXX number of posts
Care to be more specific of just who makes up the "clique" that ignores "newbies?" I would really like to know, as I've been here for some time and I've never noticed it.
I'm very, very sorry you feel this way. And very sorry I had to take this public and off topic, but you do not list an email address in your profile.
[This message has been edited by PremEx (edited 03-02-2000).]
Mar 2, 2000 | 1:11 pm
#53
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: PDX
Programs: TSA Refusenik charter member
Posts: 16,126
Originally posted by doc:
There was literally NOTHING about the NUMBER of posts. This was/is an "afterthought" at best! It's good, I guess to cover all the bases!
There was literally NOTHING about the NUMBER of posts. This was/is an "afterthought" at best! It's good, I guess to cover all the bases!
I watched as others routinely violated copyright etc., for nearly a full year- which I should apparently do no longer, thanks to the heightend sense of awareness I now possess thanks to you!
Another problem with links, aside from the often (24 hr) limited nature, is that they many are "live" and thus change as time passes.
The fact is, I believe, as your friend Premex noted, that this has nothing to do with copyright! Nor is it about the material being posted.
Yet, various FTer's have commented as DJlawman just did, that no one cares.
YOU could have easily been more fair and shown some RESTRAINT.
Mar 2, 2000 | 1:21 pm
#54
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: IAD
Programs: AA Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 27,068
Originally posted by essxjay:
We've tried to be fair with you. We've asked you politely to post in moderation and have indulged you when you said you'd tone it down.
We've tried to be fair with you. We've asked you politely to post in moderation and have indulged you when you said you'd tone it down.
How many posts is "post in moderation"?
Mar 2, 2000 | 2:19 pm
#55
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 1999
Posts: 444
PremEx -- you don't need to agree with me --
that is exactly my point --- we are a community of individuals with differences of opinion on a number of issues -- it is not for any of us to dictate to the other what he or she can or cannot "say" --we are ultimately responsible for our actions -- I cherish the fact that you disagree and have posted that fact -- it helps to make my point -- I do not take your posting in any negative way, therefore I welcome the public nature of it -- you are not attempting to regulate what I say , you simply disagree ---
That is healthy and wonderful --- as for finger pointing -- SORRY, but I have no use in trying to define a clique ---I see it one way and you see it another - the joys of free speech -- I need not define or defend my thoughts, nor must you --- However, I would refer you to lengthy posts in the Coupon Connection in which there is a long discussion of "whom to trust" -- this thread certainly casts a disparaging view on low posters and that thread's very existence is validation enough of my point of view -- the correct answer to that particular question, in my opinion, is ----- we should trust everybody, regardless of number of posts, until they prove themselves not worthy of our trust -- I think that you and I can agree that some posters in that discussion would not agree with me and believe that "low posters" should be viewed with suspicion --- if that is the case --- well, then, that is exclusionary and "cliquish" in nature -- I prefer not to judge on such merits -- In fact I prefer not to judge, thus my distaste for a public display of threatening behavior that I commented on - kazman
that is exactly my point --- we are a community of individuals with differences of opinion on a number of issues -- it is not for any of us to dictate to the other what he or she can or cannot "say" --we are ultimately responsible for our actions -- I cherish the fact that you disagree and have posted that fact -- it helps to make my point -- I do not take your posting in any negative way, therefore I welcome the public nature of it -- you are not attempting to regulate what I say , you simply disagree ---
That is healthy and wonderful --- as for finger pointing -- SORRY, but I have no use in trying to define a clique ---I see it one way and you see it another - the joys of free speech -- I need not define or defend my thoughts, nor must you --- However, I would refer you to lengthy posts in the Coupon Connection in which there is a long discussion of "whom to trust" -- this thread certainly casts a disparaging view on low posters and that thread's very existence is validation enough of my point of view -- the correct answer to that particular question, in my opinion, is ----- we should trust everybody, regardless of number of posts, until they prove themselves not worthy of our trust -- I think that you and I can agree that some posters in that discussion would not agree with me and believe that "low posters" should be viewed with suspicion --- if that is the case --- well, then, that is exclusionary and "cliquish" in nature -- I prefer not to judge on such merits -- In fact I prefer not to judge, thus my distaste for a public display of threatening behavior that I commented on - kazman
Mar 2, 2000 | 2:30 pm
#56
Original Poster
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 46,817
As I've noted before, Samantha, if I may address you as such, or essxjay, if you prefer, POST WHAT YOU LIKE, WHEN YOU LIKE! That's the point. Just please be civil!
One point of clarification, the "no one cares" above was a reference to my posts, NOT to your copyright issue! Yet the thread seems to have metamorphasised somehow! See, it's a bit confusing when we mix apples and oranges!
DJlawman commenting AGAINST regulating/ moderating/"policing" FT noted"...people who seem to have nothing else to do with their lives than post every thing they can find on FlyerTalk, whether anyone else 'cares' about it or not." Thanks for the charitable comment! Needless to say, I'm not a great fan of everyone on the boards either. I try to refrain, however, from such relatively negative phraseology, even when Im being flymed/attacked- though not always 100% successfully!
And I never said PremEx or anyone speaks for you. Quite the contrary, rather that he is a friend who notes that like I, who clearly are not a friend, that he feels it is NOT at all about copyright, as you have claimed. Recall that you immediately burst into your "just the tip of the iceberg" rant in the original SAA thread!
You continue to seem to fail to appreciate that I HAVE tried to "satisfy" you and your friends on one extreme, as well as all the other FT'ers at the other extreme. Recall previous discussions regarding thes issues.
You can research the threads if you like.
Lastly, I'm trying to avoid further confrontation, not induce proliferation of it!
Perhaps you can REread my former post:
"Again, the incredible persective(s) (and perhaps lack of such among some FTers, IMHO) manifests itself. The lack of truthfulness/ objectivity is astounding to me and to any others with evejn a hint of objectivity.
essxjay- You simply told/ordered me to "cease and desist" or else. Nothing could have been more clear.
There was literally NOTHING about the NUMBER of posts. This was/is an "afterthought" at best! It's good, I guess to cover all the bases!
I have always, up until very recently, simply summarized and directed FT'ers via link(s) or otherwise. I watched as others routinely violated copyright etc., for nearly a full year- which I should apparently do no longer, thanks to the heightend sense of awareness I now possess thanks to you!
I had been hesitant even to use a link! One of the FT posters you noted enjoying reading commented just recently, as you may recall that "doc has learned to cut and paste." As I noted previously, a current relatively high profile case, stemming from DVD, has challenged quite effectively, it seems, the propriety of even using links.
Another problem with links, aside from the often (24 hr) limited nature, is that they many are "live" and thus change as time passes.
You say "bunk", yet it is on the record that a NY Times article was on a dead link and would cost $2.50 to open/recall! The poster was- you got it- essxjay- not "essexjay!" Sorry for the previous typo/mispelling.
The fact is, I believe, as your friend Premex noted, that this has nothing to do with copyright! Nor is it about the material being posted. It is, in fact, IMHO, the POSTER- "me"- and not, as you lay claim- my "actions!"
You profess to not be willing to stand by and watch others violate copyright, yet it is in fact precisely what you have always done from the day you arrived up 'til now! Shame on you- you should know better!
Recall when Ken (kyklin) recently noted so matter of factly that he sometimes posts an entire article despite knowing it's a copyright violation and despite the fact that he knows it is wrong- but that he simply does NOT CARE!!! Perhaps that would have been an excellent time to openly threaten someone about going to the AP???!!! Even the most inastute among us can see that the "rules" are applied in a less than egalitarian fashion!
Just a bit of candor, along with a little respect and tolerance of others goes a long way! THERE ARE OTHER PERSPECTIVES OTHER THEN YOUR OWN. If any FTer, no less many do not like my posts, I'm sorry. That's a fact. It's the risk in posting!
Yet, various FTer's have commented as DJlawman just did, that no one cares. Again, I must be the only one who can NOT read others minds and also the only one who unfortunately misreads posts.
What I see is a handful of vocal FTer's who apparently feel that they rule by fiat. This group takes every opportunity to harass/flyme me under other false handles as well as their own real ones!
I'm a fairly well informed individual. I see alot of things I already know. I see quite a bit that I don't care for and/or don't agree with! Or don't like. So what? I just move on. I suppose that makes me silly. Well, I'm learning albeit slowly. Perhaps I can soon attack with venom! Then I too can grace the board with scurillious aspersions to the mutual benefit of all! Is that whats wanted? I think not!
In the interest of keeping peace and in direct specific response to your threat, I say I'm not posting any more news items. So you now apply the term "martyr!"
Having said all this, you are right, silence is golden! I WILL practice more of it.
PremEx is correct in that I've promised to show restraint and done poorly in that regard. Again, while I don't necessarily agree entirely, thanks for the polite reminder.
Yet, while "right," whatever one wants to say or think, that's their point of view. It does not, however, make it necesarily right for EVERYONE, IMHO! This is in sharp contrast to a rule or law such as the copyright issue where, as I plainly noted above, I was wrong!
Nonetheless, I will continue to respect everyone else and their rights even while some FTers hurl thinly veiled insults and profess to never be insulting!
My view is that this entire fiasco should have been handled somwhat differently- perhaps alot differently! YOU could have easily been more fair and shown some RESTRAINT. Unfortunatly, IMHO, you've been lured into a kind of cabal which makes it their business to harass/ flyme me at every opportunity.
FWIW- In ant case, let's let bygones be bygones and move on from this ridiculous distraction. I already have! I've already said FAR too much.
Again, with apologies for the rant,
Mark
PS I dont have the energy to go back and put in HAPPY FACES. Just try to imagine them, they are there in spirit!!!"
One point of clarification, the "no one cares" above was a reference to my posts, NOT to your copyright issue! Yet the thread seems to have metamorphasised somehow! See, it's a bit confusing when we mix apples and oranges!
DJlawman commenting AGAINST regulating/ moderating/"policing" FT noted"...people who seem to have nothing else to do with their lives than post every thing they can find on FlyerTalk, whether anyone else 'cares' about it or not." Thanks for the charitable comment! Needless to say, I'm not a great fan of everyone on the boards either. I try to refrain, however, from such relatively negative phraseology, even when Im being flymed/attacked- though not always 100% successfully!
And I never said PremEx or anyone speaks for you. Quite the contrary, rather that he is a friend who notes that like I, who clearly are not a friend, that he feels it is NOT at all about copyright, as you have claimed. Recall that you immediately burst into your "just the tip of the iceberg" rant in the original SAA thread!
You continue to seem to fail to appreciate that I HAVE tried to "satisfy" you and your friends on one extreme, as well as all the other FT'ers at the other extreme. Recall previous discussions regarding thes issues.
You can research the threads if you like.
Lastly, I'm trying to avoid further confrontation, not induce proliferation of it!
Perhaps you can REread my former post:
"Again, the incredible persective(s) (and perhaps lack of such among some FTers, IMHO) manifests itself. The lack of truthfulness/ objectivity is astounding to me and to any others with evejn a hint of objectivity.
essxjay- You simply told/ordered me to "cease and desist" or else. Nothing could have been more clear.
There was literally NOTHING about the NUMBER of posts. This was/is an "afterthought" at best! It's good, I guess to cover all the bases!
I have always, up until very recently, simply summarized and directed FT'ers via link(s) or otherwise. I watched as others routinely violated copyright etc., for nearly a full year- which I should apparently do no longer, thanks to the heightend sense of awareness I now possess thanks to you!
I had been hesitant even to use a link! One of the FT posters you noted enjoying reading commented just recently, as you may recall that "doc has learned to cut and paste." As I noted previously, a current relatively high profile case, stemming from DVD, has challenged quite effectively, it seems, the propriety of even using links.
Another problem with links, aside from the often (24 hr) limited nature, is that they many are "live" and thus change as time passes.
You say "bunk", yet it is on the record that a NY Times article was on a dead link and would cost $2.50 to open/recall! The poster was- you got it- essxjay- not "essexjay!" Sorry for the previous typo/mispelling.
The fact is, I believe, as your friend Premex noted, that this has nothing to do with copyright! Nor is it about the material being posted. It is, in fact, IMHO, the POSTER- "me"- and not, as you lay claim- my "actions!"
You profess to not be willing to stand by and watch others violate copyright, yet it is in fact precisely what you have always done from the day you arrived up 'til now! Shame on you- you should know better!
Recall when Ken (kyklin) recently noted so matter of factly that he sometimes posts an entire article despite knowing it's a copyright violation and despite the fact that he knows it is wrong- but that he simply does NOT CARE!!! Perhaps that would have been an excellent time to openly threaten someone about going to the AP???!!! Even the most inastute among us can see that the "rules" are applied in a less than egalitarian fashion!
Just a bit of candor, along with a little respect and tolerance of others goes a long way! THERE ARE OTHER PERSPECTIVES OTHER THEN YOUR OWN. If any FTer, no less many do not like my posts, I'm sorry. That's a fact. It's the risk in posting!
Yet, various FTer's have commented as DJlawman just did, that no one cares. Again, I must be the only one who can NOT read others minds and also the only one who unfortunately misreads posts.
What I see is a handful of vocal FTer's who apparently feel that they rule by fiat. This group takes every opportunity to harass/flyme me under other false handles as well as their own real ones!
I'm a fairly well informed individual. I see alot of things I already know. I see quite a bit that I don't care for and/or don't agree with! Or don't like. So what? I just move on. I suppose that makes me silly. Well, I'm learning albeit slowly. Perhaps I can soon attack with venom! Then I too can grace the board with scurillious aspersions to the mutual benefit of all! Is that whats wanted? I think not!
In the interest of keeping peace and in direct specific response to your threat, I say I'm not posting any more news items. So you now apply the term "martyr!"
Having said all this, you are right, silence is golden! I WILL practice more of it.
PremEx is correct in that I've promised to show restraint and done poorly in that regard. Again, while I don't necessarily agree entirely, thanks for the polite reminder.
Yet, while "right," whatever one wants to say or think, that's their point of view. It does not, however, make it necesarily right for EVERYONE, IMHO! This is in sharp contrast to a rule or law such as the copyright issue where, as I plainly noted above, I was wrong!
Nonetheless, I will continue to respect everyone else and their rights even while some FTers hurl thinly veiled insults and profess to never be insulting!
My view is that this entire fiasco should have been handled somwhat differently- perhaps alot differently! YOU could have easily been more fair and shown some RESTRAINT. Unfortunatly, IMHO, you've been lured into a kind of cabal which makes it their business to harass/ flyme me at every opportunity.
FWIW- In ant case, let's let bygones be bygones and move on from this ridiculous distraction. I already have! I've already said FAR too much.
Again, with apologies for the rant,
Mark
PS I dont have the energy to go back and put in HAPPY FACES. Just try to imagine them, they are there in spirit!!!"
Mar 2, 2000 | 2:39 pm
#57
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in KOH LANTA,THAILAND!
Posts: 61,895
I need not define or defend my thoughts, nor must you
A thought or idea is nothing unless it is grounded in logic and is able to be antithisized into a synthesis. And this is my point in http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/002351.html
[This message has been edited by kokonutz (edited 03-02-2000).]
Mar 2, 2000 | 2:41 pm
#58
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Texas, U.S.A.
Posts: 19,523
Kazman thanks for your response. I appreciate your opinons. Now one of my own. In regards to you comment
I don't think that has anything whatsoever to do with any kind of clique. That is just a matter of someone excercising their right as a seller to use whatever criterion they want in establishing credit in order to protect an asset in a commercial transaction. Credit Card companies establish credit limits by various criterion, including how long you've been around! Anyway, I don't think that example indicates any sort of clique. Just various individuals stating their view. Just because some fall into column A and others into column B does not make them a "clique" by definition, IMHO.
And that thread certainly does not address your opinion that:
That is the statement I don't see any evidence of.
Next...
PG wrote:
Well, I assume I am one of the "we."
Come on PG. Why are you insisting on playing a numbers game? You know as well as I there is no absolute number and that's not what's being suggested here.
Answer me one question. If I were to post today a hundred posts on various non-travel related items to say General Travel Talk, would you object? I'm not referring to anything about anyone else here. I'm asking if for whatever reason I decided to post large numbers of whatever I wanted here, based on my personal judgment, good or bad, you would not object?
Imagine clicking on In The News and some real news item has been pushed back to page three because I have filled it up with stories I just feel like posting.
You would not object to that? I would like to know your answer.
Because it's the same thing. Just using a different quantity in the example.
It's about the poster using their personal judgment to decide what is appropriate in this forum.
Judgment or "moderation" cannot be measured or numbered in an accountant's ledger. You know that! But a community has an obligation to not just let anyone do anything they want. They have to let that person know how they feel. Otherwise you have anarchy. Whole societies are built on guidelines and peer pressure.
There's a reason for that. You can't legislate everything. You can't have a cop on every corner. Not everything can be put down in black and white.
I'm just one of the community letting someone know that I don't appreciate some of what they do. Don't try to make it anymore than that. Thank You.
[This message has been edited by PremEx (edited 03-02-2000).]
However, I would refer you to lengthy posts in the Coupon Connection in which there is a long discussion of "whom to trust" -- this thread certainly casts a disparaging view on low posters and that thread's very existence is validation enough of my point of view -- the correct answer to that particular question, in my opinion, is ----- we should trust everybody, regardless of number of posts, until they prove themselves not worthy of our trust.
And that thread certainly does not address your opinion that:
you rarely see the cliques respond to new members or offering advice to the "newbies" until they have "MEMBER" status or XXXX number of posts
Next...
PG wrote:
Who is the "we" referred to here?
How many posts is "post in moderation"?
Answer me one question. If I were to post today a hundred posts on various non-travel related items to say General Travel Talk, would you object? I'm not referring to anything about anyone else here. I'm asking if for whatever reason I decided to post large numbers of whatever I wanted here, based on my personal judgment, good or bad, you would not object?
Imagine clicking on In The News and some real news item has been pushed back to page three because I have filled it up with stories I just feel like posting.
You would not object to that? I would like to know your answer.
Because it's the same thing. Just using a different quantity in the example.
It's about the poster using their personal judgment to decide what is appropriate in this forum.
Judgment or "moderation" cannot be measured or numbered in an accountant's ledger. You know that! But a community has an obligation to not just let anyone do anything they want. They have to let that person know how they feel. Otherwise you have anarchy. Whole societies are built on guidelines and peer pressure.
There's a reason for that. You can't legislate everything. You can't have a cop on every corner. Not everything can be put down in black and white.
I'm just one of the community letting someone know that I don't appreciate some of what they do. Don't try to make it anymore than that. Thank You.
[This message has been edited by PremEx (edited 03-02-2000).]
Mar 2, 2000 | 3:11 pm
#59
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 3,709
Sir Winston Churchill once said, "A fanatic is one who cant change his mind and wont change the subject."
Jeez, I hope that isn't Copyrighted.
------------------
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own."
Jeez, I hope that isn't Copyrighted.
------------------
"I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own."
Mar 2, 2000 | 3:25 pm
#60
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: IAD
Programs: AA Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 27,068
Come on PG. Why are you insisting on playing a numbers game? You know as well as I there is no absolute number and that's not what's being suggested here.
Answer me one question. If I were to post today a hundred posts on various non-travel related items to say General Travel Talk, would you object? I'm not referring to anything about anyone else here. I'm asking if for whatever reason I decided to post large numbers of whatever I wanted here, based on my personal judgment, good or bad, you would not object?
As I mentioned before, the ruckus is not about non-travel items being posted. The ruckus is about travel related items which is posted. I do not know why you keep coming back to talking about non-travel items.
Imagine clicking on In The News and some real news item has been pushed back to page three because I have filled it up with stories I just feel like posting.
You would not object to that? I would like to know your answer.
Because it's the same thing. Just using a different quantity in the example.
It's about the poster using their personal judgment to decide what is appropriate in this forum.
Judgment or "moderation" cannot be measured or numbered in an accountant's ledger. You know that! But a community has an obligation to not just let anyone do anything they want. They have to let that person know how they feel. Otherwise you have anarchy. Whole societies are built on guidelines and peer pressure.
There's a reason for that. You can't legislate everything. You can't have a cop on every corner. Not everything can be put down in black and white.
I'm just one of the community letting someone know that I don't appreciate some of what they do. Don't try to make it anymore than that. Thank You.
It's about the poster using their personal judgment to decide what is appropriate in this forum.
Judgment or "moderation" cannot be measured or numbered in an accountant's ledger. You know that! But a community has an obligation to not just let anyone do anything they want. They have to let that person know how they feel. Otherwise you have anarchy. Whole societies are built on guidelines and peer pressure.
There's a reason for that. You can't legislate everything. You can't have a cop on every corner. Not everything can be put down in black and white.
I'm just one of the community letting someone know that I don't appreciate some of what they do. Don't try to make it anymore than that. Thank You.
[This message has been edited by PG (edited 03-02-2000).]