The problem with arguing with a fool is that the people watching might not be able to tell which is which.

Mvic,

As I made clear before, I chose to participate at a level I saw as fair and as, reasonably intended by the offerer. I have never said no one should have participated at all. I said reasonable people should treat others reasonably. Did you miss that part? Did I ever say any participation was unreasonalbe? Quite the contrary, I outline my personal process for deciding what to do... that I would order magazines I would read on subjects of interest to me, one copy of each... that's what I considered reasonable. Have I once in any post suggested that no one should have ordered any magazines, or have I expressed my belief that ordering thousands of dollars worth voilated the spirit of the offer, ruined the process for the future, and displayed disregard (when fair regard was yet expected in return). I don't think I missed differentiating those two ideas.

BTW, I am not trying to 'win' an arugument, I won't 'win' with my ideas in this place. I am, however, trying to posit other considerations in the hope some people will consider (reconsider) whether they really 'win' when programs are strip mined to the point of destruction.

I don't have it 'in' for milespy and actually received an email from one of the principals appreciative of the flow of differing ideas. As individual people I have no ill will for Beaubo or Matthew Clement, none at all. I see some of their behavior as destructive to the overall picture, this I choose to point out. This forum is after all about sharing ideas and ideas are much bigger than just bonuses; and bonuses, and their future in particular, are about more than just the particulars of a particular bonus (repetition intended )

I DO have it in for the idea that FF programs can be run over in such a way as exemplified by GP/VM and then the 'community' can expect FF to continue to be reasonably generous over time. I thought that was obvious. I have a stake personally in that (I have quite a few miles/points as previously stated) as well as a view that if we expect (as FTers do in abundance) to be treated well and fairly, that we ought to consider what fair treatment is in return. I don't see that as novel or extreme. What I see as novel and extreme is the use of the internet, this site in particular, to empower all the gougers with quick information, and that this has dire consequence for the future. I do believe lack of self-limitation is a threat to frequency programs in the age of instant sharing (and on a broader plane lack of self limitation is a threat to much more).

[This message has been edited by wormwood (edited 05-14-2002).]

[This message has been edited by wormwood (edited 05-14-2002).]

[This message has been edited by wormwood (edited 05-14-2002).]

Without knowing the exact nature of their agreements both with the airlines and Valuemags it's impossible to assert whether they did or didn't lose money. For all we know, Radisson may trade out crew-space for airline miles. Yes there's a 'cost' for the rooms but that's not the same thing as an outflow of cash. We're going to have to agree to disagree here.

Point well taken. Information sharing is a fact of life now. The flip side is: who wants to be the one who missed out on the deal of the year? FT exists to share information. Yes, it works to the detriment of uncapped loss-leader promotions (and I don't think anyone can seriously doubt that *somebody* lost a bunch of money on ValueMags), but that's ultimately the fault of the designers of the promotion. You might as well blame water for running downhill.

Getting back to your point: are FTers better off with a few super-generous promotions that only a few of us find out about? I prefer less generous promotions that we all have a chance to participate in, and I think that's where things are headed. I don't agree with the doom and gloom.


The parenthetical comment is where I have to disagree. Human beings have been living with what economists call the "tragedy of the commons" since before the dawn of recorded history. We make rules and procedures to deal with the problem, taking human nature (greed, if you prefer) as a given. Some say greed is bad, and some say greed is good, but either way, greed IS. Get over it. Systems that require human nature to change are doomed to failure.

[This message has been edited by nsx (edited 05-14-2002).]