Hi Randy,

I know that in the FT rules it says not to bump a thread that is over two years old.

There have been a couple of recent threads that have been attached to very old threads ,greater than 2 years old, by the moderators.

Aside from information being out-of-date in these old threads, it can make a new thread very long trying to get to the new info.

I have asked the moderators why they have done this but have had no response. Here is an example in the Hilton forum. They attached a new thread to one that way 7 years old.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/hilto...-starwood.html

Thanks,

MoreMilesPlease

I think it is pretty obvious that the thread, to which you linked, demonstrates a clerical error by the moderator. However, it was fun to be reminded of some people who don't post as much as they used to.

As you know, you received a personal reply from at least one of the Moderators in the Hilton forum regarding your question. Because the information you received might help others understand that it's not the MODs actually bumping old threads, but rather members who provide the direction on where information should go in a forum, I'll recap what I know of it for the reading interest of other members.

The reason why the threads were combined is because both threads had almost exactly the same name, that is, they were asking the very same question.

In the early days of adding a volunteer Moderator to the Hilton forum, they were overwhelmingly inundated with Report Bad Posts requesting that the moderators merge threads with similar topics to facilitate in the ease of searching for information in the Hilton HHonors forum. That problem was also evident in other forums, such as the American AAdvantage forum where long-time members were constantly complaining about newer threads of information asked in the past and that unless threads were merged it was nearly impossible to sort out 1,000 threads on the very same topic. So the Hilton moderators set out to listen to the members of the forum by analyzing the RBPs that came in about certain types of threads in the forum. Since much of the Hilton forum has been consolidated, the number of Report Bad Posts have been significantly reduced -- which would seem to indicate that the general members of the forum were now quite pleased with its overall organization. The fact is, the Hilton forum moderators usually receive Report Bad Posts whenever a new thread is launched when a similar one already exists, requesting that the threads be merged! It's not the Moderators who are spotting these types of situations or even requesting action, rather, it is the members who spend the most time there and are most familiar with the topics that are new and that have been answered in the past.

When Moderators of any forum respond to the majority of members in that forum via their suggestions, it would seem that the Moderators are serving forum members in the best way possible and that is to ensure that their experience in the forum is as positive, informative and valuable as possible.

I've now read the thread you referenced and if one were to actually ignore the date stamps on the posts, I did not find that a reader would be harmed in the comments and advice that span 7 1/2 years. In fact, it seems that not many even noticed as the thread garnered 17 posts in its two years of existence and now added 29 new posts since it was merged. The member who posted the question seems extremely pleased with the advice given them and the general members of forum seem genuinely interested in providing their different takes on the answers.

What we do know is that the question of Hilton vs. Marriott vs. Starwood is well answered. Would it have been better to have three threads of the same similar question? I simply do not know for sure that answer. I'm sure that some members would have argued for three threads, other for a single thread and that there would likely have been no super majority. So a volunteer makes a judgement call. After reading this particular thread, I can live it that. There's other merged threads I would have said differently, but it any of those situations, it would have been my single opinion vs. those of many other members and it's cool that I just may be in the minority at times.

There is one thing about this particular thread. In my research of log files at the time, your RBP about this particular thread was the only one. And to that, I would credit the volunteers as I would not be in favor of any volunteer doing knee-jery reactions to a single RBP unless it was related in nature to a flaming of another member. As with any merged threads, it takes up to dozens of RBPs for members to make a point toward a thread merger, not just a single report.

But, this is how we continue to learn and balance the needs of our members, the growth of posting on FlyerTalk and the information that is contained in threads already part of FlyerTalk.

I hope this might have shed additional light on the actions of merged threads -- that they are far less the actions on the volunteer Moderators, than they are the wished of our member members so that it is easier to narrow down any searches they have on particular topics. Again, I'm not sure that 1,000 threads titled Hilton vs. Marriott vs. Starwood does FlyerTalk any good and as for the delicate balance of merging vs. letting threads lay live, I'm comfortable with the odds that over time, more members will be served with merged threads than without them and I'm willing to accept that not every single merged thread will be the correct decision. And, I would hope that our volunteers would spend the time to review any merged thread if there is a plentitude of additional information that may help them manage that thread better.

Again, appreciate the feedback. On this one, the overall thread still seems relevant to me despite one of two singular posts that may appear dated or incomplete. Heck, that happens even in real time. And thank you for your support of FlyerTalk.

Sorry, Randy, but this has been one of my pet peeves on FT for years -- not only in connection with merged threads but with any RBP.

The number of RBPs sent in is (or should be) immaterial. A thousand RBPs do not make a TOS violation out of a harmless post. By the same token, even if no RBPs at all are sent in, if a moderator sees a post which is in violation of the TOS he should take action.

I have known (and I believe you have too) of groups which banded together to attack certain posters and posts. One of the tricks they used was to agree to RBP a post and then proceeded to do so en masse.

I have not heard of this being done recently but I would not be at all surprised if that were the case.

IMHO, the RBP button should serve only one purpose -- to bring what the member considers to be a problem to the moderators' attention. It is the mods' review of the post/thread in question which should determine what action they do or do not take, not the number of RBPs made.

There might be a language barrier here. I think the OP's comments were relative to a single merged thread in which the member provide a link to. It was regarding comparing various hotel loyalty programs. Members do actually use the RBP to bring attention to any number of situations, including in this case, that of threads in which the member may believe and does suggest it be merged with another. One typically would not RBP a thread in which they say "do not merge."

As to your point, that's actually the issue. A thousand RBPs do not make a violation of anything, but it is the mechanism of which the situation can be brought to a volunteers attention and then if necessary an action take place -- key word here, "if necessary."

The issue is a bit more complicated than just this. While you are correct in asserting that "It is the mods' review of the post/thread in question which should determine what action they do or do not take, not the number of RBPs made," the problem does exist whereas a Moderator makes a decision by what they believe they see which is aided by input from our members. In any situation, it can lead to this being a questionable call if the decision is not in line with a single or multiple members point-of-view. But of course for the members whose input was fairly parallel to that of the decision by the Moderator, then life is good. I'd be sorry if any observation of a volunteers work was held up for examination by a single decision of a thread or a member. I would hope you'd agree with that as well and only when members become aware of the tremendous number of actions and decisions that our volunteers have to make does it seem like maybe, just maybe they do a very good job. And these actions really aren't about merging threads. I'd say most of the time they spend today is protecting you from the outside attacks of spam, etc. For instance, in 2009, according to the Moderator Log Entries, the 80 volunteers were involved with 94,492 actions. In 2006, they were involved in only 35,661 actions. That's a healthy increase in work load, again mostly due to protecting you from spam attacks, etc. Yes, that's an average of nearly 259 Moderator actions daily on FlyerTalk and you know what, I'd say that 99% of our members never notice a single action daily by these volunteers.

So, let's continue to work together and let our volunteers know of situations that may better FlyerTalk -- and this may be a merge of similar topic threads, or in the case of what you suggest Dovster and I agree with you, alerting them to "what the member considers to be a problem" and then rejoin using FlyerTalk to better your travel and other knowledge or to help another member. Now, it may be you need to remind or inquire with the Moderator about something and that's good as well. I know I need all the reminders I can get.

Appreciate your input.

Randy: Thank you very much for the detailed information. As the history logs will show, as an original member I think I have pushed the RBP button less than three times EVER. My point is not that I am right and anyone else is wrong (even though I obviously believe that, personally). Rather, my point is that your post helps to remind me that because of the diversity of people who post here, there is sometimes much more thought, behind the scenes, than we individually realize, from our own perspectives.

FT continues to be one of the most pleasant items in my 35 years of "internet" experience.

Thanks, I appreciate you seeing that.