Feedback on Proposed FlyerTalk Program Levels
 

First, please give everyone at FlyerTalk a huge thumbs up for working on getting the electronic "glitch" bugs out of the board.

Can you tell us if one of the topics that got "lost" when the problems occurred was the one wherein you asked for our input regarding potential different levels of participation in FlyerTalk? Or was it that you received the feedback for which you were looking and decided to erase (or not reopen) the thread?

Thanks in advance for your answer.

You're right, this post did get messed up. Let's start again. I'd like feedback on two levels:
1) renaming the levels of FlyerTalk. The main engine allows us to rename "Junior Member" and "Member". If we were to add a third level to FlyerTalk, what would you to have these levels called? They will probably still be determined by the number of posts, as we can't alter that part of the software. Ideas?
2) On the main WebFlyer area, we have had comments asking why we don't have our own "Elite" levels. We have some ideas on what the qualifiers might be, but we'd like some feedback on what to call the levels. Could they be the same as FlyerTalk? One of the purposes would be to distribute awards, for instance, on FlyerTalk, we have in production, luggage tags and t-shirts. We'd like to have levels to hand them out against so that we don't appear to show favorites as to who gets them. Names? How about EliteOne, EliteTwo and EliteThree? Talk to me....

Duplicate thread caused by me.....sorry.

[This message has been edited by Randy Petersen (edited 05-27-99).]

Randy, are you trying to get over 30 posts so you can lose that "junior member" label too?

I vote for _no_ "elite" levels. This is a pretty democratic place. People get status for the value or interest of their posts, not (except for a little friendly competition) for their quantity. I don't think we need status differentials. The reasons airlines have elite levels don't apply here.

As for luggage tags, etc. - a great idea, but I think anyone who's interested enough in FlyerTalk to want to advertise it publicly ought to be able to get them. A free set after some number of posts would be a nice touch without creating status levels. Anyone else should be able to get them at a price, perhaps after showing some minimal level of participation.

Regarding what the current levels are called: I don't like "junior member" since it sounds derogatory, though it does have the (usually) beneficial effect of encouraging people to make their first 30 posts quickly! How about "new member?"

Thank you for explaining what you are seeking Randy.

As I have said, this is a community and I think we should all be EQUAL. It is difficult enough to struggle and fight and fly and stay to reach elite in the "real" world... here let's make everyone ELITE!

And we can all be one big happy family of ELITES!

No titles, no differences, just friendly Frequent Flyers sharing their knowledge and their humor!

Thank you for letting me put my point across.

I would also vote against having levels.

This is a paraphrase of the thoughts I posted on this topic before the computer gremlins ate the prior thread.

For the purpose of allowing InsideFlyer to recognize special participants, I would support a scheme that honored our mileage athletes (from lowest recognition to highest) as follows:

1. Player

2. All Star

3. Hall of Fame

I agree that this is not the way to honor an especially effective individual post or series of posts. In that regard, any one of us has the potential to earn the respect of the others who post to this board.

If a third level can only be determined by "number of posts" then I vote NO. If it can could be achieved as a result of contributions to the board I would be in favor. Although this would prevent Arturo from attaining automatic membership in the new category it might cause Counsellor to be included who, because of his Healthy Choice post I am 11,000 Aadvantage miles richer.

I don't like doing this twice!

Junior member is not my favorite. I agree with others that this seems like they are not members, to me.

Members and Senior Members would be better (if people do not get confused with age).

Finally, as previously stated, take ELITE and use it. First post is E. 11th post EL, 25 ELI, 100 post ELIT, and 1000 posts ELITE. At 10000 posts I believe part ownership should be awarded!!!!

Some posts should not count...

arturo themk es long es arturo kawled "sir", no labels ar OK. en fack arturo suport no labels et awl, eben kawlin arturo "sir".

Randy, if all you're looking for are names for the arbitrary software levels, the answers should be obvious:

1) Passenger
2) Crew
3) Captian

I'd still like to see the levels relate to something other than posts. Perhaps a simple "member since" like Amex might be better?

Randy, as one of the newest "Junior Members" on the block I am more than glad to
provide (I feel) some impartial input. I haven't had the chance or pleasure to meet or bond with any of the fine persons of FlyerTalk whether they are regular contributors, staff members or silent observers--all equally important components for this type of successful forum.

I would suggest retaining "member levels" using different criteria than the sheer number of postings. It has been helpful to me, though not imperative, to be have at least some idea of a person's level of expertise or involvement with frequent flying when perusing and contributing to the boards. With that in mind, I propose the following ideas.

Plan I
Simply stated, our FlyerTalk level of membership would be listed as the highest level of any one (or more???) of our current Frequent Flyer programs. Give it your best shot! For example: CO GOLD, UA PREMIER, HP PLATINUM, etc. This could be accomplished
during the initial sign-up through a well formatted yet simple check list allowing changes like any others as they become necessary. This type of membership status is earned the old fashioned way, we've had to fly for it!!! Randy, if you need tiers, please see my example in Plan II.

Plan II
Rather than reinventing the wheel or having to get our scales or dictionaries out to
determine which is more valuable, let's stay with terms we are ALL familiar with:
Platinum, Gold, and Silver levels and add Titanium at the top and Bronze at the bottom
for some flexibility. Nothing new to learn! And Randy, if you need more than five levels for whatever wonderful things you have up your sleeve in the months and years ahead, you could add I, II, III, IV etc. to each of these five metals. Unlike your tier suggestion, the difference being, the higher the number, the higher the status, thus giving you unlimited growth potential within each metal!!! Upward mobility, as it were. Under this plan, I would suggest that current members and junior members be grandfathered in at the
(yet to be determined) appropriate member levels. Also, length of membership or
Frequent Flyer program experiences be factored in somehow in determining member level rather than just a simple count of postings.

Randy, I submit these ideas based on the limited knowledge of not completely knowing
what you have in mind. Take them with a grain of salt and a million miles!

I very much agree with mrlimo. That would seem to be a very fair and rational way of doing this and it would remove the concern of people making posts just to make it to the next elite level! Also, perhaps you could work in some way of measuring people who have elite status in more than one program - such as Merry who seems to be Platinum, Gold, Emerald or Titanium in every program imaginable!

This posting temporarily unavailable for routine maintenance. Please try back repeatedly for days for [no] further information.

[This message has been edited by onefreeman (edited 05-27-99).]

I'm not in favor of "levels." I have received great information from both "newbies" as well as the more senior members of FT. Let us all contribute what we know and not allow our advice be "labeled" with status. My 2 cents...