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...

MRLIMO's idea of using the highest FF program level has some merit. If nothing else, it says something about how much experience one has with these things. Unfortunately, if you read Randy's post (any of them - couldn't resist another dig) he says the software can't do that. It only counts posts. The only flexibility is in how many posts each level requires and what they are called.

If that's the case, I still say no elite levels unless the titles are tongue in cheek. How about "coach" (or "economy"), "business" and "first class?"

Again, elite levels from lowest to highest:

10 posts: Emmit_S
30 posts: Nancy
50 Posts: Roberto
100 posts: Karl Stevens
500 posts: mileshog
1000 posts: Dick Branson
10,000 posts: Arturo
Infinite posts: Randy

I'm not sure what I did to deserve such a high honor as having a whole elite category named after me, but I am happy just being junior.

By the way, I do realise that this is simply another lame attempt by Matt Wald to lampoon me. But he will get his in the end...so to speak.

Using your highest elite level would be fine as some people know what some of them are and there are a bunch existing.

One's highest lever does change from time to time, but that just means we would change them. Oh, yes, the programs change too, but again we would just submit again. Then there are the braggers, who might create a level for themselves that is untrue. Or the underachievers that might fudge the other way.

When your a this with an airline or two and a that with a car company, a somethings else with a hotel, an often yet another thing with your spouse, one can only imagine the variations.

This is fun.

Randy--where are the t-shirts, Exlg for me please.

IMHO:

I don't really think we need much in the way of elite levels since we all contribute to the board in our own way. However, I do think there should still be a designation for new people just so that us "old timers" can cut them some slack when they post to the board. I would recommend changing the new status to "Newbie" instead of "Jr. Member" which can be a bit demeaning. The "Newbie" status could change to the "Member" level after about 10 posts or so. By then, they should know their way around the board and some of the "unwritten" rules & nettiquette. Then they get no slack! http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

------------------
Regards,
- Anna




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

My purpose in getting some feedback is that the "levels" are written into the code of the board software we are using and right now I'm a little hesitant to "hack" the code to remove them. Because they are with us, I was looking to rename these levels, to something more related. This was brought on my a few emails from contributors that were confused by using the terms "members" of any sort. So, since we're stuck with have these levels have some sort of name, what will they be?

arturo, junyor--fore knew peepl

arturo--fore knot knew peepl

Seems like a common thread that some difference should exist for very new contributors and those who have been around longer. This is tied to protecting the newcomers. I agree. I will give up my t-shirt chances and suggest we use "recent member" and "member". This takes care of another common thread of the "stigma" associated with junior member. I also understand those how believe we should all just be members. I propose that what ever the "pre" member is called that it only last thru the first 5 posts. That is a compromise that perhaps we can all live with. It works with Randy's system, it differentiates the newest for their own protection, and it limits the time anyone is "less than" a member.

Randy Petersen writes:

"... I'm a little hesitant to "hack" the code to remove them."


Randy, Go for it! It's not like your folks haven't already been pulling their hair out trying to stay on top of all of the bugs in the system. How much worse could it get?

http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Seriously, I'll stick with passenger, crew, captian. Personally, I'm proud to be any of the three, as they are very related to our interests here. Are there still miles in it for the winner?

Geez -- if you insist on "levels" for a web based bulletin board, let's make it something relative to what we are:

Lurker -- those who don't post much but read EVERY thing

Afflicted -- those who have graduated from lurking to posting (the current 30 post plateau should be lowered)

Addicted -- those who contribute regularly and have Level II withdrawal symptons when the board is "temporarily unavailable" [for DAYS]

Of course we'd need a special level for the special cases like Rudi, Catman and Madame Tree...

I suppose that makes sense: Afflicted Flyer, Addicted Flyer and finally the proverbial...Mileage Junkie. Do we sense the powerful narcotic that miles have become?

Yes, indeed. I never would have thought it before becoming a frequent flyer, but at some point, it isn't about the miles; it becomes a giant, 550-mph pinball game.

Oh! The Double Bonus is lit! Get it! Get it!

I second onefreeman's suggestions!

I agree with the last set - onefreeman's version, Randy's version, or some variation on the same theme. I don't know how many posts it will take to earn the title, but I'm definitely a junkie myself - not only with miles, but with FlyerTalk too!

Randy, I see you're up to 23 posts now. Almost there!

Give me my METHADONE MILES!!!!!
Please, please, please.
This is the last bonus program I'll ever sign up for.
I promise. Just let me have the miles this one last time!!!! Come on..... http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://talk.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

I suppose that "Male Junior Member" and "Male Member" are out of the running along with "Female Junior Member" and "Female Member."

Oops, "Board temporarily out of service due to malfunctioning member."

>>I would recommend changing the new status to "Newbie" instead of "Jr. Member" which can be a bit demeaning. The "Newbie" status could change to the "Member" level after about 10 posts or so.

"Newbie?" Oh, please. That's an Internet beginner. Much more demeaning than "Junior Member." I've been posting using the Internet for years, even if I am new here.

The mental image I get is tatooed and pierced Gen-X'er, sneer on face, can scarcely bring him/herself to utter the word "newbie." I've been living in the Bay Area too long.

I kind of like "Junior Birdman" for us non-elites, but can't come up with anything similarly good for the old timers. "Silver Wings," perhaps?

I agree with Catman and others that we don't need levels. But, If Randy is afraid to "hack the system" to eliminate them, I'd go for onefreeman's version, as modified by Randy's following suggestion. Tying the levels to our FF program levels would probably create a bunch of problems. In my years with Delta, I've always been at least Silver, but I've bounced back and forth and even been Platinum (just one year). Why complicate the record keeping?

please don't use any "dubious/offending" adjectivs (like addicted).

if it has to be two classes I vote for:
1) New Member
2) Member

if it has to be three classes:
1) New Member
2) Member
3) Senior Member

My support goes for the plans proposed by - in their order of my preference - Catman - and Onefreeman. Either no levels, or something amusing - let's not get too serious, folks!!

I'm not certain about this forum, but when it comes to getting on a plane, the different "elite" levels are not what they appear. Somewhere, in the dark recesses of the mind of each of us, where we allow no one else to enter, I suspect there are really only two levels: Me, and Everyone Else.

Regards,

Ken Hamer
P.S. Oh yeah... about the new member ratings system, how 'bout just putting the total number of posts beside or below the members name?

As a new poster but very long time lurker, I would like to add my opinion to this thread. I agree with several others that different levels are not desirable - anyone who has been reading here for a while knows who is and isn't posting good information. Since you are unwilling to hack the code, could you set a single level by making the threshold for the second level so high that nobody will ever reach it?

If levels are a must (commercially, politically, technologically), I like Rudi's suggestion. It seems to combine the maximum dignity with the minium potential for offence.

Best wishes,
James

If we have to have levels then I vote for Rudi's sugestion.

Randy,
I have to agree with proposed "member" and "senior member" designations.
A "lurker" designation for those of us who read all the posts but do not reply is unfair.
Unless I have a contribution to make, I refrain from responding.The erudite and knowledgeable amongst us have provided valuable commentary. Why toss my two cents in just to make "senior member".
Flyer Talk is a most valuable asset.

After onefreemans' post, I had to reply! Yes many are "addicted", I've seen withdrawals first hand, not a pretty sight. I have a problem tho with "Lurker" makes me sound like a peeping tom.