United board moderators out of control
May 21, 2003 | 11:26 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Too many
Programs: Lots
Posts: 5,765
United board moderators out of control
This is getting ridiculous. United moderators are now locking threads where members are simply pointing out other members' previously stated "predictions" or simply stating that some members could not possibly have any idea about plans a particular airline might have.
As pointed out in the other thread currently running, moderators seem to be expressly allowing ONE member to bait, yet locking threads when people respond. Note, recent locked threads contained no personal attacks or anything similar - Just posts pointing out how wrong a poster was.
I do not believe these moderators are acting within the spirit of Flyertalk. Moderators should, above all, be impartial and this is clearly no longer the case here.
As pointed out in the other thread currently running, moderators seem to be expressly allowing ONE member to bait, yet locking threads when people respond. Note, recent locked threads contained no personal attacks or anything similar - Just posts pointing out how wrong a poster was.
I do not believe these moderators are acting within the spirit of Flyertalk. Moderators should, above all, be impartial and this is clearly no longer the case here.
May 21, 2003 | 12:01 pm
#2
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Sunny SYDNEY!
Programs: UA Million Miler. (1.9M) Virgin Platinum. HH Diamond + SPG Gold
Posts: 32,351
Axey. Well I would not term it 'out of control'. They have a difficult line to tread with a troll who posts nonsense like this an hour back:
"My discussions with several UA resource planners and industry insiders have caused me to conclude that UA flying B744s on domestic routes is a losing proposition on many fronts".
The fact it is demonstrated to avek00 UA is running near FULL 747s domestically does not matter one wit. He posted yesterday he did not even know if UA ran 3 class 747s - such is his total lack of UA flying ... they have flown ONLY 3 classers for yonks.
There are dozens on the UA board who now respond to it at different times. I am by no means innocent and I am not saying that for a second. And there is their dilemma.
I literally tried for a while responding to such nonsense with:
That made him even worse. It does not work. Ignoring certainly does not work.
I am not sure what the moderators can really do?
"My discussions with several UA resource planners and industry insiders have caused me to conclude that UA flying B744s on domestic routes is a losing proposition on many fronts".
The fact it is demonstrated to avek00 UA is running near FULL 747s domestically does not matter one wit. He posted yesterday he did not even know if UA ran 3 class 747s - such is his total lack of UA flying ... they have flown ONLY 3 classers for yonks.
There are dozens on the UA board who now respond to it at different times. I am by no means innocent and I am not saying that for a second. And there is their dilemma.
I literally tried for a while responding to such nonsense with:
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">avek00, would you please be so kind as to refrain from commenting on
programs with which you are unfamiliar and not an active flying member. Please refer to statements by present Mileage Plus Elites on these boards who DO have accurate information and valuable first hand knowledge on United.
Sweeping and vague statements adding nothing to the thread is confusing and only tends to make things even more stressful and difficult for those of us here who ARE actually directly affected, during these complicated times of change. Thank you. </font>
programs with which you are unfamiliar and not an active flying member. Please refer to statements by present Mileage Plus Elites on these boards who DO have accurate information and valuable first hand knowledge on United.
Sweeping and vague statements adding nothing to the thread is confusing and only tends to make things even more stressful and difficult for those of us here who ARE actually directly affected, during these complicated times of change. Thank you. </font>
I am not sure what the moderators can really do?
May 21, 2003 | 12:02 pm
#3
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: CH-3823 Wengen Switzerland
Programs: miles&more, MileagePlus
Posts: 27,043
I fully agree with what SEA_Tigger posted in the 'avek'-other thread in this Forum (and as I can't formulate as clear and precise in english, please let me quote him here):
SEA_Tigger
And, Randy - it was wonderful seeing you and Julie last weekend here in Seattle.
SEA_Tigger
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">My issues are not with avek00 as a person, for I have never met him and know nothing about him, so it's pretty hard to form any sort of opinion on him.
My issues are with his often (not always, but often) inflamatory remarks in the UA forum that seem to serve only two purposes:
1) inciting almost Pavlovian replies from a handful of FTers, almost always disparaging;
2) forcing the moderators to close these threads, thereby denying the remaining FT community on the UA forum the chance to discuss/debate the issue.
I have attempted to debate avek00 on many of his statements, but generally he ignores any rational/logical/reasonable rebuttal in favor of those who do not respond that way to him, helping to fan the flames until the moderators come in and close the thread.
Only this morning, two threads on reports that UA may be considering leaving bankruptcy in Q3 2003 instead of Q2 2004 have been closed - one within three responses. In both cases, avek00 made a comment that UA should exit C11 by filing C7. Within seconds, the Pavlovian attacks began and the moderators had to close the threads moments later.
Frankly, both parties are at fault. avek00 for using language he knew would upset UA flyers, and "the usual suspects" who seem to only be able to respond to his posts with sarcasim and derogatory comments.
avek00 should be privately counseled to moderate his tone. He is welcome to post on the UA forum even if he does not fly UA. But just as I would be out of line to constantly reply to every post in the CO forum - regardless of topic - with "Gordon Bethune is an idiot and CO will file C7 because he runs them", avek00 is also out of line with his equally inflammatory remarks in the UA forum.
As for "the usual suspects", they also need to be counseled privately to "shoot the message, and not the messanger". Debunking the views of avek00 with factual, knowledgeable, and intelligent replies is far more effective than calling him names.
Banning avek00 will solve nothing in the long run. We must all acts like adults, regardless of our age, and remember that FlyerTalk is a community and not a verbal wrestling ring.</font>
My issues are with his often (not always, but often) inflamatory remarks in the UA forum that seem to serve only two purposes:
1) inciting almost Pavlovian replies from a handful of FTers, almost always disparaging;
2) forcing the moderators to close these threads, thereby denying the remaining FT community on the UA forum the chance to discuss/debate the issue.
I have attempted to debate avek00 on many of his statements, but generally he ignores any rational/logical/reasonable rebuttal in favor of those who do not respond that way to him, helping to fan the flames until the moderators come in and close the thread.
Only this morning, two threads on reports that UA may be considering leaving bankruptcy in Q3 2003 instead of Q2 2004 have been closed - one within three responses. In both cases, avek00 made a comment that UA should exit C11 by filing C7. Within seconds, the Pavlovian attacks began and the moderators had to close the threads moments later.
Frankly, both parties are at fault. avek00 for using language he knew would upset UA flyers, and "the usual suspects" who seem to only be able to respond to his posts with sarcasim and derogatory comments.
avek00 should be privately counseled to moderate his tone. He is welcome to post on the UA forum even if he does not fly UA. But just as I would be out of line to constantly reply to every post in the CO forum - regardless of topic - with "Gordon Bethune is an idiot and CO will file C7 because he runs them", avek00 is also out of line with his equally inflammatory remarks in the UA forum.
As for "the usual suspects", they also need to be counseled privately to "shoot the message, and not the messanger". Debunking the views of avek00 with factual, knowledgeable, and intelligent replies is far more effective than calling him names.
Banning avek00 will solve nothing in the long run. We must all acts like adults, regardless of our age, and remember that FlyerTalk is a community and not a verbal wrestling ring.</font>
May 21, 2003 | 12:09 pm
#4
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Sunny SYDNEY!
Programs: UA Million Miler. (1.9M) Virgin Platinum. HH Diamond + SPG Gold
Posts: 32,351
Rudi .. you were in Seattle too last weekend? How was the weather there?
May 21, 2003 | 12:16 pm
#5
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: West Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,469
maybe it was a pocket-sized Rudi that Punqi kept well hidden! 
I do agree that SEA_tigger's words are wise in this regard!
[This message has been edited by chexfan (edited 05-21-2003).]
I do agree that SEA_tigger's words are wise in this regard!
[This message has been edited by chexfan (edited 05-21-2003).]
May 21, 2003 | 12:22 pm
#6
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Sunny SYDNEY!
Programs: UA Million Miler. (1.9M) Virgin Platinum. HH Diamond + SPG Gold
Posts: 32,351
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by chexfan:
[b]maybe it was a pocket-sized Rudi that Punqi kept well hidden!
</font>
[b]maybe it was a pocket-sized Rudi that Punqi kept well hidden!
</font>
May 21, 2003 | 12:55 pm
#7
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Too many
Programs: Lots
Posts: 5,765
Point well taken, Rudi [and others].
However, the one minor flaw in tigger's well reasoned post is this paragraph:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but as Tigger himself clearly outlines, we've already tried the debunking. I tried it weeks and months ago constantly. Tigger tried it as well. So have countless others.
So my entire point for the last few weeks has been this: We've all tried to deal with Avek reasonably. We've all tried to post reasonable contrary opinions. He continuously ignores them, instead choosing to continue his provocative tone. Why are the moderators ignoring his behavior, while constantly locking threads which contain rebuttals to his constant drivel? Granted, some of the rebuttals might have an edge to them, yes. An edge that only Avek himself is to blame for. But today's locks did not contain any personal attacks.
This is why this is getting out of control - Moderators are locking threads which should not be locked. This is why I question their impartiality in this matter.
However, the one minor flaw in tigger's well reasoned post is this paragraph:
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">As for "the usual suspects", they also need to be counseled privately to "shoot the message, and not the messanger". Debunking the views of avek00 with factual, knowledgeable, and intelligent replies is far more effective than calling him names.</font>
So my entire point for the last few weeks has been this: We've all tried to deal with Avek reasonably. We've all tried to post reasonable contrary opinions. He continuously ignores them, instead choosing to continue his provocative tone. Why are the moderators ignoring his behavior, while constantly locking threads which contain rebuttals to his constant drivel? Granted, some of the rebuttals might have an edge to them, yes. An edge that only Avek himself is to blame for. But today's locks did not contain any personal attacks.
This is why this is getting out of control - Moderators are locking threads which should not be locked. This is why I question their impartiality in this matter.
May 21, 2003 | 9:46 pm
#8
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: LAX
Programs: UA 1MM, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 6,759
I think it goes without saying that the airline forums are the primary purpose of Flyertalk, and they are certainly my main reason for being here. While we all like to have fun in OMNI, the airline forums should be strictly business, IMHO. If a "troll" decides to post an irrelevant or inflammatory remark, why can't that person's post (and any other inflammatory rebuttals) simply be deleted, rather than shut down the entire thread? As it stands now, ANYONE can shut down an otherwise perfectly good topic just by posting some smart a$$ remark...
But that's just my opinion...
But that's just my opinion...
May 22, 2003 | 6:26 am
#9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: NYC
Programs: AA LT PLT / 3MM, Marriott LT Gold
Posts: 36,865
Boy, the would-be censors are really crawling out of the woodwork now ... 
You must love John Ashcroft, Adm. Loy, and all the others who would love to tell everyone how to run their lives. Now you want the moderators to take it upon themselves to delete posts that some of you don't like?
Grow up, people. If a poster is not attacking you, if you don't like his or her post, ignore it. That is what mature adults do. They don't need to be protected by moderators.
------------------
Vasant
You must love John Ashcroft, Adm. Loy, and all the others who would love to tell everyone how to run their lives. Now you want the moderators to take it upon themselves to delete posts that some of you don't like?
Grow up, people. If a poster is not attacking you, if you don't like his or her post, ignore it. That is what mature adults do. They don't need to be protected by moderators.
------------------
Vasant
May 22, 2003 | 7:22 am
#10
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Too many
Programs: Lots
Posts: 5,765
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by vasantn:
Boy, the would-be censors are really crawling out of the woodwork now ...
You must love John Ashcroft, Adm. Loy, and all the others who would love to tell everyone how to run their lives. Now you want the moderators to take it upon themselves to delete posts that some of you don't like?
Grow up, people. If a poster is not attacking you, if you don't like his or her post, ignore it. That is what mature adults do. They don't need to be protected by moderators.
</font>
Boy, the would-be censors are really crawling out of the woodwork now ...
You must love John Ashcroft, Adm. Loy, and all the others who would love to tell everyone how to run their lives. Now you want the moderators to take it upon themselves to delete posts that some of you don't like?
Grow up, people. If a poster is not attacking you, if you don't like his or her post, ignore it. That is what mature adults do. They don't need to be protected by moderators.
</font>
May 22, 2003 | 7:36 am
#11
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northeast MA, USA.
Programs: HHonors Diamond, DL Silver, TSA Harassee
Posts: 3,657
They are being locked because some members of the clique cannot control themselves.
Dispute the message, not the messenger.
Or, if you cannot dispute the message, IGNORE IT.
Dispute the message, not the messenger.
Or, if you cannot dispute the message, IGNORE IT.
May 22, 2003 | 7:39 am
#12
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: NYC
Programs: AA LT PLT / 3MM, Marriott LT Gold
Posts: 36,865
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Axey:
Huh? This topic has to do with the locking of threads which should not be locked. I'm not quite sure what you're on about, but it doesn't belong in this thread.</font>
Huh? This topic has to do with the locking of threads which should not be locked. I'm not quite sure what you're on about, but it doesn't belong in this thread.</font>
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">If a "troll" decides to post an irrelevant or inflammatory remark, why can't that person's post (and any other inflammatory rebuttals) simply be deleted</font>
------------------
Vasant