timeout for (public) timeout-requests?
 

I propose a timeout for (public) timeout-requests.

Upon reflection, I support this - it is an unfortunate and growing trend.

Sounds much like the soccer rule where the referee can give a player a 'caution' for the player asking the referee to give another player a 'caution.'

Two cautions and you are ejected http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

ONE person starting 2 or 3 of these threads can hardly be called a "trend", one email from Randy to the person in question should be sufficient.

Do you realise you just requested your own timeout?
Oh well.
mike

Do you realise you just requested your own timeout?

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif
(well, I thought of time-out for the 'requests' - not for the posters ...)

I agree that Randy needs to control that same thread starter who continues a policy of harrassing those who do not agree with his view of life.He has also used email to try and get supporters for his motives,whatever they are.

I have no problem emailing the moderators of forums where posters tell others to F off, insult them etc., rather than post here.

But if I read the comments above properly, I should be banned for bringing this to the RP forum, twice? Granted under the OMNI one I should have emailed the mods and it was discussed with a moderator offline and resolved. But for the one in the AC forum where no moderator exists who do I email?

If you don't read the forum, then it won't bother you. If something upsets me, as much as AC/AP and AC forum upset you, I tend to avoid them and focus my time and energy on something more positive.
That would be called self moderation and only requires some common sense.

Mapleleaf,

I have always found it more efficient to email Randy and his team directly when I had an issue... instead of posting here.

Just a thought!

William

I agree with Papst on this one.

Quote by Maple Leaf:
But for the one in the AC forum where no moderator exists who do I email?
__________________________________________________ _________________

How about no one? You are not God here even though you give out communion in a theater.
Randy is the go to guy when all else fails?
How about him?
And how about this support for Empress on the AC board per the link below? Does that send you a message?
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum5/HTML/012234.html

[This message has been edited by parnel (edited Dec 27, 2003).]

I agree with Rudi.

I second Rudi's timeout. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

This will only create more problems than it solves. And the fact this suggestion wasn't done by via e-mail at a sensitive timing like this (with several threads of this nature around) just seems to invite more unnecessary divisions between FTers. Is this necessary?

Is this necessary?

yes, I think so

I have to agree with you now Rudi, or else this circus will never end. I am sure Randy is having a headache reading through all this and he will notice all this non-sense has a common denominator - AC Forum.

One might also say that the common denominator is people who come into the AC forum looking for trouble, as opposed to posting anything related to flying AC or accumulating/using/etc. AP points.

One might also say who knows where are you when WE were roaming the AC forum with incredible ideas such as MHD and many other deals and ideas. Look junior, watch your record such as registration date and the # of your post, I highly suggest you do a search in the Archives of AC/CP forum, you have no idea whom you are talking with. Not offering tips on AC travel. Geez, you are beyond laughably ignorant about the senior AC forum members, are you? Empress and I have been for a long time on par as far as AC knowledge is concerned. Sometimes, I knew things he doesn't and vice-versa. I knew him back to the time when we were both CPers, junior, bet you didn't know that either.

And quickly label anyone with a dissenting opinion as trouble-maker seems to me the thief is crying for robbery himself.

LOL, this is really like a joke, right. I mean you don't really believe you are important or anything, do you? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif


------------------
dallasflyer, Let's put the fun back in FlyerTalk!

LOL, do you believe for a sec what you say matter in this world, small you! ROFL

Who are you anyway? HAHAHA

I am not sure who I am, however I did pass third grade english. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif


------------------
dallasflyer, Let's put the fun back in FlyerTalk!

I can't believe this stuff is really going on.

I think that Rudi has a point. If you think that someone has violated the TOS, e-mail Randy privately. Or e-mail the forum moderators... or one of the WebFlyer folks.

But for GOSHSAKES... keep this drivel off the public forums. It is annoying and it doesn't not bode with the spirit of the community.

Is GOSHSAKES a new FlyerTalk member?

If so, let’s welcome this new member to the community.

If not, that would make a great name for a FlyerTalk member...

-----------------

By the way, for what it’s worth, I agree fully with the post just above this one...

Looks like "Nov 2000" is looking to get beat up. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/rolleyes.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/tongue.gif

FewMiles from Nov 1999 era..

I agree. Posting a public request is trolling for debate on a question that is up to Mr. Petersen's private discretion.

Randy it really is time to make a statement concerning all of these timeout requests on your board. IMHO, all of these posters know that the correct procedure is private email to you. In addition, these public timeout requests are many times just personal attacks, not legitimate requests. Most of us are tired of reading this endless stream of threads that take away from the real purpose of the ORP forum.

Perhaps you need to appoint a moderator to edit and lock these timeout request threads. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Rssrsvp - I can't recall a thread ever being locked in this forum, and the 'Moderator-General' has the key. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

But I do have a feeling anyone commencing frivolous threads here (and that comment is not directed at Rudi I hasten to add) is noticed by Randy more than on any other Forum. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Some with short memories might have forgotten this Forum was closed for quite a while, which was disappointing to see, so your point is well made IMHO, and I do hope some take it.

------------------
~ Glen ~ sipping bubbly from a UA 747-400 exit row 15 near you SOON!

Try these:

http://www.flyertalk.com/pasttalk/ft...ML/000721.html *

http://www.flyertalk.com/pasttalk/ft...ML/000637.html

http://www.flyertalk.com/pasttalk/ft...ML/000607.html

http://www.flyertalk.com/pasttalk/ft...ML/000384.html *

http://www.flyertalk.com/pasttalk/ft...ML/000376.html *

http://www.flyertalk.com/pasttalk/ft...ML/000337.html *

By the way, the ones marked with *'s are threads in which you participated.

Indeed!

FewMiles..

FewMiles, that last thread,

http://www.flyertalk.com/pasttalk/ft.../000337-3.html

was quite interesting.

Looks like dan at WebFlyer explicitly said that cigarman had incorrectly accused ozstamps of having used another handle. That kind of explains to me why ozstamps seems to be mad at cigarman, especially since cigarman did not apologize in that thread as he had said he would...

This is starting to be better than watching soap operas! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

(Not that I ever did that anyway http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/redface.gif)

Oh, and on the topic of this thread, I absolutely think the "requests for timeouts" are nothing but personal attacks and whoever publicly requests a timeout should get one himself.

[This message has been edited by attorney28 (edited Jan 19, 2004).]

Dan stated that ozstamps was not that particular handle. Please do some research to see why many thought it was.

How could cigarman have apologized in that thread if Dan locked it?

Good point, I did not think about that! So do you have a link to the new thread he started to publicly apologize for the false accusation?

Sorry, I am not THAT interested that I would start a research project about this http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif (even though the whole thing is entertaining in a way).

My sincere apologies for not recalling a few threads from THREE YEARS ago. I guess after some 19,000 posts my memory is not perfect. My goodness, time certainly lies heavy on the hands of some here it seems.

I notice you have discovered NO examples from when this Forum was re-introduced, which was actually my point, and you have not noted the only recent thread was locked in FT Community, NOT this forum:

www.flyertalk.com/pasttalk/ftpasttalk_forum/Forum97/HTML/000721-2.html

But seeing you have dedged up these mouldy oldies - I noted the comment Randy made when closing one of those threads, and it does further back up the point of Rsssvp:


[This message has been edited by ozstamps (edited Jan 19, 2004).]

Apology accepted. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Look, ozstamps, my point was simply that nobody's got a perfect memory and that what people think they know as facts is not always correct. Being loud and wrong at the same time does not change the fact that one is wrong.

True, I'll grant you that. And an examination would show that there are in fact, no locked threads that are not from the archives. There are many that deserve to be locked though.

It was? It was not made clear in your earlier post. Trying to twist your words ex post facto does not help much when people missed your point the first time around. Too late now.

It originated in FT Community, but was moved to this forum at some point. It's still a locked thread in this forum.

No, nothing dredged up (where's your perfect spelling now?)... the threads are closed and are archived; you can't reply to them. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Again, I'm not trying to pick on you or something, just showing that your absolute statements about "threads never having been closed" can be wrong.

FewMiles..