This thread is prompted by, and in response to, this statement by Squeakr:

(Bolding added.)

which statement appeared in this thread.

As I recall, I have e-mailed Squeakr regarding her moderation efforts, exactly twice. In both instances she had closed/moved UA threads which were, IMHO, appropriately placed, not duplicates of current threads, and of real interest to me as a UA 1k flyer. While I did, and still do, disagree with her actions, I made every effort to make certain that my private e-mails to her regarding her actions were clear, factual and polite, and in no way personal, so her above accusation appears to be totally inappropriate to me.

In response to closing this thread, I sent Squeakr the following two e-mails.

"Hi Squeakr,

I don't understand this moderation:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum50/HTML/023241.html

UA flyers were politey discussing a valuable UA issue, and you elected to close the thread.

I am curious what your reasoning was in this instance?

Thanks, Punki"

At this point there was a response from Squeakr, to which I replied:

"Hi Squeakr,

Oh goodness, where on earth did you get the idea that I don't like Moderation. I am a huge advocate of Moderation and would very much like to see far more aggressive moderation, particularly when it comes to flaming, bating and all other types of attacks.

I do, however, think that threads should only be closed and/or moved when there is no possible justification to leave them open and/or keep them in their original position.

The thread in question was a wonderful thread. One in which I was very interested.
It was exactly specific to UA and not to any other fora.

I can understand closing one thread if there are two identical threads on the exact same subject active on the first page or so, but that did not appear to be the case in this instance. Closing a thread simply because the subject has been previously discussed is simply not reasonable. If that were a reasonable criteria, 95% of all threads on the board would have to be shut down which would make FlyerTalk totally unappealing.

I am sorry, but your reasons are still unclear to me. Did I miss a duplicate?
Would you please be so kind as to elaborate?

Thank you, Punki"

Sarcastically insulting??

I also e-mailed her regarding this thread.

"Hi Squeakr,

This:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum50/HTML/022813.html

type of thread movement is, IMHO, both unnecessary and disruptive. The original
poster was obviously interested in Star Awards using UA points and, therefore, properly located his/her post in UA where he/she would get responses from those familiar with using UA points.

To move it to Star Alliance (without even providing a link), where the original poster is receiving irrelevant feedback, does not appear to be very beneficial.

This is exactly the type of situation to which I refer when I ask that the FT moderation policy be tweaked to provide that, "If there is a logical reason to leave a post where it is, leave it alone". It would appear that the current policy
is that, "If there is any slight justification for moving a thread, move it,"
which is both clumsy and disruptive.

As lomatopo pointed out, it appears as though you simply moved the post when you saw the word "Star" without really reading the thread and thinking about the content and intent of the original poster.

This is the kind of activity that makes people think, "Trigger Happy Moderator".

I look forward to hearing from you. I do, BTW, think that this type of moderation
activity should be publicly posted in Randy Only and politely discussed to get community feedback, but since the concensus of opinion is that the Moderator first be contacted privately, so I am first trying that course of action.

Thanks,

Punki"

Squeakr responded privately to that e-mail, and also made this public response on the thread which had been moved to Star Alliance:

(Bolding added)

This quote appears in this Star Alliance thread.

I thereafter sent her this e-mail:

"Hi Squeakr,

I sincerely apologize for any offense you took from my original e-mail. I assure
that none was intended. I actually reread it twice to make certain that it contained
nothing personal and was focused solely on the moderation in question and FT moderation policy in general. Obviously, lomatopo, Attorney28, and I had no way of knowing that you were unfamiliar with variables in the Star Alliance awards programs. Assuming that you did understand the program and the post, your closing and moving of the post did appear frivolous.

Beyond that, I really do think it would be beneficial to the both the Moderators
and the moderation process if the guidelines were adjusted to provide that posts
be left alone if there is any justification for so doing. It would be wonderful
if a polite, logical discussion of this issue could occur, but, sadly, there is
a small group who always manage to hi-jack any moderation thread, making a good discussion impossible.

Again, sorry if my e-mail upset you.

Thanks, Punki"

I realize that all inperpretation is subjective, but I truly do fail to see how anyone could characterize these e-mails as "shockingly unfirendly".

I am beginning to suspect that the standard here is that any FlyerTalker questioning this Moderator's actions is "wrong", no matter how justified the question might be and no matter how politely the question is phrased, even when the FlyerTalker apologizes for any unintended offense the Moderator migh have taken. On the other hand, anything this Moderator chooses to post is "right" no matter how personal, inaccurate or rude the moderator's post might be.

The sad thing is that type of behavior on the part of some few moderators reflects poorly on the truly excellent job that many moderators do.

OBTW, I do believe I will in the future skip the "private e-mail" step with this particular moderator.



[This message has been edited by Punki (edited Feb 01, 2004).]

Do we really need ANOTHER thread on moderation?

If these thread closings needed to be questioned publicly, that should have happened 3 months ago... when they were closed.

For what its worth, I agree that both threads were closed properly. The first could have been moved to TravelBuzz where people talk about booking and seat engines. The second one says it is about a Star Alliance award... no where could I find a reference by the OP to a United award or miles.

We do not have to agree with the moderators' decision... but we should at least respect it unless it is being done out of malice or prejudice.

William

As if Randy did not have enough to look at already.

This is really Punki, posting under a Fake Handle, of which Randy is well aware. I am posting under this name because it would appear that a hacker has changed my password. Interesting days.

But, on to the issue at hand, which you will note if you carefully read my post, is that Squeakr, three months after I privately e-mailed her with my concerns regarding her moderation efforts, publicly and falsely accused me of sending her "most sarcastically insulting e-mails".

I assure you Wharvey, that if Squeaker had made her false accusations three months ago, I would have responded three months ago. She, however, chose to make those accusations yesterday, so I responded today.

As I recall, both you, Wharvey, and you, attorney 28, were parties to threads advising me that the appropriate course of action was to privately e-mail moderators with my concerns regarding their moderation activities. I did so in reliance on that advice and, as a result of so doing, was yesterday falsely accused by a moderator of sending her "most sarcastically insulting e-mails".

I know Randy is busy and has a lot on his plate, but in this instance he has a moderator acting in his behalf who has behaved inappropriately. IMHO, bringing this to his attention is exactly the right course of action.

What course of action would you suggest?



[This message has been edited by fake handle (edited Feb 01, 2004).]

Wow. This is getting weirder and weirder by the minute.

Since you asked, I would suggest to take the high road and let it go (regarding your dispute with squeakr). Too much persistence can make one look bad, even if one might be right (which I don't know and don't even want to comment on).

If it were an ordinary FlyerTalker making a pointless or mean-spirited post, I would most assuredly, attorney 28, take the high road and let it go. If you pay close attention, you will see that I am quite good at considering the source and walking away.

In this instance, however, we have a moderator who has chosen to abuse the authority entrusted to her by Randy and that is an important issue, that is IMHO well worth pursuing.

Punki - let Randy know about it and then consider it water under the bridge.

Don't let it continually eat away at you.

I'd be more concerned about the password change.

Are you sure someone changed it? Sometimes I mistype my password or forget to capitalize a letter or vice versa.

Did you have the same password as other websites, like Gaucho?

Oh, UALOneKPlus, I assure you that it does not "continually eat away" at me. She only made the false accusations yesterday, and up until that time, I hadn't even thought about her at all since the original incidents. My concern really isn't so much about me as it is about other Flyer Talkers who may be subject to this same type of questionable treatment by this or other moderators.

Yes, I did use the same password on another site but I honestly don't think that the only folks who might have access to our passwords on that site--chexfan, beckles, AnnaS or dgolds--would even consider doing anything that was not above reproach. I have known them all for a long time and trust them all implicitly.

There is not much point in worrying about that password change at the moment. What's done is done. On Monday, the FlyerTalk folks will change the password back again and we will go on from there.

I don't have any deep, dark secrets that can't withstand the light of day.

fake handle:

Why did you create this fake handle in Dec. 2003?

So I could make discreet inquires about a Christmas present I wanted to buy for Hunki, who reads FlyerTalk.

I e-mailed Randy at the time, explained the situation and got his permission.

Jesus, this gets weirder by the minute. When it all shakes out I am not sure what the result will be. Hope that it is public and not hidden away.

Good Luck, Punki, and remember that Squeakr may not have actually made the post with all that is going on, ala Gaucho100K's seemingly fake post.



------------------
dallasflyer, Living in Denver and Dallas, oh boy!

I have nothing but the highest regard for our moderator corps overall. A few may be slightly over-sensitive.

I do not post my e-mail address publicly. As a federal prosecutor (for three more weeks) who has sent people to prison for fifteen years and more, I prefer not to get spammed unnecessarily.

While most or all of the moderator corps is dedicated, hard-working, and temperate in thought and deed, there may be one or two who are prone to abusing their position or acting vindictively.

Not being experienced enough to know who is who, and never having met any of them, I prefer not to provide my own e-mail address to the moderator corps as a whole.

In fact, keeping this information private has a personal benefit to the owner of this site, in that he will not be liable if one of the moderators acts vindictively using that e-mail address.

If anything, what the current problem of illegal password access -- in my view the FBI and Secret Service should be contacted, as this is the second largest UBB bulletin board -- and disclosure of private forum communications exposes is the problems inherent in the transition from a small volunteer run board to a larger institution.

While the moderators may still be volunteers, they are cloaked with so much power delegated from the owner that it may very well be in his best interest to run background checks on the moderators.

Run background checks on the moderators?!?! hahah. This is Flyertalk not some kind of financial or privileged forum that requires mucho confidentiality.' ... and a past "clean" record check will not necessarily mean a future "clean" record.

It is sad that there are malicious people in the world, but I don't think we need to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

[This message has been edited by GUWonder (edited Feb 01, 2004).]

We are truly through the looking glass.



------------------
-alan in sitges, home of the new, improved Si-Re-Do

I'm not clear on the exact chasm between these two members and offer that they take it offline.

As reference, Punki has from time to time dug in to my hind side and I've lived through it. I've also dug into her as well and I (while not speaking for her) still can honestly say I respect her no less than any other member. My own experiences with squeakr have been nothing less than enjoyable. I think we might have exchanged a few differences at one time, but I think we both reflected and moved on. I can't be a referee here folks for a public thread. I can assist each member through this off line and that's where this kind of stuff needs to stay.