Inappropriate Moderation in Coupon Connection
 

Please see this thread: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum...ML/015038.html .

IMO, if an official representative of a frequent flyer/guest program is going to chastise members about trading items on the Coupon Connection, then FT members ought to (1) have access to those comments and (2) be aware that he may have access to their account numbers and information. In any event, the comments in the thread certainly were pertinent to the topic of the thread (SPG points), and the moderator does a disservice to the community by deleting them.

And a related thread: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum...ML/000152.html .

[This message has been edited by cactuspete (edited Feb 24, 2004).]

Just so we are clear on the subject, there was no chastisement of anyone. I simply reminded the people posting there that it was against the Terms and Conditions of Membership in SPG to trade for Starpoints.

However, I also do not agree that my comments should have been edited as they had some very important information to our members on the subject, but that is how the moderator is allowed to operate in this forum apparently.

Sincerely,

William R. Sanders
Customer Service Coordinator
Starwood Preferred Services

[email protected]

[This message has been edited by Starwood Lurker (edited Feb 24, 2004).]

Three thoughts.

[1] I think the moderators have been clear that chastising or criticizing a member for their post or request is "off topic" and the response will be deleted. Commentary on the advisability of an offer or exchange is similarly deemed "off topic." I read the moderation as simply being consistent in the application of that rule.

[2] Discussion of how each program views different kinds of exchanges.. what's okay, what isn't, and when.. does seem appropriate for Flyertalk, and in fact that kind of discussion goes on all the time. An open question, and perhaps one for the Coupon Connection moderators, is whether that discussion is appropriate for the Coupon Connection forum as opposed to the individual program forums. In other words, if Starwood Lurker's reply had been posted in a separate thread rather than as a reply to a member's request, would it have been alright?

[3] While I understand the program T&C, and I also understand that there are some real grey areas and fine lines that many folks skirt -- especially trading for gift certificates, cash, etc. -- the real benefit of Coupon Connection comes from friends that have gotten to know each other here on Flyertalk simply helping each other out. For example, I decide I'm going to the Freddie Awards. I currently have an award night reserved at the Embassy Suites. Maybe another longstanding member that I've gotten to know asks me to front them HHonors points for an award night there, too. They even offer to "get me back" with a night at a St. Regis. I really do think that's alright. Branching out from there are alot of uncomfortab

gleff, I agree with your comments re: spirit of FT. But I also think that if there is an official "lurker" posting on CC reminding posters of the "letter of the program rule" then those comments ought to stand. Particularly when it is a rep who is invaluable on the SPG board, but also has access to specific account numbers. I realize that Starwood Lurker has stated that he isn't in the business of ratting out FTers. On the other hand, he has also professed his loyalty to his employer (as well he should). Again, an inherent conflict, IMO.



[This message has been edited by cactuspete (edited Feb 24, 2004).]

Not having read what was actually posted, I cannot make a full opinion. That being said, countless people have reminded other posters that these practices are against the terms of the forum and FT. I do not see why SL should be beat on about this.

It would also seem that certain idiotic people love to post things like, "well if I want to gift something or make a private exchange, there is nothing that can be done about it!! They can't stop me".

Wow, my infant son could make that reasoning, pretty much everyone knows this. Just harping on and on about it will one day get some changes made to programmes that will make things tougher for everyone.

Did part of gleff's post and his second post disappear? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/confused.gif

On this we agree.

And I find it hard to know how to take postings from a company official as anything but a subtle threat.

I don't have strong feelings about this one way or the other; what I do know is that dmfriedman and I have tried to bring some order and civility to Coupon Connection, working very hard to keep the "brokers" away, and keep things on track. One of the requests that we have announced is that "if one is not interested in what the original poster has to offer or request, there is no need to post on the thread." Most folks seem ok with that and it keeps things from devolving into spats or folks saying that other folks' "valuation" is wrong, etc., etc.

If an exception is to be made for company officials who wish to warn or subtly threaten folks, then we will adjust our standards accordingly.

Gleff, as usual, has stated the gray areas very well.

In my view, when someone signs their post with their name and company title, they are making an official response. Just as when a moderators signs their post with "Moderator" I take their post as an official stand -- not a personal comment.

I believe that William's posts with his signature as:

William R. Sanders
Customer Service Coordinator
Starwood Preferred Services

make it a Starwood company response and not a personal opinion.

As such, I believe the moderators were consistent in their editing.

William

Yes! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/frown.gif

Would that it were so. Apparently not even the moderator can keep on topic:

From this topic in Coupon Connection:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum...ML/015038.html

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

Sincerely,

William R. Sanders
Customer Service Coordinator
Starwood Preferred Services

[email protected]

[This message has been edited by Starwood Lurker (edited Feb 24, 2004).]

Surprised to see this as I explained my position quite well in private communications.

I am only interested in the customer service aspect of things. Find a post of mine where I have threatened anyone - subtle or otherwise in the past five years. I have only ever posted warnings of what could possibly happen in one instance or another should it be discovered by someone else in the company.

That being said, I am perfectly fine with Randy having the last call on this and I have stated so many times before.

Sincerely,

William R. Sanders
Customer Service Coordinator
Starwood Preferred Services

[email protected]

I have read through this thread and the linked thread. As some of you know, much has been edited from the other thread. Let me do some research on this and I'll try and offer up any thoughts I think may help this situation.

I believe Randy has stated (in gleff's mileage devaluation thread) that he is fine with links to targeted promotions being posted (with explanation to follow), but he has not yet spoken on the issue that is being discussed in this thread here.

Not exactly the point of this thread, but instead of opening a new thread, may I ask this question, with apologies for slightly widening the scope of this thread (I believe the questions are somewhat related): Starwood Lurker, since you said you would accept whatever Randy would decide, can we expect that you will not ask for removal of posts with links to targeted promotions anymore (since Randy has stated he is fine with that)? Thanks.

I would be more than happy to promise not to request any removal of targeted promotion codes provided Randy gives us the explanation he said would be forthcoming, and if that explanation does not support my position on the subject.

I really don't even see why it is necessary to say that, but there you go. Do you really think I'm going to press for something against Randy's will? What sense of wisdom is there in that?

Sincerely,

William R. Sanders
Customer Service Coordinator
Starwood Preferred Services

[email protected]

[This message has been edited by Starwood Lurker (edited Feb 24, 2004).]