Canarsie, very well said and I agree 100%!

------------------
Vasant

[Edited for UBB]

[This message has been edited by vasantn (edited 09-22-2003).]

Oz, would you be kind enough to provide the details of those deletions by private email?

---

Is it possible that other FT's may hold different views than yours?

Please recall:

http://www.flyertalk.com/pasttalk/ft...ML/001928.html

Just a thought!

-Mark

I thought we were talking about stalking here. Or were we? What with the advancing Alzheimers I am getting more and more confused lately.

------------------
Continental Airlines and bankruptcy: The third time will be the charm!

Rssrsvp - gladly. I posted detail earlier in fact so no need to make it private email

I noticed this thread below recently - which for about a week was not on topic at all, and I sadly think the Moderator did indeed fail in his job.

We have exchanged polite emails on that, which Randy was copied into (not my choice) so these comments of mine here simply echo those concerns raised:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum.../003985-2.html

It went on and on for 2 pages and 63 posts that we could see. The Moderator deleted in its entirely any post he did not "like" and made that clear more than once, so it may have really been 5 pages long.

I do not agree with posts being totally deleted. Unless of a totally obscene or really abusive nature etc. I saw one post making a very valid point that was deleted entirely in this thread. I still have a copy of that post as I retained it, anticipating its fate.

I think for transparency sake in any Forum the TEXT being objected to should be deleted, and the comment: "deleted by moderator because of ....." added in that place. It shows the original poster and time then. (i.e. Option "B" above)

Surely that might be one of the "consistency" things to be set by Talkboard as mentioned earlier by chexfan. To do otherwise is rather poor moderation IMO.

The thread referenced above was to me a clear example of where an Moderator should recuse himself publicly on thread due to a friendship with the thread starter.

Had that NOT been the case, the thread starter would surely have had his comments deleted by the other Moderators, as at least eight Flyertalkers called for it on the thread?

While I agree that the moderator in the above linked thread should have recused himself, I do not agree that the comments by akek00 should have been deleted/edited.

Therewas certaintly a number of members who objected (8?), but there was also a similar number who did not object in the least.

The above mentioned link is just another example of the stalking that has been running rampant here on FT.

Isn't the idea of a better defined Moderator process an even better idea as we have seen things get way out of hand. It is the very arbritary moderation we currently have and the ability of members to plant "flame bombs" that I think cause many of these problems. It is easy to talk about the problems. I have suggested elected Moderators, it has been suggested to me that we could rotate moderators from board to board over time. What other suggestions do members have? Or do you think that we do not have a problem at all?

------------------
dallasflyer

Here's an example of over-moderation, in my view:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum50/HTML/022280.html

The guy posts on the UA board to ask about the security wait at Denver which has 70% UA traffic. The moderator moves the post to FT Airports under a topic that's had no posts for more than 30 days.

I give this one an A for neatness, and an F for effective communication.

Next time the guy has a question, he'll likely go elsewhere. Is this really what Randy wants?

I should think that the grade should be a little higher than an F, since I took the time to give an exact link to the now-transferred post , rather than just saying go to FT Airports/DEN.

But in any case, I too would be interested in knowing what Randy wants. I have tried to follow his instructions that posts be made in the most appropriate forum and if that counsel has changed on his part I certainly would want to know.

That said, there is certainly nothing wrong -- and both neatness and communication are achieved -- when someone posts in the correct forum and then posts a cross-reference (not a cross-post) in a related forum that says, "Could ya'll take a look at my posts at xxxx and give me some comments."

All of that said, I do personally think that the FT Airports forum has not been the success that Randy had hoped, and that given the amount of traffic there, those posts could in fact be in Travel Buzz. But that's a different issue.

Chuck
aka cblaisd
Moderator, United

(edited to add last paragraph)


[This message has been edited by cblaisd (edited 09-27-2003).]

Exactly, Mountain Trader!

This is exactly the type of situation where I would prefer to see the moderator use the, "Is there any logical reason to leave this post in place?" approach, rather than the, "Is there any possible reason for moving this post?" criterion.

Obviously this post mades perfectly good sense in the UA forum for all UA flyers, who sometimes get to go DEN, whether they want to or not. It is this type of subjective thread movement that I seen as unnecessary and disruptive to the natural flow of FT.

What exactly is "Subjective" about this paragraph.

The Moderators are following the guidelines given to them by Randy. Obviously, Randy wants FT MILES to be about MILES.

Why is this illogical?

But remember that the Moderator's understanding of the process is to move posts this way. We should not necessarily be blaming anyone. Let's just work on positive suggestions to Randy and the Moderators to help improve the moderation process if you feel it needs improving. Thank you to all the moderators that are participating in this thread.

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

Thanks for your objective answer, with which I completely agree. I'd redo my grade on communication at least to a C.

Another post after mine and yours hit the nail on the head: The standard should be "Is there a vital reason to move or close this thread?". If so, do it. If not, don't. And Randy's the one who has to make the change.

I don't agree on the moving the thread part. Even if it's not "vital" IMHO. Whenever possible, a thread should be moved to it's proper place. And as long as a Moderator puts in the link to it's new location...what's the problem?

If people see too much leeway being given and too many off-forum threads being tolerated...guess what? You're gonna get even more of them...guaranteed.

Many folks are lazy. Or just want to post where they are known. Or where they think it will get the most readership and/or response...all without regard to organization. Those types of behavior should not be encouraged in that individual and others by "looking the other way" too often, IMHO.

If folks see just proper forum topics, and those that are not being quickly (but nicely) moved...they will quickly learn and adapt.

IMHO.

My only advise for Moderators is if you're going to relocate a thread, please make doubly sure you are relocating it to a proper forum! The most common mistake I see being made is not in the judgment that the thread doesn't belong where it was originally posted. What I have seen most is some poor judgment (but rare mind you) on where it's moved to!

I've seen too many travel questions being moved to OMNI, for example. Instead of TravelBuzz or some other Travel forum where it might actually belong.

Nothing makes a Moderator's action look more loopy than moving an off-forum thread to some other forum that it also doesn't belong in!

But 99% of the time, I think Moderators are doing a great job. Here's to The Great Relocate-rs! Thanks for making FlyerTalk a better travel resource for those that appreciate a well organized, monitored and on-topic bulletin board!

The less chaff, the more attractive it is to newcomers too, IMHO. It's what separates FlyerTalk from those other internet newsgroups and unmoderated boards.

While it may not be illogical for for FT miles to be about miles, in my observation, that's not the way it is in practice (to this point in time, anyhow).

Think about the individual airline forums- they cover a range of topics outside of discussion of the FF program, and are, once again in my observation, the center of discussion about a range of issues surrounding each airline _and_ its affiliated FF program.

If FT Miles really were solely about miles, then there'd be an AAdvantage section in FT Miles ("how do I waitlist for an AAdvantage mileage upgrade?") and and American section in, say, FTtravel ("how is AA J service?"). Repeat as necessary for divorcing each airline from it's loyalty program.

Milesbuzz, for instance, is tightly moderated to be about miles, IMHO, and I believed that most of the overflow ends up at Travelbuzz. If every forum were moderated that tightly, a _lot_ of threads in the individual airline forums would end up elsewhere, but where?

Given the current situation as described above, moderation is, in most cases, a subjective issue, (IMHO).