You are correct about the individual airlines. Maybe there should be another set of forums in FT Travel.

But, there IS a set of Forums for Airports. That is where an Airport question belongs.

If the moderation policy/guidelines are changed, FT will become a vast wasteland of crap. As it is now, Press Releases are cluttering the indiviual forums when the SHOULD be in the "In the News" forum. Add in even more off-topic threads and FT will become useless.

Just a small correction for factual use here. Moderator Guidelines were not given by me. Moderator Guidelines were actually developed by members themselves and the TalkBoard. These most excellent guidelines have no personal imprint by myself, the thanks going to BlondeBomber, as well as AAW and Robb. There are certainly from time to time a different view of a post being moved around, but let's put into perspective the number of posts that FlyerTalk generates. We average nearly 20,000 posts per week. I will guarantee you that no matter whom moderators are and the posts involved, there will be a question about one of them next week, next month and years from now. But considering the activity on this Board, I still maintain the moderators have a very good record.

I stand corrected.

Nothing new here.

But in the past, I've long enjoyed flyertalk, gotten something out of it, hopefully contributed a little something back. But for the past couple months, seeing good threads closed has been constantly infuriating. On a pleasant afternoon between two Cubs' playoff victories, I shouldn't get infuriated.

There is a thread closed in MilesBuzz about fare basis rules. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/009352.html
Someone asked for a web page that explained them, and there was a useful discussion about it beginning, and then one of the moderators closes it off with the statement,
"it is unrelated to miles or points".

Problems understanding fare rules has been my #1 problem with frequent flyer programs. I'm sure for others it is different. But understanding the fine print of bonus mile offers sometimes has meant understanding much more about the various codes than most airline employees are able to tell you. And there are new and changing rules about fares which affect the ability to upgrade, a frequent flyer program benefit. And there are fares in some airlines which do not allow the accrual of frequent flyer miles, an important aspect of the fare code which has been the a-posteriori cause of many threads. And I'm sure there are many other aspects of fare basis codes which are both related and unrelated to frequent flyer programs. And I'm sure that an interesting discussion could have covered both aspects. Instead, because of someone's sense of order, it has been effectively cut off. And what would have been the harm of leaving it?

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

Deep breath.

[moderator hat on]
Given that

1) the topic is only marginally on-topic
2) there has been many similar discussions in the past
3) this is a topic with high potential for acrimonious emotional exchange.

The thread is now closed.

[moderator hat off]

Posted by Platos in a peanut allergy thread on AA. Evidently because of a person with a severe peanut allergy all nuts were banned from this flight. If you look at the many other topics on the AA forum I have no idea why this one is any more on or off topic that others. It is this type of moderation, the apparent premptive strike that I wish we would change. I found the thread interesting and would have liked to have heard others opinions, maybe some from AA folks themselves? I emailed the moderator involved with no response as yet.

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

I responded already via e-mail, but here's my rationale for those interested...


I don't consider the possiblity of flaming to be "may". It's a certainly, because uthornsgo's reponses are already bordering on a flame war. This type of discussion happens all the time, whether a passenger's request should be accomodated by others or whether the requestor should just deal with his own problems.

Maybe it's food allergies, or an oversized pax, or children who travel. They are all emotional topics which have little direct relevance to AA or AAdvantage. There will be discussion, but people don't tend to be persuaded out of their existing positions. As such it becomes an arena where people strike a pose and hold it.

Unless the prohibition of all nuts for an allergic passenger is policy for AA, which I know it is not, it's really more of an Omni topic than an FT:AA topic.

Bingo. Some topics you know, based on past experience, are going to be "rough and tumble". Witness the TravelBuzz thread on "seat blockers" to prevent people reclining their seat. Within a half-dozen posts, you could see that sides and weapons were drawn and much written blood would be spilled.

I'm not against "free-wheeling" posts. I've waded hip-deep into more than one myself, on occasion. But they should be restricted to more general forums - like OMNI or the "Buzzes". I don't need to read about seat blockers in the UA forum (especially since I find Economy Plus negating the issues with seat reclining). It might be more "relevant" in the CO or DL forums (with their universal 30-31" Y pitch), but even there, you know there will be a few "if you flew UA/AA/Business/First Class, you would not have this problem" replies and then it becomes airline vs. airline or elites vs. non-elites.

I think we need a new forum - Thunderdome - for threads that devolve into two sides that have ossified into intractable debates. Label it "Two sides enter, no side leaves" and let the folks who want to hash it out ad nauseum hash it out. No moderators. No rules.

Any moderator who feels a thread has "degraded" to the point it should be closed can move it to Thunderdome, instead. So the thread remains "open and available" so neither "side" has to open another "Overmoderation" thread here and those folks who joined in, and now are getting slapped around, have to live with their decision to get into it and can't run to a moderator or Randy and "demand satisfaction" for TOS violations because the TOS will not apply (in a general sense. There are always some rules that must be enforced for legal reasons, and posts that violate them can be deleted with an "Edited for legal reasons" moniker).

[Edited for UBB errors]

[This message has been edited by SEA_Tigger (edited 10-07-2003).]

This is a HORRIBLE idea. It's bad enough when rivalries from one part of this board infect other, completely unrelated areas.

And SEA_Tigger wants a forum for the gloves to come off?

This is a SCREAMINGLY TERRIBLE idea.

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

------------------
-Otto

Well, having all the rivalies confined to one forum might prevent them from spilling all over the place. And having no moderators would end the "moderator X went too far closing / editing this thread" posts in this forum.

I have no real issues with the current "moderation protocols" in place on FlyerTalk. My only issue is that a few people getting frisky can shut down a thread that had good dialogue going, but it's easy enough to keep opening new ones to try and keep the positive conversations going. And it keeps folks on their toes as they have to bounce from closed thread to closed thread to follow along. http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

Are these moderator guidelines published somewhere?

The Talkboard guidelines certainly are published:

http://www.flyertalk.com/townhall/tb_guidelines.shtml

Also be interested in reading the Moderator ones.

------------------
Try and make it down to SYD for "OZ FEST 2004" - May 21-23

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

ozstamps I only can direct you to the director’s cut of the TalkModerator Guidelines.

But for a self-appointed, totally unofficial and unpaid volunteer watchdog of the Ansett Australia Forum it should be not too difficult to ask for it ... http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Thanks! :) As a moderator, can you perhaps reveal if there is anything additional in the way of "guidelines", or is this pretty much "it"?

While I'd kinda' thought it was important in general, I just wondered about it in view of the migration to the now one month old "new" board, and the concommitant expanded role and/or powers attributed to our moderators.

Thanks again, in advance! :)

-Mark

The software got upgraded, the philosophy still remains the same

Thanks.

I thought there may have been a notice/announcement that I might have missed. :)

-Mark