Closing Threads
 

My thread was closed because it was about me being afraid of getting negative posts and redirected to another thread. I got a lot of good feedback from my fellow FTers and could not respond because the thread was closed.

My other thread (the only other thread I had) was closed because I put a FT name in the thread title. I forgot that rule and I have no problem with it being closed.

Wingless, I closed the thread because it had turned into a more general discussion about the reputation system, we had closed several of those in the past days and in order to be consistent (and to prevent being accused of biased moderation as usual) I decided that what was being said there could quite easilly be said in one of the several already existing threads on the topic.

Scott I guess I was just a bit bummed when I only posted 2 new threads in the last month or two and both were closed.

No problem

Cheri

Wingless ... wise up .. you are talking about OMNI here. There never IS necessarily any reasoning or logic involved. ;)

ScottC closed your thread today at 7.28am - I Am Afraid to Post Anything That May Give Me A Negative Rating

on this basis:

"OK, this has moved from a fun thread into another discussion of reputation in general ..... "

(All the posts, including those from the Forum Mods seemed light hearted to me!)

However with true OMNI consistency, this silly thread was opened at 8.50am and remains open:

The Anonymous Negative Reputation Thread

Where folks are posting the actual negative dings they have allegedly received. :rolleyes:

So it seems you are free to go post to that seeing both yours were locked.

Sorry Wingless, I hope you now see we were not picking on you!

As always Ozstamps thank you for your input in Omni moderation.

As for the TIMES on those threads, you are quoting your LOCAL time.

Thanks for taking care of those threads, Scott!

Hmmm .. well resident techie, it is actually 3.30am here - Wednesday. ;)

You might if you look carefully see I was (AFAIK) quoting Flyertalk USA COS Mountain Time.)

And regardless of what time zone was quoted, the chronology is surely:


1. Wingless's light hearted (perfect OMNI?) thread get closed.

2. An hour or so later a similar thread gets opened.

3. And 2 hours later it is still open while you explain here why hers got locked

But as always, I maybe wrong. :D

As always Ozstamps thank you for your input in Omni moderation.

Its a well known fact that the OMNI moderators are holding a grudge against wingless (due to the fact that she's only started two threads in OMNI over the last month).

Or could it be that we just missed the other thread?

Actually it was just 2 new threads on FT not just in OMNI.

Thanks for the support everyone and Scott you may now close this thread.

Thanks!

Cheri

Glad to assist where I can guys ... notice it got locked down REAL fast. :D

Can you guys in return please share a few of those juicy collector series "Reputation" points with me if you don't mind though? :)

'could it be that we just missed the other thead?'

skofarrell - yes I can understand missing a thread for hours titled:

The Anonymous Negative Reputation Thread

was very easy to do. ;)

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

Not so fast - - the OMNI gestapos got that one, too. :(

So what if it is silly? Isn't that part of what makes up OMNI?

And Randy has implicitly approved the use of anonymous reputation dings. If it acceptable to send them, why isn't it acceptable to discuss them?

I DO NOT appreicate being referred to as one of the "Omni gestapo".

Nobody said it wasn't acceptable to discuss the negative reputation dings, but there are other threads discussing reputation AND negative remarks left there.

You seem to have a lot of free time on your hands! Perhaps you should volunteer to become a moderator. I hear the pay is great!

I really resent that remark, maybe I should use the report bad post function.

Don't we have enough darn threads regarding reputation already :rolleyes:

No, not IMO. Some may be duplicative, but many are variations on the theme. No harm, no foul. OMNI mods should not be in the business of locking down "similar" but not identical threads.

As always Cactuspete, thank you for your input in Omni moderation.

Then explain how you think that is OK to call us gestapo.

IMO, the general use of the word "gestapo" would indicate an internal police force known for overly-aggressive tactics against those suspected of not conforming to their beliefs. I think you can make the leap from there.

Really, well here is a definition o Gestapo

Gestapo
Acronym in German for Geheime Staatspolizei (Secret State Police). The Nazis established the Gestapo in order to monitor and stamp out any political opposition to the Hitler regime. Under Heinrich Himmler, the Gestapo's powers became brutal and far-reaching in ferreting out Jews, Marxists, and even moderate critics of the regime.

I don't care how you use it, you have no right in calling us that.

Exactly!

Say, isn't the gestapo a right-wing organisation? How can that be consistent with the OMNI moderators' well-known left-wing conspiracy? You know, the one that makes them biased against all things right-wing? :D

FewMiles..

Good for you. You found a definition that suits your agenda. I'll stick by mine, since that is what I intended. YMMV.

If the shoe fits, ... IMO. I still get one, don't I?

But in any event, thanks for the opportunity for a reasonably intelligent discussion on the issue. That's much more than some of your fellow moderators allow.

This is definitely going nowhere, but humor me, other than your own personal definition, show me one in the internet, feel free to google, where one wouldn't be offended by being called that.

You are entitled to your opinion, however, you are not entitled to call people names.

Shoe doesn't fit, I am very much Mexican, and could never be confused with a member of the gestapo ;)

And I will leave it at that.

Why am I always hungry every time I read threads in this forum?
 

I do not know why the OMNI moderators should be offended.

Isn’t it a compliment to be called something that is nice, sweet and refreshing?

After all, the definition of gestapo is an Italian ice cream or ice.

No, wait a minute — that is gelato, not gestapo...

...never mind...

I've always thought of my FT persona as more like Sgt Schultz than Maj. Hochstetter. I guess that's a step up, right? :confused:

YMMV.

Well, since Nazism is National Socialism it actually becomes clear! :p

If you look carefully at the time codes above, the "The Anonymous Negative Reputation Thread" thread was closed down immediately AFTER my post in this thread. Up until that point it was perfectly fine with the 2 mods who were active on the board.

Yes it was silly. So was wingless's thread. So are 95% of threads on OMNI for that matter. ;)

It was IMHO unbalanced moderation. If this "reputation" feature is part of FT, I fail to see why folks are not able to discuss it in OMNI - especially in a light hearted way.

Our signature on FT, or our handle or post count, or slowness of search, or any other feature are and have been fair game for all the years I have been here.

The OMNI mods appear to be oddly sensitive to any reference to this "reputation" feature being analysed in THAT forum. Why?

I personally feel calling Moderators "gestapo" is not polite. However on the flipside, playing the devil's advocate a little here, I notice that ScottC was perfectly comfortable with calling BA airline staff "gestapo" so that term is not unacceptable to all of us it seems.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showt...hlight=gestapo

For the 10 millionth time...
 

Moderators aren't required to (and often don't) read every post/thread on their respective forum.

If Scott noticed the other thread after you pointed it out, then you did your good deed for the day.

skofarrell. I accept that Moderators are not reading their boards at all times. Far from it.

HOWEVER in the time frame this thread was left unlocked (and wingless was locked down) all THREE of you Mods were on OMNI, and happily posting away. So presumably you all had ample time to look at the other threads on page one?

You have all decided for some curious reason to ban all comments in OMNI re these silly "reputation" points (and only Randy can advise if that course is suitable or not) - my comments simply request ya'll be CONSISTENT about banning all such comment there. Which you clearly were not.

cactuspete by his comments above seem to have stirred you all up which (co-incidentally? :rolleyes: ) caused some of his later comments on OMNI to be edited by ScottC - and had you personally threaten him with "the suspension of your FT account".

'Payback' for the above perhaps???? Your image above of Sergeant Schultz does spring immediately to my mind for some reason. ;)

This is my own observation, and I stress I have had no communication whatever with cactuspete on this, but several others have pointed your actions out in this matter and I was advised the comments removed were of a VERY mild nature by OMNI standards:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=314797

The FIRST post in the thread referred to the "moron in the White House" - yet none of you saw any problem with that or warned that poster about that having nothing to do with thread topic (Australian aboriginals) or threatened to suspend that person from FT.

I personally find someone American calling the US President a 'moron' on a travel bulletin board is equally as tasteless as calling Moderators gestapo. And even-handed Moderation would ensure civility breaches like that were corrected too IMO.

There is a difference between calling a politician (who is a public figure) a moron and calling your fellow posters gestapo. In the latter case, that equates to me calling you an ******* (insert expletive of your choice) -- it's simply not acceptable.

FewMiles..

Dude, unless George W Bush becomes a member of FT, he is just a public figure. We the mods, are not public figures, but members of this community.

It is not the same thing ;)

I might the only "conservative" member of the mods, but just because someone doesn't agree with my public views, doesn't mean that he doesn't have the right to express his opinion.

Where we draw the line is when people get out of hand and start calling people names, liberal, conservative or indifferent.

So, there you go, there is a difference, and we deserve the same respect as any other member of FT, and contrary to some people's opinions, we try to do the same

Your friendly neighborhood moderator ;)

What up with the Dark Orange Color :D

Canarsie....valiant effort in at least trying to cool down the rhetoric with a little levity.^

Is this another "Let's bother Randy" thread? ;) :D

Nope. I only read the threads that interest me, and the ones forwarded to me via the complaint process (either "report post", or if a member sends me an email).

Reputation threads don't really interest me. Same Sex Marriage threads don't interest me. Political threads don't interest me. While I can't speak for jfe or Scott, I don't think those types of threads interest them either. This may help explain the "unbalanced" moderation in OMNI, a forum that has no real topic to help keep people in line.

As to you your other assertions, Fewmiles is right on his followup. Calling a public figure a "moron" is not again the the TOS. "Calling out", insulting, or attacking another FTer is. There is no "mild by OMNI standards". The difference isn't subtle or vague. Stay on topic and don't flame other members (no matter how much they irritate you) and you'll never hear from a moderator. Now are the moderators going to catch everything? Of course not. Do we rely on the complain process? Yes. Do some people complain to us too much? Sometimes.

But the truth is that some members can't seem to help themselves. They insist on commenting on other FTers, straying from topic, and in most cases resorting to personal attacks. These are the behaviors that the moderators are here to stop, those "negative" behaviors are quite clearly laid out in the TOS (as is the "disciplinary action" model).

If you look at the number of people posting, and the number of "warnings" we've had to make on OMNI, you'll see that there are very few people that fall into the category I've outlined.

I wish this was more juicy for you. Personalities and grudges don't come into play for me. At the end of the day, I just want to avoid having to lock threads, edit posts, and warn members. It makes less work for me as a moderator, and raises my enjoyment of FT more.

If you're going to post on OMNI, remember the TOS.

Are EITHER suitable for a Flyer Bulletin board - that is the simple question.

As I have said, I think calling Moderators "gestapo" is not appropriate on any FT Forum. (Whether they acted a little like them or not. ;)

Is calling the USA President a "moron" just for the fun of it - and having nothing whatever to do with the thread topic what Randy wants this board to be in business for?? Seems so, as the poster was not advised to stay on topic in a thread 2 Mods posted on:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showt...08#post2754708

I guess as this is Randy's Forum he is the only one that can really answer that?

I have posted many times that religion and politics can be vigorously discussed/debated/argued on 1000s of other BB's - all with varying moderation controls and policies. I just fail to see what either of these subjects has to do with Flyertalk.

The connection OMNI (and its sleazier dimensions of politics and religion) has with Flyertalk is that it keeps a group of people (even if a small minority of FTers) visiting FT more frequently than they would otherwise. As a consequence, we have marginally more participants with substantive travel knowledge lingering online to help inform, clarify, assist and/or enjoy the airline/hotel game in the company of fellow FTers.

Hot Dog. ^^^^

So can we next expect to see ..... on-line auctions, tarot card and horoscope readings, a dating site, beanie baby discussion groups, a used car market, baseball debate area, porno jpeg swap meets, a Music download Centre, Employment classifeds, horse racing tip sheets, Catholic Theology think tanks, and the Billboard Hot 100 on streaming video?

Those will all attract a bunch of folks too. Of course they need know nothing about flying either. :D

As always - I could be wrong, but those do not YET appear to be a main corporate objective or mission statement for Flyertalk.

Randy could multiply x 1000 the daily visitors to this site just by introducing a few of the above 'great' ideas. So far (thankfully) he does not appear to have been tempted. ;)

"Bush is a moron" is about as close as we are getting. As that is still regarded as civil posting it seems.

Wow, I think I'm being lighthearted (if perhaps a little bit impish)... but I get a negative reputation hit for this?? :eek:

I tell ya! :o

Thank you, ozstamps, for your very very accurate observations.

Perhaps with the new format the TOS was changed, but under the old rules it was specifically written that "Any posts containing communications that are knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, obscene, profane, threatening, harassing, offensive, vulgar, abusive, hateful or bashing -- especially those aimed at sexual orientation, gender, race, color, religious views , national origin, or disability - will not be tolerated."

In the post immediately above the one which CactusPete had removed, the person he allegedly attacked had written, "The 'kangaroo bone' faith is no more worse that the evangelical faith of the chimp."

The words "the chimp" referred to Bush, who is not a poster on F/T and therefore does not constitute a violation of the TOS. However, many Christians, including some who are indeed members of F/T, share that "evangelical faith" and to have it compared to a "kangeroo bone faith" would certainly be offensive to them. More than that, it is certainly "defamatory...hateful or bashing...aimed at...religious views."

Oddly, although it is unquestionable that this letter was seen by at least two moderators, it was not removed.