Questionable Credentials Of Some FT Members
 

Randy,

Congratulations and well done on your achievement in the sale of FT. ^

But as you said, you're still in charge, so here's a question:

I have noticed at least a couple of FT members claim to work for the U.S. government in a law enforcement capacity. One says he works for the Transportation Security Administration. Another claims to be a Federal Air Marshal. These are merely two I have noticed.

I know you and your staff are very busy but has anyone actually verified these claims?

If not, is it in the best interest of FT for people to be allowed to make such claims?

[This is my first post in this forum. If I have inadvertently violated some protocol, I apologize and ask that you delete this post immediately.]

Unless they are posting in an official capacity, how is this any different to an FTer proclaiming to be a FA, or hold a certain elite status, or have inside knowledge of airline/FFP rules/changes?

Given the wide range of experience and collective knowledge of FTers it doesn't take long for someone faking it to be outed.

Note - I have no idea who you are referring to, and am replying as a member of FT not as a moderator.

Look at post #205 in this thread:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=668388

I don't know, Kiwi Flyer, some people get away with fraud for a long time. Remember B Watson? Eventually most fakes get caught, but it amazes me how long some people can live a lie, even duping their close friends and family.

Fortunately, in cyberspace, it really doesn't matter what people say unless you plan to do something in reliance on their information. If one were contemplating doing something based on information provided by a stranger, it would be smart to carefully verified that information before taking any action.

This isn't ebay. We aren't routinely sending other FlyerTalkers money until we get to know them. Of course there are times when we might send money to a Do Host prior to having met them, or perhaps contribute to a gift, but I have never heard of an instance where either of those requests for money turned out to be less than honorable.

Actually, one of my very favorite FlyerTalkers, arturo, is a patent fraud, but what difference does it make? I still love him and sure miss him. :(

To the best of my knowledge, even our most famous fraud, never really hurt anybody on Flyer Talk, although that is not true for his investors. :(

Agree.

Over many years on FT I've seen a number of folks posting pretending to be top airline elites, or hotel top tiers or Centurion Amex card holders etc, etc.

And seen all of them trip up on their own shoelaces sooner rather than later.

FT'er are very savvy as a group, and smell a rat pretty instinctively. @:-)

Take everything with a grain of salt that spouts out of your computer monitor. Many people refuse to believe I fly with Santa on Christmas Eve and have racked up an amazing 2 million miles in Santa’s frequent flyer program. But it really is true.

What's your point? That I raised the same question in another forum and didn't get an answer.

That is precisely the reason I am raising it with Randy.

I do not believe people should be allowed to claim law enforcement status unless that has been verified.

TSA Screeners are not Law Enforcement.

As for baseless claims, FT is chock full of them. In the past we have had members claim:

To be MDs, and they were not.
To be Journalists, and they were not.
To be Record Producers, and they were not.
To be Attorneys, and they were not.
To be in possession of internal airline documents (Training manuals, etc..), when they were not.
To be able to bring multiple FT members into an airline lounge as their guests, when they were not.

Bottom line is that you should always "trust, but verify" any information provided on an anonymous IBB. ALWAYS. If you cannot verify, then do not trust.

I didn't think it was FT's duty to check the background of some or all of it's participants. Why, I could just be pretending to be a travel agent because of all the prestige and adulation that profession commands. ;)

I think that Cholula's excellent response is about as good and complete an answer as you could ever hope to get.

Why would they? Really, do you think they spend their time reading thousands of posts daily in search of false claims by members in order to verify their authenticity??

How do you suggest they prevent people from making these, perhaps, false claims?

I have no point to make at all. I was pointing KiwiFlyer to the thread where the question was raised, so he could look at it himself. You're reading a little too much into my post.

The moderator in the Travel Safety and Security forum has replied to your question in that forum.

Maybe we could threaten to shoot them?? @:-)

OP, if you want to believe somebody, believe them. If you do not, ignore them.

Regarding the aforementioned departed Mr. Watson, several very active FTers believed him and may have even thought they befriended him, several very active FTers did not believe him and warned others (including me) not to do so, and most of us (including me) couldn't have cared either way.

Ignoring TSA for a second: Suppose I say I'm a minister. You believe my pitch and send me money for my cause, or maybe an expiring award on Southwest which I turn around and sell on ebay, or maybe you let me sleep on your couch for a night during a mileage run. How is that different from any con job on the internet?

Now, the obvious ones, such as the Nigerian scammers, don't last long here. But the nature of the community allows many of us to figure out who is not being honest about their details over time. Most of the time, it is not criminal, just a veneer of self-delusion.


ETA: Randy, i'm sorry for posting here in ORP - I know you sometimes object when the members are portrayed as speaking for you. I am writing while trying to stay awake on a conference call, and thought I was on the regular communitybuzz forum instead. But since some people have subscriptions set up, I'll leave my thoughts here until you wish to delete them.

Caveat lector, no?

On the internet, all men are handsome and all women are size 6. I always want to believe, but am frequently disappointed! Ah well, such is life, and I can deal with it. Bet the OP can too.