Better than 820.

And you are right there were no avatars that election.

gleff - 1223
ozstamps - 979
missydarlin - 837
Cholula - 824
bhatnasx - 656
doc - 656
ScottC - 656
FewMiles - 630
kokonutz - 554
Shareholder - 514
VPescado - 468
peteropny - 440
stimpy - 364
Markie - 328
socrates - 298
parnel - 198
Marathon Man - 196
John C - 145
nsx - 140
Radioman - 122
CameraGuy - 112
civicmon - 92
Alston - 89
HNL - 84
NOLAnwGOLD - 76
~Matthew~ - 64
vivrant - 38
Buzzard533 - 36
xmlsoa - 25
rothsteg - 25
fredman - 23
mbstone - 20
RamAir - 20
gaz_zman - 18

I honestly believe that the low voter turnout was a direct result of the actions of the past 2 TalkBoards. There was little feedback requested from the TB and when feedback was requested it was quite often ignored.

Also, there were far too many self-serving agendas the past two years.

I for one have not been participating on FT very much and it is mostly due to my disgust at how some of the members of the TB have treated us "mere mortals".

Actually FWIW I do recall Talkboard voted on that Randy.

A lot of members were keen to see that occur, and I and the other non-moderator TB members certainly voted for it to be read-only for all members, but the motion was defeated.

attorney 28 is in Sydney and I was talking to him yesterday which is how I remember. as we discussed it.

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



Motion rejected: Open Private Talkboard Forum for All Members in Read-Only Format

Moved by doc and seconded by attorney28

Quote:

That we open the TalkBoard Private Forum to all Flyertalk members on a "read only" basis. This access will apply, if the motion should pass, only to all new posts, beginning on the date of this vote.

Yes: attorney28, doc, ozstamps
No: Cholula, gleff, missydarlin, ScottC, Spiff, wharvey

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=529617

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

FWIW, I would have voted for a read-only TalkBoard, but if Randy has reasons that he wants it closed, then he has every right to keep it closed, even if we all voted to open it up.

As long as we can have civil public debates on the issues concerning the community, such as this one, then it is not a particularly burning need. The open debates are healthy and give the TalkBoard members good input from the general membership, as well as giving the general membership a chance to weigh the arguments of the TalkBoard members, in a way that a simple vote just cannot.

Punki - it is probably a sign that past TalkBoard make-ups have been healthy and robust, as evidenced by the mere fact there WAS a free and open vote on such a matter as a "read only" Talkboard forum.

I imagine that is why Randy established TalkBoard - to seek wide-ranging input from member elected representatives, rather than make all policy himself.

I'd have to say in my 2 years on Talkboard Randy encouraged us to discuss whatever we wished that members had raised, and to vote on them how we wished if matters became motions.

He never once came in and told TB members how to vote, or influenced a vote, which is to his great credit.

No Talkboard vote - even if successful, gets implemented until it has gone to Randy first for info, before being posted up publicly.

I am pretty sure there were no votes that Randy ever "vetoed", and that is a sign the Talkboard has worked exactly in my view as he planned it to.

Democracy in action. The members voted in the TB members they wanted, and those members voted and debated as they saw fit. It works well.

There has been a remarkably diverse range of folks voted into recent Talkboards. Radical and Conservative, young and old, male and female. And spread all over the place - England, Israel, Australia and Germany as well as the USA.

My term is ending and new terms are beginning. I feel sure Talkboard will continue serving the members the way it was meant to do, and I wish all the new members well. ^

The same old predictable handles will never be happy with anything any TB achieves, but positive things will get achieved all the same. As with all kind of government - anywhere. @:-)@:-)@:-)

But, that's just my view.

This is a final warning for people to watch what they post.

We have received several Reported Posts for personal attacks.

Members... including Talkboard Members need to remember that personal attacks are not allowed.

William

Hey, no fair warning them! I'm second in line to succeed banned TB members.



Drifting back on topic, I'm not reflexively in favor of anything that increases voter turnout. We need informed voters in whatever quantity we can get them. We don't need people voting who don't take the time to learn anything about the candidates and just pick the ones they've heard of before. People like me who are only known in a remote corner of FT would have absolutely no chance in a name recognition contest.

OTOH, one could argue that the number of people willing to vote for you on the basis of name recognition is a reasonable measure of the overall value you are providing to FT. If TalkBoard membership is to be an achievement badge, then this approach makes sense. If FT wants the best people to do the job, that might be a completely different set of members.

As I said before, I'm pretty darned happy with the election results, and the low vote totals don't change my opinion. As I think others have mentioned, low turnout means that people are happy with FT, and that's great. I got some great exposure for the TOS clarification project, and being outside the eventual voting on it is arguably an advantage to me in working with everyone and getting the best possible result.

No, I don't believe this is correct.

Chexy,

It has always been in bounds during both my stints on the Talkboard... believe it has always been that way.

In regards to others comments, I do know the following:

1. Randy has stopped a motion/vote while it was going on (I remember this because it was a motion I seconded of a former Talkboard President(

2. He has chosen to implement something sooner than the Talkboard had recommended. (I remember this because he implemented my reason for dissenting from the motiom)

So, Randy does step in.... rarely, but he does....

William my comments below were STRICTLY related to my 2 term term on TalkBoard and I stick by them, and do not beleive any other TB member will disagree.

Nothing like you refer to did occur in those 2 years, and that is what I posted as members might have been misled as to what really occurs with Randy's involvement, had they read and believed Jenbel's recollections.

William - your term started a lot earlier than mine. I recall the motion you refer to and it was well before my time on TB.

IMHO, there's a lot of common sense and wisdom in this statement.

As for the name recognition factor, I think many of us are guilty of just picking any old handle when we first registered for FT.

I know I planned to log-on, ask one question and disappear forever.

If I'd known I'd be around as long as I have, I might have chosen a handle that sounded like a hot sauce.

Congratulation!
However it's very sad that we still don't have e European representative
FT is still too much American based.
And how can it be that a suspended member got elected ??? hmm...

Emmmm... excuse me.

Last time I checked, I was European and last time I checked I was on TB.

Isn't the UK in Europe? The last time I looked, Jenbel was a proud resident of Scotland

Ooops... Sorry Jenbel. I've overseen that.
Well done! It's good to have Talk Board Members from all over the world.

And many thanks to all the TB members for your support in advance.

My first 2 wishes,
1) I know it has been discussed for hours already... Please bring the avatars back.
2) I've already discussed this with other FTers. I would like to have a (sub-) forum where we could find the reasons why members have been suspended. Is that possible?

Greetings from Youngstown, Ohio.