missydarlin

Not at all. But I don't think the answer to "why aren't people asking XXX here" is necessarily "lets build it and see if they will come." I think the bigger discussion is "WHY aren't they asking the questions now?" Is there something about the culture of FT that makes someone uncomfortable to ask about Lourdes in the France forum? Or about Pets in Travelbuzz? If so...what can be done about that?

HNL

State a platform motto or goals for FlyerTalk for the future

There is a wealth of information stored in the Flyer Talks posts. Unfortunately much of that knowledge is siloed. I propose FT embark on and effort to break down the barriers between forums through functionality that allows cross forum postings. Many of us have deep knowledge of cities, airports, and other information that goes beyond a singular program. With cross forum postings people can query a wider audience, which in turn will build more connections between members.

Flyer Talk knowledge is not limited to loyalty programs alone, nor are the questions and comments from posters. FT should develop a categorization system for threads, so readers and filter through the posts to find the threads of interest to them. This will allow FT members to subscribe to more that thread categories, not just programs.

nsx

Based on my early experience with usenet and email lists, I believe that there is an optimum size for a forum. Above about 200 active participants, flame wars seem to be inevitable. Forum growth without limit is thus probably a bad idea.

At the other extreme, a forum needs activity to be worth visiting. If a new forum can attract at least 5 active participants, and if it does not detract from an existing forum that is not too large for its own good, then I would normally vote to add the new forum.

Another solution is to have many small forums and implement email notification as described in my platform. Then FTers can track our subjects of interest without having to visit all the separate forums until something is actually posted.

ozstamps

My guess is that forums like UA and AA for instance have at least ten times that number of active participants?

Both seem to work well. IMHO.

peteropny

My position on the creation of new forums on Flyertalk is that there be a demonstrated support for the particular forum. Perhaps there should be either an ongoing thread in Talk Board or separate forum discussing potential new forums. I was behind the creation of the GLBT forum in 2001 (after the events of 9/11) which started as a thread in Community that ran 13 pages. Without a centralized place where people can post their support for such a forum, it probably would not have been created. I strongly belief that the GLBT forum has attracted quite a few members to Flyertalk (I see posters initially post there as their first post regularly). As many have stated in this thread, it becomes very difficult to dismantle a forum. Therefore, I think there needs to be some demonstrated support prior to the creation of a new forum.

FewMiles

I used to be rather opposed to establishing new forums too quickly because I've never really liked the idea of expanding things too quickly or expanding things for the sake of expanding things.

But recent discussions I've read including some direct debating I've had with the TB member who asked this question have led me to re-evaluate this position and I'm now actually somewhat convinced that the "let's give it a try" approach is not bad at all.

(Yes I actually agree with him on something.)

That said, I'd still like to see some evidence of demand for the requested new forum, but all that has to be should be a few examples of threads that would best belong there and don't really fit elsewhere in the existing framework of FT. Of course, I also agree with others that have stated that a re-evaluation of the new forum will need to be done, let's say once at six months and again at one year after it's opened. I just don't have a good feel for what metrics should be used to evaluate success/failure, but that would have to be the subject of further discussion.

FewMiles..

John C

I actually am going to differ with you on this one. In certain centralized and highly controlled environments, you can better organize and index information through cross-indexing. In an environment such as this, I predict it would erupt into a horrid mess in no time. The moderating duties would triple overnight in my mind. The incredibly helpful informal indexing via the community (e.g. "try looking in X, I see things there regarding...") would vanish as everyone became hopelessly confused over what was where (and where anything was supposed to go). Within a matter of months, the sizable investment required to make this happen would make information retrieval more rather than less difficult. Just one opinion, but I'd vote against this proposal.

doc

Thanks very much for the question. I think, as silly as it may sound, that what we need is the "right" number of forums, based upon FT'er interest at a given "time." There is an optimum number for all and we should try to get as close as possible to it.

Heck, I fondly remember back when "OMNI" simply meant to be a warning to others that we were now headed, full speed, "off topic!"

Initially, many years ago, as Randy could tell you, I'd strongly advised him that he was seemingly expanding the board too much, too quickly, to get ready for the growth that was forthcoming. And I felt that many folks potentially would not know where to post, nor where to find the great information that had already been posted.

Also, FWIW, even the highly successful GLBT fora, which I could sense there was a "need" for, I initially had some reservations about, simply becuase I did not want to lose the input from the many gay FT members whose opinions I valued, and who might have otherwise posted in fora where I was more likely to be visiting myself.

Thankfully, the expected growth has now come at last, and also, attorney28, has successfully lead a rather massive forum restucturing that has helped quite a bit as well.

The other alternative, for the adventurous among us, may well be to try to adopt the "wiki" concept, so that much of the wealth of information buried here on FT may more easily be discovered, particularly by "newbies." As most of you likely well know, this is based largely upon the key word concept. FWIW, it does provide easy access, I believe, accross a huge board.

Unless we do that, getting more to the specific point, now, I am increasingly of the view that having new fora is a generally good idea. I'm far more inclined now to try new forums than I used to be.

The newly proposed Religious Travellers forum is a good example, as was Budget Travel, and I fully support these fora, despite being only slightly more religious, than I am gay!

If I do not like the fora, then I'll just not visit it!

I am now, and always will be, in favor of whatever is in the best interests of FT and all FTers, not just me personally!

Mark

VPescado

I've been giving this matter some thought.

One side wants to be conservative about the creation of new forums as they reasonably point out that overzealous creation will lead to junk forums that no one visits and clutter up the forums page - or they become an administrative nightmare to close down.

The other side believes that forums should be given a chance. Dovster makes an excellent point that there is an inherent catch-22: We require proof via the existance of posts/threads relating to the subject of a prospective new forum, but at the same time we close down off-topic threads. So proof can only be provided if the new topic already falls (at least barely) under an existing forum.

Both sides make their point.

One idea that occurs to me is the creation of a forum for "debates on new forums". It would be open to the membership that had exceeded whatever the standard hurdle is for things like OMNI and Coupon Connection. It would allow any applicable member to start a thread requesting a forum's creation. Members that agree as well as disagree could debate the issue in the thread.

It would not be a means to circumvent the TalkBoard's authority: The TalkBoard would not be bound by anything that occurs in such a thread.

It would however provide useful information regarding interest - as well as allowing any reason not to start a particular forum to come to light.

Any thoughts from the other candidates?

John C

I am of the opinion that the far more important communication with TalkBoard is inbound rather than outbound. Rather than create a new laser focused "new forums" forum, I would likely ask for moderating in the current TalkBoard Topics forum to be more permissive of requests and a bit more tolerant of "noise".