^ ^ What she said...

Again, it's Randy's world, we just live in it.

But I just think it is silly that the discussions that affect all posters by their elected representatives take place in secret. And sillier that the EXCEPTIONAL instance is the excuse to hold deliberations in secret.

Not only does it deny posters the opportunity to see their Talkboard in action, it forces TB members (when properly harassed and harangued) to have to RESTATE their position and arguments in the public TB forum.

Cut-Paste-Problem Solved.

I don't think you can use "technical limitations" as an excuse here. Randy sent me (as well as the other candidates, I'm sure) a PM outlining this debate. There are more than 5 candidates.

Exactly! ^

The point is that one cannot see the responses of others and react to them if such a case has to be handled via the Private Message system.

Both.

The TalkBoard should respond to user's input and suggestions. It should also be willing to come up with its own initiatives.

Email reply all.

The point is that from what I understand nearly all of what TB talks about does not need to be kept secret nor should it.

Not allowing the vast majority of deliberations to be available for posters to read for the sake of maybe an issue or two a year is poor logic and does not serve the posters well.

koko, we all understand that you were upset that several years ago someone trashtalked you on the TB forum and someone sent you copies of it. It wasn't right and you have a reason to be upset, that being said, don't you think it a little repetitive to call for the opening of the TB forums in almost every single post on these TB threads??

See, I TOLD you all that people were sick of my beating this 'dead horse!'

No. I dont think it's repetitive. Just insufferable.

If you look at my platform, this is one of the two main things I am running for TB to talk about (the other being an emphasis on community as well as points and miles).

I am well over being upset about the former Old Boys Cigar Club that used to pass as the TB. I think the current TB is hard working and focused on doing good things for the community. I just think everyone ought to be able to see that for themselves.

For the record, the reason I am calling for making the TB forum read-only for all posters is because posters should be able to:

- follow TB debate and discussions in real time so that each poster can determine for his or herself what the TB is talking about at any given time

- know who is taking what position on a particular issue

- know why TB members are taking a certain position in their own words, and

- see for themselves how effective each TB member is as an advocate for their positions or against another TB member's position on issues.

There. Have I hoplessly alienated you with my insufferable agitation!? @:-)

My view as a member has been to be PROACTIVE.

I do not wait for an idea to be floated in the public TB forum before bringing it up in the private forum. We are the peoples' representatives... and have to be trusted to represent their interest from our own perspective.

I also believe we have to consider what members ask from us... but I would not call that reactive. In fact, not every idea that is suggested will even get a vote....

William

I believe that TalkBoard should be proactive in asking for feedback from a wide swath of the FT community and reactive to the needs of that community as a whole.

I vote for INACTIVE.

That is, the TB should not be looking for change for the sake of change. This is a very well run and successful site, and it has scaled nicely. With over 100,000 users, changes must be very well thought out -- otherwise, the community might go RADIOACTIVE.

Nothing is ever perfect, so the TB is there mainly to advise on mid-course corrections. Those can be either proactive or reactive (for practical reasons, they will probably be more reactive before a consensus is reached).

I think the TalkBoard membership should be 'Proactive' and constantly strive to help make FlyerTalk as good as it can be. There, of course, should be a 'Reactive' process to include general membership concerns. We are all in this together and need to receive communications from the general membership, and disseminate our intentions as board members back to them.