It's not just tech issues. Where can we go to discuss other issues with IB? If I want to ask a question about the general direction of FT or what their vision is for the next year, for instance, where would I go for that discussion?

Further, your analysis suggests that the moderators have lots of interaction with IB. That's nice. But what about the non-moderators? Do they not count?

TBers have campaigned on trying to get an open channel for communication with IB; hopefully they'll see this proposal as exactly that opportunity. ^

Amazing that we need a forum proposal in TB for this information to come out. Kind of makes my point, doesn't it Randy?

What is Brent Conver's username?

Not really. A point might be made that no matter how much time you spend on FlyerTalk you really never read it all. For instance, here's a post by Brent all the way back from 2007 where he asks members to let him know if he can be of any assistance. You'll note that he has Internet Brands in his profile:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/8892124-post111.html

If you were interested in how to contact someone or who to contact, a note to me or a volunteer moderator would have garnered this same reply. No real need to start a thread. We're really here for many reasons, learn to use us for these types of things.

And as you'll note in the above link, his user name is bconver

So why don't we just do the same with you? Why do we bother having an Only RP forum? If we should just PM you with concerns, why bother with the forum?

The answer, it seems to me, is that there is value in having an open and community channel of communication with IB. Private messages are fine, but they're pretty inefficient when it comes to a community conveying information. Don't you agree?

Obviously at the risk of repeating myself, you seem to want me to disappear or just enjoy pretending I'm not here. It's been pointed out, many times to you and others that while IB is solely responsible for the tech and advertising of FlyerTalk, that I still run the day-to-day operations and unless you got an email I didn't, I haven't been fired from that role as of a few minutes ago. So, if your question is about general direction of tech, then there are forums for that. If its about FT in the bigger picture, come visit me in ORP. But it just may disappoint you when I say that there is no specific vision. I enjoy FlyerTalk as a community of like-minded travelers. I don't feel the need to have some spreadsheet that say our vision is so many posts next years by X number of members and sell so many ads. Sorry, that's not the nature of FlyerTalk to date on my side of things. How about this vision which I'll borrow -- "Do No Evil." Seriously, on a training chat with a number of volunteer moderators (and we'll get to your seemingly distrust of them later) last night, someone asked me what my current goals were for FT and while i outlines broadly some things for our volunteers, I told them that in the near side of things, I really wanted to go back to the idea of Ambassadors. We've had a lot of growth on FlyerTalk -- new member enrollments are up 67% so far for the year and as a result, so is the number of posts by members. I'm fairly comfortable with the overall direction and program of volunteers (and while you'll have your opinion, among the industry, our program is regarded as world-class) but am bothered by doing a much better job of managing two things: 1) a welcome environment from moment one on FlyerTalk and 2) easy access to answers to a newbies questions. As for #1, members do a fairly positive job of welcoming members but in the busiest and the least visited, i think it's either being overwhelmed or underwhelmed and as such for new members. We've really got some excellent general members and I'd like to find a useful and rewarding manner in which to take advantage of their generosity of time and positive contributions for FlyerTalk. Fact is we have a large number of volunteers to become Moderators but I really don't want to grow that group for the sake of growing it. As a result, maybe there is a way to create other types of opportunities for these kinds of volunteers. FlyerTalk when you step outside, is very, very intimidating. And #2 and it's not new but balancing the need for "Experts Only" and a "Beginners Slope" for members of FlyerTalk.

Anyway, you get the idea I hope.

As for non-mods, maybe civics is a good answer for you. In most large communities, there are appointed or elected groups of the general population to serve as funnels for being heard. You will never convince me that you have something to say that isn't already being heard. Is it best to have a forum where it is 200,000 trying to be heard against a handful, or the current system of 80+ that are very represented of the general membership to funnel the dialogue so that is is heard and not just managed.

Question: Just why is it that you never seem to feel that you are heard? Is this just a FlyerTalk thing or does it reveb in other parts of your life. Just wondering because you seem to always stand out on things like this and certainly continue to think that Mods have reptile skins. I've just never noticed any difference between a volunteer and our other members.

Neither is this one.

But making bold claims out of ignorance isn't something that should be punished so we all move on in life.

Wow, does someone need a ride on the RV, Randy? Why the personal attacks? I'm not going to continue to discuss this while you don't follow the TOS.

Plonk.

I said I would ask the question. If IB wants to inform us of the secret moderator-IB cabal that makes decisions around here, the forum would be a great place for it.

If you don't want to do the research, that's not my problem.


Read through the chats and you'll find that IB quite clearly claimed open communication going forward. Maybe they just said this to appease us while Randy was selling the joint to them?

How about between the TalkBoard and Internet Brands, though? Does the TalkBoard have a relationship with Internet Brands, where they can be consulted on changes or the future of FT, or is that strictly limited to moderators?

Not limited at all to Moderators, it's just more convenient because there are 80+ mods who are typically very active in their own private forum vs. 9 TB members who generally aren't that active if there is not much put forth from members for their consideration. It really has nothing to to do with mods vs. TB vs. members. It's really just a matter of practical convenience. And actually, the mods do not even engage in conversations re: the future of FT, etc. if you think you're being left out. IB remains content in their choice to continue having me run FT and that leaves much of any "future" in my hands. As noted, FT can pride themselves as being more organic because of its members and no real need to change that. I certainly don't wield spreadsheets and a Brooks Brothers or Dockers approach. As for changes related to tech you'd be a lost bet if you thought that IB always consults the Mods on changes. What is often lost is that IB owns more than 100 other Web sites, so they obviously have a laboratory of other practices and performance issues from some of the successes of those other Web sites and as such there is certainly going to be times when they put into play something that while emotionally isn't to our liking because of the past, it works in other similar environments with other online communities. Can't say I'd argue against that and while we always think we're pretty different and special (come on, we know we are!) it doesn't pass that someone will have a better idea, or at least a different one. Just look at our members success at forums. We've seen members politic for the establishment of certain forums only to see that they did not pan out with projected traffic and other similar ideas. No big deal, we made the changes to scale them back.

As for TB and IB, there just doesn't seem much in common to chat about since IB still entrusts me to run FT and as a practical matter, tech issues aside, nothing much if any thing has changed with me and TB as compared to prior to IB entering the arena. In April, many members of TB will meet in person (we did that a few years ago as well) and I've invited some of the executives of IB to stop by and say hello. So we may see a new level or channel of dialogue, but the fact is, IB really doesn't want to interfere with the organic nature of everyday life on FT and has shown so through the past few years. We should be fairly happy with that type of situation.

Anyway, not sure if i correctly addressed your question and please let me know how better i can do so.

Randy

You didn't "ask the question." You made an accusation. A question would have been "Was anyone outside of IB consulted prior to X happening?" rather than "Why was no one consulted?"

See the difference?

I see the difference but it is a difference without meaning in this case. I don't consider interacting with a small cabal of unelected moderators to be consulting with FT. Sorry, YMMV.

IB doesn't get FT and never has ... creating an IB-only forum won't improve anything. Getting them involved and communicating on tech issues that are theirs to address, is usually a minimum half day event and usually a day or more before they pop in to say they are looking at, aware of it, or whatever. Rarely is it an exchange as in the days when HOM ran the place and I freely admit to missing that. The different levels of support and responsiveness (and even competency on occasion) are significant, and I think we as a community need to continue to lower our expectations which is just sad.

As for comments Randy has made in this thread regarding Mods and their communication with IB, while I appreciate they have a forum in which to complain, and I know they do plenty of complaining themselves, I think Randy's assertion that Mods reflect regular user activity is a misnomer, as they tap the system differently, for different purposes than the regular user community and we all have different expectations. They can definitely play a role in trumpeting issues we're experiencing and have documented, but they should not be representing all of us in what changes should be made, especially with no discussion out to the community. Moreover, if IB communicates with them maybe removing that layer will provide more visibility to the community by IB than currently exists, and which absolutely contributes to the frustration experienced since their takeover.

A comment that I believe was also Randys that we could never expect to read all of FT is THE point which makes IBs latest change a poor one for the FT world, as people just do not read everything, ever. Whether it's within one busy forum or across the whole board - there just isn't enough time in the day to read all that and have a life (and travel, must include travel). We all pick and choose, but with this new enhancement that picking and choosing became significantly more difficult with a lot more clutter than there ever was before. I think "regular" users would have provided a different response to IB than the Mods or whoever sbm12 is so busy saying was involved with the testing/review/assessment process for new "enhancements".

IMO - this latest enhancement is just another scenario where IB has once again failed basic expectations in communication and technology with the FT community.

I think you've explained it well. I had thought, from the last election campaign, that the Talk Board would be taking a bigger role in FT's relationship with IB, but it sounds like there's really not a need for that right now. Thank you.