I personally think the perspective here is a little different. In our point of view FT is an important piece of our online activity, therefore we would like to have all issues, be it on the tech or administration side, cleaned up.

Internet Brand wants the same - but more for operational and business than for emotional reasons. The recent outage / cyber attack showed how vulnerable the whole IB empire (and probably any comparable enterprise) is. This is not about an individual issue just effecting FlyerTalk. There are talks with IB behind the scenes... however if it's about tech stuff then what are you supposed to do except hoping it get's better. This comes from someone smashing his notebook with a baseball bat...

So regarding the original post, I think the proposal that magiciansampras made came with the best intentions. But what would such a forum actually result in ? Internet Brands operates many platforms and it is just too much to dedicate individual discussion forums next to the opportunity to contact the reps via pm. Add that up to the number of websites owned by IB !!

Thanks GoingAway. I don't know if you might have been mislead by the comments of the OP, "secret moderator-IB cabal". The actual facts of the scenario for this "latest enhancement" (your reference) if it makes any difference is that IB posted to the Moderators that they were making a change ... the very same afternoon that they made the change. There was no actual long testing period by the Mods which might have resulted in a different response nor lengthy period of input. In fact, the very first reply from a Mod regarding this issue when it was posted by IB, was that they did not think it that important to change vs. "other things that need fixing (like search, or the periods of slooooow speed on FT for instance)." The very first reply. Now, do you really think that this reply is that different than "regular" users might have posted?

Again, I totally understand you may have been mislead by the OP believing there is some sort of "secret moderator-IB cabal." There is not. I hope the addition of actual facts are of assistance to you.

Maybe, maybe not. The fact is that certain TBers campaigned on trying to improve the relationship of the FT membership with IB. If not a separate forum, I'm happy to listen to their ideas. If we create the forum and it is barren, we can close it. No biggie. But maybe, just maybe, IB would feel compelled to communicate with us if there was a separate forum to use.

Clearly the current system isn't working. Any actual TBers want to chime in?

Very interesting, thanks for this information. It might be helpful if it were also posted in the current related thread in the Technical Issues forum:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/techn...-3-1-10-a.html

FT seems more active than ever, and it's working a lot better than, say, the new Southwest Airlines website.

However, back to the point of the OP. IB is a business. They are stretched thin for staff, and IMHO we are lucky to get as much of their time as we do. We should use that limited time for the highest value FT can get. I believe that is occurring.

The problem is mostly one of perception. As Randy described, almost all the interaction with IB is occurring away from the public forums. That includes email and phone calls. IB can help with administrative problems, and these channels of communication are the best ones for that discussion. Problems posted in the Technical Issues forum WILL be raised with IB when IB is a necessary part of the fix.

A public griping forum for IB would be fun, but it would be a low-value use of the time of IB's staff. That's my opinion, anyway.

LOL, imagine if we treated the airlines like this?

"Yeah, sure, United lost my bags and canceled my flight 4 times, but hey, they're busy people and we should be lucky that we get as much of their time as we do."

Classic. ^

Wirelessly posted (goingaway\'s phone: BlackBerry8900/4.6.1.231 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/100)

Thanks, Randy. To be clear, not misled by the OP but rather sbm12's posts both in this and the tech forum thread which were fairly strong intimating that a)of course it was tested within FT and b) that he/she was one of those testers. When you post calling people liars and more, you expect there to be some reason, but apparently the post and inference were incorrect and misleading in and of themselves - disappointing all around

Well, I did read it through and I have to ask again the question that you pointedly failed to answer: where exactly does it say that IB wanted an IB only forum? Because while John certainly stated that he wanted comms to flow, he was distinctly non committal on any particular means of comms. OTOH, he was very clear in inviting FTers to email IB if they were under the impression that comms were not flowing adequately.

As I could not for a second imagine that you would be a person that would stir the pot for the sake of stirring the pot, I can only assume that you have in fact got in touch with IB (as John suggested in those chats that you have researched in detail) and that IB have told you that they would welcome an IB only forum, which would only makes sense if IB themselves wanted it. I note that, again, you have not answered that question. No doubt that this must be your natural shyness and modesty...

i do not think its a bad idea to request more direct and prominent access to the owners of a website.

And where did I claim that they said this?

The IB forum is my suggestion. If you have ideas on how to increase communication between IB and FT, please feel free to speak up.

Are you on the TB? I forget.

Wrong. My PMs to IB on this issue have been unreturned. @:-)

I think that's your answer right there. @:-)

Very interesting. So we have established that at no point has IB expressed the desire to see an IB only forum established.

Since there would be no point in having an IB only forum established if IB did not participate in it, it would be a waste of TB's time to create such a forum.

Therefore, until such time as IB express such a desire, any such discussion by TB would be utterly pointless and a waste of everybody's time. Time to move on.

Nothing of the sort.

We've established that IB doesn't like communicating with me via PMs. This could be for a variety of reasons. Lots of people don't like communicating with me (see above). I ask tough questions.

We haven't established that the reason people don't like communicating with you is because you ask tough questions.

What we have established is that IB apparently doesn't like communicating with anyone. Oh, except the small group of moderators the day a change is coming.

So I say open that group up! Let's let IB communicate with us all about potential changes and feedback.

Why are you against open communication channels, Spiff?