The lack of FFP is the only legitimate reason this poster requires to say no to the creation of individual Ryan Air and Easyjet FT forums. FT's core purpose is stated well right on the home web page:

FlyerTalk is an interactive community that provides up-to-date information on travel-related loyalty reward programs.

Hmmm. I think its good answer the specific questions for U2 & FR, too. Let's the speculating about this one. I think it would be very good comments for creating new forums is sound good logical choice. However, it's up to Talkboard will have to made decision to be in negotiate deal from Talkboards is subject to voting to start more new fourms on Miles & Points thread. Actually, I think it would be good idea to proposed to create new U2 & FR forums is approval from Talkboard will put on the vote to says Yes to me.

Obviously, I think it will may to be in negotiate deal from our members to have more specifically for me is context to create new thread. This is better way to keep out of Budge Travel forums is not necessary. Final, it will have to decide own facts will awaited for finalized approval. It will be motion passed to startup new thread is perfect opportunities lots of FlyerTalk members will be great additions to get new FR & U2 fourms. It will be great appreciate it for our contributions to start new forums sometimes in the future.

I’m a relatively new member and although read a lot of the threads am not a major contributor. Yet. However, I do feel a lot of well-established members have not moved with the times. I don’t think I’ve looked at the home page to understand the original purpose of the site since I joined. The clue is in the title: it is “flyertalk” not “frequent flyer programme talk”. If the threads were strictly about just FFPs the great range of threads would not be allowed (this morning I have already read about macaroni cheese pies at GLA and the BA strike – neither of these are strictly related to FFPs but do form part of the whole flying experience which is what I want to read about).

I have several gold cards from various FFPs but also fly easyJet and want to easily find threads about LCCs as well. To my mind easyJet and Ryanair are different beasts and deserve their own fora.

Websites develop and change. Their members should too.

Judolphin and Ex Amex Card have stolen my thunder with their excellent posts. :)

The objection some have is that FR and EZ do not have a FFP along the same lines as legacy carriers and we don't need an information forum. That logic doesn't apply to these current forums:

• AF Frequence Plus - which doesn't exist
• KLM Flying Dutchman - which doesn't exist
• Swiss International Airlines - which is not a FFP

I'm not suggesting that any of these should be removed, just that they are not current FFPs and have relevance only as discussions on the airlines concerned.

Then there are:

• NW Worldperks (Discontinued Program) which is, er, a discontinued program
• America West (Discontinued Program) (ditto)
• USAirways Dividend Miles (pre FlightFund merger)

Given the interest referenced previously, it is difficult to see FR and EZ excluded in favour of these redundant ex-programs.

Well, as for the discussion of opening other forums in the past, it would be interesting to see how many threads and posts focused on RyanAir and EasyJet there has been over the last year. And I am not counting the threads where the mention of any of these two carriers has been incidental, such as the traditional bashing posts in the BA forum ;).

I would support the systematic move of the threads focused on these two carriers to the Budget Travel forum, as a first step, so that we can have a more precise understanding of the trends. It would have two benefits IMHO:
- having a clearer view of the number of threads / day that are really focused on these carriers
- see whether or when they represent a significant portion of the threads in that forum, which would warrant the creation of new forums, just as the Accor forum was created when the Accor focused threads represented more than 50% of the threads in the Other hotels forum.

BTW, the forums mentioned by Roger are sub-forums created for the purpose of managing the merger and co-existence of different communities or airlines within an airline group. They are not on the same level as, for instance, the Delta Skymiles forum.

Yes, but also, the end of that sentence:

Also, are you proposing the Swiss International board be removed from FT due to a lack of a FFP?

I hadn't either until yesterday. If we truly believe in those standards, why is there a Politics & Religion forum, an OMNI forum... well, I'll answer the question for you! It's because

(a.) The powers that be felt people would use it
(b.) It makes the mods' jobs much easier by giving OT posts their own forum. No one has addressed this particular point:

I'm sure the BA mods would be thrilled with the opening of these forums -- they could probably start taking a vacation with the time they'd save.

This is the reality of how the site is used, regardless of the verbiage on the home page. I think we all know this.

This is why I want to know the real reason some of we Titanium Elite Executive Diamond Enterprise Medallion 1K A-List Club Gold Members are seemingly allergic to giving even a nod towards LCCs. Every reason I've heard so far to exclude them has extremely compelling counter-examples even within FT (13,000 Google hits for easyJet on FT.com? Holy cow, how can we ignore this?).

See my results below... as for the bashing threads, those should not ever live on the BA board. They should simply be moved to the Ryanair/easyJet forums ;) Again, ask the BA mods what they think of this idea.

I think searching for the airline within the title is a good way to measure this for airlines without a forum.

You could reasonably say a large percentage of U2 threads would have easyJet in the title, but most DL threads would not have "Delta" in the title because it would usually be redundant.

These numbers only includes pages where the name of the airline is contained within the thread title.

easyJet: 687
Ryanair: 1460
China Southern (a SkyTeam airline without a forum): 335

Again: over 2100 hits for these two airlines within thread titles. Imagine if they actually had their own forum(s).

If you create the forums and I and others who agree with me are wrong, just close the forum! No harm done, experiments don't have to come with guarantees. It's not like there's some huge outlay of capital to build the easyJet forum's factory. It's a message board.

(Bolding were words I never said)

If you are going to quote my post/s, I would appreciate you don't mis-quote me. I didn't say any of the words you inserted in the above quote. Nor did I mean what you said. Not only did you misunderstand my post, but also you mis-represented my post. The latter part is actually against FT's policy (link to this policy).

You also failed to understand how FT search works.

It seems to me you had difficulty understanding my rebuttal to your logic of reasoning. Let me try again.

1. You had used the passenger number (from Wikipedia) to support your argument for a standalone RyanAir Forum (see your quoted "110,000,000 annual pax" post#28). I then used the same source (Wikipedia) to prove to you there was another larger airline (in this case, China Southern) that carried more passengers than RyanAir and China Southern didn't/doesn't have its own I was/am NOT proposing China Southern to have its own FT forum (as a matter of fact, I don't really care if CZ has its own forum on FT.) So passenger load is not the (absolute) deciding factor of forum creating on FT.

2. Instead of finding other stronger selling points for RyanAir, you then focused on China Southern Airlines and assuming more Englisher speakers flew RyanAir than CZ (see post#34). I didn't know if it's true but I was able to provide evidence to you (in post#35) that spoken language/s was not at issue. I gave you real data that the traffic of China Southern on FT was heavier than RyanAir in my preliminary search using FT Search tool in post#35.

3. Instead of refining your own argument of passenger load and language usage, you made your "selling" point a moving target again to the "popularity" criterion (and misquoting me as a result). This is NOT a popularity contest. The data only show (existing) traffic on FT. If you had investigated further in TB Topics Forum, you would have known that TBers didn't/don't use a singular quantitative matrix to consider forum proposals. Heavy traffic does help though, just see what happened to the recent Accor A-Club Forum.

There are many other factors to support creation of a new forum on FT. That's why you don't see TB consider forum proposals nor approve motions on new fora every other week. ;)

4. Giving the history of both RyanAir and China Southern Airlines, both of them are "old" enough to "prove" their existence on FT by FTers, present and past. But neither of them make the cut to be a single forum (yet). That did/doesn't stop RyanAir and China Airlines being discussed on FT. RyanAir posts are mainly in Budget Travels Forum, just like China Southern in Other Asian, Australian and South Pacific Frequent Flyer Programs Forum. Posts about both airlines are also scattered in other fora on FT at the same time, while posts on China Southern are >>500.

5. I suspect with the "relatively" low count of posts/threads of RyanAir using FT Search, passengers of RyanAir may have found other website/s to fulfill their needs to discuss or search info for RyanAir. Should FT compete with the other website/s for RyanAir? Would a single RyanAir forum win those potential 110,000,000 annual RyanAir customers over? Do regular RyanAir customers think the same (or similar) as average FTers? Would regular RyanAir customers be the target population for IB? Would a RyanAir Forum bring in more traffic for FT and more business for IB?

Well, I don't have a crystal ball nor am I a psyche. I don't have the answers and don't know what are the other websites for RyanAir either. I also don't have a clear picture whether RyanAir customers are interested in the same miles/points/travel pursuits as FTers. I would think for those who are in favor of a RyanAir forum should do more thorough research then come up with a more convincing proposal that can address all these "more important" issues.

BTW, the the preliminary data I presented in my search was based on the existing posts/threads in ALL FORA on FT. That applied to both search terms "RyanAir" and "China Southern."

I was referring to posts within threads that do not have EasyJet or Ryanair as their main topic.

Over what period of time ? Even if it was only within a year, fewer than two threads per day would not seem to justify a specific forum for Easyjet, as was discussed for other proposed forums in the past.

This argument has been made for other proposed forums as well in the past. I don't really see a reason for changing the rationale just because it is about EasyJet or Ryanair.

Wow, that was ridiculous. I will unsubscribe from the thread and exit on that note.

Even though I disagree with you and feel it would be good to try the EZY/Ryanair, your position is very reasonable and logical. Thanks for being civil in disagreement.

Google (recountable) Search vs. FT (mutually exclusive) Search
 

First things first. I use Google more often than FT search. I also know, without refining the search parameter, results can be recounted in Google key-word per search.

Did you try use "CZ" for China Southern in Google search as well? Quite a few FTers refer China Southern as CZ.

(1). CZ on FT/forum using Google/ncr: 1020

(2). "China Southern" on FT/forum using Google/ncr: 557

(3). RyanAir on FT/forum using Google/ncr: 3160

(4). easyJet on FT/forum using Google/ncr: 1800 (quite different from Ex Amex Card's. Did you happen to make a typo on 131,00 or something? :confused:)

ps. Don't add up (1) & (2) since they can be overlapping of the same airline.
pps. the 3160 results in (3) are not necessarily mutually exclusive (meaning some, or even many, of them can be the same posts/threads). Same applies to (1), (2), & (4).

I don't know how many of the Google results are mutually exclusive but I do know FT search, even though not perfect, gives you exclusive results per FT Search:

"CZ" search as threads on all FT fora using FT Search: 499 threads
"CZ"search as posts on FT using FT Search: 497 posts
"China Southern" search as threads on all FT fora using FT Search: 497 threads
"China Southern" search as posts on all FT fora using FT Search: >>500 posts

RyanAir search as threads on all FT fora using FT Search: 498 threads
RyanAir search as posts on all FT fora using FT Search: 497 posts

Per thread title search:
RyanAir as keyword in thread titles on all FT fora: 490 threads
"China Southern" as keyword in thread titles on all FT fora: 191 threads
CZ as keyword in thread titles on all FT fora: 103 threads

Whether RyanAir's numbers are good enough indicators for its own forum is up to TBers.

ETA:
ps. I didn't specify the date ranges for my preliminary FT searches. I just double checked and it seems my search results from performing FT Search are only backdated to mid-2007. I suspect FT search automatically stops feeding older posts/threads when the results are hitting close to the 500 cap.

A further examination and analysis of FT post/threads on RyanAir/easyJet over the years (and possibly cross different duration should be conducted by those who are interested, so TBers can learn more about the true data.

Is this the same Swiss who is part of the Star Alliance and participates in the Miles & More FFP. That Swiss? Sorry unlike the LCC's Swiss is not lacking a FFP even though it may not be their own exclusive version.

And as JOUY31 notes Swiss doesn't even have its own forum but rather is a subforum because of its LH ownership:

Yap, good sport, after you mis-representing other's post. When I called you out, I became ridiculous? :rolleyes:

Nobody's perfect and we tend to misunderstand each other from time to time. But citing other's posts then replacing the whole content with your own words, that's mis-quoting and mis-representation. I do mind being mis-represented by others. That's a principle thingy. If you had elaborated your (mis)understanding of my post in your own reply, I would have been able to re-explain myself to you without referencing FT's policy.

This is a discussion thread for open debate. FTers are able to engage in civil discussion on the pros and cons of topics at hand without any personal attack. There's no need to get emotional when others disagree or find flaws in your logic. You also have to understand what others are really saying in order to refine or further your pro position for a RyanAir forum.

I gave my arguments with hard data in this thread. Quite a few savvy & established FTers already stated very clearly why they didn't/don't think RyanAir is ready for a forum on FT. I think I read enough TB Topics Forum to understand why and how certain forum proposals make into motions then succeed.

IMHO, RyanAir isn't there yet. I see no problem having Budget Travel Forum as home base for LCCs on FT.

This well-established member has seen this website develop and change and this forum is proof that still happens. And I would disagree with the contention that well-established members resists change as I only resist change for change sake. Give me what I feel are good enough reasons and you'll have my support for a new forum but IMHO I'm not there yet with the suggestion as made. Were it to come down to creating a sub-forum of the existing Budget Travel forum strictly for LCC's without FFP's then that would be something I could support.

FWIW as a relatively new member you may be unaware that there have been many suggestions for FT to broaden out to become a wider community with proposed forums for dating, photography, private clubs, international sporting/Olympics, spas, health & fitness and many more if you care to browse TB Topics thread titles. FT trying to be all things to almost every member is IMHO a recipe for losing focus on what brought us all here in the first place: travelling and FFP.

And yes, there already is a fairly wide choice of non-FFP/FFM forums so that is more evidence that change has happened here at FT but I see nothing wrong with trying to manage that process for the long-term benefit of the site. As the FT saying goes YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary) but those are my well-established member thoughts on the proposal as made and I would encourage other relatively new members to offer their input on these discussions on this forum as they do help shape the future FT direction.

I'm not going to join in the name-calling but would just observe that putting text in square brackets - [ ..... ] - is often used for explanatory info, for example by moderators in thread titles. Square brackets are not quotations.

Also, using CZ as well as China Southern in totals is muddying the waters and IMO could produce a dubious result. Are you going to include typos as well? Would you include FR, EZY, EZ, U2, Ryannair, Ryan Air in your numbers? All of these and more have been used in FT posts.

If a further analysis on RyanAir's presence on FT would help TBers, I would say go for it. The burden should be upon the shoulders of the pro camp to justify the creation of RyanAir Forum on FT. Number is not everything but numbers speak. Since statistics can be manipulated and misleading at times, sound research is must when playing number games. All I am saying is choose your weapon wisely when it comes to numbers.

When LCCs and RyanAir have no FFPs to attract miles/points enthusiasts, this proposal needs to build a strong case for RyanAir with other better fitting criteria to gain support from fellow FTers and TBers.

A couple of days ago, I felt passionate about this, it struck me, and you can tell by my posts, as being totally relevant to provide forums for these two airlines, because of their significance in the European market. Now I have totally lost the will to live, I have a life to get on with and boy is this a place that encourages Banging One's Head Against the Wall!!!!

:td::td::td:

No doubt I'll get flamed for saying this, but I don't know how this is decided, (I don't have time to look up all the rules), but could someone in power decide, or put the wheels in motion - to decide, Yes you can have the forums, or No you can't and close the thread, and I can move on to more important things like - Do I need to get more milk or can I manage with what I've got before my flight to Dallas on Saturday!!!!!!!!!

You don't have to look it up. The sticky thread on top of TalkBoard Topics Forum explains very well how things work in two posts. Two very long posts, may I add.

What is the TalkBoard and How are New Forums and Other Suggestions Considered?

There is democracy on FT, represented by 9 elected TBers on board. TBers vote on motions. A motion passes if two-thirds of TBers vote in favor. TBers don't vote on proposals. A proposal becomes a (votable) motion when one TBer makes a motion and another TBer seconds it in the private TB Forum. Meaning a proposal needs support from at least two TBers to get started.

This is a discussion thread for a forum proposal. If FTers don't discuss the pros and cons in say proposals, how can our elected TBers get input from fellow FTers? I don't think our TBers would make up their minds in the dark nor vote in blindfold. Why close a thread when the discussion isn't over?

This is the process in TB Forum on FT. As a FTer, you can decide if you want to participate (or not) and the degree of participation in discussion. You can choose to understand the TB rules (or not). You may even contact individual TBers privately to win them over, if you so choose.

Speaking for myself, I didn't know nor understand how TB worked nor FT operated until about 4-5 years ago. An issue regarding a forum that I frequented was served on TB's table. It didn't take long before I "educated" myself about TB and FT. That has helped me tremendously in taking part of discussion in TB Topics Forum.

FT is very special. There are quite a few devoted FTers on board. If you think moving on to other part of your life is more bearable and important than sitting through a TB proposal, please do what your heart desires. :)

Be aware that CZ is also the ISO two letter country code for the Czech Republic... :)

Quite possible, it was a quick and dirty search. When I click on the link I posted, the numbers match your ones so I don't know what happened there. I must have made a mistake or Google is up to some mischief.

As I said, it was pretty unscientific study. :eek:

OK, so from the sounds of the opinions of the TB board members this proposal isn't going to get off the ground (so to speak), let alone be voted in.

Really, the airline forums are an elitist group for high status frequent fliers or those who aspire to the status. I'm sure most of them do fly with LCCs from time to time but many of them don't want to admit it, let alone discuss it in the same forum for fear of losing face.

The low cost carriers don't fit in with the demographic here. I'll stick with FT because I get some really useful information (though I don't post that often anymore) but look elsewhere for a forum for frequent fliers of the LCCs.

It was a pretty off the wall post in the first place but unless we have a strong consensus then we should just move on - the discussion has run it's course.

Thanks to all who participated, especially to those who kept their cool and made their points so eloquently. ^

lin821 thanks for the info on how the TB system works, I found that helpful. Thanks for taking the time to post all that information.

I still get the feeling is that the answer to the OP's topic is.

"The computer says NO."

Cheers Larry.

And I would disagree as IMHO it serves to change the meaning or words of a quote while still attributing it to the other member as it still says Originally Posted by and the other members FT handle.

Actually you haven't "heard" all 9 TBers speak up in this proposal thread yet. Maybe in the private TB Forum, some of them are considering making this proposal a motion. Maybe there is more than 1 secret TB supporter. You never know. But if you do think RyanAir is deserving but give up with a well-thought forum proposal now, you'll never get to see a RyanAir Forum on FT. That I am sure.

Well, I take that back. You'll know for sure if this proposal makes it to the table because there will be a public announcement/thread about a TB motion on this TB Topics Forum. We just don't know when. ;)

See if reading my post in another airline forum proposal thread would help you come up with a better strategy for advocating RyanAir forum. Good luck!

You are very welcome. :)

That's my point about mis-quote and misrepresentation. Even though I have no intention to drag this OT issue any further, I thank you for understanding where I was/am coming from.

I want to defend myself, apologize, and speak to the possible creation of this/these boards once more:

First: Brackets in a quote means the person didn't actually say those words. The fact the whole "quote" was in brackets should make it obvious that it wasn't really a quote but a paraphrase. I didn't think much about it, I just realized my post was really long, I was quoting someone for several paragraphs a post or 2 above me, and thought I'd just paraphrase the section I was responding to. I had no idea it would become a federal case.

That said, I apologize for the misunderstanding. I disagree that I changed the meaning of what the poster said, but my opinion truly doesn't matter in this case; I regret that the poster I was responding to was angered by what I did, I really do.

In the future, if a non-moderator thinks I broke a rule, I would ask to be PMed rather than to be embarrassed and chastised publicly.

Back on topic:

JOUY31 stated he/she would be for RyanAir/EasyJet forums as subforums of Budget Travel. I think that would be a spectacular idea. It's a compromise that, to me, actually makes more sense than either (a.) putting it under "Mileage Programs" or (b.) excluding them altogether.

I am not a frequent flyer of either airline, so my interest is the interest of FT. I like FT a lot, and want it to come up on the front page when someone Googles the #8 airline in the world. I want to be able to rely on FT for information from fellow pax when flying a large airline while in Europe. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

How does one present a proposal to TB?

That's what this thread is.

Actually I think it was me that suggested the subforum idea while JOUY31 suggested consolidating things within the Budget Travel forum:

As to the other thing, I'm not a big fan of paraphrasing but am glad you adressed the issue and rejoined the thread to offer your opinion on the thread topic. :)

judolphin highlighted this thread to me. Though I sense he/she might not like what follows.

Prospero has already explained our MO for EZY/FR threads. In terms of volume we might get 1 thread every 2-3 weeks on the subject on BA which would qualify for the proposed forum. On that basis, along with the absence of FFP and the perfectly acceptable budget travel forum I can't see any real need for the proposed new, seperate fora.

Whilst normally very in favour of new forums on the 'build it and they will come' theory, I am in two minds about this one, because it exposes the limitations of the FT category system.

If you have a question about EasyJet ex-UK, you could post it a) OT in the BA forum, b) UK and Ireland or c) budget travel. Possibly even d) Other European Airlines. You would get a response in any of those forums - ironically, the biggest response would be if you did a) even though that is the worst place for it. I'm not sure that creating a further option e) helps.

At the end of the day, with no FF programme to disect, the number of EZ / FR queries is relatively finite, relating to the intricacies of the fare structures and the in-flight experience. Once you've got that out of the way I'm not sure what is left.

What I WOULD like to see (and this is going off topic) is better linkage of related forums. There should be, for example, a quick link on the BA board to the 'UK and Ireland' forum, plus possible 'Budget Travel'. This would reduce the number of OT threads in all forums.

If a post gets moved, it still appears in the original forum with a Moved: tag in front of it... so if a U2 or FR post gets moved to Budget Travel, can't visitors of the BA forum (or whichever other forum it starts in) still be able to weigh in on it if they have insight on the topic at hand? I'm not sure why that's not sufficient if we stay status quo.

That said, I would be interested in seeing a forum for LCCs without FFPs either as a subforum under Budget Travel or standing on its own.

Having been a relatively frequent EZ flyer over the past year (in fact more so than any other airline - I'd have earned top tier status if they actually had a FFP) I'd be perfectly happy to have a dedicated forum for EZ.

I think my issue with EZ in the budget forum as stands is that most people asking about EZ are basically asking the same kind of question about them viz 'How do they work, are they like Southwest?'. There are several EZ regulars who answer these type of question, but not that many. I'm not sure if that's because the group of people who most often fly EZ (European - because of airline location and predominantly business people, to judge from the flights I've taken and my own experience as to why I was flying them) aren't the kind of people who frequent budget travel too much, or if it's because those of us who fly frequently on EZ also have our own frequent flyer boards to hang out on in addition to flying EZ so don't have time to do a general board as well, where many of the threads are just not of interest (I've done budget travel, I've done non-budget travel, I prefer the non-budget version thanks ;)). Be that as it may, I don't think using the Budget travel forum for EZ is a particularly good fit and while it kind of does for questions about EZ, I think there is a case to be made for giving EZ it's own board as it would allow better and more informed discussion of EZ, allowing those that fly EZ a focus and those that want to fly EZ and have questions someplace definitive to go ask them - or to go search for answers.

I can't speak for FR. I don't fly them. I've never flown them. I won't fly them as at all if I can possibly avoid it, and I disapprove so much of the company I wouldn't chose to give them the oxygen of their own board. But I also know that me disapproving of their business practices so not wanting to give them a board on principle isn't really a rational argument!

I'd also add that discussion of the moderating practices of BA is not within the remit of TB.

Ahem... post #40? ;)

jenbel, I know what you mean about FR. My resolve is not quite as strong as yours and there are some occasions where the alternative to FR is so complex or expensive that I end up on an FR flight but it always leave me feeling morally 'dirty'. But, yes, this cannot be an argument against a forum. In any event, your problem would be that one cannot reasonably allow an EZY forum while denying an FR one...

On the oxygen of publicity bit, well, to be honest, anybody in Europe who has not heard of Ryanair is probably not aware that we have had flying machines since the Wright Brothers, Santos-Dumont and Bleriot. As to our US friends, it is very helpful for them to know more about FR as they should know that FR is not really like B6 or FL, which some would tend to assume.

Your post, as well as that by Raffles, also point out to another problem re the multiplication of forums: the list of forums in my own 'My flyertalk' keeps growing and I find that my reading is being spread increasingly thinly. If the critical mass is there, then it makes sense to create another forum. If it is not, it is counter-productive as some of us who are happy to frequent a generic BT forum will simply give up with several additional fora. That's the fragmentation problem again.

Ha, to the underlined part: if those are the numbers, those are the numbers. Perhaps it's not needed after all if it's only 1-2 threads per month. With your insight the only rational argument left is," If you build it they [may very well] come."

There should have been a ;) at the end of my sentence, it was tongue in cheek.

touché, Nick. I'm not one who usually favors subforums but think it would make sense in this case, more sense than say trying to rename the forum something more generic that would indicate LCC inclusion. Just MHO.

Right. Somebody posts an idea here on TBT, and everyone discusses and debates it. If a large majority of posters are persuaded that the idea is good, the TB will typically make a motion and pass something. If the discussion here is inconclusive, the TB is not likely to have a 2/3 majority to act. Simple, really. Because TB members are no different than any other FTers.

There is a grey area here that tends towards "discussion of moderation" (discussion about whether threads could be moved to the "Budget Travel" forum in lieu of creating a new forum) - and it is not permitted for non-moderators to discuss moderation issues on pain of suspension. Some outspoken TB members however are moderators and can therefore voice their opinions on this thread. The rest of your elected TalkBoard members can only voice their opinions via the ballot process. That is why I hesitate to post a more detailed position on this issue here, and I am some of my other TB colleagues feel the same.

I don't think that this is right. I stand to be corrected if my understanding of the rules is erroneous but my understanding is that moderators are no more no less at liberty to discuss moderation than any other FT member. They can 'do the thing', i.e moderate, in the forums in which they have that function but discussing it is another matter.

Surely common sense would be used on an issue like this before suspending a TalkBoard member's account. It's not like anyone's publicly criticizing a mod's decision(s), just discussing if there's a better alternative to moderation available -- namely, a new board.

FT TOS calls it Discussing Specific Moderator Actions so how can speculating about what a moderator might be willing to do in the future within a forum be discussing a specific action if that action hasn't even happened yet?

Respectfully I disagree that the debate this far has tread upon taboo ground but rather merely discussing the proposal as made and suggesting alternatives. It should be noted also that it was a moderator who suggested possible thread relocation, not a regular member if my reading back upthread is correct. Just MHO.

I certainly apologize my post here was likely what brought up B747-437B's mention of discussing moderator actions. I certainly wouldn't have asked the question that was asked and removed if I didn't think it had relevance to the need (or lack thereof) of the proposed forum. I was merely trying to get a sense of what does or doesn't typically happen right now so that I (and possibly others) could offer an informed opinion on the subject.