Jenbel

Congrats - I hope the new lot actually bother to communicate with those they supposedly represent. Got to say, not holding my breath though! I would say, that looks like another very low turnout, and this time we can't blame the absence of 'I voted' avatars - what was that argument that low profile was not arguing the reputation of TB?

SkiAdcock

Is this actually a congratulations? Reads more like a complaint on some areas you've got problems w/ than an actual congrats.

Speaking only for myself, yes I do intend to communicate w/ FTers in my role as TB member. Never held back before as a regular TB member; don't see any need to start now

Also AFAIK #s haven't been released for this year so not sure how you know it's a low turnout? Might be; might not be. I really don't know. Hopefully Randy will post the #s before his final farewell in a few weeks.

But as I've also said before, with members numbering in the hundreds of thousands who primarily come to FT to learn about miles & points & who really don't care about how the BB works, whether it be by IB or TB, as long as they get the info they're seeking, I think expecting thousands upon thousands to vote in TB elections is a bit naive. It would be nice if they did, but I seriously ever doubt it will reach in the tens of thousands. It's the nature of most BBs and not unique to FT. And I'm still confused on how (what I'm guessing will be) an average turnout 'harms the reputation of TB'.

Cheers.

skywalkerLAX

Considering there were only two TB members exchanged, myself and nsx, may I ask where exactly your hopes of change are? Or alternatively, can you elaborate your criticism on either of our communication?

Cheers,
S

Jenbel

I know it's a low turnout because Randy annouced the turnout in the first post:
Now the wording is ambiguous - is that the number of votes cast (which I believe it to be) or the number of people who voted? If it's the former, then it's likely only about 1000 people voted (and possibly even less, if everyone exercised their five votes per person )

And yet so many of you were arguing in the election that TB's profile has not declined. So how do you explain a drop from a record 7630 members voting in 2008 and about 1000-1500 voting two years later?

So yes, I am less than impressed with TB and the behaviour of TB, and given who was elected, I'm not predicting much of a change in the behaviour over the last two years which has caused such a decline in the number of people prepared to vote in the TB election.

So do you want to rethink any of your remarks, now I've drawn your attention to the number of votes which was announced in the first post, and contrasted that with the much higher levels achieved only two years ago?

To sort out a problem, the first step is to actually acknowledge it. Unless TB actually recognises that it's inactivity is driving it into obsolescence, then it cannot do anything to arrest that - but too many of those who competed in the election in which so few actually voted couldn't even recognise that TB is gradually fading away due to the inactivity of the TB members, their inability to do anything or indeed to communicate with the members.

Jenbel

Ok, remember you asked this question publicly - if you didn't want to hear the answer, then you shouldn't have asked.

In fairness, I had hoped that there would be a higher turnover than just you and nsx! Afterall, it was an election, and there was a chance that the incumbents wouldn't be re-elected. However, TB is a recognition/popularity contest and it's been quite some time since someone was sitting and wished to continue was actually voted off (2004 or 2005?) I think some people on TB have been on it far too long now. I think that the two elected positions are going to those who may once have been good, but have not shown much dynamism recently, and I think TB desperately needs re-invigorating and a kick up the arse frankly. I hope they'll prove me wrong, and at least one has a point to prove so I hope he won't be as passive as that particular position appears to have been recently.

You have made 24 posts on the public TB forum in the past year, and nsx has made 23 posts on the public TB forum in the past year. I don't consider that particularly communicative with the members. Do you?

You said in your election debates that the difference you would make to TB was
Now you might have done that privately, because we can't see that. But do you feel that you participated enough on the public board to fulfill that promise? Have you posted often enough to present another perspective in the discussion? That would seem to suggest a certain level of involvement. In your time on TB you haven't started any threads on the public forum either, so you've not initiated any discussion.

nsx said - given the number of posts he made this year, I'm not convinced he used the public forum as he said he would. Afterall, with the mileage run forum discussions, TB did not lack for difficult subjects!

While I do think that some TB members have been better than others over the past year, I don't feel either of you are the worst. But that's kind of damning with faint praise. What do you think are your concrete achievements in your two years on TB? What can you look at and say with pride 'I did that!' And if there is nothing... then what did you do and have you missed a great opportunity?

skywalkerLAX

I like the straight forward approach actually. I agree on the popularity thing - but then again, which election does not have this issue? I think Talk Board should see fresh faces now and then. Many members put themselves up for the election process which is a good and a bad thing alike because that benefits very popular and well known candidates the most.

24 posts p.a. are 2 per month... in all honesty for what has been discussed in the past year that is IMHO already quiet a bit. It does not make sense in my eyes to permanently chew over the creation of new forums, especially if the majority of these proposals comes from the same member every couple weeks. If I remember correctly, in one thread I said something along the line 'the proposals are getting ridiculous and you can't expect someone to engage in an discussion ala 'I want an ice cream forum''. I weighted into topics where I felt I can contribute words that are reasonable and help to understand my voting decisions. Underlining my position and explaining my reasoning. It makes no sense to me to repeatedly nicknagging with members about forum creation for 3rd world airlines just to name an example.

My 'perspective' was clear: I'm a member first and then a TB Member. I have been criticized when I posted how crappy airline X is and how I collect a bunch of Vouchers and compensation (I think it was on United). PMs where people said they would 'report' me to Randy for such behaviour. NOw I don't think Randy gives a damn about it (and neither do I) but my response was I'm not a role model as a TB Member, if you need one, check with your parents. People seriously need to get a life. It's not my business to defend airline X for every bs thats going on - some members seem to have just that for their hobby. I always discouraged it and called those people out. That's the way I am. Get to the point and don't bs around.

There were rarely any threads to respond to. If so, one post was more than sufficient in most instances. Even longterm TB members considered the past 2 years 'slow', maybe it was not the most exciting term to serve but I liked it, it gave me a nice insight. Not sure how much time I will have the next year or two so that was one of the reasons why I did not run for re-election. And as I said above, TB should see fresh faces from time to time.

Of course this is only my perspective.

Cheers
S.

techgirl

I agree with you that there *should* have been more turnover. You and I served together for two years so we have a bit of a different perspective - and let's not forget that our term was plagued by a lot of "unique" issues that we got to deal with that prompted us to *have* to post in the public forum a lot more.

I was never a big public poster myself though either - I'd comment on the issue at hand, maybe solicit a question or clarification here or there, but mostly I spent my time reading. So perhaps I also wouldn't have been one of the more "memorable" TB members - but as you and I both know there is a LOT that goes on behind the scenes that no one beyond those 9 (plus RP) gets to see so we aren't really in a position to comment on how well someone served. And if TB members are commenting on it to outsiders (re: happenings on the private forum), well I *know* Jenbel that you and I both share the same stance on that happening.

I personally question whether a TB is still needed to serve the community given all the changes that have taken place... but then again, when we got elected four years ago many were at that time saying that there was nothing left that TB could do. And perhaps we really have reached that point where most of the best ideas have already been suggested and improvements made. Looking at the work of the TBs that proceeded us, a lot of the groundwork was laid... and we came in with a specific "agenda" laid out of things we had to address.

I think some fresh blood would be good... and perhaps we need to rethink what we want TB to be. I know personally there is NO way I'd put up with the criticism that others in the community lobbied my way if the only purpose was to debate name changes and merges for forums.

kokonutz

Lol, I was sort of thinking the same thing.

I served my sentence then stepped aside to let new blood serve. Incumbency breeds complacency, imho. But elections have consequences, as they say!

As for the communication thing, my theory is that the TB NEEDS the likes of an Ozstamps, Punki or, dareIsay, kokonutz to keep things lively, interesting and, of course, controversial. I remember coming in on day one (after serving out a suspension incurred during the election) to a heated debate about some of my campaign promises to make ALL TB deliberations public. Good times. Good times.

Cholula

I couldn't agree more.

Agreed as well.

While we didn't elect an ozstamps, Punki, kokonutz, Dovster, doc or attorney28, we did get a SkiAdcock. And I'm thrilled about that.

She may be many things but a shrinking-violet wallflower is not one of them.

Q Shoe Guy

I more or less wanted the same thing across all volunteer(elected or non-elected) positions but you would have none of that! So what gives.....? Can't have change without actually changing something... How about retiring from your volunteer position(s), as you seem to want incumbent TB volunteers to do @:-) !?

Cheers

tcook052

Seems everyone is busily grinding their own axes, so to speak, as it relates to TB; election results, low voter turnout, the make-up of TB, etc. Perhaps not getting elected will work out better for me after all.

Dovster

Cholula, while I am honored to be on that list, I have to admit that there is no way I would run for TalkBoard again -- and for several reasons.

1. I have long held that no one should serve more than 2 consecutive terms (although this would not be a problem as I was elected twice and then did not run in the following two elections).

2. TalkBoard has been castrated to the point where it now serves as nothing more than a debating society determining whether Outer Mongolian Airlines deserves its own forum or not. It is not allowed to even discuss matters which are important to many of the members.

3. With Randy's departure, FlyerTalk has lost much of the personal touch. Carol may turn out to be great in her new job but she is not, nor can she ever be, the person who built FT up from nothing. TB members, and moderators, are no longer volunteering their time to help a friend but rather to serve as unpaid employees of a corporation. Frankly, I can't see why anyone would want to do that. I enjoyed the morning that I spent as a Gate Agent for Delta, but I would have to be a fool to go to TLV on a regular basis and do the job for free.

I would feel differently if moderators were chosen by the membership in order to make this the kind of IBB that we want, but they are not. They hold their positions in order to enforce the rules that the ownership wants.

TalkBoard may be elected by the membership but it is not allowed to represent them on issues which really impact posters.

From my personal experience, I know how much time being on TalkBoard involves (admittedly, not a lot) and from speaking with friends who are moderators I have a good idea of how much time that involves (one heck of a lot).

For the past 6 months, working under a different user name, I have been working as a moderator for a start-up IBB, connected to an industry which has nothing to do with travel. It is still a tiny one, owned by a larger, successful, business and I doubt that I spend even an hour a week on it but I get paid $500 a month (with the money, of course, going to my kibbutz) and there is an agreement that this pay will increase as does my workload.

Why would I (or anyone else) want to donate his time to a corporation for free?

B747-437B

IMHO, the main reason for this is the dual mandate of a majority of TalkBoard members as both Moderators and TalkBoard Members. It gives them multiple fora to raise ideas and drive points for change, thus emasculating what the TalkBoard is able to achieve. It also doesn't help that discussions both on the private TB forum and in the public TB forum are often censored/restricted to steer discussions in pre-determined directions.

The TalkBoard is simply the rubber stamp for decisions taken elsewhere. This will not change as long as a majority of TalkBoard members view their roles on TalkBoard as being secondary to their roles as Moderators. It is also why electoral reform is the only way to try to bring relevancy back to TalkBoard.

jackal

While I would love to get paid and certainly wouldn't oppose a move by IB to compensate those currently volunteering, I choose to view it as donating my time to the community, not IB. IB facilitates and supports the technical needs of the community, but I answer to and serve the community of members. If they don't like what I'm doing (either as a moderator or on TalkBoard), they have the ultimate power to demand my removal or vote me out. Therefore, my responsibility is to them, and I do what I do out of appreciation for all this community has done for me.

That said, if you want to contribute to next year's travel budget, I'll be happy to PM you the account details you can wire funds to.

I respectfully disagree. First, I haven't seen any of the dual-moderators/TalkBoard members give any indication, in either the public forums, private forums, or via PM, that they view moderation as the more important role. Moderating is a daily (often more-so) chore and thus can be in the forefront of a busy FlyerTalk moderator's vision, but just because your daily duty is to drive your car to work doesn't mean your commute is the most important part of your day. On the contrary, among those who are both moderators and TalkBoard members, I actually encounter them in their roles as TalkBoard members more often than I see traces of their moderator activity.

That leads me in to my second point: you argue that moderators use the moderator forum to bring up points that should be brought up on TalkBoard. I can't recall a single instance during my tenure where a dual TalkBoard member and moderator has raised a point or argument in the private moderator forum or even in-person at the recent Moderator Do that would be anything that could even potentially be under the purview of TalkBoard. The vast majority of threads in the private moderator forum are "Does this guy's IP address make him look like a spammer?", "Is this member a duplicate of XXX?", and "How should I handle a disruptive member?" kinds of threads.

Actually, in the past half-year I've been a moderator and TalkBoard member, most of the forward movement on FlyerTalk has simply been implemented top-down by the FlyerTalk host. If you want to blame anyone for acting without TalkBoard's input, that's really where--from what I've seen--you need to aim. Not that I would advocate doing so; it's his right (and even responsibility) as the Host to make decisions that he thinks are for the betterment of FlyerTalk. And until you can get Randy and/or Carol and IB and the TalkBoard and everyone to agree to make this a true multi-branch system of government with checks and balances and limits on power (i.e. restricting the Host-cum-FTCD from introducing changes without TalkBoard's approval), this is how it's going to be. However, that's not going to happen, and TalkBoard will remain mostly an advisory council to the FlyerTalk administration.

In any case, having been exposed to the (usually not very much and certainly insubstantial) discussion in the moderator private forum, I really don't see how you can blame the moderators for anything that's wrong with TalkBoard.

Jenbel

I disagree with that and I've served as a TB member both as a mod and not as a mod. I think that's another excuse. I'd say it's happened the other way around - that TB's quiescence has instead created a vacuum which others have had to step into fill, because TB won't/hasn't. How many times did the mods try to refer the signature thing to TB, only to be told by TB they wouldn't make a change? Well in the end since the signature thing wasn't working, and TB decided to ignore it wasn't working, the mods ended up having to develop new ways of dealing with it, because TB wouldn't.

It's like the CO/UA merger. Members have been asking TB to make decisions now about it, and have constantly been told TB doesn't feel anything needs to happen yet. Members are looking to TB to set a clear path and define what is going to happen and it hasn't done so. Uncertainty is bad - but TB has been content to allow that uncertainty to continue, despite members' requests to resolve it and chart a future which means they know how their involvement will work. And of course, someone then has to start working out what is going to happen - and since TB has declined to involve itself, it likely will be presented with a fait accompli. That's no-one's fault, but TB's. To try and pass the buck is frankly dishonest.