FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   TalkBoard Topics (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics-382/)
-   -   Proposal/request for comment: codifying policy for handle changes (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/1269290-proposal-request-comment-codifying-policy-handle-changes.html)

nsx Oct 27, 2011 6:27 am


Originally Posted by jackal (Post 17343225)
I would fully expect any ignore-list selections to carry over (it's probably handled behind the scenes by user number rather than by specific text-based name).

That's my belief as well.

kipper Oct 27, 2011 8:27 am


Originally Posted by jackal (Post 17343225)
Unfortunately, it turns out that under the handle is not logistically feasible.

I would be very surprised if one would have to re-add the new handle to one's ignore list. I would fully expect any ignore-list selections to carry over (it's probably handled behind the scenes by user number rather than by specific text-based name).

That makes sense.

Originally Posted by SkiAdcock (Post 17343237)
It's late, I'm tired, but my understanding is that people can request a 1-time only change & the under the handle or next to the handle or the dual handle exists for 30 days. To me that's enough for a changeover re: the dual handles.

Cheers.

My concern about 30 days is that for some, it's easy to be away from FT for 30 days, between travel and such. Is there any reason why one would be opposed to 60 or 90 days?

SkiAdcock Oct 27, 2011 8:55 am

I'm not opposed to longer, but I think current policy is 30 days. I'm not sure there's enough reason to make it significantly longer, but am certainly willing to listen if there's a groundswell of support.

Cheers.

dchristiva Oct 27, 2011 1:22 pm

How many handle changes have been requested and how many have been approved over the last 12 months? The last 24 months? 36? I'd like to understand how often these requests are made. I can't imagine it's that frequent that the TalkBoard needs to weigh in on this.

N965VJ Oct 27, 2011 2:19 pm


Originally Posted by jackal (Post 17343225)
Unfortunately, it turns out that under the handle is not logistically feasible.

I wonder what has changed from when I saw this done ~3 years ago. :confused:

lin821 Oct 27, 2011 3:22 pm


Originally Posted by N965VJ (Post 17346795)

Originally Posted by jackal (Post 17343225)
Unfortunately, it turns out that under the handle is not logistically feasible.

I wonder what has changed from when I saw this done ~3 years ago. :confused:

I share your confusion. :confused:

jackal, are you saying this is an exception and no longer possible on FT? I knew in this particular example, the poster had a handle change not long after the original signup date in 2008 (within weeks, if not months).

N965VJ Oct 27, 2011 4:43 pm

Hey guess what- that was the FTer I remember. Looks like they've had that title for several years now. :eek:

lin821 Oct 28, 2011 8:41 am


Originally Posted by N965VJ (Post 17347654)
Hey guess what- that was the FTer I remember. Looks like they've had that title for several years now. :eek:

I guess we share more than just confusion then. We even use the same crystal ball. ;):D

SanDiego1K Oct 28, 2011 12:16 pm


Originally Posted by lin821 (Post 17347223)
jackal, are you saying this is an exception and no longer possible on FT? I knew in this particular example, the poster had a handle change not long after the original signup date in 2008 (within weeks, if not months).

It is still technically possible but it requires admin to make a data entry and then remember to remove it at the time agreed upon. There is no automated process for either step. This is a superb example of why I prefer to request the member to show it as his/her signature for 30 days, rather than expect admin to remember to do so. I believe that this member was told that the former handle had to be shown for 30 days - but here it is, years on, and it's never been removed. (And if that member is reading this, and wants that note removed, please message me.)

lin821 Oct 28, 2011 12:27 pm

Under the handle vs. Signature...
 
I just saw another thread today, which could highlight the consistency issue.

I have no idea when this OP changed the handle but in this case, said FTer has no "Formerly Known as" notation under the handle. Without reading the signature line, I wouldn't have known the handle previously associated with this person.

That brings about another confusion in consistency. Do FTers themselves get to choose between shown under the handle and signature when they request handle change? Why some have "former user name" under their handles (as my example in post#51) while some don't? Is that an admin's decision or users'? :confused:

I am aware whoever meets the 90/90 can set up her/his own signature. So the signature option is not really an either-or choice. It appears to me under the handle notation should be a system default. I just don't understand why it is not applied to those who ever had a handle change?

ETA:
Just saw SanDiego1K's post. Carol and I happened to be replying at the same time, while I worked, well, much slower.

Still, how the notation works (personal requests, timeframe...etc) is not fully covered in current TOS on handle change. More clarification of such TOS will certainly reduce unnecessary confusion.

nsx Oct 28, 2011 1:00 pm


Originally Posted by lin821 (Post 17352024)
Without reading the signature line, I wouldn't have known the handle previously associated with this person.

letiole? Never heard of her. :D

kipper Oct 28, 2011 1:18 pm


Originally Posted by SanDiego1K (Post 17351961)
It is still technically possible but it requires admin to make a data entry and then remember to remove it at the time agreed upon. There is no automated process for either step. This is a superb example of why I prefer to request the member to show it as his/her signature for 30 days, rather than expect admin to remember to do so. I believe that this member was told that the former handle had to be shown for 30 days - but here it is, years on, and it's never been removed. (And if that member is reading this, and wants that note removed, please message me.)

I'd prefer the way that alerts the greatest number of FT'ers to the change.

lin821 Oct 28, 2011 1:59 pm


Originally Posted by nsx (Post 17352196)

Originally Posted by lin821 (Post 17352024)
Without reading the signature line, I wouldn't have known the handle previously associated with this person.

letiole? Never heard of her. :D

Right, where does the apostrophe go? :D

As for the case how FT does NOT differentiate apostrophe, hypens, and underscore in handles, please join the party over Technical Issues Forum. ;)

jackal Oct 28, 2011 3:27 pm


Originally Posted by SkiAdcock (Post 17344945)
I'm not opposed to longer, but I think current policy is 30 days. I'm not sure there's enough reason to make it significantly longer, but am certainly willing to listen if there's a groundswell of support.

Cheers.

Actually, I believe Randy's policy--at least as I heard when I was helping some other members deal with him--was 14 days; 30 is actually a (better, IMHO) extension of that policy.

I, too, am not opposed to longer but like Sharon am not fully convinced the need for longer exists.


Originally Posted by lin821 (Post 17347223)
I share your confusion. :confused:

jackal, are you saying this is an exception and no longer possible on FT? I knew in this particular example, the poster had a handle change not long after the original signup date in 2008 (within weeks, if not months).

The reason why was outlined by the Community Director above. She had answered my question on the issue in the private TalkBoard forum before, and I am bound to not publish what is said by others within that forum, so I couldn't specify exactly what the reason was. I'm glad Carol came by to explain it herself.

DeaconFlyer Oct 28, 2011 3:32 pm


Originally Posted by SanDiego1K (Post 17351961)
It is still technically possible but it requires admin to make a data entry and then remember to remove it at the time agreed upon. There is no automated process for either step. This is a superb example of why I prefer to request the member to show it as his/her signature for 30 days, rather than expect admin to remember to do so. I believe that this member was told that the former handle had to be shown for 30 days - but here it is, years on, and it's never been removed. (And if that member is reading this, and wants that note removed, please message me.)

How hard is it to set a calendar reminder 30 days in the future?

If you are going to make a requirement to publicize a change, it should be in a form that everyone can see.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:41 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.