I intend to run for President of the TalkBoard and I am going to tell you why.
 

I intend to run for President of the TalkBoard and I am going to tell you why.

First of all I think it would be cool if, for the first time in, what? Ten years or more? The President of the Talk Board was not also a moderator. In point of fact, not only am I not a moderator, but by Randy’s stupid old rules I am prohibited from ever becoming a moderator.

And really, how stupid is that; there is no person who is more dedicated to FlyerTalk than I am. I was one of the very first posters here. I have made a lot of my best friends here. For God’s sake, I even met my wife here. True story! And I’ve never tried to make a dime from being involved in FT or very frequent travel. And yet, by some retarded, arbitrary Randy Petersen decree/decision I am prohibited from getting more involved in the FT decision-taking process. Stupid.

But that’s not what this post is about. Because Randy did me a favor in his decision to never allow me to moderate. He ensured that I would always and forever see FlyerTalk from the perspective of a poster and only a poster; that I would never become invested in FlyerTalk as a moderator or senior moderator or administrator. So he locked me into that perspective, that unique perspective, and it has given me a unique insight into the poster experience.

So, from that unique perspective I am taking the unusual (and likely controversial) decision to announce my intention to run for President of TB here rather than in the rarified airs of the private TB forum. After all, if TB is going to be totally transparent it should start right here, right now. I apologize in advance for this breach of decorum.

But I view my intention as far more than an administrative nicety. I view it as a proposed revolution.

I don’t intend to preside over the TalkBoard. I intend to revolutionize it. I intend to, to coin a phrase, #occupy it.

Here is what I would do as President of the TB:

Work with Carol to expand the scope of the TB beyond its Randy-assigned task of recommending forums into a body tasked with making recommendations regarding every aspect of the FT experience.

Make FT truly and 100% responsive to the posters, from forum creation to moderation to forum closure.

Use that influence to, for example:

• Audit suspensions, forum bans and permanent suspensions of posters to make recommendations to ensure they are appropriate.
  
• Make recommendations to enforce best practices on moderators up to and including reviewing and if necessary removing moderators.
  
• Draw a bright line between FT administration and moderation by ensuring that TB members divorce themselves from moderation responsibilities.
  
• Ensure that TB members, moderators and all who are entrusted with leading FT have the interests of FT and only the interests of FT at heart. Ie, no hucksters, money-grubbers or commercialists taking the critical decisions on FT.
  
• Generally work in an uninhibited and unlimited collaborative way to ensure that the TB make FT into a place that is by the posters, of the posters and for the posters.

I realize that these ideas are outside the box, radical and not in keeping with the status-quo, go along to get along TalkBoards of yore. There are many posters reading this right now who are probably thinking: ummm NO. Most mods must be thinking the same thing.

I’m posting this in the wee hours from Louisville, Kentucky. I’ll be slightly surprised if it’s not deleted by the time I wake up in the morning (c'mon, Craig, gimme a chance!!!).

I don’t expect everyone to like my intentions or this post. Hell, if Randy had never done me the favor of entering his BS suspension of me into the moderation database, I’d likely be the first to say that this post and my intentions were an insane over-reach.

And maybe they are.

But I don’t think so. I think they are simply removing stupid limitations from the advisory focus group that is the TalkBoard.

If I’m right, I will be elected President of the TB. If not, then so be it. The will of the posters via their elected TB members be done.

And oh, but one last thing: I love Spiffy. I consider him a true friend, from our many drinking and talking sessions. But he and I have incredible different views of the TB. That’s cool. Because maybe he is right. Maybe the TB should be severely limited in scope. I suppose we’ll find out if a majority of the TB thinks so before the next four weeks are up.

Until then, as always, I look forward to a lively conversation. That is, after all, what FT is all about.

xo

koko, I don't know you but I like you. I like you as a person. I sincerely do.

But this sounds too much like "I am running for Boss of the MODs." Can the mod edit the thread title? :D:p

Having grown up in politics, one of my favorite bosses ever said something I will never forget: "Everyone has a boss. Even the Congressman. His boss is the constituents." @:-)

:)

Bravo Koko ^^ Bravo!

And fingers crossed Carol is strong enough to allow your post to stay for all to respond (pro and con and everything between)

@:-)

Probably the best post Ive ever read on FT^

I really see chances of FT/TB developing now.

This is why I voted for you- and even got a bunch of others to do the same.

Love your dedication, your style and your ideas.

I volunteered to become a moderator because FT was a place which I liked spending time on, and I wanted to give back.

Now I'm being told that actually, what I'm doing is not good enough, and it will only be good enough if I have to go through audits, reviews and suspensions. That's getting scarily close to sounding like a job actually - the kind of thing I'd expect to be compensated for. What next, performance targets?

But I don't get paid for any of the grief of doing that. I'm expected to do it all for the love of FT.

Tell me koko, as one of those moderators you want to exercise control over - and forgive me for putting me first for a change, but I do devote quite a large number of hours to doing what I do for free, and now it appears that you are asking even more of me - what benefit is there in this for me? What is there in the regime you are proposing which actually improves what I do, helps me do what I do or makes what I do easier?

In other words, why shouldn't I just quit if you make the role too onerous for me to continue on in it?

At least some of your expectations are reasonable. Everything else however is IMHO not.

While koko attempts to revolutionalize FT & TB ;) :p :D, just an FYI to regular FTers re: the actual responsibilities of TB President (from the guidelines).

"a. President: Will act as executive officer of TalkBoard, ensuring that timely consideration of issues takes place, keeping the parliamentary processes flowing, and providing liaison between individual TalkBoard members and the FlyerTalk Host. The President will also serve as or appoint another TalkBoard member as a liaison between the TalkBoard and the moderator corps. The President shall comply with and enforce these guidelines as well as the FlyerTalk Terms of Service in the private TalkBoard forum. In the event that a TalkBoard member who is not already a moderator is elected as TalkBoard President, the Host shall decide who shall have moderator powers in the private TalkBoard forum with the understanding that the assigned moderator, if other than the TalkBoard President, shall use such power in close coordination with the TalkBoard President. In situations where there is lack of guidance from these guidelines or Roberts Rules of Order with regard to the conduct of TalkBoard business or the responsibilities and obligations of TalkBoard members, the President shall provide such guidance and/or clarity with the advice of the FlyerTalk Host until such time that these guidelines are amended to provide such guidance and/or clarity."

I'd also like to mention that koko bringing up his ideas/suggestions to TB and/or the Community Director to consider is certainly within his scope of being a TB member, but to imply that it's more than that because of his possible President role is a bit misleading I think. Also, Prez or not, koko gets 1 vote on motions, just like other TB members.

I'm in agreement btw w/ tcook052's comment above mine, btw.

For the record: koko & I are friends & have shared many a pint (make that a LOT of pints) and I know his lovely wife. He & I will agree on some things & disagree on others, and do on a regular basis.

PS - I'm sending the Community Director a case of Excedrin :p :D

Cheers.

I don't think 1 case will be enough :D :D I'll send one too :p

I'm not proposing changing your role on FT at all. And I don't want to 'control' you. I'm simply proposing to make your role and that of all moderators more directly responsive to the posters through the elected TB.

I'm proposing collaboration, not antagonism. I'm proposing creating a process by which FT will always be what the posters want it to be rather than what Randy wanted it to be at one point in time ten years ago. Where those elected by the posters have the ability to affect the day-to-day FT experience.

Is that really so unreasonable?

Correct. My intention is to use the position as a bully pulpit to work toward the changes I seek, including to those guidelines.

Of course, I'll be doing that whether I'm in the President's throne or not. ;)

You are very good koko, I always have to give you that. Very smooth, very plausible and good at delivering a message which is starkly controlling in an entirely different tone (and with some nice buzz words in there to sound modern and progressive).

You state you don't want to control me, yet the language you use in the original post is that of control (my bolding):
Let's take the last one first, in part because on close reading, you realise how contradictory it is with the rest - given you are already restricting who can serve on TB, then how can you claim to be working in an uninhibited and unlimited way? Ah right, yes, you set your limits, deem who is appropriate, do that first and then afterwards say TB is uninhibited and unlimited. Hmmm.

Lots of talk of 'ensuring' ror 'enforcing'- how can you deliver that, without control? Ah yes, the answer to that is there also - "if necessary removing moderators" - so, if they won't do what I/we say, then we can them. And you say this is not about control.

You claim to be about collaboration, not antagonism - and yet you post this. Vastly inflammatory and antagnostic - for all its dressed up in passive, nice sounding language ('moderators divorce themselves' does sound so much better than 'moderators will be required or even forced to step down'. What price voters choice? That was terribly important when it came to discussing members with suspensions, less so for moderators - hmmm, I wonder why?) What do we believe when your own actions belie your stated intentions?

If you really wanted to collaborate, not antagonise, then you'd have worked up, not down. Small steps, not size 9s. Taking mods and members with you, not pinning mods to the mast head. For such a canny operator, this seems a big misstep.

But maybe that's what you want? Engineer a confrontation? Risky strategy. And not in the best interests of FT, as I just can't see a good outcome.

How is your perspective unique vs. the thousands of posters who have never bothered or cared to want to be a moderator or admin, like me?

I can only control what I say. I can't control what you hear. ;)

I never expected moderators to love these ideas. Change can be scary. But there is no harm in having the conversation and exploring the notions, is there?

yes, if it alienates at the outset the people who you might have been able to win over with honey.