I agree with this comment. When I ran for TB this year, I figured there was a 50-50 chance I would end up with a suspension and possibly a lifetime ban.

But I think Carol knows that I am not a troll, but rather someone who has some ideas about how to make FT a better place. Someone who feels a little burned by how the whole MilePoint thing went down and was left by it singularly focused on making FT even better than it has been for over a decade. Someone who is would like to address head-on the few areas left that can be improved to make FT more poster-focused than any other IBB on the interweb tubes.

But if I end up with 'Suspended' or 'Banned' under my user name, so be it. I will have gone down trying to improve FT. That's totally worth getting kicked off of it for! ^

Sure, and it looks like the last 2 posters in the DL thread, mbarreto and Colin, are less than satisfied with recent management decisions. But they get to have their say. And they are likely more satisfied for having had it and knowing they are not alone in that dissatisfaction than if had they not had that opportunity. And as moderators, you get to know that there is some dissatisfaction, where it stems from and learn from that.

And people like me can read that thread and know not just the rules of FlyerTalk, but how the rules of FlyerTalk are generally enforced in the DL forum and how other posters feel about it. And know that my input and collaboration on management issues are welcome

Those are all incredibly positive things that make the FlyerTalk experience better. ^

What we all see as improvements are subjective, though I will give you points for caring enough to effect a "remodelling" while shaking up TB in the process.

That would be more useful overall, but either would be distorted by an individual thrashing through a lot of pages. As long as you understand that a single user can be counted more than once, it's still a useful indicator of activity.

Google Analytics provides a good measure of unique visitors, but I'm not aware of anyway to break that down by forum.

Hi: Let me say upfront that I have been a sporadic participant in FlyerTalk (both as a member, and prior to that as a lurker); depending on my work and travel schedule, I sometimes check it several times a day, and sometimes not for months at a time (as has been the case recently). I'll also confess that I have only skimmed the previous 13 pages of this thread, so apologies in advance if I am repeating something that may have already been suggested. With those caveats, though, I thought perhaps I might be able to offer something from my perspective as a somewhat 'average' member.

First of all, I very much appreciate the fact that FlyerTalk IS a moderated forum -- it's what keeps the discussion and information here useful. For that reason, I very much appreciate all the time devoted by the volunteer moderators (and TalkBoard members) to keep things running smoothly. And for THAT reason, while I would hope that most moderators are reasonably responsive to community feedback, I would really disfavor adding a feedback mechanism that requires yet more work for the moderators, or creates a disincentive to moderate, because it becomes a public bully pulpit.

For the most part, I think that the ability to PM a moderator provides an adequate channel for feedback about specific issues as they arise. It also puts more onus on the member providing the feedback to do so in constructive and clear terms -- I think it is much easier to complain about someone on a public forum than it is to their face.

However, I think it is equally true that there can be some benefit to public discussion of issues regarding moderation -- e.g., when one person states "I'd really love it if the moderators did x," and someone else chimes in to say "I never thought of that, but now that you mention it, that's a really great idea." Though not perfect by any means, a public forum can also provide some gauge of how widespread support or lack of support for a particular suggestion may be.

Bearing these two considerations in mind, here is my suggestion: instead of having an ongoing thread for moderation issues in each forum, how about having a limited-time thread (e.g. 2 weeks) posted on an annual basis to collect feedback -- i.e., similar to the way in which polls are posted for a limited time. There would need to be ground rules, of course, that keep the tenor of the discussion civil and not personal. But I think a once-a-year thread would encourage the posting of more general suggestions rather than complaints about specific moderator actions. It would also limit the burden on moderators of having to sift through a thread. Perhaps, if desired, sometime following such exercise, the moderators could post a message providing their own feedback on some (not necessarily all) of the suggestions offered.

Anyway, just a suggestion. At the end of the day, as someone who benefits a lot from this forum but does not have any responsibilities for running it, I'm willing to live with the rules that the moderators and the TalkBoard set up -- including the rule about not discussing moderation decisions publicly -- even if I may sometimes disagree with individual moderator actions. If I didn't feel that way, there are plenty of other internet fora to explore. And I've never felt that a politely worded PM to a moderator would be unwelcome as a means of feedback.

Good luck, and sincere thanks to everyone who works to make FT a better place, whether in an official governance role or making constructive suggestions. It's a very interesting community.

I find much merit in these suggestions. Thank you for taking the time to post, ZenFlyer. ^

This sounds pretty good to me. Moderators would always have the option to open the thread more frequently or even full-time if they saw value in that.

FTers are so very creative!

Very, very true. ^

That's your opinion. I have the PM from the moderator. Was there a response I needed to make or are you baiting me to violate TOS [substance = name]? Also, note I said deck in favor of the mod (Community Director was shown where the mod violated TOS and as far as I know he/she hasn't been disciplined@:-)).

Now, back to Koko's proposal...

1. Not all reported TOS violations result in disciplinary action obvious to the reporting party/parties.

2. Not all reported TOS violation are treated equally, whether by way of deliberate intent or unintended negligence.

Thanks for sharing your perspective and suggestion.

I like that you are seeking a middle-ground solution! ^

But I would be concerned that allowing/requiring only 2 weeks of collaborative feedback to day-to-day forum management per year would miss many of the opportunities we have to make FlyerTalk a better place. Would members jot down an idea or issue for discussion that occurs to them in February and wait until the 'collaborative feedback' session in August or whenever? Or would we have lost that input by then?

Perhaps a compromise is to have 'open feedback' threads open in all active forums for the first week of each month. That way the mods are not constantly required to monitor that thread, but members need only wait a maximum of three weeks to bring up and/or talk about suggestions to improve the day-to-day management. Or set that process as a minimum, anyway. If mods want to keep the thread open longer or even permanently, that would be up to them as time allows.

I agree and with special emphasis on the bolded part (mine) as what might be an excellent point in February will be/could become lost by August

Nobody is trying to bait you into a violation of the TOS and you know it.
As long as you make posts that don't violate the TOS we both know this is a non issue. @:-)

Not necessarily. As ZenFlyer pointed out:

But that's a private conversation. From a moderator's side, they get various independent points of input. But there is no collaboration. And from the poster side we have no idea if any other members share our issues/concerns/suggestions or have different ways of looking at them, thinking about them or addressing them.

It's the difference between a letter to the editor and a comment section in an online story. One gets your point across. The other adds to a conversation. And since this is FlyerTALK, not FlyerSENDEACHOTHERPMS it seems like this collaborative conversation ought to be the norm.