I agree with you Mary, it should be consistent.

So, as long as there are less than 25 game threads at any given point, then games are ok? I put forward that games not ok, full stop, and this motion is going to allow people to wrack up huge post counts participating in them.
Quantity of threads isn't the issue. Each thread could have many, many posts. It's the posts that count, not the threads or how these affect the front page of OMNI.

Still, NO-ONE has bothered to answer the question of why game threads do not count as post padding as per the FT TOS? Perhaps I will need to ask the OMNI moderator directly, since no-one here is prepared to answer.

You did send us a PM and I answered you.

Feel free to repost my PM answer (normally they are private but what I said I don't consider private) so you have my permission to post it and make whatever comments you'd care to make.

Actually, I think I can favor to restore the post count again. I can surely understand why Omni post counts is no longer existed. That was long time ago. I will have answered any question about reinstated Omni post counts again. I think TB will have reconsider again.

I am not a passionate voice about this issue but am passionate about Flyertalk.
I urge the TalkBoard to vote NO. Any issue which is this fractious gives me cause for concern.

Thanks Cholula, yes I did, and thanks for your prompt response.

I asked the moderators of OMNI and OMNI P/R (Cholula and essxjay) why game threads are not considered post padding:

So that explains it. Thanks.

A simple stupid question as its all about volume; want to include PMs?

On a more serious note. What is your opinion on the meaning of and value behind post count as such?

Rather have the diagnosis before we give medicine:D

The line about "there is no inequality" reminds me of a line given from an apartheid-era South African official to my grandfather: "there is no inequality in South Africa, just different privileges for different cultures". A canard of a claim then and still, as indicated by the following paragraph.

Not every poster on FT has had their posts counted the same way. There is inequality on FT: in the manner of post count calculations; in the manner of where a post may or may not occur or rest on FT; in the manner in which access is granted or denied to certain parts of FT.


That's your opinion. Just like many airline passengers don't like that kind of airline frequent flyer program practice, many FTers may not like some of the segregated ways things have been done on FT; while others like the practice for who knows what reasons.

There are OMNI posts that are relevant to travel. Anyone interested is well capable of doing a search on their own, since being spoon-fed or providing spoon-feeds is not a necessary condition for being able to use FT. Where there is a will, perhaps there is a way.

You are wrong. The rules for posts counting/not counting is the same for everyone.

Leave your tiring moderator vendetta out of this discussion.

If the poster wants those to count, they could have made them in the appropriate non-OMNI forum. Since they didn't, apparently having them not count doesn't bother them.


And LOL at trying to compare what happens on a messageboard to real life discrimination. I'm sure all the South Africans who really went through Apartheid really appreciate being compared to those who are banned from certain section of an Internet travel BB.

He is not wrong. Over time, the rules have changed. Members who have been here for a while have post counts that include OMNI posts from way back when. Some longtime members have Evangelist status based on participation in counting games during the era when OMNI posts still counted.

So do a little research first before spewing a rude, ignorant response. @:-)

Some even have legend status because of the counting games in Omni - and they stated that was their goal. (the person is not posting in this thread)

1. You are free to believe me to be wrong even when I am correct, as I am in that post.

2. I have no moderator vendetta, so who knows why you even make mention of such an imagination-based claim about me. [If anything, I have a public history of voting for moderators to TB who previously either took exception with me and/or my posts; so your moderator vendetta claim about me is one rooted in imagination but not in reality.]

3. The OMNI posts about travel were sometimes made in non-OMNI sections of FT.

4. I made no comparison of apartheid era practices in South Africa with the way things occur on FT. Rather the reference was to your notion of inequality not existing on FT, even as it does.

Who is treated unequally on FT when it comes to posts counting or not counting?

Folks who keep talking about "consistency" fail to answer this: what about all of the OMNI posts that DIDN'T count for the last few years? How is anyone's post count NOT corrupt or inconsistent?

Why are we bothering to count posts anyway? I still haven't seen a good reason for this (aside from the first 180 to get access to OMNI).

Exactly.

I explained it already in post #294, but I will try once again.


To answer your question, you and me are treated unequally. When I joined FT in 2004, every post that I made in OMNI contributed to my post count. So some percentage of the post count number you see in my profile is from posts I made in Omni. By the time you came along in 2009, the rules had changed. Omni posts no longer contributed to your post count. When this change was made, there was no retroactive "cleansing" of Omni posts from members' post count totals. So the number you see today from older members may include posts from Omni.

Some members from that era took advantage of the rules of the time, and padded their post counts (in some cases, substantially) by playing number games in Omni. By doing this, they were able to "earn" Evangelist, or even Legend status.

Under the rules which were in place at the time you joined, members could only build their post counts through non-Omni posts.

So there you have the inequality of post counts. Do you understand now?