Very well said! I agree completely. ^

The idea that 50-some votes should be used as a reliable gauge of the opinions of 377,000 members is really kind of foolish, don't you think? Rather than tallying the numbers, I'd suggest reading the arguments posted by both sides, and deciding which arguments make the most sense. @:-)

I am of the opinion that no votes should be cast until the debate has been completed and I've stated that over on another thread where RichMSN was asking about time limits. So, I think it is wrong for any TB member to vote without hearing the debate, but the current system allows them to.

I agree, it is obvious that 56 people do not represent the majority. However, since all members have been notified equally and have had equal chance to express an opinion, the resulting debate is the only measure available. What other information should be used to determine the opinion of the community if it isn't the official feedback thread?

It is your opinion that those opinions are nonseniscal, it is not fact :D


Most sense to who, since some TB'ers aren't interested in those arguements as they have already voted?

Can we stop using that term? I think it's used in rather poor taste.

Hi from a lurker!

I support counting all posts. I have read all 29 pages but have not felt compelled to post because my reasons are similar enough to other posters. I have sent PMs to Talkboard members about issues of concern. I also voted for Rick And Koko and trust them to vote wisely and uphold their campaign promises.

I assume our Talkboard members who have chosen not to participate in this thread have also made up their minds.

I realize I do not have enough posts to even obtain Omni access, but if I had responded three times per page on this one thread, I would be halfway there.

To the people we elected to represent us. @:-)

I give up. This is just going around in circles.

If people think that it is ok for representatives not to represent the opinion of the community then so be it. I think it's wrong, but no-one else seems to care about that. So fine. I get it. I've learnt how things work around here.

Please read Profiles of Courage by JFK. It discusses elected representatives who vote for what they consider to be right when they realize it is not going to be popular among their constituents.

It may very well be the case that "a-post-eid" practices being applied to mainline OMNI and OMNI P/R contributions to FT is not popular practice in the opinion of the majority of the constituents whom actually provided votes to those individuals on TB who support this motion.

If people aren't happy if this motion gets passed, there's always the next election to demonstrate that "elections have consequences" sometimes and/or that elected individuals' votes have consequences sometimes.

Among the few things I learned from my research methods classes:

1). There's positive correlation, like more food intake, more weight.
2). There's also negative correlation, such as the lower the credit scores, the more likely credit card application rejection.
3). Correlation isn't causation. :-:

Isn't it ironic how all the "solutions" are coming from and going?

The truth is this is not the first OMNI post count motion served on TB's voting table in FT history. My crystal ball tells me, it doesn't matter whether this current motion gets passed or not, a new OMNI-post-count-or-not cycle will soon begin on FT. :rolleyes:

I get FTers' passion, possession and obsession of miles and points. At least in real life, we can take advantage of miles and points and put them to a good use.

What is post counts? What is post counts for? What/how should FT define post counts? What value should FTers assign to post counts, if any?

IMHO, it's never about the numbers. As long as there's no consensus on post counts and the fundamental hangups on OMNI and OMNIites are unaddressed, this OMNI counting argument will never end nor die.

FWIW, I personally don't care if lounge threads count. I didn't participate in the Community Lounge to move my post counter. I didn't come to FT for post counts either. My love for FT has nothing to do with my post count.

How to better FT? That I do care! Knock, knock, TB?

Tut, tut, how dare you rock the boat? :)

Anyway, this should be over in 3-4 days depending on timezone and come up again after the next TB elections, so starting next week TB has 11 full months to debate and legislate other topics @:-):D

Ahhh, the anti-brigade has come out.

All they all ever say is no (well, most of them). Not a single on ever addresses the inconsistency that currently exists, nor just how un-representative of true travel contribution the post counts are right now for those who joined before August 2008.

But hey, the majority in this thread seems to want to continue the inconsistency - no matter what arguments/explanations are provided. IMHO, people against something are more likely to voice their opinion. That doesn't mean their opinion is the right one.

Please don't get frustrated.

Typically, my personal approach is to look at the arguments made by proponents and opponents. I'm a firm believer in the marketplace of ideas and that the best rise to the top. So if one person has a great argument, that's the way I'll go. But if 500 people make a bad or illogical argument that will not sway me.

In this particular case, my mind has been set since 2008 when Randy unilaterally (and imho randomly) turned off OMNI counting. It was a bad decision then and I tried to have it turned around the day he made the decision. I have continued to try ever since.

And my reason then is the same as my reason now: FT is about point and miles AND community. And OMNI builds a sense of community.

So please don't feel like your input is unwelcome or useless here. Every poster has the opportunity to make an argument for or against any proposal. Or even come up with proposals of your own. And I promise that, even if I don't agree with your argument, it will at least be read considered.

I agree completely.

My point wasn't to say what the correlation was or what the cause/effect might be. I was only trying to comment on Dovster's assertion that post counts were meaningless. I would assert that they can convey some information, but agree that information may be limited. But some is more than none.

We had this discussion a few months ago when you weren't participating in this forum. I can't even recall what the motion then was, but one Talk Board member voted five minutes after it was posted. I learned from that discussion that some Talk Board members already have their minds made up the minute the motion is introduced, and they don't need to listen to the members thoughts. It's just the way it is. At least they're being up front and not dancing around the issue.

One way around this is to have a discussion with members before the issue is put up for a vote, and then craft the motion based on the discussion. That didn't happen here.