Originally Posted by SkiAdcock

I'm a bit disturbed by what I consider a bit of a witch hunt/outing (my term) by some TB & FT members who are not happy w/ a TB member. A TB member who HAS participated many times on public TB forum in the past it should be noted. Yes, the accusers do the generic thing to cover themselves, but it's not hard to read between the lines.

Originally Posted by kokonutz

Look at it from the perspective of a regular poster who is passionate about an issue: you come to this forum and debate your heart out for day after day. Meanwhile, the issue has been settled for a week. How does that make you feel?

Originally Posted by kokonutz

I have attempted to address this issue via PM. To absolutely no avail.

That said, this proposal is not about what is going on here right now.

Rather, what is going on right now points out the need for this proposal.

Currently, whatever the TB member's motivation, it is possible for a TB member to drag out debate on an issue that is already secretly settled in the private TB forum. Doesn't matter if they are MIA, really slow to make decisions or having a fit because they are not happy about how votes are going.

But let's forget about the perspective of the TB member dragging it out and/or the TB members who know the outcome but are waiting for the last person to vote so they can announce it.

Look at it from the perspective of a regular poster who is passionate about an issue: you come to this forum and debate your heart out for day after day. Meanwhile, the issue has been settled for a week. How does that make you feel?

We were elected to the TB to act in the best interest of the posters. This proposal does exactly that: takes care of the posters by letting them not waste their time passionately trying to secure an outcome that is already decided.

This proposal is not about TB members. It is about taking care of the posters.

Originally Posted by lin821

+383,000 (Wonder why? Check out the FlyerTalk Forums Statistics Section )

For the record, Sharon, I am very happy that I voted for you. You'll have my vote again if you decide to "sacrifice" yourself and run for another TB term when the time comes.


That could be me.

FWIW, I am fine with the status quo w/r/t TB 2-week voting process/procedure. I can wait, and keep posting meanwhile.

Originally Posted by RKG

At least the outcome - if decided- will be known to everyone and they will be able to direct their attention, or efforts, elsewhere.

Originally Posted by SanDiego1K

Members have been discussing post counts ever since Omni was removed from post counting. I believe that the issue has been voted on 3 times by Talkboard...

Originally Posted by kokonutz

This proposal is not about TB members. It is about taking care of the posters.

Originally Posted by lin821

RKG, there are really not that many days in 2 weeks, you know.

Originally Posted by lin821

(bolding mine)

Are you sure?

Even when outcome is announced per post#510 on page 34, the attention, or efforts, still keeps the referenced motion thread alive, and currently at Page 50. What makes you think this new motion to amend TB guidelines would change the "loving" dynamics among FTers?

And since when FTers would stop "talking" even with a decided outcome (quote borrowed from another TB thread)?



FWIW, I am just not sure if the amendment motion is really for the betterment of FT or serving some personal agenda in disguise.

RKG, there are really not that many days in 2 weeks, you know.

Originally Posted by Prospero

I think it is of little consequence to the needs of the greater membership. This thread has been live for 5 days and thus far has harvested responses from only 16 members. What does that say about the proposed CNNification of TalkBoard?

Indeed, fourteen days is a perfectly reasonable period of time for each TB member to cast their vote on any given motion. There are no fires to be fought.

Originally Posted by kipper

TB member interaction here at least gives the illusion that they are willing to share their opinions with the general public.

Originally Posted by tom911

What if all Talk Board members felt that way and elected not to post in public? Without them participating in the public forum there wouldn't be much need for a public forum. Last year we had two Talk Board members who went months without posting, yet they met the requirement to remain Talk Board members, and they could not be recalled because there is no requirement to post here. Sort of like a secret society if you're a Talk Board member that only expresses his opinion on the private Talk Board forum and not in public.

Originally Posted by Ancien Maestro

Perhaps, TB members should be required to participate in forum discussions.. but I'm sure this notion has been visited many times in the past..

Originally Posted by Ancien Maestro

So you're saying to require TB members to keep involved by posting? Certainly, the TB members should have a command of the topic issues, at the very least reading what the Public Forum has to say..

If there is a secret society, certainly the other TB members would know if other members remain involved through dialogue.. Personally, I agree that there should be a requirement to keep involved and up to speed with what the public forum is saying.. how that's enforced would be a good topic to tackle..

Originally Posted by Ancien Maestro

Private discussions amongst Board Members is a must.. the question surfaces how much involvement a TB Member should engage in the public discussions..

The other question that surfaces, is how much measurable involvement would a TB Member be required to undertake with public forum involvement?..

imo, as long as TB members have a command of issues, part of which is public forum knowledge and input, that would be good. Just the perception of little involvement exists with low post counts.. as demonstrated in this thread..

Thanks for the link.

Originally Posted by kipper

Sometimes, perception matters more than people think or realize.

Originally Posted by Ancien Maestro

Reading the archives of previous TB threads, TB members would know whether another TB member is contributing or not.. so it seems historical that TB members enforce one another's participation.

Originally Posted by tom911

On the public forums? That didn't seem to help too much last year when two Talk Board members were posting all around FT while not appearing here for months. Didn't look like any Talk Board members were enforcing participation there. The problem was discussed in the public forum with other TB members and there was nothing within the rules that required either of them participate in the public forums.

Same thing could happen today. Any TB member could stop posting on the public forum for 6 months and there's no consequences (and no requirement to participate on the public forums). Just the way it is.