Motion Failed: Require Login to View Mileage Run Forum
#61
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: MHT/BOS
Programs: Airline FF: UA 1K, DL, US, AA, NW,
Posts: 219
In Favor!
#62
Moderator Hilton Honors, Travel News, West, The Suggestion Box, Smoking Lounge & DiningBuzz
Join Date: Jun 2000
Programs: Honors Diamond, Hertz Presidents Circle, National Exec Elite
Posts: 36,027
And again: ^^
I, for one, can't remember the last time I logged out; there's no point to it, except extra work, when one has broadband.
#63
Original Member, Ambassador: OneWorld Alliance
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Austin, TX, USA
Programs: AA ExecPlat & 3MM; Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,015
This motion is not going to just restrict viewing of the forum to those registered as FTers.
This motion would also involve blocking the forum visibility even from registered and heavily contributing members except during the period of time in which such FTers are logged into FT under their FT handle.
This motion would also involve blocking the forum visibility even from registered and heavily contributing members except during the period of time in which such FTers are logged into FT under their FT handle.
In practice...
Can you please provide a real-life example in which a registered member can not log-in?
If you believe that "can not" is too high of a bar, is there example in which a log-in requirement will cause a meaningful hardship (let's agree that just typing username and password is not a hardship).
Thanks
#64
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: DCA
Programs: UA Gold
Posts: 1,653
No one should be able to post before they have 100 posts.
#65
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
For the context challenged, the initial question in my post was about supporting a post-count minimum before enabling viewing of the Mileage Run forum by registered FTers.
#66
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
In theory you are right.
In practice...
Can you please provide a real-life example in which a registered member can not log-in?
If you believe that "can not" is too high of a bar, is there example in which a log-in requirement will cause a meaningful hardship (let's agree that just typing username and password is not a hardship).
Thanks
In practice...
Can you please provide a real-life example in which a registered member can not log-in?
If you believe that "can not" is too high of a bar, is there example in which a log-in requirement will cause a meaningful hardship (let's agree that just typing username and password is not a hardship).
Thanks
#67
Moderator Hilton Honors, Travel News, West, The Suggestion Box, Smoking Lounge & DiningBuzz
Join Date: Jun 2000
Programs: Honors Diamond, Hertz Presidents Circle, National Exec Elite
Posts: 36,027
That is ALL that is involved, insinuations to the contrary notwithstanding
The sole time I can see where a registered member could not see the forum is when serving a 7 or 30 day suspension. (And there are very effective -- and timely, unlike in the past -- venues for appealing such). And if the person has received a permanent ban (which takes an extraordinary amount of effort), then that person is no longer a member of FlyerTalk and the question is moot.
Someone who was obsessively concerned about being "visible" can either take advantage of the invisibility option or quickly log back out after viewing the forum. There's really very little downside to this proposal and much to commend it, other vague insinuations notwithstanding.
The sole time I can see where a registered member could not see the forum is when serving a 7 or 30 day suspension. (And there are very effective -- and timely, unlike in the past -- venues for appealing such). And if the person has received a permanent ban (which takes an extraordinary amount of effort), then that person is no longer a member of FlyerTalk and the question is moot.
Someone who was obsessively concerned about being "visible" can either take advantage of the invisibility option or quickly log back out after viewing the forum. There's really very little downside to this proposal and much to commend it, other vague insinuations notwithstanding.
#68
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
The sole time I can see where a registered member could not see the forum is when serving a 7 or 30 day suspension. (And there are very effective -- and timely, unlike in the past -- venues for appealing such). And if the person has received a permanent ban (which takes an extraordinary amount of effort), then that person is no longer a member of FlyerTalk and the question is moot.
But thank you for yet another example where being logged in may not be practical/ideal, even as YMMV.
#69
Moderator Hilton Honors, Travel News, West, The Suggestion Box, Smoking Lounge & DiningBuzz
Join Date: Jun 2000
Programs: Honors Diamond, Hertz Presidents Circle, National Exec Elite
Posts: 36,027
You've given no other example. You've talked about folks who might not want to be logged in due to some sort of hyper-fear about something, but not wanting to be logged in is not the same as being unable to log in. The latter is what you have claimed. And I would be happy to be corrected if there is some occasion on which an FTer in good standing is not able to log in.
#70
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by cblaisd
You've given no other example.
#71
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: DCA
Programs: UA Gold
Posts: 1,653
And you proposed expanding it to all FT. Which i agree with. 100 posts before you can view any FT forum.
#72
Moderator Hilton Honors, Travel News, West, The Suggestion Box, Smoking Lounge & DiningBuzz
Join Date: Jun 2000
Programs: Honors Diamond, Hertz Presidents Circle, National Exec Elite
Posts: 36,027
So it is not just solely FTers who are suspened temporarily or permanently.
#73
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
So when it comes to currently active users of a forum and the display shows "192 (63 members & 129 guests)" as it did a few minutes ago in the MR Deals forum, then the 63 covers FTers -- including those who have choosen to hide their log-in status by way of the FT member profile feature -- while the 129 "guests" includes persons who may or may not be FTers?
No, it was not a proposal of mine. It was part of a line of questioning.
No, it was not a proposal of mine. It was part of a line of questioning.
#74
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Well, I wouldn't know about that. They still have member handles that note "suspended".
#75
Moderator Hilton Honors, Travel News, West, The Suggestion Box, Smoking Lounge & DiningBuzz
Join Date: Jun 2000
Programs: Honors Diamond, Hertz Presidents Circle, National Exec Elite
Posts: 36,027
So when it comes to currently active users of a forum and the display shows "192 (63 members & 129 guests)" as it did a few minutes ago in the MR Deals forum, then the 63 covers FTers -- including those who have choosen to hide their log-in status by way of the FT member profile feature -- while the 129 "guests" includes persons who may or may not be FTers?
No, they won't. As stated in the motion. ^