travelkid

My original proposal has faced two main objections. The first whether to include Taiwan or not. That is no longer part of the proposal up for vote.
As I see it now, at least in this voting thread, the only counter argument reamaing is that the proposed forum- reduced to only mainland carriers- wont see enough traffic.

We have several TBers on record stating they are pro new forums, giving them a chance, based partly also on the fact that forums that fail can be closed. It has been done and is pretty easy to do.

I think- as we are within FTs core values on FFPs- that the only relevant question is; will FT(the members) benefit from this?

As we have heard from the few newbies that have stumbled by, for that large group this will be benefitial. A small group of veterans are reluctant, mainly due to anticipated traffic level. It will be easier also for all those google redirects, just coming as readers (not newbie members).

It all boils down to what ones individual level of what one think would be minimum traffic for success. I would look at A3, EI (maybe), EY, AB, Russia/CIS carriers and maybe some destinations forums like Antarctica, Korea etc. Have these forums made FT navigation and discussion easier? A strong yes from me. If you remotely agree on that, I feel the conclusion is given. For all those forums, AFAIK the discussion on those topics have increased after getting a forum. There is nothing indicating that wont happen with the current proposal. Some of those forums mentioned have a limit. A3, AB, Antarctica may have reached their potential. The current proposal has a potential to be the biggest forum on FT in the long run. Obvisouly before that happen, the forum will be split off further.

Im sorry for not being more eloquent on this, but we should have had some supporter wording himself as good as Gold Circle on EI proposal. That single post was almost a game changer for that proposal.

Winetemplar

Where does one vote?

travelkid

Im sorry, for this only Talkboard can vote. We vote people on Talkboard annually.

May we know what you would have voted, and why?

Thanks.

lin821

Ans:
There are 9 TBers.

(underline mine)

Is that just an impression of yours or you do have some data to support that statement? Opinions are not the same as facts.

FWIW, I am not a supporter of create-it-and-they-will-come mentality. Threads about those fora were already present before individuals fora were approved then created on FT. Whether traffic in those newly created fora has been significant or busy enough to substantiate their existence is up for debate, which has nothing to do with the motion at hand.

Having said that, each forum is unique and has its own niche & merits. For example, traffic-wise, I don't think its a fair comparison between destination Antarctica and Korea Forum. What earns Antarctica its own forum isn't the same as the new Korea Forum.

Whether this "Airlines of Mainland China Forum" motion will harvest enough TB votes should depend on the criteria of forum creation on FT, merits of PRC FFPs & airlines, and participation of FTers.

Bigger than say UA or OMNI Forum on FT? I highly doubt it. But who says one cannot dream?

travelkid

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/gloss...tterSelected=A

No facts. My impression. Based on reading those threads, and being heavily involved in the creating of several of those FFP forums.

IMO it does. Because it says something about what is regarded sustainable level, and not to in any way discriminate.

Im not considering OMNI, only points and miles forums. I believe it can reach top 10 very soon. Being number 1 of course is more of a bald statement
But with the current increase in FFP members on Chinese carriers, and increase in traffic by said carriers, as well as the increase of english speaking such passenger, there is absolutely the potential to be number 1 in say 10 year, as said if the forum wont be further fragmented due to heavy traffic@:-)

LegalTender

I enthusiastically vote "yes" since point-earning/redemption varies so widely. There certainly is no inter-alliance standard. The quality of the product differs noticeably, along with on-time performance and check-in procedures.

China Eastern is my usual preference, but I have flown four others since 2010. They lately recognize the value of partner perks and some now offer "elite" check-in lanes and club access.

I find no good reason not to provide this forum.

FLLDL

I'm opposed, as the current "Other Asian Airlines" forum seems to meet the needs of users quite well. Not enough demand for a separate forum as of yet. As others have mentioned, there is little interest in China FFPs themselves most current threads on PRC carriers are simple queries about equipment and seating.

also the posters in the combined forum who have a lot of overlapping knowledge of the different carriers across the region would be less likely to visit multiple forums after a split, resulting in a net loss to users. Much like the new Korea forum, which is a total ghost town.

Maybe down the road the PRC airlines could use their own forum but i dont really see the demand for it currently.

travelkid

Take a look at the front page of lets say UA forum, or any other big forum. The majority of threads are related to the carrier, and not to the FFP. That is the norm. Should we require something else for new forums? Discussions on the carrries it self and its FFP live in perfect harmony. Synergy.

I dont see any to support this theory for FFPs. Havent checked Korea traffic pre/post forum creation, but maybe those advocating that forum could comment? In any case there is a big difference between destinations, and miles/points forums, which FT is about after all. I claim (AFAIK) that traffic on carriers in the recent opened forum have increased- which matters a lot to me (A3, EY, AB etc). Main point however is the user friendliness of having discussion concentrated.

Taiwaned

Very Opposed

Most readers of flyer talk are English speaking/reading - the vast majority of those using Mainland China airlines and their FFP's are Chinese reading/speaking. They are not going to be reading flyer talk.

Therefore the vast majority of the target audience will be foreigners who are visiting China and have to use domestic carriers. They will be collecting FFP's with their primary non Chinese carriers so if they have redemption issue, they will be visiting not the China mainland carriers but the primary carriers thread.

So what will be the purpose of diluting the threads?

People are busy enough as is and having another area to look at for the occasional airline related question is a pain.

In the end, it is people that make a forum run well. There is not enough China experts to go around. We have a good handful that work hard to make China forum interesting but only a handful. Ask yourself this, how many in the current China forum are willing to support and be active in a China Mainland Airlines forum as well? If there is only a handful, it will end up being a ghost forum.

travelkid

The fastest growing group of people learning English is Chinese. The biggest growth in terms of air passenger and frequent flyers is in China. The language of aviation is English.

Having one thread on CAs new F on every forum for *A carriers is far more diluting than consolidating info and making it much more accesible for all in a new forum.

FLLDL

Out of sheer curiosity travelkid what is your agenda with this proposal?

Nearly all of the other new forums on FT were advocated by someone who was a strong participant in the predecessor forums.

Just strange that the primary (sole?) advocate for this proposal is someone who does not really participate in any of the Asia discussions.

Taiwaned

Really dumb logic.

Researching information, people use the language they are most comfortable with. For the Chinese, it is not English.

The language of aviation is English however the people that fly on Mainland Chinese are Chinese. Are you targeting the pilots?

We have asked travelkid the same question about what his agenda. He has never answered this question. Interesting that a person who rarely posts in the China forum is pushing so hard for this forum.

lin821

I agree. 110%.

Well, he sort of did, in the other proposal thread:

Even though I am not a frequent visitor to China Forum, I do believe travelkid had downplayed the great work & info our China Ambassadors have done in China Forum with the above underlined statement.

I am sure countless hours have been invested into a master thread like this: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/china...on-thread.html. And that is just an example thread why and how our China Forum and Japan Forum set great examples and standard for destination fora on FT.

garykung

I have a suggestion. This suggestion may resolve both issues - PRC v. Taiwan (ROC) and the need to expand forums at FT.

1. FT will create a Main Forum for all Chinese airlines (regardless of PRC or Taiwan)

2. In that Main Forum, it will be divided by 2 sub-forums: SkyTeam airlines and Star Alliance airlines.

3. The main forum will serve for those airlines without alliance membership or general questions.

4. The current Cathay Pacific Asia Miles forum will keep standalone (as it is only oneworld member in the Greater China).

moondog

MU and CA are both participants in Asia Miles.