Mary2e

FT is a profit making business. It was sold in by the founder in 2009 to internet brands, which is a publicly held company.

More clicks=more revenue. I doubt there will be any kind of an argument to hide any popular forums to keep the secrets within. That's what private groups off FT are for

travelkid

You are quoting two great posters. Speaking of which I hope to see that thread revitalized, and things to start moving^

N965VJ

So what would be the criteria for seeing the forum; 180 posts / 180 days of membership? That would lock out the OP, and the first person that replied in this thread that agreed with him.

tom911

I'm against this proposal for the same reason I was against locking Mileage Run Deals: some of those less than 180/180 posters do contribute, and by putting restrictions on the forum you take away their opportunity to contribute let alone read the forum. We don't need any additional restricted forums here.

As you've contributed less than a post a month since you've been on FT, I don't think we're going to miss you sharing your material if you go elsewhere. There's plenty of other members here that are willing to share.

travelkid

tom, do you want to open CC and OMNI?

tom911

That would be fine with me. I remember OMNI not having any restrictions. Just as the AA forum is open to everyone, I think every forum here should be open. I don't buy into the argument that those forums are rewards for contributing 180 posts and need to be locked down. I'd just as soon have every forum open to everyone and not have to lock down a single one.

ScottC

Anyone that thinks that locking it down will stop companies from just posting a bunch so they can get in is nuts. Any company interested enough in what happens here will get in the forum.

84fiero

Exactly. It's not tough for someone to work their way in - it's not like this is a top secret, ultra-secure secret society.

What would help the most is people having some restraint and discretion...but being human, there's always someone who can't.

I'm not creative enough to come up with any new methods but if I did, I would only share privately with a few trusted people. Even then I'm sure it wouldn't last forever.

Doc Savage

Someone with 15 posts is proposing this? LOL

Certainly has chutzpah.

lin821

Another legend thread that carries the reoccurring themes:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkb...ies-blogs.html

Fawlty Tower :-O

The problem (or more precisely: the catalyst) is that FT has two indicators next to every post: The date you joined and your post count. This seems to occasionally cause a bit of an awkward personality shift (uppity?) among several (certainly not all) posters with a high post count and/or long-time membership. The hardcore people even bother to look up your "posts per day" ratio as possible means to discredit everything you say, in a committed effort to prove how ridiculous this can get if they try hard enough.

Just consider for a second that in your office you had a colleague who has worked in your firm or industry for over fifteen years and has earned his fair share of experience and acknowledgement (of which you might not know but then it's none of your business). Now, this guy, he transferred to your department about two years ago, even though you didn't get to talk to him all that much because you were working on different projects. Now, suddenly, you find yourself in a meeting with him, trying to solve a problem together:
Never in a thousand years would you dream of dismissing his contributions solely on the basis that he has been in your department "for only two years" and you have only "talked to him 15 times".

I mean, you might do that of course but if you have a good manager who knows how to organise an effective group of people that gets results he will notice and you will not be reviewed as a productive member of your team. Ultimately, that's -> out for you, and nobody will care about your years of service or how much you have "talked per day").

So, as always on the intertubes, it's the old problem of people who are probably insecure or harbour anger for some reason or other, hiding behind their nicknames and perceived status (post count (not content) and time of membership) and dismissing each and every one who they perceive as being "below" them on the basis of the two parameters next to their posts. That's not how people normally behave in a social environment and it is a peculiar appearance on the web but that doesn't make it any more okay or helpful.

That's all I have to say about that... and the thread lin821 linked to (I guess, as a wake-up call?) actually saddens me. Such meta-discussions and ad hominem arguments in full disregard of the actual topic or problem are neither productive nor conducive to a community that wants to prosper and accomplish something.

tom911

One parameter you should consider is the lack of Talk Board members posting to support your position. Those are the folks you need to win over.

travelkid

Great post^ I dont get the idea that someones opinion is superior to another based on post padding or length of membership. FT is so cliquish that a few influential posters can turn suggestions just as they want.

TailSpin

I'm new to this site and this activity (I'm sure there is another term for it but I am new enough not to know the term). I'm not new to forums of course and participate in a few. This is by far the most active and "information focused" forum that I've sever seen.

My opinion means nothing at this point but here it is anyway: Please keep the OMNI section the way it is. As someone starting out I can tell you I have plenty to do and learn for 180 days/posts that future goodies don't need to be exposed... Something to look forward to

nsx

The TalkBoard has never given any weight to that argument.

Searchbots.

I tend to agree with this for MR Deals and Manufactured Spending.