essxjay

The discussion is in the private TS/S mod forum. All of us were around at the split (except for maybe aztimm?) so feel free to direct specific questions at us.

GUWonder

A fair amount of the PreCheck related threads are distributed amongst the airline forums. Some "fast-track" border clearance threads are also distributed amongst the airline forums.

Is the plan under this proposal to be shuttle all of those threads into this newly proposed sub-forum?

Is there something broken that is going to be fixed by creating this proposed forum? How will that "problem" be "fixed" by this proposed forum?

N965VJ

The reason for that is simple: there have been, and are, many threads in the Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate forum that belong in the Practical forum. So the number of trusted traveler threads are artificially increased on the first page. Right now on the first page in Policy Debate there are -

Benefits of Dual-Nationality/Two Passports
Carrying bottles of Whisky through Security in Transit
Enter Canada with DUI (has been redirected today, after being active for 12 days)

Why do these threads seem to remain where they are? Probably because people just decide to participate where they're at and not waste a Mod's time with RBPing them.

The stated reason for splitting the forum a while back was that too many threads started by people with questions were getting shoved off the front page, unanswered. That's never been my experience, and in fact unlike too many other forums on FT, often-asked questions are never responded to with "Did you do a search before starting this thread?!?!?!?!"

Water under the bridge, it won't be undone, and there's probably more that went on in the decision that goes up to IB.

In the examples I posted above, all were started by new members with less than 20 posts each. So instead of "making it easy for people to ask questions", we've confused them on where to go, and made them post in the Bad Travel Safety & Security Forum Where People Holler and Beat Their Chests.

And whadaya know, their questions were thoughtfully answered. There's been a number of lengthy threads about arrest records and Canada entry for example, but not one "did you try a search first?" snark reply in the thread linked above.

Things that make you go hmmmm.

squeakr

I don't think that's a signal to not have a forum split. I don't doubt that posters who want a simple question answered may find answers in the debate forum. But having a place where three is NO debate is helpful to just as many posters, some of them of longstanding.

Kagehitokiri

when they are documents (not one-time-passes) yes those are "trusted traveler"

if youre saying you have a reason to not separate trusted traveler, im not seeing it in your post?

GUWonder

As a practical matter, there may be an intrinsic element of debate that can provide useful practical knowledge when having questions or communicating experiences in dealing with people, processes and technologies which jointly or severally don't necessarily result in consistent outcomes.

I don't think there is any great need for a second "practical" "no debate" security forum in the absence of there being an obvious, substantial problem needing resolution.

What problem is it that we are attempting to fix? How does this proposal "solve" the "problem"?

chgoeditor

IMHO, the Practical Safety forum has become the de facto home for trusted traveler programs which (despite their name) have almost nothing to do with travel safety and everything to do with travel convenience (at least from the user perspective).

Trusted traveler threads are now the plurality--if not majority--of the recent threads in Practical Safety forum, but the programs are of interest to only a minority of travelers. Moving them to their own separate forum would enable Practical Safety to focus on its mission, which also providing a clearly defined location for Trusted Traveler threads.

goalie

The way I see it (tho I can only speak about the Precheck thread in the UA forum) is that threads in the airline forums which are unique to that airline (i.e. precheck checkpoint locations & hours for a specific airline, how to decode your bp to see if it's "prechecked" , where & how to enter your TT number in your airline profile and etc should stay in that specific airline forum but if it's related to the actual applying for GE, what to do if rejected, how to use the GE kiosk, an airport specific question (i.e. location of CBP office for one's interview) and etc, then those threads should go in the new proposed forum.

As to "fixing a problem", I don't see it as that per se but rather moving traffic which seems to be very prevalent in one forum* to a forum of its own

*a spot check just now shows 13 GE type threads on the first page of the Practical forum

MSPeconomist

I agree with this.

In a sense, the problem that would be fixed is that the trusted traveler threads concern only a (small?) subset on FT, yet they seem to be overwhelming the Practical TSS sub forum.

JDiver

Just as a point of observation, as TSA PreCheck has rolled out, it has been discussed fairly extensively in airline fora - PreCheck was originally offered to elites of specific airlines, and as it has broadened and grown it may be a good topic area for a Trusted Traveler program if such is established.

The list that was established in the American AAdvantage Forum when PreCheck was new is no longer maintained - too many airports, for one thing. And the PreCheck discussions are perhaps less genuinely airline-specific. PreCheck stations at one airport may serve more than trusted travelers from one airline.

Other discussions we've seen include UK's IRIS (and I suspect more nations will be trotting out TT programs of interest to our members), and iirc a new Australian program (programme).

These, added to the TSS Practical Forum, would certainly add to the volume there.

Kagehitokiri

pre check is (now going to be) rolled out to everyone in US
an asian business traveler card is (going to be) rolled out to US residents

http://www.globalentry.gov/korea.html global entry for korean citizens
http://www.globalentry.gov/netherlands.html global entry for dutch citizens
http://www.globalentry.gov/newzealand.html

http://www.globalentry.gov/smartgate.html australia
http://www.customs.gov.au/smartgate/default.asp AU's own page
http://www.customs.gov.au/smartgate/...ders-trial.asp AU also working with UK epassports
seems both AU and NZ are trials, and smartgate is also in NZ?
dont see a mention of AU/NZ getting global entry themselves? would be after trial?

SkiAdcock

I'm bringing this up for discussion in the private forum. Based on what everyone has posted, it makes sense to me.

Cheers.

GUWonder

UK IRIS has been killed. A pseudo-replacement has come online but is only in trial. If I had to guess, I'd guess that the extent of discussion about UK IRIS and its replacement would be far less in a general "trusted traveler" sub-forum than a thread on the topic in say the BA forum.

PreCheck stations are in substantial part materially supported directly by the airlines at the terminals/airports where the PPT related to PreCheck has been put in place, even when a terminal PreCheck line is shared by more than one airline. Hiccups with the way PreCheck operates are going to continue to have a large airline-specific factor.

I have some doubt that putting all of the "Precheck" and other "trusted traveler" threads into a separate forum and/or sub-forum is going to result in the same concentration/extent of knowledge/sharing as has taken place in the airline forums that have their own PreCheck and fast-track/preferential immigration/customs threads.

Global Entry and other FLUX type arrangements for expedited passport control clearing are going to come also with discussions about things like US APC and non-US e-gates which are not necessarily "trusted traveler" programs. Are the threads about non-GE/non-FLUX type arrangements to remain where they are already?

The forum is "overwhelmed" only in the way that FTers have deemed appropriate for those who post there. What is stopping other "practical TSS" threads from being in the "Practical TSS" sub-forum?

If there isn't a problem, then what is this going to fix? If there is a problem, how is this going to fix that?

Narrowing down the scope of a forum (and/or diluting an existing forum's activity level) may not always be helpful for gathering/transmitting knowledge. Whether or not that would necessarily be the result were this proposal to be realized, not completely certain; however, I'm more certain that unwinding this change wouldn't be as quick to happen were the result to be that of a diffusion/loss of gathered/transmitted knowledge.

nsx

Thanks for all the viewpoints. My fellow mods and others make a good case.

I'd support a forum at the same level as Practical and Policy if it were titled something like "Trusted Traveler Programs (Global Entry, Nexus, PreCheck)" with a cautionary subtitle like "Practical Discussion only: No Policy Debate!"

If the new forum nevertheless attracts too much debate, our Community Director can relocate it under the current Practical Travel Safety Issues forum. IMHO that decision should be made fairly quickly, before bad posting habits take root.

GUWonder

Why the hostility to policy discussion, a desire to railroad discussions that are fundamental to how these programs operate, change, etc? Policy discussion is part of even the airline forums and FTers seem no worse off for it.