kokonutz

<redacted>

And it's clear that no action other than yet another 'tweak it and watch it become even less used anyway' is going to come of this discussion at this point.

Folks: if someone suggested starting a forum with such a narrow and vague remit as TN has today it would never get created. You know it. I know it. This whole matter is a study in incumbency trumping best practice.

cblaisd

Thank you! I try to take seriously the respectful suggestions from folks. This will also, as some have suggested, help the forum allude to its roots -- when one FTer suggested articles he thought would be of interest to fellow members

SkiAdcock

<redacted>

The rest of your post I understand as you're articulating your viewpoint which is consistent with what you've posted previously, but this thread affecting your posting in other forums makes no sense to me.

Cheers.

CMK10

That's absolutely false, we created the Smoker's Lounge last year which certainly has a narrower focus than TN.

And even if your point is correct, does that mean we should close all forums that wouldn't get created today?

kokonutz

That forum has a clear and non-redundant remit: helping smokers travel while engaging in their filthy, filthy habit.

The 'new' remit for TN is:

What's the difference between this forum and other forums? While an imprecise distinction, this forum is to discuss the articles themselves about a topic. Sometimes the topic itself could well be in another forum but one of your fellow FlyerTalkers put a link to an article here because he or she thought the article itself was worth discussing.

Tell me honestly: if I came in here and suggested creating a forum to, imprecisely speaking, discuss travel articles (NOT the subject of the travel article, just the article itself)...but only those travel articles that are about things not talked about elsewhere on FlyerTalk (where the subject as well as the article itself may be discussed)...you'd laugh me off this forum. And rightfully so.

Yes! Absolutely. The same standards for keeping a forum open should exist for creating one. :-:

This is particularly important if, as I think you and I agree, one holds the opinion that forums should be given a 'build it and see if they come' approach. In that paradigm it's important that failed forums be acknowledged and cleaned up.

Prospero

Call me a cynic, but I just don’t think the new definition will invigorate TN in the long term. It’s mission is still awkward and convoluted and besides that, IBBs simply cannot compete with other dedicated news feeds available online. New discussions do flourish in specialist forums because the subject matter retains relevance to the forum’s purpose and user base and I believe that is where the focus should be. A stand alone general news forum just does not attract a viable audience and I don’t see that changing.

All credit to those involved in giving TN care and attention. Unfortunately, it will take more than a defibrillator to bring about a reversal in fortune

CMK10

I don't get these criticisms. Yes, it doesn't receive much traffic but neither do a dozen or more forums. It has a purpose, people seem to like it and it's not causing any damage. Forums don't need missions or heavy traffic to enjoy a place on FT. Otherwise we'd close half the forums here.

Eastbay1K

Yet the other "underutilized" fora have discrete missions. This one has more padlocks and re-directs than any other as a percentage of posts. Almost every TN topic has a possible other home.

I cannot understand why Iran Air purchasing Airbus planes (with an Airbus newslink) gets a redirect to an airline forum, but Air India proposing a longer flight (with a newslink) does not.

The thing is, there are news stories on TN that get rerouted that I'd want to read but I can't because I never know of them. They are rerouted to other fora that I may not frequent or perhaps never visit.

The solution may lie in that any arguably proper TN topic stays as a topic in TN and gets a link to the existing topic elsewhere, if one exists. It is sort of "double posting" but not really. Should I want to join the clutter elsewhere, I can. Should I want to comment in TN, I can.

Prospero

When you look closely at TN, it really is an outlier - it accommodates topics that other forums accommodate so much better. A relic of a past age.

FT is a fabulous community - the site excels because it is structured in such a way that promotes and engenders high quality discussion on specific areas of interest, so my suggestion is we play on the strengths of the site by focusing on what is great and re-structure those areas that are redundant. And TN is a redundant forum - not a subjective view by any manner. Look at the recently posted threads on the winter storms along the eastern seaboard. There is a multitude of threads covering every angle relating to the storms, in AA, in BA, in UA, in NYC, in OMNI and each containing a bewildering array of personal experiences, top quality insight, the most fabulous advice a traveller could ever wish for. And then there are two threads in TB that have dwindled. Not a single response. Now that is not to criticise the topic, rather it highlights where FT’s strengths and weaknesses lay as part of a journey that will improve FT.

I am a progressive. When this thread launched last year I was lukewarm to the idea of closing TN. Having digested the opinion and cogent arguments posted by others, I have come round to the idea that our members would be much better served if all threads containing news articles were housed in specialist forums. News stories that are focused on the specialism engender infinitely better quality discussion compared to those stories that are randomly placed in a nebulous forum.

If you look around FT, you will see evidence of this.

cblaisd

And, like the Religious Travel forum, it serves a helpful purpose and keeps tendentious discussions out of other forums. ^

It's not meant to. It's a place where FlyerTalk members can point to general travel news articles that they'd like their fellow members' thoughts on.

Should we close the Alaska forum, say, because it has so few posts? I would say not.

That is a false assertion. Rhetorically intriguing, perhaps, but incorrect.

At YOUR request, on one of the last occasions that this periodic quest is brought up by a few folks, all thread-moves out of Travel News have a permanent redirect. So, you can always read those stories by starting in Travel News.

I don't think that's necessary, but I would certainly be open to that.

Eastbay1K

You are completely correct, but it is clear that this forum is here to stay. Koko speaks an uncomfortable truth.

Canarsie

I actually like that idea and had been thinking about that for some time.

CMK10

Uncomfortable? How? Because we're letting a forum stay open? There's no groundswell here of people who want to close it and in fact plenty of people seem to want it open. Nor has any reason given for closure been persuasive.

Eastbay1K

to you.

Prospero

I appreciate your time and thoughts all the same.

Remember, military travel topics can and do attract quality discussion (if you think about the best forum to post them in) - http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trave...force-one.html