Formalizing a Minor Amendment Process (retry)
May 22, 2015 | 11:13 am
#16
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 29,078
I don't see why the TB president shouldn't make minor changes that do not affect the intention of the motion - such as fixing typos - besides if anyone thinks the TB President as abusing their position they can complain to the Community Director.
Personally I can't really see the point of this. Common sense dictates that typos need to be fixed and that fixing them doesn't change the motion. And if a motion is badly written/wrong it should be withdrawn or voted down. Maybe what is needed is a way of rejecting motions which haven't been properly written?
Personally I can't really see the point of this. Common sense dictates that typos need to be fixed and that fixing them doesn't change the motion. And if a motion is badly written/wrong it should be withdrawn or voted down. Maybe what is needed is a way of rejecting motions which haven't been properly written?
May 22, 2015 | 1:53 pm
#17
Original Poster
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN A-list preferred, United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 22,856
While I agree that motions should be as well thought-out and carefully proofread as possible, and while I do my best to put that into practice, experience has taught me that minor changes are sometimes needed. I prefer that such changes be handled consistently, under a well-defined and approved procedure. Asking the TalkBoard President to make all these decisions solo can cause bad feelings and is unfair to everyone.
I'm old enough to recall popular objection to the installation of seat belts in cars, and later objection to laws mandating their use. This formal procedure will increase the quality of TalkBoard's output. So I have called for another vote. Doing it now, when another vote is in progress, will avoid cluttering FT with a separate sitewide announcement of the vote.
I'm old enough to recall popular objection to the installation of seat belts in cars, and later objection to laws mandating their use. This formal procedure will increase the quality of TalkBoard's output. So I have called for another vote. Doing it now, when another vote is in progress, will avoid cluttering FT with a separate sitewide announcement of the vote.
May 22, 2015 | 3:00 pm
#18
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2002
Programs: UALifetimePremierGold, Marriott LifetimeTitanium
Posts: 74,119
Does anyone else besides me find the car seat argument a bit silly - ie, seriously, comparing a minor amendment process to something that impacts the public's safety really overstates TB's mandate/influence on FT. Geesh.
May 22, 2015 | 3:17 pm
#19
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 29,078
May 22, 2015 | 4:51 pm
#20
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 52,790
While I agree that motions should be as well thought-out and carefully proofread as possible, and while I do my best to put that into practice, experience has taught me that minor changes are sometimes needed. I prefer that such changes be handled consistently, under a well-defined and approved procedure. Asking the TalkBoard President to make all these decisions solo can cause bad feelings and is unfair to everyone.
I'm old enough to recall popular objection to the installation of seat belts in cars, and later objection to laws mandating their use. This formal procedure will increase the quality of TalkBoard's output. So I have called for another vote. Doing it now, when another vote is in progress, will avoid cluttering FT with a separate sitewide announcement of the vote.
I'm old enough to recall popular objection to the installation of seat belts in cars, and later objection to laws mandating their use. This formal procedure will increase the quality of TalkBoard's output. So I have called for another vote. Doing it now, when another vote is in progress, will avoid cluttering FT with a separate sitewide announcement of the vote.
May 22, 2015 | 5:42 pm
#21
Original Poster
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN A-list preferred, United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 22,856
TalkBoard has no formal procedure to withdraw a motion once voting begins. Normally the vote has to run to completion.
May 22, 2015 | 6:44 pm
#22
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Either at the shooting range or anywhere good beer can be found...
Posts: 52,790
May 22, 2015 | 7:34 pm
#23
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 42,582
May 22, 2015 | 7:36 pm
#24
Original Poster
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN A-list preferred, United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 22,856
May 22, 2015 | 8:40 pm
#25
Moderator: Hilton Honors forums
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Marietta, Georgia, United States
Posts: 25,435
May 23, 2015 | 8:52 am
#26
Moderator: Hyatt Gold Passport & Star Alliance
Join Date: May 1998
Location: London, UK
Programs: UA-1K 3MM/HY- LT Globalist/BA-GGLfL
Posts: 12,761
I don't see why the TB president shouldn't make minor changes that do not affect the intention of the motion - such as fixing typos - besides if anyone thinks the TB President as abusing their position they can complain to the Community Director.
Personally I can't really see the point of this. Common sense dictates that typos need to be fixed and that fixing them doesn't change the motion. And if a motion is badly written/wrong it should be withdrawn or voted down. Maybe what is needed is a way of rejecting motions which haven't been properly written?
Personally I can't really see the point of this. Common sense dictates that typos need to be fixed and that fixing them doesn't change the motion. And if a motion is badly written/wrong it should be withdrawn or voted down. Maybe what is needed is a way of rejecting motions which haven't been properly written?
Fixing minor mistakes in public is better than doing it in private as at least the voting members of FT can see who made the error. However, getting it right first time, seems to be a better way to go.
May 23, 2015 | 10:07 am
#27
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 29,078
This! ^
May 23, 2015 | 12:01 pm
#28
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Durham, NC (RDU/GSO/CLT)
Programs: AA EXP/MM, DL GM, UA Platinum, HH DIA, Hyatt Explorist, IHG Platinum, Marriott Titanium, Hertz PC
Posts: 33,856
Incidentally, I see this as having an eraser on a pencil. You don't tear up a piece of paper and start writing your whole document again when you misspell a word. Same concept to me.
May 23, 2015 | 12:59 pm
#29
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 42,582
But that wastes time. There's no reason to have to start all over again, especially if people have already voted, for a minor change. Why waste days when a simple fix will take care of the issue a lot quicker?
Incidentally, I see this as having an eraser on a pencil. You don't tear up a piece of paper and start writing your whole document again when you misspell a word. Same concept to me.
Incidentally, I see this as having an eraser on a pencil. You don't tear up a piece of paper and start writing your whole document again when you misspell a word. Same concept to me.
One person's minor change is another person's deal breaker. One person's typo is another person's "this is why I voted the way I did, and wouldn't have otherwise." Who decides what is minor? How much can the "pencil erase" before it is no longer minor? And by the way, before "your time," if a secretary messed up when preparing an important document that was a multi-carbon form set, the entire thing would go into the dustbin, and (s)he would start all over.
I know we all think it should be so obvious. But there is a line somewhere, and that line will not be obvious.
May 23, 2015 | 1:10 pm
#30
Moderator: Smoking Lounge; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: SFO
Programs: Lifetime (for now) Gold MM, HH Gold, Giving Tootsie Pops to UA employees, & a retired hockey goalie
Posts: 29,078
But that wastes time. There's no reason to have to start all over again, especially if people have already voted, for a minor change. Why waste days when a simple fix will take care of the issue a lot quicker?
Incidentally, I see this as having an eraser on a pencil. You don't tear up a piece of paper and start writing your whole document again when you misspell a word. Same concept to me.
Incidentally, I see this as having an eraser on a pencil. You don't tear up a piece of paper and start writing your whole document again when you misspell a word. Same concept to me.
One person's minor change is another person's deal breaker. One person's typo is another person's "this is why I voted the way I did, and wouldn't have otherwise." Who decides what is minor? How much can the "pencil erase" before it is no longer minor? And by the way, before "your time," if a secretary messed up when preparing an important document that was a multi-carbon form set, the entire thing would go into the dustbin, and (s)he would start all over.
I know we all think it should be so obvious. But there is a line somewhere, and that line will not be obvious.
And now back to discussing automobile seat belts