I'm surprised by the amount of current moderators running for Talkboard, mostly because it shows their dedication to Flyertalk.

I don't want to start a discussion whether or not they are "allowed" to run as that is Randy's decision but I am curious how a moderator plans to combine both activities.

In my view the Talkboard will become more of an active participant in several processes, will the moderators participation be a conflict of interest or a valuable asset? Should there be a maximum of 1 or 2 moderators on the Talkboard. Should there be a non-elected moderator on the Talkboard to work on issues together?

my guess is, that if elected as a TalkBoard member, a moderator will simply step down as a moderator.

I do not see why a Moderator would step down if elected to the TB.

As far as I am concerned, the two are mutually exclusive.

Also,

I like Scott's suggestion of having a Moderator Appointed to the TB.

I like Scott's suggestion of having a Moderator Appointed to the TB.

I did read Scott's suggestion as a max-limit of 1 or 2 moderators being 'able' to be elected ... for me, I don't mind if more (or even all) future TalkBoard members would have already former experiences as moderators.

I try to view the governing structure of Flyertalk similar to the three branches of Government in the USA.

The Executive is Randy Petersen and the WebFlyer staff.

The Legislature is TalkBoard. They decide the policy and general direction that the board should take. Essentially these are the guys who SET the rules.

The Judiciary is the moderators. They interpret the rules and enforce them.

Separation of powers is absolutely essential for Flyertalk to run smoothly without conflict of interests. As much as we like to think that we are above it, we are all human and power struggles will inevitably emerge at some stage, either within or across groups, indeed as they have in the past.

I don't think there is anything wrong with a Moderator RUNNING for TalkBoard, but I do take exception to someone serving both as a policy maker and a policy enforcer. Pick one and give it your full effort. We have seen that there are plenty of qualified and willing volunteers willing to step up and fill the other role.

I too think that would be the best option.

http://www.flyertalk.com/townhall/talkteam.shtml

Says that Talkboard and Moderator are two different FT roles.

I count NINE current moderators in the list of TB candidates.

Some I feel have proven to be totally unsuited as Moderators and I would be concerned to see them in any dual role. Others have IMO been great Moderators and would be a fine addition to TB.

Randy may have no problem whatever with folks holding dual roles if elected to TB, OR he may prefer or expect they'd resign from the Moderator role if elected.

I'd be interested to read his thoughts on that prior to us voting.

I do think Sean (a current Moderator) makes the point well:

According to some of the moderators running (to whom I posed the question "Will you resign as a moderator if elected to TalkBoard"), Randy said they were free to run. From what I understand, resignation was not discussed.

I will come out on the record and state that I am opposed to TalkBoard members also serving as moderators. I don't think that moderating and legislating is a good mix at all.

I personally will not vote for any current moderators (despite the fact that I think that some of them would make wonderful TalkBoard reps) unless they plan to resign their moderating duties after they are elected.

As I shared with techgirl and others previously, I really hadn't considered the potential conflict when I decided to run for TalkBoard. I really appreciate the thoughts that have been aired on this issue.

My goal really is to help the Flyertalk community, and to the extent possible to help Randy as well.

I saw running for TalkBoard as a way to do more for the Flyertalk community, and hadn't even thought about it in terms of amassing power or separation of powers issues.

I also realize that if the community sees it that way, then this is a real issue. I don't want to be the cause of any hard feelings.

I currently moderate both the Delta and MilesBuzz forums. On the Delta forum, moderators have been controversial. I have no desire to add to that controversy. If elected to the TalkBoard, I will resign as Delta moderator -- contingent on Randy accepting that resignation.

In other words, if Randy specifically and explicitly wanted to me stay in both roles I would because as I said above I'm trying to do what I can to help. I don't expect that to be the case, though, because there are three other moderators there! I just don't want to commit 100% to resignation without discussing this with Randy first. But I do want to make clear that I don't want to create problems or controversy for the community and I will take necessary steps to avoid that, for sure, if elected.

As far as the MilesBuzz forum, moderation has been less controversial and is generally limited to moving new topics around to their appropriate homes. Since there's lots of this, and Randy seems to appreciate it (he does it himself when he as time), I don't think I'd resign right away. I think it would be alright to continue in the role for at least a limited time, and I would ask Randy whether he thought adding another moderator there to take my place would be doable or whether he preferred me to stay in the role. I'm not wedded to this -- it just seems like there's less of a potential problem in MilesBuzz and more of a heavy workload there, and I wouldn't want to leave anybody in the lurch.

Of course, for someone who sees this as a huge conflict, it's possible to simply vote against all moderators (including me). I hope that you don't do that, because I really do want to engage in this community as much as possible. I think I'm a positive contributing member, and I'd like the opportunity to serve on the TalkBoard.

I will be quite careful to avoid even perceived conflicts, and I look forward ot additional input from the community about how the TalkBoard/Moderator role is seen.

Like I said above, I hadn't thought of a problem when I first decided to put my name forward. So it's feedback from the community, and from techgirl in particular, that brought this to my attention and I appreciate that and I take it seriously.

Thanks much,
Gary
aka gleff

It truly doesn't bother me if a person is both a moderator AND a member of the TB.

In my experience (i.e. having been around but unfortunately not a TB Member AND a moderator), the two really don't match up.

I agree with gleff. I had come to the conclusion that abstaining from any vote in which a conflict might arise would be the best course of action, but I will not stand in the way of the perceived conflict of interest.

If elected to the TalkBoard, I will resign my post as moderator.

I also agree with proposals to have a liasion between the TalkBoard and the moderators, and would like to see a moderator appointed to an advisory role to keep that perspective fresh.

People think that the legislative branch will be able to make progress when it is almost always waiting for the executive branch? Yes, Randy and co. are really busy with other efforts as well, but FT is often left to its own devices. I'm not even sure the smileys have been totally fixed. When was the last time you saw the animation actually work properly?

FewMiles..

If anything, who has enough free time to do both?

I think that Randy ought to decide who the moderators are. It is his board; he funds it. I should hope that the TalkBoard would have an advisory role; but the final decision should be his.



[This message has been edited by Analise (edited 07-31-2003).]

I kinda agree with Chexy!

I believe a "Moderator" perspective would be a welcome addition to TB discussions.

I know in my consideration of who to vote for I am looking at how moderators moderate and their views on that role. However, I would never just exclude someone just because they are a moderator.

William

Only a few of the 9 or so Moderaotrs standing for TB have outlined their position on this question.

I'd certainly appreciate hearing from the others before voting.

In addition to the 3 branches, I think we need more localized, regionalized, and branded representation. I think there should be local elections for sub-representatives within each brand forum (United, American, Starwood, Hilton, etc. etc.). Then sub-sub representatives elected for geographical regions within those brands. I then thinks we also need to elect an oversight committee to play the role of impartial watchdog. These watchdog committee members would not be moderators, TalkBoard members, industry representatives or even members of FlyerTalk at all.

This would, among other things, prevent say a Talkboard member who is strictly an American Airlines person, from recommending anything having to do with decisions made that might effect the United Airlines forum, where they clearly would have no business sticking their little noses into.

We also need a Synergy task force to bring all the various aspects together and to share with each body all the others hard work and suggestions. This task force could also write lots of big papers and policies and procedures and recommendations that would keep everyone busy for weeks and weeks.

Mostly we need lots of folks empowered by "popular vote" to create a bureaucracy and counsel to fix and improve a very simple little internet bulletin board that doesn't need much fixing to begin with. At least that couldn't be fixed or improved with much less trouble by 2 appointed people sitting over coffee on a weekend sometime.

There's much much work to create here, whether we need it or not! We need more rules and lots of 'em! We need interpretations of those rules. We need precedents, examples, variations.

As funny and unproductive and inefficient as I found all of this TalkBoard stuff last year, this year I find it doubly hysterical. All the hype, logos, posturing, egos, banners etc, etc. Jeez. Am I the only one out there willing to say this all looks soooooooooo silly!

I'm all for community involvement and appreciate anyone that contributes ideas to Randy on the efficient operations of the board itself. And those that contribute their time as Moderators. Those folks are Saints.

But the best contributors to the Community of FlyerTalk are those that contribute to what the core asset of FlyerTalk is...the active participation in the many Frequent Traveler forums. Helping out those newbies. Those in need. Helping each other ferret out the inside track, the hidden benefit, the circuitous loophole, the straight scoop and sometimes even the dirty poop. That's what we need more of, IMHO. Not more non-travel forums. Not more bureaucracy. Not more about FlyerTalk "business." Not more TalkBoard. We got more FlyerTalk "business" than we can handle, IMHO. It's diverting attention and energy from the most important asset of FlyerTalk...active travel forum participation!

I remember FlyerTalk.

I guess I just don't understand how it only took a handful of people relatively very little time and trouble to get 95% of FlyerTalk right, right out of the can. But now we seem to need a board and elections and all manner of other crap just to fine tune it or improve it in some manner!!

Remember that story of the camel, as that which came out of a committee that was trying to design a horse?

Hat's off to all of you candidates that sincerely want to give something back to the Community. Really, I mean that. A noble and worthy sentiment. I just don't think this is the best way to do it. And frankly, some of you look a bit like prostitutes out there touting your wares for votes. A few are even stinking up their own good names a bit as a result, IMHO.

Randy...can't you just appoint someone on your staff to assemble all the FlyerTalk suggestions sent in from anyone and have a pow-wow with them once a month to pick-out the ones that sound good to you, implement them, and see how they pan out? If they don't work out, pull 'em?

Why the need for a TalkBoard? Why all this? Because of the way it's set up, they're not representative of anyone other than themselves. They certainly don't represent me! That's not something I agreed to in membership or is a condition of membership. So why the vote then??? Anyway, isn't a good idea a good idea, no matter who it comes from? Isn't all of this "overkill."

I know I'm fighting an uphill battle. The monster has been unleashed and probably can't be stopped. It now has a life of it's own. Sort of like the TSA and Homeland Security.

IMHO.

Now, back to topic. If I believed any of this TalkBoard stuff was really important (which I do not), there would be absolutely no question, not even for an instant, of whether or not Moderators should or could be TalkBoard members. IMHO, it not only should be allowed, but it should be an absolute prerequisite that any candidate must have contributed some time as a Moderator before being allowed to serve on TalkBoard. No "outside directors" here. Serve some time in the trenches before being made an officer. That would be my opinion.

Moot point though, as I think TalkBoard is pretty much unnecessary, unproductive, sometimes counter-productive, and a totally inefficient application for the particular standing model.

I've said my piece...now I'm headed back over to United and Starwood and maybe a quick pass by Continental and FlyerTalk Dining...all where I can really make a contribution to what the Community of FlyerTalk should be about, IMHO. Might even learn a few new tid-bits myself, along the way, thanks to other contributors and participants.