I agree. But given that there are exceptions to this general policy (eg CC and OMNI) I don't think that argument works as a blanket reason.

Actually, modularmayhem looks like a new member, but is in fact a name change for a longstanding poster. Although I accept your general point that often new members do find these deals.

I think that if it was a subforum of MR that would answer the TOS query (and, indeed, I think part of the TB's remit is the TOS itself, no?).

I do appreciate that it would place an additional burden on the moderators of MR, and I'd be particularly interested to hear their thoughts. The moderators would be in the position of determining the value of the post as you say, but in many ways that is a decision that every moderator makes every day (should a post stay or go or be edited or be moved or whatever). I think that with a fairly clear cut guideline from TB, eg: has the new poster posted details of a likely fare error which is not already posted on FT, this shouldn't be too much extra work.

And FWIW, I'm not sulking because I didn't get in on the Hilton deal - I made my reservation before FA came out! My problem is not with the new members who post these errors, it is rather with the brand new members who book a year's worth of rooms, restricting the availability for other members (new and old alike) and possibly increasing the chances of a rate not being honoured.

I can kind of see the principle behind Wingnut's request - I got annoyed too watching brand new members booking a years worth of room which they openly admitted they would be looking to see on to other people :( having said that, in virtually every deal I've seen, someone has pushed it to excess, and it isn't always the new members

I'd completely disagree with tying any new forum into only those who have the no-ads FT - just because I can tolerate the ads (which also bring revenue into Randy), I should be kept out of this forum? hmmm, think not. I also have some problems with what attorney28 is suggesting re moderation, but since I'd be verging on discussing moderation, I'll shut up on those (see, for those that know me, it is possible! ;))

Overall though, I'm not sure the problem is bad enough to warrant changing what we have already - I do know some of the MR purists get upset by the error fares appearing in there, so for their sake, I could see why having a new forum would be good. Not convinced that the benefits of limiting access would outweigh the costs (ie missing out on error fares because the finder wasn't able to post in a restricted forum)... I may revise this post though after any publicity from the Japan/Hilton thing.. and I will own up to not having caught up on it this morning either :o

I think the proposal eliminates this "cost" - if the finder can't post in the restricted forum, the finder can post elsewhere, the thread can be moved and the finder granted access to the restricted forum. Indeed, the finder could be granted access to all restricted forums - that might mean people spend less time padding post counts and more time finding deals for the benefit of all.

Here are my (very quick - I've got a breakfast date in 30 minutes) thoughts:

1) Randy already tried this several months ago - he created a subforum & had ScottC as the moderator - it didn't even last a day or two at most.

2) In order to implement this, there would ALWAYS have to a moderator viewing the threads. What happens when a mod isn't able to get to it immediately & non-viewing rights folks post in it & then it gets moved to the special forum where they can't touch it?

3) Whereas from a personal standpoint, I wouldn't be opposed to seeing it happen since I would be able to benefit from it personally - I don't think that its necessarily the best thing for FlyerTalk as a community...I think its selfish & I believe that anyone who is willing to invest their time & energy in FlyerTalk should be able to view & post about these types of deals. That said, I still think that the FareAlert's a deal killing thing since it brings in a lot of people that are dealseakers only.

Just my quick 2 cents - off to breakfast!

PS - all this was stated as a user of FT, not as a moderator of the MR forum

I'd volunteer to co-moderate such a forum :D.

I think that issue exists with threads that get moved into coupon connection or spam or OMNI as well. Then they can't read it, but wouldn't that be how it should have been in the first place?

I don't think it's selfish, because the precise point of this suggestion is that everyone who is "willing to invest their time & energy in Flyertalk should be able to view & post about these types of deal" - but not those who don't - the leechers and lurkers and the airline/hotel/industry lurkers.

Have a nice breakfast and good luck with the date ;).

That is true - however, the MR/hotel deals type threads often are informational & newbies often learn the most from the more discussed threads such as these - its part of the excitement of FT. In OMNI, it's off-topic discussion & the CC is usually a two-way trade - nothing really educational.

Breakfast was great & the company was even better! :D

Jenbel, you make some excellent points. I agree with you.

Everyone: Let's keep things on topic and not discuss other issues. :)

The host is no longer involved in anything related to the establishment of new forums. As with almost all other topics - except moderation - these efforts are being lead and decided on solely by the member-elected TalkBoard. As in real life, talk to your local Congressman about this.

Remember to vote in the TalkBoard election run-off.

I too agree with Jenbel's above point and Wingnut's original suggestion, purely on the basis that some of the activities that have gone on in the recent Hilton Tokyo/Osaka threads are just in poor taste and do not reflect nicely on FT. To elaborate, I mean things like using the fare error to book a room for 10 months and head off to CC to try and "sell" that room, even before we know what the resolution of the error will be. Is this what FT is supposed to be about? Kudos to the mods in CC for closing these threads ^ , (atleast for the moment!)

I am all for any idea that would remove/reduce this behaviour, or at the very least "hide" this side of FT. :(

Just a technical note, as the moderator controls are currently set up, no moderator can give a user access to a forum from which he/she is otherwise restricted. Randy or his admin staff have to do that (e.g., the Coupon Connection mods can't grant access to posters with less than 90/90, only Randy can)

cblaisd, thanks for the info. Am I wrong to assume that this is by choice, though, not because of a limitation that the software imposes?

All this depends of how fast FT wants to grow, more PR equals more users, which results in more ad revenue.

that being said, I’m for creating some sort of restriction around this.
One should put some effort in order to get on deals.

I like the idea of this new forum. ^

My two cents ... I'm not in favor of a new sub-forum, I don't think it will help and it puts additional stress on volunteer moderators. Who is going to decide what's a mistake and what's a great deal? (aside from the blatantly obvious, of course) There will be an uproar every time something gets moved from an open forum to this "private" sub-forum. Aside from all that, I'm not sure the functionality to permit access on a user by user basis would be available, either.

Based on what is happening in MR these days though, I'm wondering if posts in the MR forum should not be allowed to count toward qualification for access to CC and OMNI. I would think the privilege should go to members participating beyond MR.

I agree 100% with this. FlyerTalk should be the one to benefit from information posted on its site about fare errors. It is a magnificent attraction for new members -- and some of these new members may someday post provide us with even more fare errors.