Interaction with Talk Board
 

In a recent closed thread TB member Cholula made this comment.

I am not surprised there are low levels of interaction between general members and TB on TB matters if the past several days posts on this forum are anything to go by. Why post as a general (non TB member) if you're only going to get abused for it? Some opinions get dismissed since the vast majority of FTers haven't posted on an issue they obviously (?) disagree.

Lucky its just an internet bulletin board.

If you feel ignored, neglected, unappreciated or otherwise let down by a particular TB member or by them as a group, that seems like an issue best addressed at Talk Board election time...

That said, I have seen many good people with the best of intentions elected to the TB. I'm thinking there is something in the watercooler in the secret TB forum [ducking]

I completely agree.

TB <--> General Membership relations are not great and it seems to have gotten worse recently. :(

Some of us might re-phrase that as "why post as a TB member if you're only going to get abused for it?."

And the evidence is there to see.

Yes, the repeated condenscending remarks by one TB member recently makes it easy to see why some people would not want to get involved. While the majority of the TB members are able to respond civily to member questions, whether they agree or not, others don't seem capable.

Oh, that is very rich.

Most Flyertalkers couldn't give a hoot about the politics of this place.

As a matter of fact, some ex-members of TB just read this forum every so often... just for amusement. ;)

It seems that one of the problems with the TB procedures is that once a motion is made voting begins immediately. This doesn't allow much time for input from members (particularly if the fact of the motion's being up for a vote isn't ever communicated to the membership). Another problem we have seen from time to time over the years is this or that TB member who seems to be unwilling to answer questions.

I wonder if an addition of a "direct referendum" or "initiative" option to the TalkBoard "constituion" might help in those cases where members feel shut out or unheard?

E.g., such a provision might take one of two forms: a) upon petition supported by xx number of FT members, the TB will be directed to vote on the motion that the petitioner is bringing, or b) upon petition supported by yy number of members, an "initiative" shall be put before the entire TB membership.

In the latter case, you'd obviously want a pretty high threshhold. But either of these tools might increase trust and transparency. It's clear that there is some unsettling and shared discontent with the TB's current procedures, and it's also clear that the TB members are people of good will who no doubt would not want the perception afoot that they are not responsive.

LOL. Okay Dan...quit looking over my shoulder! LOL. :D

Sincerely,


William R. Sanders
Customer Service Coordinator
Starwood Preferred Services

[email protected]

The TalkBoard welcomes public input.

However, such input still needs to be within the FlyerTalk TOS. This is not an open forum for anyone to skirt the rules.

I disagree. The current TB discourages input in multiple forms:

1: The condescending attitude that some of the members have towards us "commoners".

2: The suprising number of TB members who fail to participate in this forum.

3: The even more surprising number of TB members who do not feel the need to explain their votes.

4: Instead of becoming more transparent following the last election, the current TB has become more secretive.

Spiff, I don't disagree that you welcome input. But, far too many of your fellow TB members do not.

I'm not really sure that's fair. The old system for reporting on motions didn't work very well, there were technological limitations and attempts to update it would fail. So we introduced a new subforum where we report our votes and they're available to everyone, including roll call voting.

Couple that with the long overdue lifting of the TalkBoard 'quiet period' aka gag rule, we're now able to comment on our personal views of current TalkBoard issues (just not characterize the views of other members or quote others' posts) and I think there have been real moves towards inclusion and transparency.

To the extent that the processes are imperfect, I suspect it's because all of these efforts take place in time and members have substantial other commitments. Flyertalkers can take individual member participation into account when electing and re-electing folks. On the one hand, it's nice to elect the best-communicating folks. On the other hand, if you want something done right and quickly ask a busy person (they're busy for a reason).

gleff,

Here is the support for my assertion:

To my knowledge, this is the first TB to institute a change to the FT features without either Member Demand or Member Feedback.

There are nine members of the TB. Two have not posted to this forum in months. Four rarely post in this forum and solicit feedback even less. Two post frequently and solicit feedback frequently. One posts very frequently and about 50% of those posts are condescending and abusive.

I think it is very fair to label this as a secretive TB. This is not an indictment of all TB members, but it most certaintly is an indictment of the so called "transparency candidates".

My first reaction is, "I wouldn't be surprised if that were true, one of the past criticisms of the TalkBoard was inaction." But then I remembered the vote on bringing back the 'old smilies'. ;)

Which category do I fall in? :confused:

Fair enough, I suppose we'll just disagree on that, if only because the results of votes are now posted nearly in real-time with full roll call details -- an improvement over past practice -- and because the TalkBoard had once imposed a virtual gag order, a practice that I was critical of and pushed to change from the very beginning of my service.

The more I read about TB, the more satisfied I am with:

a) having voted; b) having voted for whom I voted (even if I may or may not agree with every vote cast by a TB member); and c) having not run for TB myself.