ClueByFour

Conjecture. The solution would probably end up being a locked sticky (in my forum, at least), but if a member wanted to point out to other members of a particular forum something that impacted a great number of the readers of that forum that the TB was/is voting on, I'd have to think long and hard about not making it visible during the course of the vote.

I am also of the opinion that we should have an "announcement" type thread and/or sticky in every forum that lists what votes are underway (which would eliminate the need for member started threads in the first place).

ozstamps

Nope. FACT in the 3 I named. Ii agree that is how the situation should be, as well.


Totally off-topic.

Look elsewhere in this Forum if you want to add your valued thoughts to that idea.

ClueByFour

Conjecture. You said "etc." What's "etc"? A reasonable person would infer you meant other airline/point forums and I can say for a definitive fact that in at least one of them (and very likely many more) that your statement was conjecture.

Please either clarify what you wrote above or stop trying to split hairs to make it seem as if you were not called out on something that's not within the TB's purview anyway. What's "etc?" Specifically which forums were you were referring to by invoking "et cetera?"

There you go again--not your purview, not your call, and itself a TOS violation (you are supposed to report the post, not question it on-thread.)

underpressure

Total FT Post Count +7,500,000 Source
OMNI Post Count 1,214,000 Source

The fact is that this measure will reduce the total post count by +16%

A reduction of 16% that is generated by less than 5% of the 134,932 members.

I agree with OZ on one thing, that is a passionate group of people.

And when I quicly go through and add all of the other "fluff" areas (areas that are not directly travel related) I get another half a million. That reduces the total by 23%

But at least when this happens, the "protected post counts" will be pure as the wind driven snow.

ozstamps

Wrong again. Simply doing my job as a volunteer TalkTeam member (remember that term?) pointing those with less observation powers than I as to WHERE the correct thread for your important thoughts was located.

dhammer53

Same for the other side.

Japhydog

One wonders: if the issue is quality of posts, why not have a series of tests to certify a member? Maybe the effectiveness of such a measure would doom it to failure.

SlowTrekker

I'm struggling very, very, very hard to understand how this is viewed as a problem by others, let alone one that needs a solution as obviously divisive as the one proposed.

Cholula

You've posted this or a similar statement several times in this thread.

As the seconder of this motion, I assume you are referring in part to my motivations as well.

Since you and I hardly know each other than by casual association in a couple of forums, I'm curious as to how you knew what was in my head when I seconded this motion.

When I saw Dovster's motion, I seconded it to get it on the table and get an up or down vote from TB. I can assure you that there was nothing more sinister or furtive behind my seconding this motion. This OMNI post count issue rears it's ugly head every so often and TB's past, present and future will have to address it.

While I realize there are folks who are very passionate over this subject, this is not an issue that personally keeps me awake at night. Although I have already voted on the issue, I could as easily have voted in the opposite direction.

Whether or not it passes, I'm sure life will continue as usual.

RichMSN

Numbers lie, don't they?

How many ACTIVE members have access to OMNI? It's quite easy to say that only 5% of all members have access, but then you're saying that only 5% of all members have 180 posts and 180 days of membership.

It seems as though you're giving equal standing/footing to those members, but many of those members likely came to FT and disappeared, likely never to return. I would conclude, then, that you're just using these numbers to serve your purpose, whatever that purpose is. Anyone who points at the total number of registered users and uses that as a reason why OMNI is unimportant is engaging in a different kind of padding.

GadgetFreak

If there is a real problem in the people generating large numbers of posts very quickly in counting threads and the like the solution is to shut down those threads, not the forum itself. And there is no way that eliminating posts from threads in Omni that actually are threads that talk about things and not doing it to other non flying forums can be called fair.

There is absolutely no doubt that this is a completely discriminatory proposal that attacks one group of FT that posts a lot in one forum.

I dont know the motivations for it, but it seems hard to think it is the stated one. It is not clear the stated one really is a problem and if it is it is and always has been easy to fix under current rules. So it seems like it really has to be something else going on here.

GUWonder

Did I disagree? An examination of the post which I quoted indicates that I took no issue other than to note that it's a small clique that, with some TB assistance, decided to make a mountain out of a snowhill in NY at this time.

majorwibi

Agreed completely.

OMNI serves a very necessary place in FT. I have gotten some of my best advice / guidance from the folks in OMNI and I really worry what will happen to OMNI if post are removed from counting (and made retroactive).

The solution is to just not allow those counting (and other padding related) threads not kill all post countings related to OMNI and probably kill OMNI in the end.

ozstamps

Nothing will change. Life will go on.

It didn't change last time this was the rule.

Before your time on FT possibly, but that was the case.

GadgetFreak

Indeed, this has been discussed in Omni in fact. The term generally used is "we will be welcomed with flowers"