Is there a TB "must make a motion" requirement?

You didn't have to make any sort of a motion, Dov. Why you're saying that it was "unavoidable" for you to do so is beyond me.

A clarification; it was not me who made the suggestion of a sub-forum for games on OMNI, it was tom911 - all I did was support his suggestion.

While I like to take credit for brilliant ideas - this isn't one I can take credit for.

That was my sloppiness, I didn't take the time to go all the way back through the thread. :o
Credit to Tom: :)

Actions against post-padding have been taken in the past...

Edited

I just found it, via the Wayback Machine. :)

As of August 2006.
http://web.archive.org/web/200608252.../rules.php#q92

OzStamps,

All I'm saying is that someone (like me) who won't post to an Omni thread (because he doesn't want his post count to go any higher), may now post.

It's possible that the noise may increase.


I still agree with what Spiff said in the OP...

1. Posts in the OMNI forum will not count toward any member's post tally and this shall be made retroactive to the beginning of Omni.

So then the "problem" this motion is meant to "solve" can be addressed via means that already exist. My vote is for votes against this motion.

I'm missing something. I don't understand a) why you don't want your post count to go higher, b) why there would be a significant number of people who share that view, and c) why that would cause a surge in Omni posts.

I'm not sure it is germane to the topic, but it might be. That's why I'm asking.

You can request that your post count be 0'ed out/reduced .... in the same way someone can request to have the "Evangelist" title removed/not applied. Perhaps that's a way to have the cake and eat it too?

I'm sort of in the birdstrike mode too, at least in regards to items b and c below:

Agree.
Emphasis added. It appears the one poster has been dealt with.
Agree.
Emphasis added. I would narrow it down to one. It appears that the one has been dealt with.
Agree.

Or we could just bring back reputation.

<ducking>

A comment from a newbie
 

I have been a member of FT for a very short time. My post count is limited because of time and what valued info I believe that I can add to the community. Someday, I might reach the count for Coupon Connection and Omni but it is not something that I worry about. I try not to add posts to the board just to up my post count. Case, in point, I had the opportunity to upgrade a young military on his way home for Iraqi last week. I sat in the exit row and placed him in First Class, after buying the stickers I needed. I did it because I wanted to, not for the recognition. In my mind, if I was after the point count, I would have posted in it the AA forum.

I judge the value of the info I receive on this board not from the point count someone has but from having read much of the board and searching for answers before asking questions. As a result of this board, I did a Plat Challenge and have since this year already qualifed for Plat. I read (at the point all 84 pages of the Stickies) the board before I started asking questions.

I think in life there is value in communication and community. If people find community, we should respect and foster that opportunity. I have the tools here at FT to ignore and choose not to read any and all posters.

With that said, I believe that there is nothing broken here. Do not change the policy of the point count.

JMHO

Chris

I don't feel posts should be taken away but ok to not to count in future.

I have stated my motivation over and over yet you seem to think that I have some hidden agenda. Please share it with me. If I am doing something because of some driving force which is unknown to me, your enlightening me would probably save me years of expensive psychoanalysis.

I think it would be difficult to apply that post-padding provision to the Omni games. The entire point of some of those games is to make posts. If the post-padding provision were to be enforced, we would have to suspend everyone who plays in the games and I don't think that is anything that any of us wants.

Nor do I want to see the games ended. A lot of people get enjoyment from playing them. In themselves, they do no damage.

Rich, I didn't say it was unavoidable for me to make a motion. I said that those who have been asking for the elimination of counting Omni posts, as well as those who have posted urging that we keep counting them, deserved an answer from TB.

While I was not among those who first brought up this idea, I was more convinced by their arguments than their opponents'. Hence I made the motion in that manner.

It is not a matter of one poster, nor even just the Omni games. It is a question of whether all Omni posts should be counted. This will impact a heck of a lot of us -- myself included.

To be truthful, the loss of much of my post count-- even if it turns out to be considerably more than half of it -- does not bother me at least.

Why does having their post counts be high so important to others? :confused:

As a side note, my understanding is the current status of a certain individual has nothing to do with post padding...

Well, great. Why didn't you word the motion to reaffirm the status quo then?

May I ask a stupid question?

This latest resurrection of this issue seems to be driven by one or two FTers who are more focused on achieving high post counts than they are on participating in the community. Isn't post-padding already a TOS violation? Don't TPTB already have the ability to reset post counts, suspend users, etc.? Wouldn't that address this incarnation of the OMNI post count question?

There's lots of good discussion in OMNI and, though not necessarily flying-related, I've learned a lot there, in addition to enjoying the community o other OMNI posters. I've posted to a game thread only once, and that was as an excuse to get my sig seen. I really don't see why OMNI should be treated differently than, say, S.P.A.M. or other forums that are only peripherally-related to travel. The problem isn't OMNI, but a couple of posters who have exploited (I almost wrote, "abused") a feature of the FT forum software that lets them rack up huge post counts without actually participating in the community.

If the TPTB object to that, the TOS permits addressing the individual posters who are post padding. Why isn't that sufficient?