|
Originally Posted by magiciansampras
(Post 7548958)
I've asked for it before, but no one has given it to me. Can you provide me with one individual who has gotten bad advice from an Evangelist and took it at face value?
For one, the mislead poster probably did not bother to draft a supplementary post to single out another FlyerTalker -- and a heavily contributing one at that -- for providing incorrect or misleading information. For another, we're not necessarily talking about factually incorrect information. I doubt we're going to unearth an example wherein GUWonder, for example, claimed that the MD-80 is a widebody jet. If that's the smoking gun you demand, it won't be found. But post counts (along with FlyerTalk tenure) can't help but impact one's initial reaction or evaluation of a particular posters credibility. Just like in the real world, doctors or lawyers or mechanics with more experience will inherently be viewed as more credible than those with less. Sometimes rightly; others wrongly. And FlyerTalk is much more than just objective recitation of indisputed fact. In many -- if not most -- instances, subjective elements color one's opinions. So the more prolific FlyerTalkers are likely to initially be given the most deference. It's common sense and human nature, really. Give me someone who has confronted a problem 10,000 times versus 100 and I'm likely to place my initial vote of confidence in the person with 10,000. But tell me that 9,999 times out of the first person's 10,000 that the issue addressed was totally divorced from the issue at hand whereas the latter person's 100 experiences were virtually identical to the one at hand, and the pendulum of credibility swings wildly the other way. This is a valid concern behind the proposal. Only one of many valid reasons, however. |
Originally Posted by jfe
(Post 7549316)
I realize some people are hell bent on making OMNI not counting towards post counts, because it is not miles and points.
Well, the reason you make friends in FT is not only because of the discussion of miles and points, but human interaction. If all we ever talked was about miles and points, FT would be a knowledge base instead of a community. Whether this proposal passes or fails, OMNI will be ready and available for us to debate anything and everything other than "miles and points." We can socialize, interact, and even, at times, ruffle each other's feathers. Not counting posts in OMNI will hardly be the death of OMNI. But it will more accurately measure the aggregate number of topical travel-related posts contributed by each member. Of what are the opponents of this proposal afraid? That when the numbers are recalculated, their contributions to our collective understanding and appreciation of "miles and points" will prove laughably small? :confused: |
Originally Posted by SAT Lawyer
(Post 7550023)
Of what are the opponents of this proposal afraid? That when the numbers are recalculated, their contributions to our collective understanding and appreciation of "miles and points" will prove laughably small? :confused:
|
Originally Posted by Dovster
(Post 7548674)
There is nothing to get at. If you believe, as you posted, that 5 in favor and 1 abstention is enough to pass a motion then you don't understand how TalkBoard works.
Originally Posted by SAT Lawyer
(Post 7548708)
How would eliminating post counts in OMNI injure the community or discourage posting in the "miles and points" fora? Again, nobody is suggesting that OMNI be eliminated altogether. Those who derive a communal benefit from OMNI can continue to post there.
What your appear to be suggesting is that your ego and that of others would be bruised if your OMNI dalliances no longer translate into the apparent holy grail of FlyerTalk: "Evangelist" status (and beyond). Well, there's an easy solution to that: allocate at least a fraction of your prolific posting -- say 10,000 of them -- to posts dedicated to "miles and points" and earn your FlyerTalk rank not by bickering about politics or social issues or counting to ten billion, but rather by contributing to our collective understanding of travel. |
Originally Posted by hhoope01
(Post 7549830)
Don't worry about us too much (though I can always take a little sympathy.) :)
As I mentioned earlier, the issue isn't really about losing the post counts from OMNI posts. I have already sent an email to reduce my post count, so whether this motion passes or not, my post count will be reduced. So the outcome of the motion won't really effect me. My issue is more a surprise at the strength of, for lack of a better word, resentment at posting so many times in a forum and thread that many feel is a detriment to Flyertalk. That was never my intention. And if having OMNI posts not count helps others feel better about post "equity" within FT, then do it. But keep in mind the following: 1. Even the TB member that submitted the motion has said that he feels this whole issue is really a non-issue. 2. This motion doesn't really address the core of the posting in-equities (i.e. non-travel realated posts in other forums.) 3. This motion doesn't really address the issues around the use of "titles" or monikers for members that reach certain milestones. (I have to admit, I never new that their use was a point of contention to some.) 4. Based on the responses here and the emotions of those posts, this whole issue seems to have a very strong "polarizing" effect to members here. So does bringing this up in this manner help or hurt FT in the long run, given that is really a non-issue. So based on all the "turmoil" this motion has brought out (notice I didn't say caused, as the problem was there all along), I personally suggest that the TB members vote "Yes". It is sad that this step needs to be taken, but it is really a small thing in the whole grand scheme. And note as I said before, out of the 100K plus members, I bet my % post change will be as big or bigger than anyones (down from 9K to 1K). What I find amusing is that the people here who are complaining about the status quo calculation of post count (because they think a post count might be "misleading") are amongst those who are rather capable in judging a post by its content instead of by its poster's post count; however, these complainers still obsess over the posting history of other posters. Go figure. |
Originally Posted by magiciansampras
(Post 7548777)
I can't speak for GUWonder, but this is not an issue of ego for me. As stated above, I'll reset my post count to 0 if all the TB members vote against this measure. Why would I do that? Because I care about TB doing what is right for FT, not exercising control for something that doesn't need fixing.
You might think this is about ego of those against the motion. I think it is about ego of those for the motion. There are people pissed off that you can get "Evangelist" by posting in OMNI. Just like there were people pissed that a certain user got a bunch of posts in Newstand. @:-) |
Originally Posted by GUWonder
(Post 7550197)
I just don't believe this motion is needed since it won't improve my FT experience.
|
Originally Posted by SAT Lawyer
(Post 7549973)
...
But post counts (along with FlyerTalk tenure) can't help but impact one's initial reaction or evaluation of a particular posters credibility. Just like in the real world, doctors or lawyers or mechanics with more experience will inherently be viewed as more credible than those with less. Sometimes rightly; others wrongly. At the risk of getting yelled at by some ;) , let me respond to the "demand" to provide an actual FTer who has been "harmed" by relying on the credibility of a high-count poster. I tend to think that's a specious demand in this situation. If this discussion were being held on, say, GroundSpeak, there might be demand to produce an actual member harmed by relying on a high-post member. I'm not a member of GroundSpeak. I have dipped in there occasionally when I had a very specific question that I wanted answered. I used the search function to find out what I needed about a gps question I had. I do recall one case where a high-count poster's response, which from his post count and tenure I would have been inclined to trust more, was not completely correct. I suspect there are folks out there who come to FT very occasionally -- and who do not join -- in order to find the answer to a very specific question. Is it possible that they might have been misled by the travel/flying information provided by a poster with 15,000 posts in OMNI? Maybe. I think removing post counts for OMNI (and other non-travel posts -- but that's another day and another motion) could possibly lead to an increase in the trustworthiness of answers. Can I "prove" that? No. Is there a downside to this proposal, though? I don't see one. If it helps one visitor to FT, it is worth it, imo. At the same time, I think I'm done with this thread for the same reason as Dovster. |
Originally Posted by GadgetFreak
(Post 7550224)
While I dont disagree with this, I think it understates it significantly. It is arbitrary and capricious to just treat Omni this way. Other forums should be treated the same way. If that happens, and to a lessor extent even if only Omni is singled out, there will be a Balkanization of FT. There will be FT and the remainder of the other forums at the same site. At that point the total package of FT becomes a different thing than it is now. And the community becomes communities. It is hard to see any positive benefit from that.
|
Originally Posted by cblaisd
(Post 7550235)
If it helps one visitor to FT, it is worth it, imo.
|
Originally Posted by cblaisd
(Post 7550235)
I suspect there are folks out there who come to FT very occasionally -- and who do not join -- in order to find the answer to a very specific question. Is it possible that they might have been misled by the travel/flying information provided by a poster with 15,000 posts in OMNI?
We've seen one example where an "evangelist" who earned their posts in Miles&Points forums gave bad advice... I would still love to see an issue where a "game enhanced Evangelist" has done the same. AND when it comes down to it, that's what this is all about. Supposedly. |
Originally Posted by chexfan
(Post 7549355)
|
Originally Posted by bhatnasx
(Post 7535882)
Playing devil's advocate here...
Why do you believe retroactive is a bit dumb? If they count, they count past & present - if they don't count, they don't count past & present. Why not have them retroactively removed? |
Those of us with long memories remember the first big post count controversy was about behavior where one would cut and paste news stories in just about every forum, and then later bump those threads for no good reason.
We made it through that -- and it did seem seem to cause more acrimony than the current situation -- without rewriting the software for the board. In any case, I reserve the right to be outraged no matter which way the vote goes. |
Originally Posted by GUWonder
(Post 7550280)
So high post-count is not a magical shield against error or of being corrected when in error. ^^ FT works ... even without this motion being implemented. :)
Originally Posted by chexfan
(Post 7549607)
But then again, there is the beauty of this Community. When anyone (Evangelist, Legend, Noob) speaks incorrectly, the Community can correct it.
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:48 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.