^

The more I think about this, and the more our "senior" members post and bail from the discussion, the more disillusioned I become with FlyerTalk.

If you (people in favor of this change) don't think I contribute, just tell me to my face and I'll quietly go away.

hhoope01, you are obviously an articulate and thoughtful poster.

Lots of valued posters here have played on some of the 'game' threads, and I think we should be able to see that.

I didn't want this post to go without comment, because of course, you are right. There are folks who will jump in to help. There are also folks who will say "use search" or folks who will ask if they really need to have their forum cluttered up with someone asking a question that has been asked many many times before. And I see the reasons for each approach ....

I don't think people should ever piggyback on someone else's reasons, if those aren't clear. Please tell us YOUR reasons. Don't make Dov responsible for defining and supporting your behaviour.

However, I see that you are referring to other posts beyond Omni, so once again I see that this really is not about Omni posts, it is about the so-called non-travel posts or whatever some folk feel are the non-travel posts. But as you say, that is for another day.

But ... oh wait, it isn't about another day, is it ..... ??? Because at least two of you have been honest enough to admit that this is the real agenda behind your vote or support of this motion today.

chexfan ... are you of the school that thinks repeating the identical post when no-one takes any notice of it the first time(s) improves the quality or accuracy or pertinence of that post????

You've tried that exact one already much earlier in this thread. I ignored the initial posting as I assumed members had seen through your misrepresentation by actually reading your "smoking gun" thread in full. However if you insist and keep on re-posting it, seems like it better be addressed on the record, before you likely do it again and again. :td:

The real reason possibly no-one supported your point initially was that they actually read the referenced short thread in question, and not just your deliberately out of context and misleading single post link. (Itself a clear breach of the TOS as you'd well know.) They'd have seen Rudi very promptly apologised for passing on that specific incorrect information to me in person in Zürich last month, when he met me on the Swiss flight:

Rudi is a well respected evangelist with about treble your post count, yet you for some reason have not focused your barb upon him for initiating the alleged "bad advice"? He knows more in his little finger about Lufthansa and Swiss Air related matters than you and I combined would know, I am sure you'll agree? :cool:

A totally innocent misunderstanding by both of us, which was quickly corrected to readers of the thread and there is no evidence whatever anyone, anywhere on FT was "misled' by it, despite your out of context repeated mantra and imputation that someone was. The OP to whom I responded posted twice more on that thread and gives no sign he was misled in any way.

If that is the best you can do to argue about OMNI posts standing, it certainly is a pretty poor straw man argument - IMHO. Posts of that nature may be part of the reason why some folks who you are allegedly trying to influence have quit this thread. I'll join them I think.

The Men's Forum debate was run in much the same way as masonp123 helpfully outlines a few posts above. A few members making high numbers of posts urging TB to vote in that forum. (You were #8) Lots of posts and LOTS of post deletions forced on the moderators - Same as this thread. That thread needed to be locked in the end. Some members apparently felt by shouting louder and repeatedly than all others, their voice would be heard, and TB would agree with them. History shows us all the result of that vote. Just one vote going your way would have got that one voted in.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=608575

Chexfan - if you are stating to all members here all your ~8000 posts have been 100% accurate and factual you'd possibly have some kind of vague point. Possibly they have not all been, but thankfully more to the point that has zero to do with this thread anyway. Which is about a TB vote to seek OMNI posts not counting. @:-) ;)

Heck - perhaps all other folks have better things to do over Easter break than research your last 8,000 posts. I most certainly do. ;)

i don't disagree - see my original post

This proposal does nothing at all to mimic what you're discussing above. You seem to think that post counts are driven in silos; they're not. I gave a similar example above, but will have to give it again.

Say Poster X has 12,000 posts mostly from posting in Mileage Run and Travel Contests. Then they mosey on over to United and answer a question about the 767. You're saying that this poster is automatically given more credibility because they have a higher number of posts. The problem, of course, is that the posts are not from posting in United, they're from posting elsewhere.

OMNI is no different. Just as post in OMNI might not necessarily make any poster more knowledgeable travel in any particular instance, the system isn't set up that way with respect to the other forums as well. And you know this as well as I!

So, to the extent that the "problem" being identified is a problem, removing OMNI isn't going to attack it in the slightest. Nothing prevents me from going into the Starwood forum and spouting my mouth off, regardless of whether or not OMNI exists.

What are you talking about? Both Dovster and SAT have posted prolifically in this thread and they are for the motion. Your whole premise here is flawed.

And that's a summary of why they should not count, IMHO.

Part of the problem with not doing this is it encourages people to use non-airline forums to pad their post count.

These forums (OMNI, the communities, tech issues, talkboard, talkteam, etc) are not key to the central purpose of FT. Posts there should not count towards the mythical "post count."

In an ideal world, we kill "post count." People (including multiple TB members, mods, "Evangelists," etc) regularly prove that post count is not indicative of anything except, well, prolific posting (even within point and mile forums). Undoing the perception of some that post-count is at all linked to the quality of one's posts or knowledge is, alas, not something the TB can directly influence (yes kids, more is meaningless). The TB can't un-social engineer some's behavior.

However, by doing things like removing OMNI from the count, the TB can at least try to restrain the bahavior a bit.

As I said about 6 or 7 pages ago, I'm not optimistic that even this motion will pass. I hope to be proven wrong. I applaud Dovster (full moon) for raising the motion.

There are other ancillary issues here: notably some of the user titles that are granted at various post-count thresholds. Those, IMHO, should also be eliminated. No point in granting incentives for post-padding. It simply encourages people to try to claim "hey, I'm the #5th most prolific poster on FT" as if that actually matters. That said, I'll leave that line of thinking alone since those issues are not at play in the current motion.

I agree with you, actually. If TB is going to do this, they should have the wherewithal to go all the way.

But as Dovster has pointed out here: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showp...4&postcount=12

... they don't have any desire to remove Community, TB, etc. from the post-counting paradigm, presumably because those folks have a lot to lose if such a move were made.

TB should be consistent. Either solve the "problem" that has been outlined, or leave well enough alone. @:-)

Can someone explain to me why TB feels that they should be in a position of saying which posts contribute to the FlyerTalk community and which do not? Thanks!

Such a decision falls within the purview of the TalkBoard.

Furthermore, our decisions are really recommendations. Randy is still free to accept or reject our recommendations as he sees fit.

That wasn't really my question. I know the decision falls within the purview of the TB, I'm asking the members why they feel the need to make such a decision.

We can only hope that Randy will step in if this colossal mistake is made. To piss off so many people while not solving the original problem stated would be a tremendous disappointment. :(

Although it is within the purview, it doesn't mean that the TalkBoard will just unilaterally recommend such a change. After all, the jury is still out, as the expression goes. ;)

This thread has evolved into a perfect microcosm of what occurs when status incentive is granted without reference to quality.

One need do no more than read it to understand how the removal of "currency" for repetitive and off topic posting would benefit the entire community.

Ironically, the best demonstration of the benefit of the elimination of benefits for Omni posting is unwittingly being offered by the more vociferous opponents of the motion itself, undermining their own argument in action far more effectively than my (or anyone else's) words possibly could.

Of course another way to look at would be that people are "vociferous" about it because they care about their Flyertalk participation. And they realize that just selecting Omni is completely arbitrary.