|
Originally Posted by ElmhurstNick
(Post 7564227)
IIRC, a significant portion of those posts were of the sort which were not in a miles-and-points-related forum. Many of those posts were links to news articles.
After 48 pages, which I must admit I have only scanned, I still do not understand the motivation for this motion? I'm not questioning it, I just don't know what it really is: 1. Posters who post 75% or more on OMNI are not "real" Flyertalkers and they need a Scarlet O next to their name? 2. Posters who have learned what they need to learn from the miles-points fora but hang around in the non-miles-points fora should get back to the miles-points fora and contribute more? 3. Members should want to try and help Randy and Internet Brands make more money so we want to focus FTs metrics to encourage more page views on items with higher CPC and CPM advertising? 4. People are vain about their post count. I must admit the whole "oh, newbies will be trust high-OMNI posters too much and get wrong information from them..." is, IMHO, a load of hooey. We were all newbies at one point - can anybody stand up and give a concrete example where as a newbie they personally got bad information from somebody with a high post, and later found out that the poster predominantly posted on Newstand, OMNI, Community, and DiningBuzz?? And if so, did you actually believe them soley on their post count??? I am sorry, but a community cannot truly protect the stupid and gullible from themselves. |
Originally Posted by ElmhurstNick
(Post 7564227)
After 48 pages, which I must admit I have only scanned, I still do not understand the motivation for this motion? I'm not questioning it, I just don't know what it really is:
1. Posters who post 75% or more on OMNI are not "real" Flyertalkers and they need a Scarlet O next to their name? 2. Posters who have learned what they need to learn from the miles-points fora but hang around in the non-miles-points fora should get back to the miles-points fora and contribute more? 3. Members should want to try and help Randy and Internet Brands make more money so we want to focus FTs metrics to encourage more page views on items with higher CPC and CPM advertising? 4. People are vain about their post count. 2. This again stems back to the fact that OMNI is considered less of a valuable forum than anything else on FT. OMNI is as good of a place for advice as anywhere else on FT. Just because it isnt necessarily travel related doesnt mean it doesnt hold real value. 3. Probably the real crux of this push but no one will ever admit to it. When FT was sold to IB the folks at IB obviously thought that it could make some money on FT. Maybe it can but if FT goes too commercial then my guess is people will go flock to some new place. At the end of the day FT is just a web forum with some really knowledgeable people. The people make FT what it is not the web address or the fact that its a forum. 4. Most definitely true. People who have high post counts probably are a little pissed that certain threads in OMNI have caused other people to have high post counts too. The solution is to stop such threads in OMNI from existing not to stop OMNI from counting as a whole. Fact is that people value their post counts and removing the option of OMNI posts counting make people who reside primarily in OMNI (and I must admit I do now since I'm not traveling as much as normal) feel like lesser FT members.
Originally Posted by ElmhurstNick
(Post 7564227)
I must admit the whole "oh, newbies will be trust high-OMNI posters too much and get wrong information from them..." is, IMHO, a load of hooey. We were all newbies at one point - can anybody stand up and give a concrete example where as a newbie they personally got bad information from somebody with a high post, and later found out that the poster predominantly posted on Newstand, OMNI, Community, and DiningBuzz?? And if so, did you actually believe them soley on their post count???
When I first joined FT the only time posts counts mattered to me was in order to allow me access to OMNI and Coupon Connection. When I posted asking for advice it didnt matter what the person who responded's post count was but instead how did that mesh with common sense and what was the common answer. Only rarely do I take a persons post count into serious question when validating their answer. |
Originally Posted by ElmhurstNick
(Post 7564227)
IIRC, a significant portion of those posts were of the sort which were not in a miles-and-points-related forum. Many of those posts were links to news articles.
After 48 pages, which I must admit I have only scanned, I still do not understand the motivation for this motion? I'm not questioning it, I just don't know what it really is: 1. Posters who post 75% or more on OMNI are not "real" Flyertalkers and they need a Scarlet O next to their name? 2. Posters who have learned what they need to learn from the miles-points fora but hang around in the non-miles-points fora should get back to the miles-points fora and contribute more? 3. Members should want to try and help Randy and Internet Brands make more money so we want to focus FTs metrics to encourage more page views on items with higher CPC and CPM advertising? 4. People are vain about their post count. I must admit the whole "oh, newbies will be trust high-OMNI posters too much and get wrong information from them..." is, IMHO, a load of hooey. We were all newbies at one point - can anybody stand up and give a concrete example where as a newbie they personally got bad information from somebody with a high post, and later found out that the poster predominantly posted on Newstand, OMNI, Community, and DiningBuzz?? And if so, did you actually believe them soley on their post count??? I am sorry, but a community cannot truly protect the stupid and gullible from themselves. :-: :-: Great Post :-: :-: |
Lots of good thoughts here, so just one more vote! :) I think that all posts are valuable contributions to the community. However, some people depend on post count as a metric for someone's experience as a traveller and participant in various loyalty programs. Including OMNI posts in the count could cause some confusion which may not best serve the community of FlyerTalk users.
-- John |
Originally Posted by JohnMcG
(Post 7564648)
Lots of good thoughts here, so just one more vote! :) I think that all posts are valuable contributions to the community. However, some people depend on post count as a metric for someone's experience as a traveller and participant in various loyalty programs. Including OMNI posts in the count could cause some confusion which may not best serve the community of FlyerTalk users.
-- John |
Originally Posted by JohnMcG
(Post 7564648)
Lots of good thoughts here, so just one more vote! :) I think that all posts are valuable contributions to the community. However, some people depend on post count as a metric for someone's experience as a traveller and participant in various loyalty programs. Including OMNI posts in the count could cause some confusion which may not best serve the community of FlyerTalk users.
-- John The fundamental issue is the .......ization of OMNI posts and posters. To further, folks have cited the reason of confusion that you stated, no one can give an example. It sounds nice, but does not hold water. |
Originally Posted by JohnMcG
(Post 7564648)
Lots of good thoughts here, so just one more vote! :) I think that all posts are valuable contributions to the community. However, some people depend on post count as a metric for someone's experience as a traveller and participant in various loyalty programs. Including OMNI posts in the count could cause some confusion which may not best serve the community of FlyerTalk users.
-- John |
Originally Posted by Mary2e
(Post 7564698)
Agreed, but then all non-loyalty program forums should also not count.
:rolleyes: :D |
If the game threads are the issue, why not just not count posts in the game threads? Seems simple to me.
I crossed the FT Evangelist threashold late last year. I am proud of this accomplishment. It took me over 5 years to get there. I'd estimate that about 25% of my posts are in OMNI. Other than the geography and song lyrics games that we've had from time-to-time, I've not posted in any game thread. If this measure passes, I will almost certainly lose my Evangelist title. I will consider this a slap in the face and it will seriously sour me on FT. Talkboard members who vote this will not be getting my vote in future elections. |
Originally Posted by underpressure
(Post 7564751)
To further, folks have cited the reason of confusion that you stated, no one can give an example. It sounds nice, but does not hold water.
Originally Posted by uncertaintraveler
(Post 7442523)
When I first joined FT, I (rightly or wrongly) assumed that people with high post counts were more knowledgeable on the subject being discussed than those who had low post counts. Calling a member an "Evangelist" only strengthened my assumption. After all, as a newbie, how are you supposed to know if what is being told is accurate--and how are you supposed to know who really knows what they claim to know?
Of course, in the beginning, I'd still listen to the low-poster, but if there was any conflict between what a low-poster and a high-poster said, I'd probably be more inclined to give more credence to what the high-poster said. Now, however, some three or four years later, you realize that such an assumption was often incorrect. I've learned that you usually see the same members post in the same general forums, so you have a pretty good idea who is honest and knowledgeable, and who just posts to post. But learning who is who takes time, and I seriously doubt if it is possible for a newbie to be able to figure out who knows what. And, of course, if you don't frequent certain forums, no matter how long you've been a member, you are still essentially a newbie when you enter the "new" forum. Personally, I'm not entirely sure why members even have post totals next to their name. I guess its nice to know how many posts they've made, but its not exactly entirely useful information. If one of the reasons for listing a post count is to separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak, perhaps the post count could be supplemented with a ratings number (or star system) next to the member's name, where other members vote on the quality of said member's prior posts, so a newbie could easily determine who has been voted trustworthy by their peers and who hasn't. Just a thought... |
Originally Posted by majorwibi
(Post 7564600)
1. This theory would be a vain attempt by those with higher post counts not related to OMNI to make their postings more valuable.
2. This again stems back to the fact that OMNI is considered less of a valuable forum than anything else on FT.
Originally Posted by ElmhurstNick
(Post 7564227)
1. Posters who post 75% or more on OMNI are not "real" Flyertalkers and they need a Scarlet O next to their name?
Originally Posted by Gargoyle
(Post 7552263)
This is an attempt to pin down the primary concern of the two viewpoints:
For: it will make post counts more fair, and a more accurate metric. It wouldn't effect the ability to participate in OMNI or in FT as a whole, it only changes the little post number under the user handle. There is a problem and this helps fix it. Against: it will turn OMNI posters into second class citizens. Among the words used have been disenfranchisement, balkanization, marginalization, conspiracy. There is no problem so, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Originally Posted by SlowTrekker
(Post 7552400)
My personal opinion of the strongest reasons for/against motion passage:
This motion should pass because: OMNI operates under an entirely different set of moderation rules from the rest of FT, therefore OMNI posts are not equivalent to other FT posts. The option to apply the standard FT moderation rules to OMNI is infeasible, therefore FT should not "Count OMNI Posts in Member Post Counts". This motion should fail because: OMNI is an equal part of the FT Community, and placing value judgments on posts based on which forum they were made should only be undertaken as part of a publicly visible strategic plan for the FT community to prevent the appearance of prejudices. No evidence has been presented to date that this motion is part of such a plan, therefore FT should "Count OMNI Posts in Member Post Counts". IIRC SlowTrekker is opposed to the measure-correct me if I'm wrong. |
Originally Posted by Gargoyle
(Post 7564806)
I really don't think those are motivations for any of the major supporters of this motion.
I still feel that my answer to #2 (see quote below) is the real reason this motion is even being brought up (assuming one ignores the conspiracy theory thought). OMNI is basically being told that some people thing that OMNI doesnt matter since your posts dont really count. This again stems back to the fact that OMNI is considered less of a valuable forum than anything else on FT. OMNI is as good of a place for advice as anywhere else on FT. Just because it isnt necessarily travel related doesnt mean it doesnt hold real value. |
Originally Posted by Cholula
(Post 7564804)
Here's one such example that I've posted elsewhere:
Thanks. That poster offered good insight. |
Originally Posted by ElmhurstNick
(Post 7564227)
IIRC, a significant portion of those posts were of the sort which were not in a miles-and-points-related forum. Many of those posts were links to news articles.
After 48 pages, which I must admit I have only scanned, I still do not understand the motivation for this motion? I'm not questioning it, I just don't know what it really is: 1. Posters who post 75% or more on OMNI are not "real" Flyertalkers and they need a Scarlet O next to their name? 2. Posters who have learned what they need to learn from the miles-points fora but hang around in the non-miles-points fora should get back to the miles-points fora and contribute more? 3. Members should want to try and help Randy and Internet Brands make more money so we want to focus FTs metrics to encourage more page views on items with higher CPC and CPM advertising? 4. People are vain about their post count. I must admit the whole "oh, newbies will be trust high-OMNI posters too much and get wrong information from them..." is, IMHO, a load of hooey. We were all newbies at one point - can anybody stand up and give a concrete example where as a newbie they personally got bad information from somebody with a high post, and later found out that the poster predominantly posted on Newstand, OMNI, Community, and DiningBuzz?? And if so, did you actually believe them soley on their post count??? I am sorry, but a community cannot truly protect the stupid and gullible from themselves. O/H |
Just one other thought, and then I'll defer to the preferences of the consensus. I don't even know if it's possible, but perhaps showing two counts? Maybe overkill. Anyway, whatever the consensus feels is best is fine with me! :)
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:08 am. |
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.