|
Motion FAILED: Don't Count OMNI posts
Originally Posted by Spiff
On 17 April 2007, the TalkBoard, by a vote of 5-4 failed to pass the following:
Moved by Dovster and seconded by Cholula: 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. 2. Any person Omni-enabled when and if this vote is passed will be allowed to continue to post on Omni even if this motion reduces his post count to below the 180-post minimum. Voting for: bhatnasx, Cholula, Dovster, ozstamps, techgirl Voting against: gleff, Jenbel, ScottC, Spiff TalkBoard bylaws require a 2/3 majority of votes cast for a motion to pass. If you dont feel like restating your reasoning here I hope you wont mind if I go through and cut and paste your most salient posts from the long thread here...if you post for yourself I'll just delete the quote provided.... |
Originally Posted by techgirl
(Post 7548377)
Just to eliminate speculation, I voted in favor of this proposal. And I'm quoting this post because it sums up very well my feeling on this subject.
I'm one of those who will probably see my post count dinged by a few hundred posts... and I'm okay with that. Its somewhat parallel to a discussion I've had with AA/UA flyers about the differences in those two program's designation of "Million Miler" status. On UA, only butt-in-seat miles count while on AA, any mileage earning (including contests, bonus matches, and credit card miles) counts. If we had a title on FT that was just "Million Miler" but didn't list the airline, its a completely different ballgame to know whether a person has been on an airplane for one company for 1,000,000 miles - or whether they are just really good at registering for promos and using their credit card. I put a different level of credence in one vs. the other - and I'm also with other posters who say that perhaps that there are OTHER forums that don't advance the travel purpose that we should consider. But those forums weren't in the motion at hand - this one is. I've taken the time to query a few people who are regular FT users as well as to read through this thread. The only members who have suggested to me that OMNI post counts ought to remain are those that are likely to be heavily affected by it (i.e. lose a significant part of their post count and/or a title). FWIW (and transparency) here is what I said about OMNI during the campaigning for TB: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showp...6&postcount=16 Quote: Originally Posted by Brian This is an important issue... more than most posters may at first recognize, and it isnt really about simple and silly threads on Omni that exist solely for padding post counts. It also really isn't primarily about post count being a substitutional metric for trust. This core issue is behavioral, and concerned with behavioral motivation in a realtively large community. Most behavior is, at one level or another, driven by reward, or lack thereof, based on metrics that include status and renumeration, or currency. The only measurable currency on FT is post count and title, and right now, it is earned without regard to "quality" of the behavior relative to the core purpose of the board. If the core purpose of this board is travel related conversation, then any currency on this website should be structured to reward travel related discussion, and issue no reward for other discussion. The Omni section of the board exists solely for this other discussion, and participation in it should confer no "currency" or reward in the board status system. The analogy here is to cut back a plant that grows tall and thin, because by doing so it grows much fuller and more vibrantly. Status is real, and everyone here knows it, because it is avidly pursued in a hundred different proxies for "real life" status, including FF programs, etc. Status is just as real on FT, and is conferred by post count, titles, elected office, etc. It is no more and no less than a proxy for "real life." So again, the issue here is to whether status is to be granted for noncore activities on this board. The lengths to which people will go to obtain this status is evident by the lengths to which they argue against their own dimunition of status in this thread, often without making reference to that as being their motivation. That alone acts as validation of the core theory. I applaud the TB for willingness to adjust board status in the "coin of the realm" by making it aligned with behaviors that increase the total value of the community. Cut back the plant to allow it to grow fuller and with more and larger flowers. It's a powerful motion, one more powerful than it at first appears, and deserving of support by all those who wish for a more vibrant and informative travel based community. |
Originally Posted by Spiff
(Post 7600550)
I gave this matter a lot of thought.
I voted the way I did (against) because I did not see a huge problem being created by having posts count from any forum. When evaluating the credibility of a FlyerTalker, there should be more taken into account than just a post count and/or any titles derived from the post count. Caveat emptor. I am not opposed to listening to future suggestions regarding how some posts (for example the "game" threads) might be tabulated differently. However, I was not in favor of changing post counts retroactively. |
Deleted as the TB member posted for himself.
|
Originally Posted by gleff
(Post 7575268)
When the issue first came up, I didn't see a big problem to be addressed. Certainly not the problem that some members perceive. So I was a bit surprised by both the positive reaction by some, and the depth of negative reaction by others. It may just be that I'm not a big OMNI poster to begin with, so wasn't as sensitive to the issue as I might have been, and that I see post counts as a very minor fact of life.
I started off on the face, inclined against. To date I've probably moved more along that same direction, though not far enough to have actually cast my vote yet. I just don't see members being misled by high post count individuals who got those post counts in OMNI rather than in travel forums (not that all the high post count folks in the travel forums know what they're talking about, either!). Not only haven't I found cases of members getting bad advice from OMNI Evangelists and believing it and being hurt by it, I haven't found a systematic problem of OMNI Evangelists giving out bad travel advice to start with. So, not a huge deal. On the other hand, there's a significant concern many members have about the justice of post counts -- members 'earning' all these posts in OMNI, not feeling that OMNI ought to count since this is Flyertalk. In other words, is OMNI really a part of the community? That sentiment or question definitely does exist out there, but I'm not particularly sympathetic to it. I'm comfortable addressing it in other ways -- ignore post counts and make titles something bestowed rather than automatic for instance. That's one idea that's a bit more tailored to the issue, IMHO. Now, it may not be the best idea -- but I'm kinda leaning towards at least debating other options besides OMNI post counts to address the issue before acting to remove OMNI post counts, especially retroactively. And as to the matter of giving the best and most useful information to members, Kiwi Flyer offered an interesting suggestion in the thread that posts ought to display, perhaps, the number of posts a member has made in the particular forum where a thread appears. (That could, IMHO, be in addition to total post counts displayed.) I don't yet know if it's technically feasible, my limited understanding is that it wouldn't be an easy undertaking. I'm not wedded to this option and it may not be worth asking HOM folks to write the code. It's just one example of other methods of getting at the issues involved that I'd like to see explored, at least before removing post counts. As you can tell, I'm leaning towards voting against. But I have been marginally so since the outset. I just haven't felt strongly or certainly enough about it that I've cast my vote yet. So I'm still open. And geez, what a thread read all the way through in a single sitting! |
Deleted as the TB member posted for herself.
|
Originally Posted by Dovster
(Post 7537004)
Okay, a serious response:
I have said repeatedly, both on the private TB Forum and on the other TB Topics thread, that I consider the entire question of post counts to be monumentally unimportant. I judge a post by its content -- and not by whether the poster has "Evangelist" under his name or if his post count is either "1" or "100,000". In fact, in my own case, I consider the first post I ever made on FT to be among my best (although being a newbie I didn't realize that I should have started a separate thread for it and instead took another thread off topic). All that being said, I realize that there are quite a few FTers who have a different opinion than I do. They put a high value on both the "Evangelist" title and post counts. Some of these want Omni posts to be counted, others are very much against that idea. A thread was begun (not by me) on TalkBoard Topics on January 17 about this. A second thread was begun on the private TalkBoard forum (again, not by me) on March 5 to discuss this. I felt that it was time that TalkBoard made a decision, one way or the other, and put this issue to rest. I felt that we owed at least that much to the people, on both sides of this question, who feel so strongly about it. My own feeling was that I didn't care if Omni posts (indeed, posts on all of the non-core points and miles forums) were counted or not. But I did have two points that I cared strongly about: 1. If we were not going to count future Omni posts then we should not count past ones. There is absolutely no logic is giving more value to a post based simply on the date that it was made. Moreover, as all of the TB members, with the sole exception of Bhatnasx, have at least 500 Omni posts and some (of which I am a prime example) have Omni posts which run into the thousands, we should not keep these posts in our counts while telling future posters that they can not. 2. I did not want to see any person who enjoys going to Omni kept from doing so simply because we took away posts from his count and he dropped below the 180 mark. Therefore I wrote the motion to include these two provisions. As my inclination was to go along with the people who objected to the Omni posts being counted (although, again, I emphasize that I do not feel very strongly either way), the inclusion of these two provisions allowed me to vote in favor in good conscience. |
Man, this is HARD!!!!!
|
This is the best for Cholula:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showp...5&postcount=65
Originally Posted by Cholula
(Post 7540305)
Unfair or not, you’re certainly entitled to my opinion.
This whole subject of counting OMNI posts has reared it’s ugly head at least twice since I’ve been a FT member. And it always seems to reach a head when a new poster racks up 10K posts in less than a year and then gets FT Evangelist under his/her handle. It’s not a subject that keeps me awake at night but I do agree with Dovster that it’s an issue that has come up yet again and I feel it should get an up or down vote by the current TB. Thus I seconded Dovster’s motion. The following post is similar to ones I’ve seen from time to time and, IMO, it’s indicative of how many new posters react to post counts and Evangelist monikers. And based on this and similar posts I’ve observed over the years, I’m in favor of disallowing OMNI posts in the post count total: Does this issue solve the problems of the world or a burning problem here on FT ?? Not in my opinion. But, pro or con, it does get the subject off the table yet again and we can all get back to the business of maximizing miles and points. |
I'm not sure I have my reasoning posted, so you may have some troubles finding it...
Basically, I voted for the measure as I thought it made a little bit of sense. The thread that initialized this discussion was ClueByFour's thread in the TB Topics forum. I was the one who actually brought it up in the private TB forum. Both sides discussed & it - I felt that CB4 made some good points & that the some others supported it. I didn't, however, feel that there was a strong enough committment for it to be passed, so I didn't make any motions & the topic died down for a few days. Dovster made the motion, which was seconded (and although people seemed to think that Dov made the motion because of personal reasons, I don't believe that for a second). After seeing that there was a significant number of people who supported this motion - both new & old alike, I voted positively for it. Sure, there were quite a few that didn't like the motion & I haven't tallied up how many were pro & how many were against - but I felt that there were more that were for the resolution than against it when I voted. I think that those that were very vocal about being against it were worried that they'd lose their post counts & find post counts as a source of pride - though they may not want to publically admit that. I understand that - but at the same time, I still fully believe that newer members judge people based on their post counts. My concern is when we have people who have thousands of post counts derived from non-points & miles discussion & thousands of posts derived from OMNI games, etc, that folks may take more stock in those higher post count members who sometimes feel they have a sense of entitlemet. My colleagues who voted against that say that people should be judged on the quality of what they contribute, not the quantity. I agree with that - but I don't believe that it happens in practice. I recently signed up at another forum that isn't travel related to get some information. As a newbie on that forum, I felt & found that people with higher post counts were trusted more (not that FT'ers won't hesitate to correct someone) & they also seemed to have more authority in their typing. I find that happens here to. So, I voted against it - I'm fine with keeping post counts - I just think that they should be related to the main focus of FT - points & miles. I'd be fine with SPAM, CC, and other forums not counting & maybe this motion would have passed if it included those forums - maybe it wouldn't have. Either way, I'm not dwelling on it...I voted based on the feedback that I saw. I didn't vote right away. |
I'm curious if the responses & thoughts on the forum would have been different it the motion didn't apply retroactively. I don't think it would have been as heated - I think that a lot of people just wanted to keep their post counts & titles & their work towards their future titles...
But that's just my thoughts... |
I voted against because I don't feel it would be fair to remove posts from someones post count. Stupid post or not; at the time it was made you did so expecting it to add to your post count. Not EVERYTHING in Omni is mindless drivel, and not everything came from these insane games. There are many members that made a lot of posts with very insightful information.
I'd fully support not counting posts in Omni going forwards, but the retroactive portion of the motion made me vote against it. However: since we've now voted on the issue twice in one year I won't be supporting any new motions within the next 12 months on the issue. It just isn't that important. That said; I did not believe that there was such a massive problem as some people pointed out. Post counts are meaningless, they don't say anything about who we are, what we know, or the extent of our knowledge on a particular item. Someone with 10000 posts can go into a forum he or she does not frequent and still make a fool of him/herself. The only way to gain respect as a knowledgeable poster is to post helpful, correct information. Those that know what they are talking about are well known here, and we don't need a post count to find them. |
Hm, all that is left is Oz...and I cant decide which of his posts best represents his opinion....
|
To put it simply (and I did have quite a lot to say on this), no-one came up with a good answer to the question "What problem is this motion solving?" Many of the 'problems' identified were not (IMHO) solved by the motion - although we've now identified some potential solutions. Other 'problems' could not be proven - or were generic problems, not particularly associated with OMNI posters particularly. As a result, I couldn't see why the motion should pass, when it was doing nothing.
|
My explanation above was as to why I seconded the motion.
The reason, in part, I voted for it was that I still feel that FlyerTalk Evangelist is a title that has some meaning. And it's a title currently held by only 50 or so FT'ers. I didn't feel that minting new FT Evangelists solely or primarily from OMNI games was fair to those who earned the title mainly by contributing to the miles and points forums on FT. Another reason that I voted for the motion was that I feel post counts are used as an indicator, at least by some new or casual FT members, of implied expertise in miles/points issues. These were my only two reasons for voting for the motion. There were no hidden agendas and no nefarious intent. Nor did I act as an "unknowing dupe" for another TB member. :D (My favorite quote from the main TB thread on this subject.) The only thing I regret is that I couldn't develop anywhere near the passion for this subject as did many of those posting pro/con. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:59 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.