|
Originally Posted by Cholula
(Post 8972546)
And, hey, if we build it and they don't come, we can zap it in a heartbeat if so desired. And nobody is out a single cent nor does it cost anybody more than a few posts. We seriously need to get over the premise that we devaluate FT when creating FF forums that are requested by numerous FT'ers. Rather than erect barriers I think we are better served by welcoming new FT members.
Originally Posted by AZ Travels the World
(Post 8978610)
I think this is right on the money, a point that was also well articulated by gkaczmarskyj. Build the place. Give people the opportunity to make it a thriving corner of the community. Or, as has been demonstrated time and again in recent years, people will create the place elsewhere. That would be (another) shame.
Originally Posted by AZ Travels the World
(Post 8978610)
Finally, I hope those TB members who cast a vote the first go around will honestly reflect on the fundamental decision here and not be caught up in the 'It's too soon to vote again, so I'll vote no, even though I voted yes the first time' mindset. To succumb to that line of thinking would be playing politics, at the expense of serving the community with integrity, by casting a vote on the merits of the issue at hand. Please don't start this new TalkBoard term going down that road.
Originally Posted by nsx
(Post 8978908)
IMHO, it's not playing politics to elevate (sorry about that pun) respect for prior TalkBoard decisions above the merits of the specific proposal at hand. To dismiss consideration of respect for the prior TB as irrelevant is to accept that TB should not behave differently from a purely political body. To fight this tendency is not playing politics: It's playing anti-politics.
Originally Posted by Punki
(Post 8970929)
Creating a Virgin America forum, even before its FF program is established, provides FlyerTalk with a unique opportunity to contribute to and possibly even influence the formation of the VX FF program while it is still in its embryonic stages.
Originally Posted by Spiff
(Post 8971055)
There is still no FF program to speak of.
Originally Posted by kokonutz
(Post 8971748)
If I were a casual poster and I had a question about VX but I didnt see it in the drop-down list I might very easily conclude that FT is not the place for me. Further I dont support this forum based on 'buzz' or thread or view counts. I support it because there is a cadre of VX flyers and folks with an interest in VX who are also passionate flyertalkers and want to have the forum. That's precisely how flyertalk itself started, with a small cadre of passionate flyers who were also passionate flyertalk posters. I believe that, just like FT itself, with that passionate cadre and so much to talk about, VX has what it take to make it as a forum here. Maybe I'm wrong. But if so, what have we lost? Nothing.
Originally Posted by Spiff
(Post 8971490)
I disagree.
For a proposed forum whose proponents keep claiming there is "buzz" or "if you build it they will come", the decrease in the rate of VX traffic is certainly a good reason for people who voted "yes" to change to "no". The rapid return of this failed motion could also be a motivating factor to change one's vote from "yes" to "no".
Originally Posted by nsx
(Post 8971984)
This motion puts TB members who favor the new forum in the difficult position of choosing between the new forum and respect for the prior Talk Board. IMHO, respect for the prior TalkBoard is more important for FT than is the VX forum. For this reason, had I been elected I would have chosen to support the integrity of TalkBoard decisions by voting against the VX proposal at this time.
lucky9876coins: thank you for your yes vote! |
FYI, we have about a week left before we need to vote on this motion.
I really appreciate all of the input and hope that anyone who has ideas, viewpoints, etc., that they would like to have considered, speaks up over the next week. Yes, it is true that I believe in establishing this forum for all of the reasons that nroscoe has enumerated above, but I am still maintaining an open mind and will happily consider any new input that might sway my desicion. Thanks, Punki |
Originally Posted by nroscoe
(Post 8998901)
I respected the prior TalkBoard's decision, but they are the prior TalkBoard. What's the "respect" waiting period, 1 month, 3 months...?
I don't expect others to necessarily agree but prior TalkBoards as well as prior political anything groups, are about as relevant the day after an election as last months newspaper. It's valuable for historical reasons, I enjoyed it while it was still germane but it's time to move on IMO. And, hey, I'll be happy to dine on these words when I too am a prior TalkBoard member. :) |
Originally Posted by nroscoe
(Post 8998901)
Spiff: I have enormous respect for you and appreciate everything you've done to make FlyerTalk such a great place, but you are letting your opinion get in the way of the facts: I have an eleVAte number and VX is tracking my flights in a program they call "eleVAte". I also have an eleVAte number. I'm not ignoring VX - I am actually keeping a pretty good eye on it for someone who is unlikely to fly them. They still have:
I'm sorry, but they're just not there yet. Other programs with more to their FF program don't have their own forum. And there's still very little to talk about in ONSAFFP re: VX. |
Originally Posted by Randy Petersen
(Post 8979348)
I;ll state again, rather than focus on VX, why does the board not work together to come up with a formula that will serve now and into the future on when a particular program may have enough thread, posts, page views to warrant its own forum. This way, these types of posts so far will not be a distraction and the Board can serve to take on many more issues important to our members.
I'm still amazed that seeing trees vs. seeing the forest has escaped the new makeup of the Board so far. I'm delighted to say that former members of the Board like The Starwood Lurker, A28 and Dovster did at least give some thought on how to approach managing all forum startups.
Originally Posted by Spiff
(Post 8972512)
I said I was not going to give a quantifiable post volume as a criterion for my voting for establishing a forum. I feel that setting such a magic number could encourage meaningless post padding and junk thread starting.
Originally Posted by Cholula
(Post 8972546)
I've voted and, for the record, my vote was identical to my previous vote.
As I've said many times before, with very few exceptions, I've yet to meet a Forum that I didn't like or support. I'm firmly in the "you build it and they will come" camp. Although several of us did -- as you said -- try to come up with such a formula, in the end we realized that it was unworkable, partly because of stands such as the one that Spiff and Cholula are taking and partly because there are just too many variables involved. I then turned my attention to what I thought would be an easier task -- a formula for getting rid of under-utilized forums. After all, this does not require fortune-telling (as does a decision on whether a proposed forum will be successful). All we had to do was look at a forum for the past year and see how many threads/posts it had. I did come up with my own formula (100 threads in the first year, 200 for each year after that) and while it had some support when we approved the Religious Travel Forum, it obviously did not when that forum's initial year was over. I also built my own forumula for national flag carriers. I held these to an easier standard than I would a domestic airline because I feel (as I have outlined in several different threads) that their forums provide extra advantages. Hence, I said I would vote in favor of one if 25 FTers said that they were members of that airline's FF program and would be regular posters on the proposed forum. I was alone among TB members to take this stand. The fact is that the membership elects 9 people to serve on TalkBoard, each with his own viewpoints, and relies on them to use their best judgement in making decisions. You can give them your opinion, I can give them my opinion, and any FTer can give them his or hers, but in the end if they are to be at all worthy of the trust put in them by their fellow members they have to consider their votes carefully, put aside any extraneous issues, and make their decision based solely on what they consider to be best for FT and its membership. |
Trying to remain as objective as possible, I have reread every post in this thread and, as objectively as I am capable of being, this is, IMHO, the most compelling:
gkaczmarskyj writes: As my stats support, I'm clearly a "casual poster" (at best) but a reasonably frequent reader (daily) of my favorite forums (UA, Hyatt, Hertz). I just had my first flight on VX a few weeks ago (courtesy of UA not being accommodating in an emergency situation) and was pleasantly surprised by their product. I joined eleVAte and quickly turned to FT to read up on the program - I couldn't find anything. I went to Virgin and found quickly that "this isn't the place". Using search capability in FT is difficult for the untrained (like me) but by the dumb luck of putting in 4 words I came across this thread. So with that, I'm probably an example of kokunutz's observations about VX interest. To FT voting board membrs - pls give consideration to those like me who have an interest in the VX reward program and would like a forum to learn, promote and provide feedback on the program. I don't know the "cost" of setting up a separate forum (I assume "moderation" is one of the big efforts/costs), but I have to ask "what does it hurt?". Worst case, it proves to be less than active and you shut it down or delete it (don't know if that's possible). Would that be so bad? Maybe would make sense to start it up and see how it does? By reference, I find that the Hertz forum is minimally active (1-2 new threads a day - either that or my RSS reader is setup incorrectly) - VX may prove to be similar after the "buzz" period and until the airline gets more critical FT mass, routes, etc. (also consider that UA forum gets a ton of activity b/c of service/complaints/controversy whereas VX is still in honeymoon period and may not see as much activity b/c service not so bad...yet...). Thanks for the consideration. Of course, I am still open for an equally compelling argument against the motion. |
Originally Posted by Spiff
(Post 9000369)
|
Originally Posted by aviators99
(Post 9018200)
Is there any reason to leave out the two cities that have been announced for next month and the month after? I suppose you could say that they are not "destinations" yet, but in terms of what is material to this debate, "announced cities" is certainly more relevant to what would make people want to participate in a forum.
So, even giving VX 7 destinations, it's still nowhere near some other airlines that also do not have a dedicated forum. Spirit has hotel, car, and credit card affiliations. I'm sorry, but I still don't see how eleVAte is ready for a stand-alone forum. Other TalkBoard members may feel differently. |
Originally Posted by Spiff
(Post 9019758)
By comparison, SkyBus has 18 destinations. Spirit has 39 destinations (or planned in the same time frame as VX), in approximately 20 different countries.
So, even giving VX 7 destinations, it's still nowhere near some other airlines that also do not have a dedicated forum. Spirit has hotel, car, and credit card affiliations. I'm sorry, but I still don't see how eleVAte is ready for a stand-alone forum. Other TalkBoard members may feel differently. |
Originally Posted by kokonutz
(Post 9020847)
The difference, of course, is that VX has a dedicated and passionate group of Flyertalk Posters who want a VX forum. And to me that means a heck of a lot more than route structures. Other TalkBoard members obviously feel differently. :(
|
Originally Posted by kokonutz
(Post 9020847)
The difference, of course, is that VX has a dedicated and passionate group of Flyertalk Posters who want a VX forum. And to me that means a heck of a lot more than route structures.
|
Originally Posted by kokonutz
(Post 9020847)
The difference, of course, is that VX has a dedicated and passionate group of Flyertalk Posters who want a VX forum. And to me that means a heck of a lot more than route structures. Other TalkBoard members obviously feel differently. :(
Originally Posted by nsx
(Post 9021563)
Bingo.
Any respect due OzStamps, ScottC, and myself (the only members of the last TalkBoard who are no longer on it) should certainly take second place to the wishes of a large number of FlyerTalkers. (My own objection is based on the belief that most of those who posted in favor of the VX Forum will soon find that they have very little to discuss about the airline.) |
Originally Posted by Dovster
(Post 9021714)
I still think that establishing this forum now would be an error, but having said that, I can't reconcile nsx's "Bingo" with his opposition to approving this forum now.
I supported a forum for VX when it was initially proposed, and I believe the forum would be good to have. I wish the first motion had passed. I am very much in the minority on my objection, which is about the process. I believe it is disrepectful to the prior TB to immediately reverse its decision taken just a few weeks ago. When I weigh the potential damage to FT caused by treating TB like a purely political elected body against the damage to FT of delaying the VX forum a few months, I believe that the former is more important. And I am saddened that all the TB members, old and new, didn't intuitively see this before making their proposal. Maybe I'm just a starry-eyed idealist on this issue and I need to accept the reality that the TB is just about winning, as is politics. Time will tell. What's a reasonable time to wait before reconsidering a prior TB decision? If nothing has changed other than the composition of the TB, 6 months. Otherwise it depends on the magnitude of the change in the facts and the closeness of the prior vote. |
Originally Posted by nsx
(Post 9021827)
What's a reasonable time to wait before reconsidering a prior TB decision? If nothing has changed other than the composition of the TB, 6 months. Otherwise it depends on the magnitude of the change in the facts and the closeness of the prior vote.
I'm not much of a political process wonk so I honestly don't know the answer. |
Originally Posted by nsx
(Post 9021827)
<snip> I am very much in the minority on my objection, which is about the process. I believe it is disrepectful to the prior TB to immediately reverse its decision taken just a few weeks ago. When I weigh the potential damage to FT caused by treating TB like a purely political elected body against the damage to FT of delaying the VX forum a few months, I believe that the former is more important. And I am saddened that all the TB members, old and new, didn't intuitively see this before making their proposal. Maybe I'm just a starry-eyed idealist on this issue and I need to accept the reality that the TB is just about winning, as is politics. Time will tell. What's a reasonable time to wait before reconsidering a prior TB decision? If nothing has changed other than the composition of the TB, 6 months. Otherwise it depends on the magnitude of the change in the facts and the closeness of the prior vote. I haven't read the whole thread, so maybe that's what you're doing. Again, I think your objection to the process is honorable. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 7:40 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.