I guess it would be open to Randy's interpretation whether or not a paraphrased PM without any identifying info would violate the rule.

But I'll rephrase to Kiwi: Kiwi, can you tell us about a post count knowledge incident you've been a part of? Thanks!

That assumes you can find a mod with a large enough lack of discretion to do it. Good luck.

Well we'll just let Kiwi tell us whatever he/she wants about these post counts causing confusion incidents. If it ends up being nothing, that's fine too.

So by that way of thinking then we should also have a disclaimer for join date under our handles since it could be inferred that someone who has been here longer knows more about travel than a newer arrival, which we know not to always be the case. Knowledgeable about FT by all means but more knowledgeable about travel in general? Not necessarily. So what's the difference; why should post count be such a factor when there are others?

I think there should be a general disclaimer on FT anyway, one that says that you should not infer anything about the quality of the knowledge you are receiving from a poster's characteristics such as start date, number of posts, etc. Each post should be taken for what it contains and nothing more.

In practice I think people get a lot more info about the knowledge of a poster from their Programs Information than anything else. I know a lot about UA by virtue of flying them a lot and being a 1K. I am not qualified to talk about AA because I have 20K+ posts.

Well that's creative... I guess I can just start telling everyone what other FT'ers think that have supposedly been PM'ed to me. Then, if anyone questions me, I can just say "Oh, I can't tell you because it's a TOS violation, but trust me... I'm right"

Just out of curiosity, how do you folks check how many post you have in one forum or another. I trust that you aren't manually counting them.

If you go to Advanced Search you can plug in a username and a forum, choose to see the results in posts (not threads), and it will tell you have many "results" there are, which really means posts.

Sounds like confusion on the topic. I would say I would still be unsure and I would continue looking for the correct answer.

I fairly often get messages from newbies along the lines of "I don't want to post a silly question [or some other reason for not posting]. Since you post a lot you know the answer to <my question>". I assume I am not alone in receiving these kind of messages.

As Jenbel points out I can't forward the messages or post them here.

That is correct and something I point out to those who mistake post count for a knowledge indicator.

However, while most (hopefully all) who have posted on this topic here can agree that post count does not equal knowledge, it remains that in the eyes of a newbie they need some indicator of knowledge, especially where conflicting answers are given. Post count is one such indicator some of them use. This I know from discussions with many newbies over the past few years.

Just a friendly comment that we need to stay on topic here; and TOS discussions are not on topic.

Posts are no absolute guarantee of flying experience, but on a frequent flyer board, there tends to be some correlation, a,beit not an absolute one, between posting and experience.
In the same way as walking the streets of Paris has nothing to do with linguistic ability. If I was in the street of Paris and I want to address a passer-by, there is no absolute guarantee that that passer-by will speak French. It could be an American tourist who does not speak a word of French beyond "Bonn-joor", but, on the whole, it makes more sense for me to start off from the assumption that the average passer-by in the street of Paris is more likely to speak French than not.
Similarly, there are some 70-year old who are in much better physical condition than some 20-year old. Should you conclude from that that age has no connection and no impact whatsoever with physical condition?

Like in all situations of uncertainty, you form a view on the basis of a number of clues, not just a single one. And post # is ALSO one on which you base your decision.

Are you really telling me that, all other things being equal, you would attach exactly the same weight to an answer given by 5 FTers with 10 posts each and an answer given by 5 FTers with 1000+ posts?
If you can honestly answer yes to this, then your allegation that absolutely no expertise inference can be derived from post count is true.
If you hesitate the slightest bit before answering yes, then you have to admit that there is some linkage, however imprecise and indirect, between post count and expectation of expertise.

But let us admit that I am totally wrong and that absolutely nobody should make even the remotest hint of inference from post count.
Now, if you think that there should be a disclaimer that no inference should be drawn from post count, are you not implicitly recognising that some people will make such inferences? If that is so, do you seriously believe that a disclaimer would have much impact on this?
It seems to me that this leads you to only two possible conclusions:
1) post counts should not be displayed because they will mislead
2) there should be greater approximation between expectations and actual significance of post counts. Disclaimers will go some way towards that, but only partially. It would make sense therefore to increase the likelihood of match between expectations and reality. And having post counts reflect activity in FFP-related fora, even if it is no absolute guarantee, will get us somewhat closer to our aim.

In other words, starting from your assumption, we end up with the conclusion that either there should be no post count displayed at all or, failing that, as a second best solution, that posts in non-FFP related should not count.

Later in the thread:

Earlier in the thread:

So how, exactly, do you gauge any of the stuff you mention in the second quote without looking at the member's post count?

You talk of "knowing that a member is devoted to FT" and "being impressed with people who keep the post count down" and "post count and join date being a gauge." Later, you say "I rely on how they sound."

Which is it?

It's tough to take this motion seriously on it's face (above and beyond the absurdity of asking Randy to reconsider a decision he's now make twice) when one of the people who sponsored it can't settle on "what it means to them."

I understand not disclosing PM's, but you bring up a point out of concern for newbies being duped by high post counters. Your concern seems to be that denying engaged, high-use members (high post count) is ok so as not to confuse the newbies (who may or may not stay active members of FT).

I don't buy that argument. Concern for newbies should not take higher priority than passionate, committed (yes, maybe obsessive about post count) members who have proven record of time spent on FT. This is an internet bulletin board, any advice no matter newbie or high post counter or member since day one should be taken with a huge grain of salt.

FlyerTalk is one of the rare sites where I've found users to be passionate about the subject (travel and OMNI as a "valve" to that travel talk) as well as the community (Flyertalk). That's a huge advantage FT has. Yet some want to squash that passion by removing all post counts. Then the newbies will really be confused.

Of course the other proposal evens the playing field a little better.