Might this have something to do with you being a moderator, though?

I'm not sure how this is illustrative of post counts conveying anything bad, or than a general timidness among newbies, which will always be the case.

Oh, come on. Does your passion reside in your post count...:confused: ????
Has that not, once more, more to do with boys metrics than 'passion'?

personally, my passion resides in the advice given, advice gleaned, friends met and fun times that my (OMNI & non-OMNI) post count represents. I'm proud of my post count, proud of my join date, proud of number of threads started, etc. (Of course I'd rather see a reputation & # of buddies features, Randy assigning the status of "evangelist", etc. but that's for another thread) In the meantime, post count is the only vBulletin metric Randy has chosen to turn on/display at this time.

Would you have had met fewer friends and had less fun time had your post count not be displayed?

And does the fact that you care about your post count make you somehow more passionate about FT and more worthy than me, who find attachment to post count mildly distasteful and who only sees some sense in post count if it actually serve a useful purpose?

why should either of us squash each others passion (perceived or not)? Is the count hurting you or infringing on your rights? Because you find it distasteful, others should be denied something they are passionate about?

As I said earlier, post count is the only metric currently active on FT that even remotely conveys ones passion. Of course I'd prefer better ones, but until that comes along...

I am afraid that this is pure rhetoric. I could completely reverse it to the opposite effect: "Would the absence of count hurt you or infringe on your rights? Because you like it, it should be imposed on others who find it distateful."
See, I don't think that either your version or mine says anything meaningful. Just a succession of words or formulae without substance. Empty discourse.

OK. I have currently roughly 1.5 times more posts than you. Does that mean that I am 1.5 times more "passionate" about FT than you are? The ridicule of that statement, I think, makes the point that there is no relationship between passion about FT and post count. And, yes, I do find it rather distateful that some people might evaluate my 'passion' for FT on the basis of my post count and decide, on that basis, that I am 1.5 times more passionate than you and 5 times less passionate than, say, magiciansampras. This is plainly ridiculous.

Havent the arguments both sides have used been essentially empty discourse?

And isnt removing post counting from OMNI really affecting those who have come to expect OMNI to count as much as the rest of FT? The change was from the commonly understood status quo which means the affect of the change is negatively affecting some who dont understand why this change occured after so much time (or why it is so focused on OMNI when other parts of FT could obviously use the same treatment)?

And you think we really need a "disclaimer" to tell us that piece of common sense? I do not.

I get those PMs all the time, but it's always in a forum in which I have demonstrated a great deal of knowledge, such as Hyatt or Orlando. In all these years, I have never received a question from someone outside of a travel related forum that I could not answer.

Newbies know who to ask :)

That's an interesting point, Mary. I know that Randy does pay attention to standards among major travel forums when making decisions such as this. I wonder if FT is plowing new ground with this decision?

But since FT is my one and only travel forum these days (despite a recent invitation to join the imho pathetic AMEX travel forum) I'm not in a good position to know the answer.

We have a moderator here telling us that he/she gets these PMs and emails all the time. So the empirical record would seem to suggest that it is a problem.

I'll do some digging on other forums that I might come across, but the 2 I frequent most often, and one of them is as large or larger than FT and also a travel board, all posts count. The other, cruisecritic.com, I go there when researching a trip and that's not often.

As a matter of fact, I can't recall a single board I've seen over all the years I've been on the internet that this has even come up as a subject for discussion.

I wonder if the other boards have TB-like bodies that are constantly searching for ways to "improve" things.

Call it rhetoric, call it whatever you want. I'm advocating freedom of expression (count of posts) while you are advocating restriction of one method of expression. The idea of "imposing" a post count on users is hardly the same as taking away the one metric we currently have. Doing so would have an (albeit minor) adverse affect on the user experience. Anyone who signs up for FT signs on knowing their posts count is displayed. Will less people join FT because it may remove post counts, I doubt it. But why remove a feature if it's not causing harm or imposing on another's freedom of expression? Even jenbel has lamented that we've taken away features rather an added them.

I agree with majorwibi's point that removing counts is similar to changing the rules in the middle of the game. Let alone the message it sends that OMNI is somehow "less" important because posts there no longer count.

I don't doubt that there are some individuals that put a lot of stock in post counts when making judgments about how much someone knows. I don't, however, think this is a major problem (if it is, I haven't seen any evidence of folks getting screwed because they believe bad info based on post count). I also don't think it is a very big problem. It is solved simply with a disclaimer.

You see the problem here is that we've started with a solution and have gone looking for the problem. Your points are all good and valid, but they just don't paint a portrait of a broken FT. People got good information before and they'll continue to get it after this OMNI post count change.

What has changed, however, is the disenfranchisement of a lot of people who feel they contribute by posting in OMNI.

Do you not see that as a problem?

Yes. I would take from that situation that something is amiss and more research is needed.

No, I am trying to solve the reported "problem" that exists with post counts without disenfranchising a large group of people.