Thanks, Jenbel, for the concise explanation of the challenges of moderating OMNI. Anyone willing to carry that load, especially Randy, deserves a lot of deference for his or her opinions on what it takes to make OMNI manageable.

How would not counting OMNI post counts going forward make moderating OMNI easier? Do the OMNI counting games really require that much moderator involvement as a result of the activities of FT members in those threads?

It's a red herring. I'm glad Glen has joined the "move on, nothing to see here crowd" along with other former TB members who have the same standing as me, though. Although they seem to try to intimate otherwise.

I agree that purely post padding game threads are not a problem for moderation. There's nothing inflammatory about a 5-digit number. Furthermore, post padding is not a major challenge for moderators on FT. It pollutes the forum, but that's a separate issue. So your point is valid.

I am not patting anyone on the back.

This motion is simply about whether or not OMNI posts should count... it is not about posts in other forums....

I personally have never wanted OMNI posts to count.... and I have been consistent over the several years of discussions on this topic.

Are there posts in other forums that could be construed at "post padding"? Of course! Are they all deleted.... I doubt it.

Bottom line for me: I do not believe any other member will think less of a member who does not get post count credit for an OMNI post. So, I do not buy into the "disinfranchised" argument. Members who think less of themselves as a result of fewer post ticks need to figure out how to deal with that loss.

While I participate in the "wasting time" threads myself when I want a distraction, I never thought about what it would do to my post counts... just as I do not think about the fact I do not get post credits in Coupon Connection.... and I post a great deal there.

William

You are probably correct that I am too new to FT to fully understand how things used to be with OMNI. I just paint the picture as I see it from 2005 until present. And I am having trouble understanding why this apparent double standard allows to exist but I will accept your explanation that I just dont understand the history enough to fully be able to understand the position.

I do moderation on a couple of smaller forums and I know it can be difficult but not impossible to work something like this out. Realistically members usually can police the majority of issue threads once the rules are well defined and concise.


I apologize if my response below comes off like an attack but when I feel that someone is talking down to me I tend to not react well.
Do you even read what I post or just go and start attacking based on what you think you have read? I'm not arguing for OMNI to stay or even stay like it is. I really have no vested interest in what happens to OMNI other than I dont like that I see a glaring double standard being applied.



My argument has never been about post counts...


I'm glad you think the system works. I agree with you about 95% of the time on that but I'm still trying to figure out the double standard.

If you would read our (magiciansampras' and mine) arguments you should be able to see that I dont really care about the masses of OMNI. And if I cannot speak my mind and ask questions about how things work on FT then why does TB even exist?


I dont do crusades (and based on my post count that should be fairly obvious to you). I hold very little value in peoples post counts but thats primarily because I am educated enough in the travel world to read the BS from the truth.

What I'm really not liking about your posts is essentially you have just attempted to treat me like a little kid with the whole "I'm more mature at FT than you are so just shut up and deal with it" post. Jenbel did a much better job explaining to me how I might not have enough historical view on FT pre-2005 to fully understand the evolution of OMNI.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I see a glaring double standard here and thats all I'm concerned with. Post counts are meaningless to me as they show no measure of actual knowledge but instead show a large amount of time/passion on a certain forum.

It's a corollary of "Do you know who I am (was)?"

Don't worry. Some of the old members feel they have more standing than we newer members. They use joining date as a relevant metric while claiming that metrics such as post count are irrelevant and only content matters. It's quite transparent, trust me.

The first hint is when they quote other TB votes they took place in 2-5 years ago.

While this whole thing is likely a done deal, the way it was done and then the reasoning invented after the fact was just shabby and assume that we users weren't very bright (or could use search). I find that more disturbing. It'll all blow over, but some of us won't forget about it.

Out of sight out of mind is what I keep coming up with. If OMNI doesnt count WRT to post counts then it would be extremely easy to ignore for those who are worried about post count.

I dont think they do. They are pretty obviously a violation of the FT TOS and should have been cut off at the knees when the first started up a few months ago. For moderation time concerns I understand why that didnt happen but once the games are removed from OMNI how is that forum much different in content from some of the other FT forums?

I disagree.

It is also about presuming to tell the host of this bulletin board that all users must be consulted on all changes and that he is incapable or not permitted to make and implement some decisions on his own. Other FlyerTalkers may interpret this motion differently.

I disagree. If it was about that the motion would say that; it doesn't.

OFTMITMD.

The host of this bulletin board is very much aware that TalkBoard, which he established, is charged with making recommendations to him and that he retains the right to accept those recommendations or not.

IMHO, a TalkBoard member should vote according to what he believes is the best course for FT to follow. I am not one of the people who say that a TalkBoard member should go along with whatever a majority of posters on a particular issue say -- but he should also not just tell Randy what he believes (or even knows) Randy prefers to hear.

TalkBoard members were voted into office to use their own judgment and to vote accordingly. This may wind up making a particular member unpopular, perhaps even costing him re-election, or it might cause Randy to be unhappy with that member -- but neither possibility should be a concern.

Dov, you've been making a lot of sense lately. I want to thank you.

But you forgot to say that other FTers might feel differently.

Hint? Well Rich please face the hard facts you ran rather un-successfully for the last 2 Talkboards. If you are not prepared to listen to the views of those who were actually elected in those and other elections, such as wharvey and Spiff and dovster above, all of with whom I served, I think some reading this may feel you might have the relevance problem, not the other way around? Just a thought. @:-)

I imagine all TB members volunteer well over 200 hours of time during each term, and you seem to be implying that is all wasted time unless you are part of the process?

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=761215

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showp...9&postcount=73

If you imagine Hillary does not ask Bill a few pieces of advice right now you'd be wrong, but hey that is one for Omni.

I do not see anyone mentioning elections that occurred 5 years ago -- certainly it was not me, as I just completed my term.

All I pointed out was that I seconded and voted for the the exact action that has now been implemented by Randy and am pleased to see it occur.

http://flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=563745

What does this have to do with the price of tea in China?

Recommendations? Sure.

Badgering him to change his mind on relatively trivial matters? No, at least not me.

This isn't a case of telling Randy what he wants to hear. It's about not treating Randy like someone who's not allowed to make his own decisions about the board he founded and now hosts on behalf of its new owners without a small vociferous minority jumping all over him. I don't think TalkBoard should add to the pile-on by a small number of dissatisfied individuals.

Done.

It isn't.