There is an indication in the motion of which way the motion drafters believe Randy's reconsideration should come out:

Jenbel, it looks like you are trying to have your cake and eat it, too.
On one hand, you tell me that I am misrepresenting the motion by saying that it recommends that Randy count Omni posts.

On the other hand, you say that it not only recommends that he reconsider but that it also says Randy should "count OMNI posts".

With your latest post, I have to conclude that it actually is a motion which includes a recommendation that Omni post should be counted -- hence, there was no misrepresentation by me earlier.

The crucial sentence which I quoted is this one
You seemed (to me anyway) to be suggesting that this was a straight poll of whether we thought OMNI posts should count or not. Apologies if I have misread this - you certainly made no mention of recommendation in relation to this motion. But we're all singing from the same hymn sheet now.

I am a member and my input says to support Randy's decision. After reading through this thread it seems I am not alone, yet you and others here believe the TB representatives are not considering member input unless they agree with you. A little one-sided don't you think?

You are not seriously trying to blame others' bad behavior on Randy are you? Again, if people are behaving in a juvenile manner by causing problems because they disagree with a decision that was made, then they need to be dealt with accordingly. You don't give in to toddlers throwing tantrums!

Yes, and I mentioned as a contrast to TOS violations, which are applicable throughout FT.

Really? I wish I had a dollar for every time I saw someone post that Omni was a sewer and as such, no one goes there.

Then please remove the counts retroactively. Also consider removing them for non miles & points forums. After all, just because I post quite a bit in the Orlando forum about Disney world doesn't mean a hill of beans that I know what I'm talking about in a miles & points forum. The mods should also remove all OT posts in the miles & points forums. I looked, and there's a pile of OT in some of them, and the lounge threads are pretty big. One could easily rack up a a lot of posts there without knowing much of the programs involved.

Also, I remember when they did not count, and then I also remember when you shut down Omni and the posts started counting again when it was reopened. Can you clarify why you changed your mind?

I don't have to - I know you are :)

:eek: You just reminded me that he called yesterday :) Yes. I want a picture to add to the rest.

Randy, I didn't write to you on this because I felt there were enough people doing so. But my feelings have not changed. This is the only major board with these kinds of issues. I only wish you would have found a more consistent solution, because from my perspective, it isn't consistent.

Jenbel is correct and my (rushed) post from yesterday was poorly worded.

I MEANT to say that now a super-majority will be required to recommend that Randy reconsider his decision to implement the non-count and instead count OMNI posts. NOT that by its vote alone the TB could achieve that goal. That is clearly NOT the case and I apologize if my post left that impression. Randy's still da man. The TB is still the advisory board.

I think Dovster's pretty much summed up the situation as I see it: the TB is elected to give Randy feedback. What's the point of giving feedback if the only feedback we are ever going to give is 'yes sir!'?

Every single time the TB passes a motion, the TB is saying 'Hey, Randy, here is an idea for what we, the elected representatives, think would make FT a better place.'

I think Randy was very wise for setting this process up since he's a busy guy and can't always keep his fingers on the pulse of the FT community.

Once this motion either passes or fails Randy will have the TB's advice...just as he has had our advice on the creation of the Travel Products Forum, allowing a poster to solicit funds for a Sri Lankan orphanage or the creation of a VX forum. Ultimately, whether he has asked for it or not (and in nearly all cases Randy has NOT asked for the TB's opinion on a subject, instead the TB has proactively provided its collective opinion to Randy without being asked) of COURSE Randy is free to ignore the advice of the advisory board. But at least he will have it, one way or the other.

So I think it's pretty silly to continue to debate the logic behind the motion.

Randy never asked the TB what we thought about this implementation. What's wrong with proactively telling him just like we do with every other issue we bring to his attention?

In any case, I'm more interested in hearing what posters have to say say about the actual merits of the motion one way or the other:

Does counting OMNI posts make FT a better place or does not counting OMNI posts make FT a better place?

IMO, most everybody is over-analyzing and over-thinking this motion.

Again, IMO, it's simply a motion from two TB members who didn't agree with Randy's decision to arbitrarily stop counting OMNI posts. Or who wanted to get TB on record as to their stance on this decision.

There is no indication yet if a super majority of TB will agree. And, regardless, it's certainly not binding on RP in any case.




In my experience it's usually been compared to a cesspool. ;)

WHOOP WHOOP member feedback for TB WHOOP WHOOP
 

I am against this proposal.

And in case any TB members are curious, I am also against clutter.

LOL! If it makes you feel better then call it whatever you want, Dov. :D

LOL! How about if we let FlyerTalk's Town Hall determine what it is -- instead of either you or me?

There's no question about who determines TB's role: They're under RP's jurisdiction. Period. Full stop.

And I will put odds down that RP either wrote the Town Hall description I just quoted or at least approved it.

The funny thing is that nowhere does it say that it is a "sounding board."

I am against this proposal.

As the early "sounding board" discussions pre-date your registration here, Dov, perhaps you should PM Randy directly about it. (I'm not at liberty to post private communiques that would satisfy your semantic concerns.) What I can say, freely, is this:

Randy has long sought out constructive input on FT's direction, structure and management from the membership. One of the earliest round of AdvisoryBoard invitees was in May or June of '01, of which I was one (along with at least two others who've posted in this thread). Though Randy made it very clear that he wanted FT to be represented by all sectors of the membership, I was never under the impression that our recommendations were anything other than elicited opinions. Currently, with the enumerated, formal TB Guidelines in place -- including language such as "elected" and "advisory board" and "super majority vote" -- TB's essence is as it always was. And that is, a sounding board for FT's host.

Maybe the objection about descriptors here is about a perceived lack of power that rings from "sounding board" rather than "advisory board"? I suppose that could rankle some sensibilities. But the reality is, at the end of the business day, someone must make a decision about FT's rules and regs. For now, the committee known as TalkBoard is _not_ that final arbiter.

As for what the final arbiter should do, that's another matter. However, unasked-for advice once a decision has been announced and justified borders on badgering.

Was this before or after Randy sold the board to IB?

It would seem to me that the sale complicates things a bit as both TB and Randy are now under IB's jurisdiction.

Ess, as noted above, just about every piece of advice that the TB gives Randy is unsolicited, unless you count the TB's original mandate as one grand solicitation for advice on anything that the TB decides (by a super-majority) to advise Randy on.

Quick example: Randy set up Flyertalk WITHOUT a Travel Products forum. That was his 'announced and justified' decision. Without ever being specifically asked about it by Randy the TB, by a super-majority vote, advised Randy that he ought to create one. He did.

That wasn't a critcism of Randy's original decision to not have a Travel Proudcts forum. That wasn't badgering Randy. It was simply saying, hey, we the elected TB representatives of the posters think FT could be even better with a Travel Products forum. That's simply pretty much how TB works.

Now the decision we are advising Randy on is one that was made more recently than the decision not to have a Travel Products forum to be sure. But that doesn't change the role of the TB: To advise Randy regarding issues that serve the long-term interests of the FlyerTalk community.

Let us say that hypothetically later today Randy eliminated all non-US based forum from Flyertalk, with the (very reasonable and true) justification that 'the vast majority of Flyertalkers use US-based airlines and posts about non-US airlines are cluttering that up.'

Wouldn't it be quite proper for the TB to take a vote to advise Randy whether we thought that was a good idea or not?

Look, it doesn't really matter what you call the TB; advisory, sounding, chicken salad, from the beginning (and yes, I do clearly remember those days) the idea of the TB has been to give Randy perspective and suggestions. And what he does with same is entirely up to him.

Both.

"It would seem to" only if you've forgotten what the nature of the agreement is between IB and Randy.

I've forgotten nothing. IB has kept Randy on board to manage/run things. This does not invalidate the fact that he is now under IB's jurisdiction. IB has the ultimate say in how this board is managed now that they own it.

Given the magnitude of the ramification (of excising non-US programs from FT) in your hypothetical, of course.

As for the current motion being "quite proper?" No, it's not. (IMHO.) Just because TB Guidelines permit that such a motion can be made, doesn't mean it should have been. Just my 2FFMW ... my judgment call about your judgment call. :shrug:

Mmmm ... chicken salad ... :D As it's lunch time here on the Left Coast, I like the sound of that. ;)

Wishful thinking, 'mafraid. You'll find in a quick search of the boards that the nature of the sale contract contradicts you. @:-)

Now, as we're both busy students, I'm sure you'll understand that I have my own homework to do and so I must needs bid you a fond "g'day" from the tower for now. :)

I'm afraid you'll need to revisit some contract law in order to appreciate what I'm saying. @:-) :)

Especially since he just reinforced his position on that decision yesterday.

I'll be honest with ya: I SERIOUSLY considered making a motion that 'The TB approves of Randy's implementation of the policy of not counting OMNI posts...'

Such a motion, had it been seconded, would have put the super-majority burden firmly on the side of advising Randy that the TB APPROVED of his implementation of this policy. Naturally I would have then voted AGAINST this motion in the hope if it failing. @:-)

But I decided the more honorable thing to do was to give Randy's decision the benefit of the doubt by putting the super-majority burden on the side of asking Randy to reconsider his decision, such that even if a super-minority of the members of the TB agree with Randy's decision then the TB agrees with Randy's decision.

So....I dunno. I feel like the TB ought to be on the record about this decision whether we're consulted about it or not and that given the options this motion gives Randy's decision maximum respect and benefit of the doubt.

Would you be so vocal about dissent if Randy had come down on the side of posts counting and other people were complaining to the contrary?

Anyhow, I am happy to see that the motion is there for the TalkBoard to address. I am also happy that some members of the TalkBoard don't see themselves as a megaphone/sounding board for whatever Randy decides.

It's never a moot point to take a vote and get the TB members on the record. We've already learned some very interesting stances of a couple of TB members in this thread. I think it's important for the members who elected them to see how they vote on a very controversial issue.

You're very much misinterpreting the posts that have been made by a certain TB member, as well as the posts made by me. TB members should vote for whatever the members who elected them want. If the majority of members want something different than I do, then fine... that's the enitre point of elected representatives. Just because you happen to agree with Randy on this one does not mean that certain TB members are voting on "member input", rather that in this particular case them voting blindly for whatever Randy wants happens to line up with your view.

Spiff has gone on record in this thread saying that, outside of a "colossal blunder", he would never go against Randy. That is no where near "considering member input".

Blah, blah, blah...

I'm not so rude as to presume to tell Randy (our host, as you seem to have forgotten) that his decision to do something relatively trivial like removing Omni post counts is a poor one and that how dare he do so without consulting Certain Members of the Community. Does he not know Who They Are? :rolleyes:

Don't worry, J-M. Your input is very important. ;)

The feeling, Spiff, is mutual.

Providing feedback isn't rude, it's our job. The job HE PERSONALLY assigned to the TalkBoard. Why are you so rude to question his judgment for having done so? ;):p

Other TalkBoard member may feel differently. :D :D

But to be clear, you are not voting on this issue based on the merits of the question of whether you think OMNI votes ought to count or not based on what you see to be the best interests of Flyertalk, but rather on the basis of not wanting to be 'rude' to Randy? :confused:

meanwhile, the posts in this thread count :p

Providing feedback is TB's job. It can be done either tactfully or rudely. Holding an extended discussion and developing a concensus before pulling the trigger on a vote would be more tactful and more likely to produce a favorable result, IMHO.

If I were on the TB I would only make a formal proposal when I was very confident it would win approval easily. Close votes on contentious issues create stress on the TB and could make future work more difficult. For example, by leading one group of members to reflexively oppose the proposals of another group of members. That sort of nonsense is harmful to the TB and FT.

Incorrect.

Hmmmm.... post padding ;)

About post counts.
 

I went into this debate with a very open mind and no particularly strong feelings about OMNI post counts (or any other post counts) one way or the other.

Having read all of your most edifying comments, thank you very much, I am leaning more toward counting all posts.

Seriously, what do post counts tell us about an individual FlyerTalker?

Despite the passion that the "Y" chromosone instills for counting and measuring stuff, I really can't believe that anybody equates the number of post counts with frequent flyer knowledge, or anything else that is faster, bigger, or better.

All the post count really tells us is how active a member has been on, and how committed a member is to, FlyerTalk. Does it matter if a member prefers to hang out in Community, OMNI, Coupon Connection, Delta, TSA or the GLBT forum? All a high post count says to me is that a member loves FlyerTalk and spends a lot of time chilling in the FlyerTalk Community of his/her choice.

I have been around since the very early days and, believe me, there never has been (and I doubt ever will be) a time when FlyerTalk was just about miles and points. If it were just about miles and points, I can't believe that any of us would still be checking in, several times a day, after nearly a decade.

Sure miles and points are a common interest that we share, but not our only interest. We are a small group (I would guess somewhere in the neighborhood of 3,000 active members) who together make up a very real, vital, growing, often loving, and sometimes confrontational community. We are silly, amazingly smart, messy, disorganized, ridiculously generous, and sometimes we even get mad. Just like real life.

Every one of us and every one of our posts, whether they be smilies, gifts of upgrades, parties, or even adding numbers, all work together to build our extraordinary and wonderful community, and every one of us and every one of our ideas, and our posts counts, no matter what Randy may or may not decide to do with the official ticker.

Based on your post, what reason is there to have a post count at all?

It is a gauge of how often a member visits and participates on FlyerTalk. ^

And if 950 out of a posters 1000 posts are in OWOT threads, is it worth even having a post count?

I'm not arguing with you, but instead trying to get a better understanding of a position other than my own. If I don't see all the angles myself, my opinions have been known to change after having them pointed out.

Certainly it is worth it. It wouldn't matter to me in the least in which forum a member decides to hang.

I really would rather know that a member has been devoted enough to FT that they have (one way or another) managed to rack up 10,000 posts, than to not know anything about them at all.

Having said that, I am also very impressed with those folks who have been a constantly active part of the community for a decade, and still somehow managed to restrain themselves to the point where they have less than 500 or 1,000 posts.

Those two elements, join date and number of posts, work together to give us a glimpse of a member.

Well said.