Fair enough, but wouldn't you agree that companies must manage differently in times of hyper-growth than once those companies become larger and more established and stable?

New, growing businesses benefit, IMO, from seat-of-the-pants entrepreneurial management. Larger, more established businesses usually involve customer input and feedback and measured, considered decision making. Inadequate planning (this I am directing more to IB, BTW) results in poor user perception and also the kind of problems we're seeing with site and search performance over the past months.

Personally, I just wonder exactly what problem is being solved with this "solution" unless the goal was to annoy a portion of the user base.

Can you explain to us how this move is best overall for FT? Thanks.

Just want to voice my support in regards to the Talkboard recommendation to Randy to restore post counts to OMNI.

I do not hesitate to state that I value my post count as well as the contributions I feel I have made to many Flyertalk forums since 2002. I strongly feel that though many have stated they are not bothered by their posts to OMNI not counting, I put forth that a majority do, and the long term effects of this decision are detrimental to the vibrancy of not only OMNI, but of Flyertalk as a whole and this situation only serves to create animosity where none should be.

I strongly believe that OMNI and virtually all of Flyertalk forums function incredibly well the vast majority of time when compared to similar online forums. This is a result of excellent moderation as well as a thoughtful, well educated membership. With that said, there are many options and suggestions in regards to the concerns raised by members and moderators regarding post padding in OMNI and other forums that while would probably not satisfy all parties, would be more fair and magnanimous to a majority of those who have voiced concerns or have simply watched from the sidelines.

Thanks

Bravo for avoiding analysis paralysis! However, it's puzzling that you had been advised that a very small number of OMNI posters (should I name names?) were causing a vocal minority to complain. Instead of working with, limiting or disciplining the ofender(s), you made a unilateral decision that has affected everyone and IMHO resulted in some nasty attacks outside of OMNI last few days. "Solving" one problem, opened the doors for many others.

Over the years, you have set the tone of being approachable & inclusive, that by no means says you are required to respond to the above or anything for that matter. But I hope you read this and understand why myself and others are so bewildered by your decision.

Example: Had many of us been asked to do some self-policing in OMNI, we would have gladly responded to your call.

I have stated my position adequately, in some detail, on the various other threads addressing this issue (and pre-dating this thread). I am in favor of the motion to reconsider.

Though beyond the scope of this motion, I would also be in favor of Coupon Connection posts counting. My position tends towards the extreme (not sure if this is left or right): Count all posts, or don't count any.

One of the plug-ins allows members to "Ignore Thread." This means that if any of the game threads just aren't your thing, you can select them and they will not appear to you when you visit OMNI.

I am all for this!

I don't care if OMNI posts count or not - whatever TB and Randy think/decide regarding the counting question is ok with me.

Indeed! I'll take this over a new search any day of the week!

I really don't understand your OMNI reference here, sorry.
I'll only respond to a few facts regarding your reference to "unilateral."

A few members seem to think that the concept of "unilateral" is harmful. Actually, it is often preferred in those instances when it's assumed to be the most efficient. The decision to exclude OMNI post count was in fact an alignment of a post count restriction in another forum which also has post count limitations for entrance - The Coupon Connection. As well, if you were to actually read both the announcement in Community AND reference to the decision in OMNI (of all places!!) back in 2004, you'd probably be able to agree that it does seem to have been a real non-event. That is, there is no sign of overt pressure or outcry to rethink my decision or to change it back.
Here's the two threads to go back and revisit that point in time:
http://flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=345655
http://flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=353206

Now, as to unilateral? That is a decision process toward a direction which other parties may find agreeable. Cool, a few members may disagree with the decision. I'm just not sure if you and others are telling me that all decisions need to be multilateralism? I made a unilateral decision to start FlyerTalk. That is, i sought no ones input and just made a decision. I have made other unilateral decisions as well, and in fact, all my early decisions were unilateral. I made a unilateral decision to begin a TalkBoard. I made a unilateral decision to specialize in the topic of miles and points and actually do admit to a multilateral decision to begin OMNI. Most if not all other forums are unilateral decisions, including ORP, though if i were to have made that one multilateral, it likely would not be around!

So what's wrong with being unilateral. Heck, i think it's a strong point of leadership to be able to make a decision, or at least know what decisions are more efficient made by a unilateral decision and again, before you fire up the flaming arrows - OK, not you, but maybe someone you know? - the decision in 2004 was viewed as a non-event with certainly not a lot of outcry. Seems my unilateral decision was OK back then. And today, i think that decision still is the best and certainly seems today looking at this to have been the most efficient.

After reading many of the posts here:

there are so many other 'post adding topics' in each forum/area that it really doesn't make any sence to say OMNI doesn't count, people will just pad their posts in other areas and 'go around' the system to get posts. I say keep it as it is. Can ther ebe a new sub-title that can be added to certain people that 'know' or have proven that they know/can supply the proper info to questions asked. I know it is a 'collective' of people that share ideas and info, what about different scales of their knowledge for that forum.

Randy,

I think it's been validly pointed out that the 2004 decision did actually generate extensive public debate that continued in fits and starts through today. Perhaps the outcry died down after your 2004 decision based on the fact it was never implemented.

My honest impression, albeit incorrect was that you had rendered a decision but for whatever reason, the decision was either reversed or suspended. In a situation such as that where the status quo was maintained, for myself at least, the less said is often the best course of action. The fact that discussion was only raised by those concerned by post padding within OMNI after 2004 tends to lend to that scenario which is perhaps why you once again are seeing the ongoing outcry over your 2004 decision and recent implementation.

Except for one thing: forums other than OMNI generally enforce the prohibition against content-free post padding. So I doubt this particular consequence will materialize.

I really don't understand why some people are so worked up over this minor feature. But then again, I virtually never visit OMNI and I don't measure a member's value by his post count. Post count isn't part of your anatomy, so there's really no need to enlarge it. ;)

There is nothing wrong with being unilateral, as it is obviously a factor of all your success. Again, kudos to you!

But unilateral in the context of it being efficient? Seriously, are you not aware of all the bad blood, animosity, heated barbs, extra work for MOD's deleting posts, giving warning, etc. that your recent actions have caused these past few days? I see a fiasco, it seems you see it differently.

Of course, I appreciate a forum where I can say all this without reprisal, and that's worth way more than any post count or evangelist title anyday. ^

That's not Randy's fault - it's the choice made by those members who chose to get upset and break the rules in response to this decision.

Dear Spiff: not sure if your remark was trying to pin all the bad blood, animosity, heated barbs, extra work for MOD's deleting posts, giving warnings, etc. on me or that was a general statement?

Not everyone thinks with your 1's and 0's mentality towards this. Emotions are running high. Does that really surprise you? People have feelings and strong, differing opinions. A diverse group of people will cause that. People are passionate because they love FlyerTalk. @:-)@:-)

I don't claim to fully understand the novelty of post counts, but I say what's the harm. {Removed by moderator} @:-)

I am guilty of it in some of the 'Lounges' that have been established. There are jokes, short little rambles that have nothing to add to them, etc that go around. In a way the 'Lounges' are pre-OMNI places for those without OMNI privileges. Don't get me wrong, there are some great posts and first posters that post to the 'Lounges' that add to the content, but it is just a game in there.