cblaisd

And Randy's purpose, in this context, is to advise the TalkBoard.

Such advice, on the occasions that it is offered, is dispositive, in my view.

By definition, his advice was a demonstration of need, as I see it.

Rhetorically effective, but a straw man.

Jenbel

Before we get too far down the road of conspiracy theory, here is why I voted as I did:

VX: I've voted once for and once against. The airline had been increasing in buzz, and was IMHO at the point where a new forum was required. The additional information provided by Randy was just the icing on the cake.
TK: The number of threads about this airline was very scant. However, for me, the geographical argument was a valid one - without an obvious critical mass in either Europe or Middle East, it would be very easy for posters to get lost about where to post on this airline, since it has a foot in both camps. So even though it might be the quietest airline forum established, I decided to vote yes for it on those grounds, but I would like to see the position of this airline forum reviewed in a year.
QR: There have been a number of requests for a forum for this airline which TB had not approved previously. The fact that it has done well in the Freddies does not really appeal to me as an argument - it doesn't translate into posts on FT. TAP has won Freddies, but (when I checked) there were actually no threads about TAP in the last 10 days. I don't believe that the traffic is there yet to sustain a QR forum, and I liked BiziBB's argument about keeping the smaller ME airlines in one forum. I think this will unnecessarily fragment the board. Of course, I wait to be proved wrong on all of this!

Dovster

Jenbel, no conspiracy is being hinted at here. A conspiracy involves a shared secret and the only thing here which has not been made public (even by you) is the new information that Randy provided about any of these forums.

Certainly Turkey's location, like Qatar's, has not been changed.

It is true that some might be a bit confused as to where to find Turkey on FT (although, ironically, this appears to be of concern only for the airline -- the country's location remains unclarified in the "Destinations" forum) but Qatar is unquestionably in the Middle East.

How many Freddies an airline has received has never been a TB consideration and, as you pointed out, still is not one for TAP. Indeed, a very good case could be made that the poorer an airline is managed, and the worse its FF program, the more it deserves its own forum. The Delta Forum is never more active than when Delta "enhances" SkyMiles or when it was facing bankruptcy.

Yet what has happened was very clear here:

Randy told TB that he wants these three forums.

Gleff, who has not made a motion for any new forum -- at a minimum -- the past three years, and generally votes againsts new forums, immediately made the three motions.

Spiff, who is usually a hard sell for a new forum and who has been perhaps TB's most vocal opponent of VX in the public forum, voted for all three.

You, whose abstention defeated VX just two months ago, voted in favor.
Bhatnasx, like Gleff and Spiff, previously voted against this forum twice but now voted in favor.

There does not seem to be any question among other FTer's, including those who normally disagree with each other about most things, that TB was simply telling Randy what he asked it to say. (See posts by ClueByFour, CBlaisd, RichMSN, Magiciansampras, myself, and even TB member Cholula.)

In short, no conspiracy -- just some TalkBoard members abdicating their responsibility by sublimating their own judgment to Randy's. Guess what? That might even be excusable if Randy did not have the authority to establish a forum without TB's advice. After all, a TB member could say to himself, "Randy might know better than me, so I will let him have this forum."

Randy, however, has that authority so TB's approval was not necessary. It would have been better if each member had voted his own conscience.

cblaisd

Sorry, that's question-begging.

Whether or not heeding Randy's advice is some sort of "abdication" or whether it shows sound judgment is precisely what's at issue here.

Again, question begging. That's what's at issue. I would aver that one's "conscience" (gosh, this is sounding as if it's a debate over the very fate of the Republic!) can include new counsel from Randy.

You can't assume what's at issue in the argument.

Jenbel

Which as you very well know, only the person who has posted it into the private forum can subsequently post it into the public forum. So until Randy decides to share his information (and there are very good reasons why he cannot/may not), that information is going to have to remain private forum only I'm afraid.

Turkey, as I'm sure you know is situated in both Asia and Europe. The airline headquarters are actually in Europe, but it can be very difficult to communicate to members where exactly they should post. Yes, we can announce things and sticky things - but a lot of members don't bother to read such things. There isn't really a way to communicate effectively with all members that TK questions should have been posted in Other European Airlines - and since search throws up threads in both forums, general confusion would be caused.

For destinations, a) it's probably less important since this is a board about points and miles, the travel advice is just an add on and b) it's perfectly possible for people going to the European part of Turkey to post into Europe and people going to the Asian part of Turkey to post into ME.

I know you made a big thing about the geographic argument for QR but I suspect that was simply poor wording on the part of Randy in his earlier post. Having read a fair few of his posts, we all know it happens occasionally... It's certainly one I completely ignored.

The Freddies argument has been put forward previously, not just on this occasions, and I have rejected it previously too. But it is an argument we see used occasionally, and OTBMVMD about it's validity.

I'm very sorry you are so dismissive about the thinking I've put into these motions and tell me I did it just because Randy told me so. I would have thought that it was pretty obvious (because of the way I voted) that I didn't. Other TB members have provided explanations for why they voted as they did too and one thing I am 100% sure of is that they voted their conscience. Maybe I'm naive, and basing this on my own experiences, but I don't think that there are many occasions when we don't.

And to be honest, if Randy provides us with some good information, are we to ignore it just because he is the one to give it to us, and it might look like we are pandering? Ultimately, the relationship between TB and Randy has to be founded on respect, and to be discarding suggestions just because Randy has suggested them isn't really going to help maintain that respect. If we want to get the things that we come up with accepted (and we've got some really interesting and positive stuff coming through on the charity front, that I would hope do come through ), then not throwing the baby out with the bath water could be a good way of ensuring we maintain a positive working relationship? It's all very well having a TB which represents the members, but to represent the members, we have to be effective as well - a point that the recent OMNI post counts issue drove home very well.

RichMSN

Straw man, question-begging? How about GMAB?

There's been plenty of advice and counsel given by dedicated FT members here. But on this one, those people who care enough to take the time to monitor this forum and give their own "advice and counsel" weren't even respected enough to be able to weigh in on the vote.

It's pretty convenient that certain people on FT are just members...that is, until they want to be something other than "just members." Then secret advice and counsel is given in a place where we can't even see it and the rubber stamp comes out. While TB is said to represent the membership, I think that's just a bunch of rhetoric, especially given recent events. Other members may feel differently. Nobody ever said Randy couldn't create forums, but why have the illusion then that the TB represents us when a majority of members feel they have a duty to vote for whatever Randy wants?

As was said before by another member, I have to give Jenbel credit. She made a very unpopular decision earlier this year when she voted down the VX forum but did so sticking to her own personal principles. I didn't quite get that now, but now understand she's going to do that no matter who thrusts the rubber stamp into her hand.

Dovster

The whole point of TB is to give advice to Randy. Of course, he can give it general advice (as he did when he advocated that they come up with specific metrics before approving new forums) but it would be counter-productive for him to advise TB how to advise him about a specific issue.

If you decide to buy a new laptop tomorrow, you might well go into a store and say "I want a Sony VAIO". You might even say, "I want a new laptop, which one do you recommend?" or "What do you think about the Sony VAIO?"

It would be pointless of you to say, "I want a Sony VAIO so recommend it to me."

magiciansampras

Why didn't you just create the forum yourself then?

gleff

The TK forum addressed a frustration I've long faced as a senior moderator.

I've long said the VX forum would have its day. New information convinced me it was time, and I owned the commitment I had previously made on the issue. I stand proudly with the actions I took here, truly.

nsx

Where did you read that Randy advised the TB to create the VX forum? I've only seen that Randy provided some new information that made it clear that circumstances had changed since the last vote. TB members made their decision based on that information.

Is your position that TB members must never consider any non-public information in making their decisions? That makes no sense to me.

Try this hypothetical: Suppose that Sky High Airlines tells Randy that they are about to launch a quadruple miles promotion that will obviously generate hundreds to thousands of posts on FT. Wouldn't the TB want to create a forum for Sky High Airlines before this happens rather than after? Or would it be more important to pretend not to have this information, in order to avoid the appearance of being a rubber stamp?

Sorry for my late arrival to this thread. I thought it was about a Qatar Forum, something on which I have no opinion.

Cholula

And so do I.

As I've said many times in the past, I've rarely met a FT Forum I didn't like. And I'm anal about organization and classification of information so the more on-topic forums the better IMO. "A place for everything and everything in it's place" to borrow an old, tired expression.

Dovster

You miss the entire point. TB does not create forums. It advises Randy to do so.

If Randy had the kind of crucial information you indicated, he was able to create the forum without TB doing anything.

Again, it seems pointless to me for Randy to tell TB to recommend to him to do something he already feels is important for FT.

Dovster

Yes, and you have taken this same position since you have been on TB -- based solely on your own best judgment.

That is exactly what we elected you to do. ^

nsx

Thanks for the explanation. Since Randy is in the habit of establishing forums only when TB votes for them, I overlooked this point.

Are with ClueByFour that Randy should have acted without consulting the TB? If so, how's the company?

Or do you think that it was better that Randy asked the TB for its opinion before acting?

Assuming that the underlying information is not releasable to the public, what would you have liked to see happen?

Dovster

Randy usually creates forums without TB's approval. There have been exceptions.

Please do not bait me into insulting ClueByFour. He and I exchange enough insults without needing any outside provocation.

The fact is that if Randy had decided that these forums were necessary it would have been better for him to establish them without asking TB. If he was on the fence about them, he should have asked TB. Of course, if the information he provided was not enough to convince him, it probably would not have been enough to convince those TB members who usually oppose forums (or opposed the VX Forum once, and in some cases, twice) in the very recent past.

Why do you assume that? My assumption would be that if Randy were given that information in confidence he would have respected the confidence and not told anyone, including TB.