I am sure you could raise these privately with Randy without breaking the TOS.

Darling, it's gaming ;);) --- we must pretend that it has no evil attributes. The casino industry has been hard at work for the past 20 years making this a reality. It's also a bit helpful that Anthony and Vinny can no longer rough up customers who they deem as "bad for business." ;);)

Some, might argue, that you gamble every day of your life, just, NOT at the tables.

I was just responding to techgirl saying it's not shown up as a problem. Of course the general membership doesn't raise this as a concern because the subject is taboo.

And therein lies the moral of our story.

Since A has nothing to do with B, and this is the forum for A... ;)

I would have imagined that were Randy to be swamped by questions from general members with problems about Moderation he would have acted as it seems to me he is the person who has acted for the good of the community for many years; even by providing the community a foothold in cyberspace all these years.

Anyway, this was a motion about Ambassadors and not Moderation, so I'd best leave it there perhaps.

And yet you didn't vote to bring the solo traveller's forum to a motion although there were many people in the community who thought it was a good idea. The convincing argument is that there are people already in place without another "bureaucracy level/title" needed who welcome people to the forums. It may be in the form of a moderator such as SanDiego1K or obscure2K but it may also be in the form of a member such as tom911. All of whom prove over and over again that they're able to welcome a member without any snarkiness and a quick "do a search. . ."

This entire motion is good in that it raises the question and perhaps some mindfulness for folks to remember we were all newbies at one point and what makes this board successful is the sense of "Community" but is poorly executed in just trying to have a run-around of the moderators and instead of supporting them just pushing in another layer of bureaucracy which isn't really needed as mentioned by many people in this thread.

The idea of FT Ambassadors is a solution in search of a problem. Just remind FT members in general to be kind and unsnarky to newbies.

Is that a word? ;)

At the risk of being snarky, why is there campaigning on this thread for other recently proposed forums? Shameless plugs by their respective promoters? I thought this thread was about the whole Ambassador motion.

Wish it were that easy.

The snarkmeisters are going to be snarky no matter what we ask.

But we hope to outnumber them with Ambassadors, both official and unofficial.

I think the reason for the motion failing was that the proposal didn't allow for enough levels. An applicant should start as a consul, then, as their good works continue, progress to

consul general
ambassador
ambassador extraordinary
ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary

Plus, at some level, you get Flyertalk diplomatic immunity, which means you can violate the TOS with impunity, and the worst that can happen is you get sent home (still earning miles on the trip, of course).

Now THAT would be worth fighting for! :) :)

That's twisted. Also very, very funny. ^ Thanks for the belly laugh.

Double promotion if someone can pull it off with a bad (Lethal Weapon II) Afrikaans accent.

The best local story this week is the three-day-runner front page "DYKWIA" with a couple of powerful politicians after a few drinks. ;)

It's nice to have a laugh and a smile in this forum, thanks RichardinSF from twilightly Sydney. ^