An open question to moderators RE: this United consolidated forum
Apr 3, 2011, 3:01 pm
#16
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Redlands, CA
Programs: AS, AA, WN
Posts: 974
First of all, many thanks to the volunteer moderators for all of the time and effort they have been putting into thinking about how to best deal with the merger on FT. There are obviously many ways to do this, and a lot of careful thought was obviously put into the current scheme. However, by re-opening this thread, I gather that the mods are not averse to receiving some additional feedback and suggestions, so here goes.
Having now seen this in action, my personal suggestion would be similar to that of gawhite411 above: to the extent you have taken the bold action of creating a third forum, perhaps it would be easiest to just have all new posts here. People can indicate in the titles whether their message is specific to booking a UA or CO flight. This would not only perhaps cut down on the need to monitor multiple forums, but would have the advantage of cross-education -- i.e., even if I have been flying primarily United, the odds of me getting on a CO flight in the future have increased due to merger-related activities, so it is probably good for me to see some amount of the CO-specific traffic.
The old CO and MP forums could be kept alive, but on an archived basis. Someone posting in the "consolidated" forum could link back to an earlier thread from one of those forums if it is relevant.
This might have the advantage not only of preparing us for the future, but helping us all get a better understanding of the present situation. I'm not sure about the OP forum, but in the MP forum, many of the great master threads contain a lot of information that is now simply out of date. Requiring people to post new messages in a third forum, and only link back to the old threads where relevant, might be the easiest way for a fresh start.
This is coming from the perspective of someone who is fairly new to FT; I'm sure there are others with the benefit of experience with what worked (and didn't work) with previous airline mergers. And the moderators are obviously best placed to determine what works best from a technical perspective. I certainly respect the final decisions of the mods, whatever they may be; there are a lot of potentially competing equities here, and as someone said above, no solution will be perfect for everyone. Thanks for putting so much thought into this though.
Having now seen this in action, my personal suggestion would be similar to that of gawhite411 above: to the extent you have taken the bold action of creating a third forum, perhaps it would be easiest to just have all new posts here. People can indicate in the titles whether their message is specific to booking a UA or CO flight. This would not only perhaps cut down on the need to monitor multiple forums, but would have the advantage of cross-education -- i.e., even if I have been flying primarily United, the odds of me getting on a CO flight in the future have increased due to merger-related activities, so it is probably good for me to see some amount of the CO-specific traffic.
The old CO and MP forums could be kept alive, but on an archived basis. Someone posting in the "consolidated" forum could link back to an earlier thread from one of those forums if it is relevant.
This might have the advantage not only of preparing us for the future, but helping us all get a better understanding of the present situation. I'm not sure about the OP forum, but in the MP forum, many of the great master threads contain a lot of information that is now simply out of date. Requiring people to post new messages in a third forum, and only link back to the old threads where relevant, might be the easiest way for a fresh start.
This is coming from the perspective of someone who is fairly new to FT; I'm sure there are others with the benefit of experience with what worked (and didn't work) with previous airline mergers. And the moderators are obviously best placed to determine what works best from a technical perspective. I certainly respect the final decisions of the mods, whatever they may be; there are a lot of potentially competing equities here, and as someone said above, no solution will be perfect for everyone. Thanks for putting so much thought into this though.
Apr 3, 2011, 7:08 pm
#17
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SF BayArea
Programs: Nothing worth mentioning
Posts: 2,223
First of all, many thanks to the volunteer moderators for all of the time and effort they have been putting into thinking about how to best deal with the merger on FT. There are obviously many ways to do this, and a lot of careful thought was obviously put into the current scheme. However, by re-opening this thread, I gather that the mods are not averse to receiving some additional feedback and suggestions, so here goes.
Having now seen this in action, my personal suggestion would be similar to that of gawhite411 above: to the extent you have taken the bold action of creating a third forum, perhaps it would be easiest to just have all new posts here. People can indicate in the titles whether their message is specific to booking a UA or CO flight. This would not only perhaps cut down on the need to monitor multiple forums, but would have the advantage of cross-education -- i.e., even if I have been flying primarily United, the odds of me getting on a CO flight in the future have increased due to merger-related activities, so it is probably good for me to see some amount of the CO-specific traffic.
The old CO and MP forums could be kept alive, but on an archived basis. Someone posting in the "consolidated" forum could link back to an earlier thread from one of those forums if it is relevant.
This might have the advantage not only of preparing us for the future, but helping us all get a better understanding of the present situation. I'm not sure about the OP forum, but in the MP forum, many of the great master threads contain a lot of information that is now simply out of date. Requiring people to post new messages in a third forum, and only link back to the old threads where relevant, might be the easiest way for a fresh start.
This is coming from the perspective of someone who is fairly new to FT; I'm sure there are others with the benefit of experience with what worked (and didn't work) with previous airline mergers. And the moderators are obviously best placed to determine what works best from a technical perspective. I certainly respect the final decisions of the mods, whatever they may be; there are a lot of potentially competing equities here, and as someone said above, no solution will be perfect for everyone. Thanks for putting so much thought into this though.
Having now seen this in action, my personal suggestion would be similar to that of gawhite411 above: to the extent you have taken the bold action of creating a third forum, perhaps it would be easiest to just have all new posts here. People can indicate in the titles whether their message is specific to booking a UA or CO flight. This would not only perhaps cut down on the need to monitor multiple forums, but would have the advantage of cross-education -- i.e., even if I have been flying primarily United, the odds of me getting on a CO flight in the future have increased due to merger-related activities, so it is probably good for me to see some amount of the CO-specific traffic.
The old CO and MP forums could be kept alive, but on an archived basis. Someone posting in the "consolidated" forum could link back to an earlier thread from one of those forums if it is relevant.
This might have the advantage not only of preparing us for the future, but helping us all get a better understanding of the present situation. I'm not sure about the OP forum, but in the MP forum, many of the great master threads contain a lot of information that is now simply out of date. Requiring people to post new messages in a third forum, and only link back to the old threads where relevant, might be the easiest way for a fresh start.
This is coming from the perspective of someone who is fairly new to FT; I'm sure there are others with the benefit of experience with what worked (and didn't work) with previous airline mergers. And the moderators are obviously best placed to determine what works best from a technical perspective. I certainly respect the final decisions of the mods, whatever they may be; there are a lot of potentially competing equities here, and as someone said above, no solution will be perfect for everyone. Thanks for putting so much thought into this though.
Apr 4, 2011, 9:15 am
#18
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: ATL
Programs: UA 3.6 MM, Marriott Lifetime Plat
Posts: 2,582
Three "United" forums without any real reason other than mods saying we need it? Clear as mud, yes? Another reason why i spend less time year, yes again. That along with 40+ page threads that take a day to read through to find useful information, oh yes, another reason why i spend less time here
Apr 4, 2011, 11:07 am
#19
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Manhattan
Programs: CO Plat, SPG Gold
Posts: 1,468
The other serious grievance I have with this new system is that so many bloody threads are being moved from here to a sub forum or vice versa. I start reading a thread in one place and then come back here to find it's been moved consistent with the overall goal of maximizing complexity.
How can we appeal the decision of the moderators to try to get them overruled and force them to employ one of the suggestions made above? Clearly the people have spoken.
Apr 4, 2011, 11:26 am
#20
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LGA/JFK/EWR
Programs: UA 1K1.75MM, Hyatt Globalist, abandoned Marriott LTT (RIP SPG), Hertz PC
Posts: 21,172
The endless threads with all similar items combined seems to be the fashion on the UA board. It does make it tough to focus on the latest and greatest.
The other serious grievance I have with this new system is that so many bloody threads are being moved from here to a sub forum or vice versa. I start reading a thread in one place and then come back here to find it's been moved consistent with the overall goal of maximizing complexity.
How can we appeal the decision of the moderators to try to get them overruled and force them to employ one of the suggestions made above? Clearly the people have spoken.
The other serious grievance I have with this new system is that so many bloody threads are being moved from here to a sub forum or vice versa. I start reading a thread in one place and then come back here to find it's been moved consistent with the overall goal of maximizing complexity.
How can we appeal the decision of the moderators to try to get them overruled and force them to employ one of the suggestions made above? Clearly the people have spoken.
Apr 4, 2011, 12:23 pm
#21
Suspended
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Manhattan
Programs: CO Plat, SPG Gold
Posts: 1,468
Apr 4, 2011, 12:27 pm
#22
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: EWR, BDL
Posts: 4,471
My only request is tht there be less moving and merging of threads on the new forum. On the CO side this hardly happens, but everytime I go to the UA side, there's at least 4 threads where I see have been moved into existing threads, tht take at least a day to read through and this seems to happen all the time. Also I've noticed on the UA side of the forum mods tend to lock up the threads after about 1 or 2 posts. I knw alot of us like to participate in the discussions about a particular subject, however it's hard to answer or participate whn a thread is locked. I would suggest tht everyone be able to at least give their opinion before the thread is locked, not jus after a few posts. And if the mods feel the thread is straying off course by all means lock it, but at least give others the chance to post in the thread.
Apr 4, 2011, 1:40 pm
#23
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: CLE
Posts: 9,816
We as a moderator group elected to move forward with a combined forum as many, if not most, announcements and related issues apply to the merged organization. We have elected to keep the legacy forums active as there are certain threads and topics that may be important in the short term but not a candidate for the combined forum. This will help us maintain a "clean" forum as much as possible, which is an incredibly difficult task given the number of posts under management.
Does this mean that some may not agree with our decision? Of course, but I can say that there was a considerable amount of discussion about timing and we as a group firmly believe that it is best to present a combined forum sooner rather than later.
Does this mean that some may not agree with our decision? Of course, but I can say that there was a considerable amount of discussion about timing and we as a group firmly believe that it is best to present a combined forum sooner rather than later.
Apr 4, 2011, 2:14 pm
#24
Moderator: Hawaii-based airlines & Hawai'i forums
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ka ʻĀpala Nui, Nuioka
Programs: NEXUS/Global Entry, Delta, United, Hyatt, IHG, Marriott, and Hertz
Posts: 18,043
I would like to thank those of you who took the time to share your thoughts regarding the original question, which I was happy to answer (and I hope that MBM3's response above is an indication that this was something that we did work on collectively and were in agreement with). I'd also like to point out that there were advocates of this organization many months ago:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkb...ld-forums.html
I do also note that some of you have expressed some other comments about moderation and that has never been something that I have been confortable discussing in an open thread for a variety of reasons (and also because there is an FT Rule that discourages this).
For example, I'm going to decline to answer in this thread any questions about The Penalty Box, as it's not topical to the OP's question.
I would encourage any member with such a concern to contact myself (or any other volunteer moderator) via PM or email. Speaking for myself, I always try and respond to civil and thoughtful questions, although I might not do a good job in responding immediately nor can I always provide a lenghtly or protracted dialog.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkb...ld-forums.html
I do also note that some of you have expressed some other comments about moderation and that has never been something that I have been confortable discussing in an open thread for a variety of reasons (and also because there is an FT Rule that discourages this).
For example, I'm going to decline to answer in this thread any questions about The Penalty Box, as it's not topical to the OP's question.
I would encourage any member with such a concern to contact myself (or any other volunteer moderator) via PM or email. Speaking for myself, I always try and respond to civil and thoughtful questions, although I might not do a good job in responding immediately nor can I always provide a lenghtly or protracted dialog.
Last edited by FlyinHawaiian; Apr 5, 2011 at 11:26 am
Apr 4, 2011, 3:24 pm
#25
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Programs: DL Diamond, UA 1K MM, SPG Plat For Life, Marriott Plat, Nexus/GlobalEntry
Posts: 9,198
I would like to thank those of you who took the time to share your thoughts regarding the original question, which I was happy to answer (and I hope that MBM3's response above is an indication that this was something that we did work on collectively and were in agreement with). I'd also like to point out that there were advocates of this organization many months ago:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkb...ld-forums.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkb...ld-forums.html
I also wanted to give a hats off to the moderators here.. in general I find the moderation good around here. Not to say I agree with every thread closing.. or the creation of this new combined thread at this early date.. but all in all you guys do a great job and I appreciate it.
Apr 4, 2011, 3:37 pm
#26
Moderator: Hawaii-based airlines & Hawai'i forums
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ka ʻĀpala Nui, Nuioka
Programs: NEXUS/Global Entry, Delta, United, Hyatt, IHG, Marriott, and Hertz
Posts: 18,043
Thanks for your comments.
I should mention to all that I don't think it's any secret that once the One Pass and Mileage Plus programs are merged and the airline is operating under a single operating certificate, there won't be a need for the legacy forums and there will be only a singe forum going forward. The current organization is only a temporary one and should only last for a few months.
I should mention to all that I don't think it's any secret that once the One Pass and Mileage Plus programs are merged and the airline is operating under a single operating certificate, there won't be a need for the legacy forums and there will be only a singe forum going forward. The current organization is only a temporary one and should only last for a few months.
Apr 4, 2011, 3:55 pm
#27
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: EWR
Posts: 20
I also wanted to give a hats off to the moderators here.. in general I find the moderation good around here. Not to say I agree with every thread closing.. or the creation of this new combined thread at this early date.. but all in all you guys do a great job and I appreciate it.
Apr 4, 2011, 5:10 pm
#28
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Michigan
Programs: AA EXP(4mm), DL Gold, UA Gold (1mm), HH Diamond, Bonvoy Amb(l/t Titanium). Former EA/PA elite
Posts: 994
Wow. Three forums is too confusing. Needs to be either one combined or two separate (leave the old UA and CO open). Having three is too much work for the readers as well as the Moderators (I see they have been moving posts around). Anyway, just my 2 cents.
Apr 4, 2011, 5:59 pm
#29
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Once Seattle...then DC....now CDG.
Posts: 4,059
Again - like others I know that moderating is a tireless and thankless job - so I can't thank the moderates enough for thier work!
Looking at the forum situation now though, it really is a fair bit confusing as to where things should truly go. While there are some cross-over areas, the majority of threads tend to pertain to either one airline or the other. I'm in the same camp as many others here around just simply closing the legacy forums (and moving threads here). It's going to happen eventually anyway... At this point I have to check multiple forums and try and keep track of where things should be going.
Again, appreciate the work - just some additional thoughts.
Looking at the forum situation now though, it really is a fair bit confusing as to where things should truly go. While there are some cross-over areas, the majority of threads tend to pertain to either one airline or the other. I'm in the same camp as many others here around just simply closing the legacy forums (and moving threads here). It's going to happen eventually anyway... At this point I have to check multiple forums and try and keep track of where things should be going.
Again, appreciate the work - just some additional thoughts.
Apr 4, 2011, 8:01 pm
#30
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2002
Programs: UALifetimePremierGold, Marriott LifetimeTitanium
Posts: 71,114
Like others I appreciate the mods efforts. Not a fun job, but they do it for the love of FT/UA/CO - and of course the $$ they're paid. Oops - none.
While on paper I'm supportive of the 3 forums, I - like others - am not finding it any easier now that the third's been put in place. Presumably after time that will change.
I also think it will be interesting to see which moderator style will settle in in the future. One side doesn't do as many merges or closures as the other based on comments by FTers in multiple forums. So will be interesting to see how they 'mesh' their different styles. And no my comment doesn't violate TOS. It's an observation.
Cheers.
While on paper I'm supportive of the 3 forums, I - like others - am not finding it any easier now that the third's been put in place. Presumably after time that will change.
I also think it will be interesting to see which moderator style will settle in in the future. One side doesn't do as many merges or closures as the other based on comments by FTers in multiple forums. So will be interesting to see how they 'mesh' their different styles. And no my comment doesn't violate TOS. It's an observation.
Cheers.