Ambassador proposal reboot
#61
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,946
#62
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Yiron, Israel
Programs: Bates Motel Plat
Posts: 68,901
#63
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,946
#64
Moderator: Avianca, Travel Photography, Travel Technology & USA
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Far western edge of the La-La Land City limits
Programs: Emeritus VIP Fromins Deli Encino grandfathered successor program - UA MM & HH Diamond
Posts: 3,722
Dov and Spiff,
If you guys want to debate, let's move it to PM, or wait until the next TB election.
Now if you excuse me, South Park is on...
Night Night,
Mod2
If you guys want to debate, let's move it to PM, or wait until the next TB election.
Now if you excuse me, South Park is on...
Night Night,
Mod2
#65
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,946
#66
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Benicia CA
Programs: Alaska MVP Gold 75K, AA 3.8MM, UA 1.1MM, enjoying the retired life
Posts: 31,849
I have to agree with Spiff that we might as well take this off the table for now. Maybe when TalkBoard has its next meeting you can come to agreement on all the fine points, and maybe even have a joint meeting with the moderators so their input can be considered before your vote.
#67
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: back to my roots in Scotland!
Programs: Tamsin - what else is there to say?
Posts: 47,843
Originally Posted by Punki
I thought the original proposal was perfect, simple and workable.
#68
Suspended
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Seattle
Programs: Ephesians 4:31-32
Posts: 10,690
Actually, our most brilliant and esteemed colleague kokonutz made a yeoman's effort at trying to take all of the control concerns into account in drafting his reboot. Sadly, the result, was even more muddled confused and convoluted than the original proposal. That assessment is not meant to be a criticism of koko, but just, a statement of fact. Once we start to try to incorporate all of the rules and riders suggested, presumably to maintain some sort of uber control, the proposal simply became to cumbersome to reasonably implement.
IMHO, the original proposal was elegantly simple: "If you want to be an Ambassador, tell a TalkBoard member. They will check with the moderator of the forum in question and if you are not a known axe murderer or a serial spammer, they will take a vote and in all likelihood you will become an Ambassador. If you screw up big time once you are on the job, you will most probably get fired".
Moreover, and I think this is the best part, if you don't like the decisions of the TalkBoard, you can question them, argue with them, publicly post about how upset you are, or even boot the bums out of office next fall.
To paraphrase the honorable Mr. Churchill, "The original proposal was the worst suggestion I have ever read, except for all the rest of them that have been proposed."
Above all else, you have to love the democratic system that governs all TalkBoard activities. It allows me, as a TalkBoard member, to post my honest opinions, and also simultaneously allows each and every one of you who happens to disagree with me, to do so publicly, without any fear of recrimination of any kind, and that is a beautiful thing. ^
IMHO, the original proposal was elegantly simple: "If you want to be an Ambassador, tell a TalkBoard member. They will check with the moderator of the forum in question and if you are not a known axe murderer or a serial spammer, they will take a vote and in all likelihood you will become an Ambassador. If you screw up big time once you are on the job, you will most probably get fired".
Moreover, and I think this is the best part, if you don't like the decisions of the TalkBoard, you can question them, argue with them, publicly post about how upset you are, or even boot the bums out of office next fall.
To paraphrase the honorable Mr. Churchill, "The original proposal was the worst suggestion I have ever read, except for all the rest of them that have been proposed."
Above all else, you have to love the democratic system that governs all TalkBoard activities. It allows me, as a TalkBoard member, to post my honest opinions, and also simultaneously allows each and every one of you who happens to disagree with me, to do so publicly, without any fear of recrimination of any kind, and that is a beautiful thing. ^
#69
Moderator: British Airways Executive Club, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges and Environmentally Friendly Travel
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 22,200
I have been following the proposals for an Ambassador programme with great interest. I believe there is plenty good intent but unfortunately none of the proposals pitched for discussion thus far appear to me as if they can be implemented as workable solutions.
On the forum which I volunteer time to moderate, we have many, many helpful individuals who share the task of welcoming and providing assistance to new members. These members do this not because they have been appointed to undertake this task, rather because they are good hearted people and want to make a positive contribution to our community. This part of the knowledge transfer is key to the spirit of Flyertalk. So, as I read these proposals, I look for signs which may bring benefits to our community and thus far, I cannot say with any conviction that the appointment of ambassadors actually adds to what we have at the moment, certainly not on the BA forum. To me, it would be a fruitless introduction of unnecessary bureaucracy that serves little to further promote good behaviour, civility and community helpfulness, which I understand are the key aims behind this. The part about attracting new members, I confess is more than a little lost on me.
I accept this may be your humble opinion now, but to be fair, it does differ fundamentally from the original proposal as it was drafted.
On the forum which I volunteer time to moderate, we have many, many helpful individuals who share the task of welcoming and providing assistance to new members. These members do this not because they have been appointed to undertake this task, rather because they are good hearted people and want to make a positive contribution to our community. This part of the knowledge transfer is key to the spirit of Flyertalk. So, as I read these proposals, I look for signs which may bring benefits to our community and thus far, I cannot say with any conviction that the appointment of ambassadors actually adds to what we have at the moment, certainly not on the BA forum. To me, it would be a fruitless introduction of unnecessary bureaucracy that serves little to further promote good behaviour, civility and community helpfulness, which I understand are the key aims behind this. The part about attracting new members, I confess is more than a little lost on me.
IMHO, the original proposal was elegantly simple: "If you want to be an Ambassador, tell a TalkBoard member. They will check with the moderator of the forum in question and if you are not a known axe murderer or a serial spammer, they will take a vote and in all likelihood you will become an Ambassador. If you screw up big time once you are on the job, you will most probably get fired".
Last edited by Prospero; Jun 26, 2008 at 7:16 am Reason: typo
#70
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 57,946
IMHO, the original proposal was elegantly simple: "If you want to be an Ambassador, tell a TalkBoard member. They will check with the moderator of the forum in question and if you are not a known axe murderer or a serial spammer, they will take a vote and in all likelihood you will become an Ambassador. If you screw up big time once you are on the job, you will most probably get fired".
Above all else, you have to love the democratic system that governs all TalkBoard activities. It allows me, as a TalkBoard member, to post my honest opinions, and also simultaneously allows each and every one of you who happens to disagree with me, to do so publicly, without any fear of recrimination of any kind, and that is a beautiful thing. ^
Last edited by Spiff; Jun 26, 2008 at 8:55 am
#71
Original Member, Ambassador: External Miles and Points Resources
Original Poster
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in PALMYRA, PA, USA
Posts: 58,510
I have been following the proposals for an Ambassador programme with great interest. I believe there is plenty good intent but unfortunately none of the proposals pitched for discussion thus far appear to me as if they can be implemented as workable solutions.
On the forum which I volunteer time to moderate, we have many, many helpful individuals who share the task of welcoming and providing assistance to new members. These members do this not because they have been appointed to undertake this task, rather because they are good hearted people and want to make a positive contribution to our community. This part of the knowledge transfer is key to the spirit of Flyertalk. So, as I read these proposals, I look for signs which may bring benefits to our community and thus far, I cannot say with any conviction that the appointment of ambassadors actually adds to what we have at the moment, certainly not on the BA forum. To me, it would be a fruitless introduction of unnecessary bureaucracy that serves little to further promote good behaviour, civility and community helpfulness, which I understand are the key aims behind this. The part about attracting new members, I confess is more than a little lost on me.
I accept this may be your humble opinion now, but to be fair, it does differ fundamentally from the original proposal as it was drafted.
On the forum which I volunteer time to moderate, we have many, many helpful individuals who share the task of welcoming and providing assistance to new members. These members do this not because they have been appointed to undertake this task, rather because they are good hearted people and want to make a positive contribution to our community. This part of the knowledge transfer is key to the spirit of Flyertalk. So, as I read these proposals, I look for signs which may bring benefits to our community and thus far, I cannot say with any conviction that the appointment of ambassadors actually adds to what we have at the moment, certainly not on the BA forum. To me, it would be a fruitless introduction of unnecessary bureaucracy that serves little to further promote good behaviour, civility and community helpfulness, which I understand are the key aims behind this. The part about attracting new members, I confess is more than a little lost on me.
I accept this may be your humble opinion now, but to be fair, it does differ fundamentally from the original proposal as it was drafted.
How such a simple concept drew so much fear, anger and concern from so many is beyond me.
As far as I am concerned this fantastic idea blew up on the launch pad because, in my humble opinion only, it hit too closely to the third rail of moderator powers. Or at least that was the perception of many with the 'm' word under their handle. Not a criticism, just an observation from my own personal perspective. And yes, I realize that not ALL moderators felt the same way about it, but from what I have heard (admittedly 100% hearsay) about private moderator discussions of this concept the perception was prevalent.
And now it's a real tar pit: the more I try to clean it up the dirtier I seem to get.
So I'm through with this idea for a while. If others want to try to wrestle with this alligator then have at it, and Godspeed.
#72
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: back to my roots in Scotland!
Programs: Tamsin - what else is there to say?
Posts: 47,843
I know you and Punki would love to try and pin the failure of this on the mods - but actually, it was TB that failed. Hindsight is always perfect (just like Punki's motions ) but there were a number of ways in which what we did fell short of what was necessary to drive this from concept to actuality:
- after the motion was written, there was no attempt to take account of or resolve any of the problems identified. As I said earlier, the sticking block here is that the motioner has not actually accepted any of the feedback made about it - when someone describes their motion as 'perfect', then their mind is pretty closed to new ideas, or concerns.
- We failed to sell the concept to the membership at large - this was not something where I saw many members going 'That's a great idea - why haven't we done that already?' I'd describe the reaction as apathetic at best
- we failed to convince the moderator group that this was something which would work for them and help them
- the approach on this was simply too confrontational. We tried to dictate, when we should have listened and reassured. We don't rule, we serve and I think that was forgotten on this occasion.
Lots of learning points in this one - if we are prepared to accept responsibility and actually learn from them and not just try and blame the failure on other people. If we cannot sell an idea on its merits to the wider membership, then I don't think the blame lies with the wider membership if they don't just rollover and do what we want them to do.
- after the motion was written, there was no attempt to take account of or resolve any of the problems identified. As I said earlier, the sticking block here is that the motioner has not actually accepted any of the feedback made about it - when someone describes their motion as 'perfect', then their mind is pretty closed to new ideas, or concerns.
- We failed to sell the concept to the membership at large - this was not something where I saw many members going 'That's a great idea - why haven't we done that already?' I'd describe the reaction as apathetic at best
- we failed to convince the moderator group that this was something which would work for them and help them
- the approach on this was simply too confrontational. We tried to dictate, when we should have listened and reassured. We don't rule, we serve and I think that was forgotten on this occasion.
Lots of learning points in this one - if we are prepared to accept responsibility and actually learn from them and not just try and blame the failure on other people. If we cannot sell an idea on its merits to the wider membership, then I don't think the blame lies with the wider membership if they don't just rollover and do what we want them to do.
#73
Moderator: Southwest Airlines, Capital One
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: California
Programs: WN Companion Pass, A-list preferred, Hyatt Globalist; United Club Lietime (sic) Member
Posts: 21,589
IMHO, the entire purpose of the entire initiative was to take the sort of posters you describe above and give them a shiny gold star, thereby hopefully holding them up as an example for others to emulate.
How such a simple concept drew so much fear, anger and concern from so many is beyond me.
How such a simple concept drew so much fear, anger and concern from so many is beyond me.
The problems can be summarized as unintended consequences:
(A) People who don't get the gold star may feel slighted and may reduce their contributions or even become irritants.
(B) The selection process could be gamed or politicized (true of any conceivable selection process) and would at a minimum be susceptible of suspicion.
The benefits did not outweigh the risks of these unintended consequences.
That's how I see it, and notice that my reasons would apply even if moderators ran the entire process. In fact, these unintended consequences, especially (A), apply today to the selection of moderators. We would be doubling that problem rather than alleviating it. I have no solution to offer other than not making things worse.
As to a democratic model being appropriate for FT, I respectfully dissent.
We all know that setting up separate power centers that will battle each other endlessly helps keep government in balance. But FT is not a government, it's a business.
No successful business that I know of is run democratically. Nor by a combination of top down command and control and bottoms up democracy.
The closest such model would be a company with a union shop, in which two hierarchies compete with each other. Such companies are less likely to succeed against their real competitors than companies with a single chain of authority. That's just what works.
The government model sets up incentives to fight each other. The business management model sets up incentives to fight external competitors. The latter is what we need, not the former. Just my opinion.
#74
In Memoriam, FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Southern California
Programs: DL: 3.8 MM, Marriott: Lifetime Titanium
Posts: 24,575
Not everybody will get a "gold star" for their actions no matter how we establish the criteria. There will always be those with gold stars and those without.
So do we stop recognizing and rewarding good behavior and refrain from awarding gold stars for fear of offending or ostracizing those who don't get them? My feeling is no.
Offer those who we deem Ambassadors the vaunted gold star. Those who don't earn one can either change their behavior for a chance to earn one in the future or just drop out of the process. And if they become "irritants" then there are ways already established of dealing with that.
And not everybody is eager to become an Ambassador. In a PM to one of the top candidates for this position in the TS/S Forum, I basically said that should this position ever become available, I'd like to nominate them for it.
And they wrote back saying, basically, "Thanks but no thanks". They weren't comfortable with any special recognition for what they consider common courtesy.
I have no problem with this proposal from the aspect of potentially alienating those who don't receive the gold star. Not everybody wants it and certainly not everybody will earn it. But that holds true for nearly any title we might consider here on FT.
#75
Suspended
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Seattle
Programs: Ephesians 4:31-32
Posts: 10,690
It really was a wonderful idea.
Unfortunately, it would appear from their posts that some very vocal moderators will continue to oppose it unless and until they have absolute control over every aspect of how it works. So be it. It is not the first, nor will it be the last, great idea on earth that got swallowed up in a power struggle.
Like koko, I have shot my best shot, and I am done with the idea, at least for this TB term.
The sad thing is that, for the moment, FlyerTalk has lost a great opportunity to make our site a more welcoming and friendly place and to involve more members in making it the best place it can be. Such is life.
Unfortunately, it would appear from their posts that some very vocal moderators will continue to oppose it unless and until they have absolute control over every aspect of how it works. So be it. It is not the first, nor will it be the last, great idea on earth that got swallowed up in a power struggle.
Like koko, I have shot my best shot, and I am done with the idea, at least for this TB term.
The sad thing is that, for the moment, FlyerTalk has lost a great opportunity to make our site a more welcoming and friendly place and to involve more members in making it the best place it can be. Such is life.
Last edited by Punki; Jun 26, 2008 at 11:26 am Reason: Clarification