Jump to content
canflyer
Sign in to follow this  
exAC

Let them stew in their own FT juices

Recommended Posts

Maybe this thread can be moved to the OT Canadiana? That way those who do not want it in their face on the AE/AC forum do not have to see it?

We have never moved a thread yet so why start now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since there is no freedom of expression over there its kind of fun to point it out. The thread in question was heavily edited by the mod squad. :wink:

NO freedom of expression versus a pretty universally PROSCRIBED freedom of expression. I think most would agree with the latter.

Just like when someone goes into a restaurant and gets totally drunk. I imagine who post here would be relieved that management would ask the lout to leave, even though it impinges upon his right to drink.

It is also illegal to yell fire in a crowded theatre, so is it safe to say you choose not to frequent the movies because it restricts your freedom of expression?

And of course, airport security prohibits joking about bombs and other sensitive topics; are you ready to blow off flying as a protest.

I guess my only issue is consistency of line of argument. FT has nevedr claimed to be a 'free for all', and 99.9% of its users apparently have no problem with reasonable and defensible boundries for behavior.

And I am saying this as a friend and a peer of yours who has met you mutilple times in person. Your inperson demeanor is absolutely upstanding and beyond reproach. I'm not sure if you are just on your best behavior or if you have no problem with the IMPLICIT codes of social conduct when dealing with people face-to-face. But I have no doubt you would never resort to the kind of name-calling in person that you have no problem with doing online.

And that simply saddens me. [/u]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I enjoy this thread, I can't understand the continuing fascination with Flyertalk.

As many have mentioned, FT is a business. They charge money for ads and justify their rates by the number of hits they get. By moving a bunch of threads off the AP board and burying them deeper in the site they will reduce traffic on the AP board (but perhaps (though not likely) increase it elsewhere if people follow those threads to other boards (which I doubt)).

However, if CanFlyers continue to monitor FT so closely, and post links to FT threads, and try to generate controversy there, which in turn generates more hits, then CFers are contributing to the $ value of a site they claim to dislike enough to have left and started their own.

I like CF, even though there are fewer posts than on FT, because there is good substance here, and I don't think CF has to continue trying to prove it's better than FT. Both are interesting; each is different. The AC/AP posts on both sites are the steak, the OT posts, such as this thread, (and for me, the now deported Porter thread on FT), are the sizzle. In terms of valuable information that will actually help me make AC travel decisions, there's not much difference. The important, core, AP/AC news gets posted pretty quickly on both.

Since AP ticked me off early enough in the year (but after I re-qualified for elite) by not posting a bunch of flights I did on AC metal, I have switched my loyalty to Flying Blue. Because the important AP news will be posted on both sites, and since I am not doing much travel on AC anyway, for now I will mainly use CF to keep in touch with AP. I know some day Air France will tick me off and I will want to be up to speed in case I decide to return to AC.

Meanwhile, as interesting as this thread is, and I have read every post, it strikes me that the recent moves on FT have been motivated, in part, to appease some posters who work for AC and are therefore quite motivated to keep the board focussed on AC (and not Porter), but also to make the board more competitive with CanFlyer. I find that ironic, and if I was a hardcore CanFlyer, and not just a lurker (as I am at FT as well), I'd judge that the time had come to let the AP board at FT wither or generate it's own traffic, and I'd resist the urge to keep giving them so much attention and thus more hits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meanwhile, as interesting as this thread is, and I have read every post, it strikes me that the recent moves on FT have been motivated, in part, to appease some posters who work for AC and are paid to keep the board focussed on AC (and not Porter), but also to make the board more competitive with CanFlyer. .

Who would those posters be? Many AC employee's no longer bother posting anything there. No one at AC is paid by AC to be on Flyertalk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meanwhile, as interesting as this thread is, and I have read every post, it strikes me that the recent moves on FT have been motivated, in part, to appease some posters who work for AC and are paid to keep the board focussed on AC (and not Porter), but also to make the board more competitive with CanFlyer. .

Who would those posters be? Many AC employee's no longer bother posting anything there. No one at AC is paid by AC to be on Flyertalk.

Not only are they not paid;the head office types are told they can post on their own time and not cause any issues within AC. The AC types got fed up with useless whining about the airline an mostly don't post over there wheras before thye were involved quite a bit. That's where the moderation breaks down. Its focused on removing "jock" talk but allows the most inate and dumb critiques, not only of AC but all airlines,rental car companies and hotels profiled on FT.

I'm not absolutely sure of this but I believe AC no longer has ads on FT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NO freedom of expression versus a pretty universally PROSCRIBED freedom of expression. I think most would agree with the latter.

Just like when someone goes into a restaurant and gets totally drunk. I imagine who post here would be relieved that management would ask the lout to leave, even though it impinges upon his right to drink.

It is also illegal to yell fire in a crowded theatre, so is it safe to say you choose not to frequent the movies because it restricts your freedom of expression?

And of course, airport security prohibits joking about bombs and other sensitive topics; are you ready to blow off flying as a protest.

When its all selective then the similarities are not the same. Moderation should apply across the board~if the drunk hurled insults in the third person would he have been such a PITA. You can't joke about bombs for sure but you can not say anything critical about security in their presence either or you get turned back. That's censorship.

I guess my only issue is consistency of line of argument. FT has nevedr claimed to be a 'free for all', and 99.9% of its users apparently have no problem with reasonable and defensible boundries for behavior.

That 99.9% is hocus as for one thing there are members over there who have up to five aliases. The number of suspensions I saw over there was a lot higher than the % you intimate. And reasonable boundries is using the third person or other oblique comments. That's censorship.

And I am saying this as a friend and a peer of yours who has met you mutilple times in person. Your inperson demeanor is absolutely upstanding and beyond reproach. I'm not sure if you are just on your best behavior or if you have no problem with the IMPLICIT codes of social conduct when dealing with people face-to-face. But I have no doubt you would never resort to the kind of name-calling in person that you have no problem with doing online.

IBB's are supposed to be anonymous. The fact I choose not to stay anonymous should answer your question. My posting style is simply that. Nothing more should be read into it.

And that simply saddens me. [/u]

Yom kipper is over~ you can be happy now :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meanwhile, as interesting as this thread is, and I have read every post, it strikes me that the recent moves on FT have been motivated, in part, to appease some posters who work for AC and are paid to keep the board focussed on AC (and not Porter), but also to make the board more competitive with CanFlyer.

Interesting hypothesis, but false. No moderator on the FT AC/Aeroplan forum is employed or has interest in AC (other than perhaps stock) that I'm aware of.

I'll self disclose: I'm a former resident of Toronto since 2003 my only AC connection is the 1-2 times per year I find myself on the IND-YYZ jazz flight.

I have not communicated with Randy Petersen in months. I can give you a screenshot of the unread half dozen or so "unopened" PMs that I've sent to him YTD.

Very few people on FT know Canflyer exists. Those than do have probably joined.

The recent OT move done quite simply because OT had gotten out of hand, and Simon and I have gotten tired of the bitching and moaning. Nothing more and nothing less. Sean (the pilot) acted a s a great sounding board for ideas and offered his opinion. No black helicopters, no star chamber.

Pretty boring, eh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, beaubo is spot on.

Parnel, you keep whining about "censorship". There is no right to freedom of speech on FT. The TOS is pretty clear on what is and what is not allowed. You can say pretty much anything you want, you just can't call people juvenile names (like you yourself have demonstrated dozens of time on this thread alone).

Why can't you just move on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Once again, beaubo is spot on.

Parnel, you keep whining about "censorship". There is no right to freedom of speech on FT. The TOS is pretty clear on what is and what is not allowed. You can say pretty much anything you want, you just can't call people juvenile names (like you yourself have demonstrated dozens of time on this thread alone).

Why can't you just move on?

I long ago moved on and have no desire to move back. I also think the FT model is "broken" and censorship is the "odour de jour";you're correct pretty much anything can be stated; lies; innundos and plain libel are allowed, and protected, but you can't call someone an asshole directly for their dumb comments. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meanwhile, as interesting as this thread is, and I have read every post, it strikes me that the recent moves on FT have been motivated, in part, to appease some posters who work for AC and are paid to keep the board focussed on AC (and not Porter), but also to make the board more competitive with CanFlyer. .

Who would those posters be? Many AC employee's no longer bother posting anything there. No one at AC is paid by AC to be on Flyertalk.

Since I don’t have access to Air Canada’s or Aeroplan’s payrolls nor a key to translate Flyertalk names into real names, I can’t say for certain which Flyertalkers are AC/AP employees. And, since I am not privy to individual conversations between AC/AP employees and their supervisors or managers, I can’t say for certain what some of them are being paid to do. I’ll edit my post.

What I have observed is that some FTers reaction to the Porter thread was quite irrational given the relative tolerance for other OT threads, such as the Dell thread and many, many others. They just couldn’t stand the fact that the Porter thread existed, even though all Porter talk was consolidated into a single thread in order to keep noise to a minimum, and even though much of the thread concerned Air Canada’s response to Porter and Jazz’ ex-operations at the Island.

The only rational explanation I can think of, given that other off-topic posts were acceptable, is that Air Canada learned from the WestJet experience and was determined to nip Porter in the bud. Whether AC/AP employees were being paid directly to kill the Porter thread, or just did it out of loyalty to AC, it is clear the requests to get the Porter thread off the AP board were not entirely made in good faith. Had they been we would have seen a similar objection to Dell, but that only happened once the Porter thread refused to die naturally. And skofarell, I was not suggesting the moderators were on the payroll, just the FTers whose whining succeeded in getting the moderators to bury the Porter thread deeper in the site.

Air Canada is clearly threatened by Porter. I am sure that is why they changed their advertising to look like Porter’s. Given AC’s and AP’s reputations for dirty deals and the extent they will go to, to wipe out even the tiniest threat, it’s not much of a logical leap to observe the behaviour of some Flyertalkers and figure they are motivated by something other than keeping down the noise or clutter on the AP board at FT. And given the way they extol Air Canada one conclusion pops quickly to mind.

All this, however, is beside the point. My real intention in posting that message was to say that CanFlyer does not have to keep comparing itself to FT nor give FT additional traffic that just supports its advertising sales. CF is an interesting and valuable site in its own right and when the AP moderators on FT tell us we will have to go to another board to get our Porter news, they shouldn’t assume it will be another FT board. CanFlyer also has an interesting Porter thread, it’s just that it used to be two more clicks further away than the FT Porter thread. If it were me, now that the AP/AC board on FT has nothing to offer that isn’t also available on CanFlyer, and if I disliked FT as much as some here on CF say they do, I would indeed leave them alone to stew in their own FT juices.

By the way, I have never flown Porter; I just enjoyed the banter on their thread and I am still on FT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I have observed is that some FTers reaction to the Porter thread was quite irrational given the relative tolerance for other OT threads, such as the Dell thread and many, many others.

They don't just pick on Porter. The reaction was not disimilar to the reaction to anything related to WJ prior to the somnolent separate WJ Forum being created.

I do not believe the "objectors" are AC employees, merley AC purists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I have observed is that some FTers reaction to the Porter thread was quite irrational given the relative tolerance for other OT threads, such as the Dell thread and many, many others.

They don't just pick on Porter. The reaction was not disimilar to the reaction to anything related to WJ prior to the somnolent separate WJ Forum being created.

I do not believe the "objectors" are AC employees, merley AC purists.

Actually you have that in reverse in terms of WETJET....the noise got louder when some known conspiracy guy started to play dirty with facts and figures putting "ROSEY" BS in his posts. There were also plenty of WETJET purists who came along and turned up the volume.

As for Porter I don't think AC/Jazz fears them or hates them. There was a dirty deal on the building lease and a sole source exclusive lease arrangement was made on a government owned building. That's my bitch about Porter as I will never fly them because I don't live near their airport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since I don’t have access to Air Canada’s or Aeroplan’s payrolls nor a key to translate Flyertalk names into real names, I can’t say for certain which Flyertalkers are AC/AP employees. And, since I am not privy to individual conversations between AC/AP employees and their supervisors or managers, I can’t say for certain what some of them are being paid to do. I’ll edit my post.

What I have observed is that some FTers reaction to the Porter thread was quite irrational given the relative tolerance for other OT threads, such as the Dell thread and many, many others. They just couldn’t stand the fact that the Porter thread existed, even though all Porter talk was consolidated into a single thread in order to keep noise to a minimum, and even though much of the thread concerned Air Canada’s response to Porter and Jazz’ ex-operations at the Island.

The only rational explanation I can think of, given that other off-topic posts were acceptable, is that Air Canada learned from the WestJet experience and was determined to nip Porter in the bud. Whether AC/AP employees were being paid directly to kill the Porter thread, or just did it out of loyalty to AC, it is clear the requests to get the Porter thread off the AP board were not entirely made in good faith. Had they been we would have seen a similar objection to Dell, but that only happened once the Porter thread refused to die naturally. And skofarell, I was not suggesting the moderators were on the payroll, just the FTers whose whining succeeded in getting the moderators to bury the Porter thread deeper in the site.

Air Canada is clearly threatened by Porter. I am sure that is why they changed their advertising to look like Porter’s. Given AC’s and AP’s reputations for dirty deals and the extent they will go to, to wipe out even the tiniest threat, it’s not much of a logical leap to observe the behaviour of some Flyertalkers and figure they are motivated by something other than keeping down the noise or clutter on the AP board at FT. And given the way they extol Air Canada one conclusion pops quickly to mind.

All this, however, is beside the point. My real intention in posting that message was to say that CanFlyer does not have to keep comparing itself to FT nor give FT additional traffic that just supports its advertising sales. CF is an interesting and valuable site in its own right and when the AP moderators on FT tell us we will have to go to another board to get our Porter news, they shouldn’t assume it will be another FT board. CanFlyer also has an interesting Porter thread, it’s just that it used to be two more clicks further away than the FT Porter thread. If it were me, now that the AP/AC board on FT has nothing to offer that isn’t also available on CanFlyer, and if I disliked FT as much as some here on CF say they do, I would indeed leave them alone to stew in their own FT juices.

By the way, I have never flown Porter; I just enjoyed the banter on their thread and I am still on FT.

It pretty obvious that you have a dislike for AC so it's really no surprise that you would accuse the employee's of being behind some nefarious plot to remove the Porter thread. It wouldn't occur to you that maybe some of the people might actually want the FT Aeroplan forum to be just that, AC Aeroplan.

Not that you'll consider anything I say, after all I work for what in your mind must be the evil empire. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It pretty obvious that you have a dislike for AC so it's really no surprise that you would accuse the employee's of being behind some nefarious plot to remove the Porter thread. It wouldn't occur to you that maybe some of the people might actually want the FT Aeroplan forum to be just that, AC Aeroplan.

Not that you'll consider anything I say, after all I work for what in your mind must be the evil empire. :roll:

No, if you check my posting history on FT, which I admit is fairly meagre, you'll find I am generally quite positive about AC even when others are trashing them. I like flying on AC, my beef is with AP which keeps promising to post about half a dozen flights on AC metal from May 2007 (some of them in paid J) but which as of yesterday morning, still hadn't done so even though they have had my tickets and original boarding passes since the middle of June.

This year I have enough travel to easily make SE, and most of it is concentrated in the last 4 months of the year. But when AP failed to post my flights, I got nervous and bailed, and so will likely make platinum on Flying Blue instead (as well as elite on AP). All those miles, and those of my team members, are lost to AC because of their dysfunctional loyalty program, and frankly it hurts to be missing out on the fall promos, but I can't make SE or take advantage of the promos if I can't rely on them to post my flights. You know LOTS of people have posting problems with AP.

My comments are not about AC's evil empire. I use the example of irrational objections to Porter by what others call AC apologists, leading to a diminution of the value of the AC/AP forum on FT to make my real point which is that CanFlyer is a good board in its own right and doesn't need to keep sending business to FlyerTalk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
THURSDAY OCTOBER 4 PRE THANKSGIVING DO

WEATHER TO DETERMINE LOCATION...... PATIO OR INSIDE LOCATION

PROBABLY PJ'S OR PILOT FROM LT WEATHER FORECAST I SAW

ATTENDEES SO FAR:

MELVILLE

THE LEV

STINGER

PARNEL

BOH

ZORN

WHY FLY

LET US KNOW YOU'RE COMING BY WAY OF PM, EMAIL, POST ON LINE,ETC.

I've gone from a definite to a maybe. I have a funeral to attend on the 4th, so my attendance depends how long things go on - she was Irish. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've gone from a definite to a maybe. I have a funeral to attend on the 4th, so my attendance depends how long things go on - she was Irish. :wink:

Faith and begorrah, I'm sure she's in heaven if she was Irish..we have a free pass because Ireland is so close to GB. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW, the Porter thread did not even come into the discussion about the changes on FT.

There was no pressure from any AC/AP employees/shareholders/purists or anything else.

The forum is now AC/AE, and the changes were entirely unrelated to any other airline.

Simon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FWIW, the Porter thread did not even come into the discussion about the changes on FT.

There was no pressure from any AC/AP employees/shareholders/purists or anything else.

The forum is now AC/AE, and the changes were entirely unrelated to any other airline.

Simon

Actually, Simon, it did. I, for one, raised it and there was at least one other person who agreed with me that some people were willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater to get rid of the Porter thread. If you are saying the moderators made a decision to dump all OT threads without considering that this would mean burying a thread that was still active nearly two years after it was started and had 950-odd posts then perhaps they should consider it now and re-visit their decision. Particularly given that this thread had generated a disproportionately large amount of grumbling among a certain small element.

Perhaps the Canadian travel industry is not large enough to support separate forums for each airline, as the Porter thread will fall into disuse where it is now. That will make a few people very happy given the tone of their posts but diminish the value of the AC/AE board for others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure how it can be claimed 'Porter' thread was 'dumped' or buried' into another forum.

The sticky at the top of the AC Forum specifically instructs how to navigate to find topics of interest. 'Porter' is in the 'Other North American Airline' Forum.

Its not buried there, rather it should have been there all along, but wasn't. Tweaks to make forums more organized are widespread on FT.

As a former volunteer on AC Forum, I can concur that there were no instructions, directives, hints, etc. about how other airline content should be treated....it was hard enough to get the attention from HQ about anything over a certain period of time!!!!

Best example I an think of, is when Independence Air popped up in UA's backyard at IAD. The United Forum had an 'Indedpendence' thread for awhile before spinning it off into its own forum, because it was launched as a national airline with critical mass to justiy its own forum, and not be in 'Other North American'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It pretty obvious that you have a dislike for AC so it's really no surprise that you would accuse the employee's of being behind some nefarious plot to remove the Porter thread. It wouldn't occur to you that maybe some of the people might actually want the FT Aeroplan forum to be just that, AC Aeroplan.

Not that you'll consider anything I say, after all I work for what in your mind must be the evil empire. :roll:

No, if you check my posting history on FT, which I admit is fairly meagre, you'll find I am generally quite positive about AC even when others are trashing them. I like flying on AC, my beef is with AP which keeps promising to post about half a dozen flights on AC metal from May 2007 (some of them in paid J) but which as of yesterday morning, still hadn't done so even though they have had my tickets and original boarding passes since the middle of June.

This year I have enough travel to easily make SE, and most of it is concentrated in the last 4 months of the year. But when AP failed to post my flights, I got nervous and bailed, and so will likely make platinum on Flying Blue instead (as well as elite on AP). All those miles, and those of my team members, are lost to AC because of their dysfunctional loyalty program, and frankly it hurts to be missing out on the fall promos, but I can't make SE or take advantage of the promos if I can't rely on them to post my flights. You know LOTS of people have posting problems with AP.

My comments are not about AC's evil empire. I use the example of irrational objections to Porter by what others call AC apologists, leading to a diminution of the value of the AC/AP forum on FT to make my real point which is that CanFlyer is a good board in its own right and doesn't need to keep sending business to FlyerTalk.

Now I wonder where I could have got the impression you dislike AC and it's employee's? Could it be that even though you admitted you are unsure which FT posters are AC employee's, it must be AC employee's trying to remove the Porter thread. :roll: There couldn't possible be other posters that would want it moved. It must be an AC initiative because everyone knows "Given AC’s and AP’s reputations for dirty deals and the extent they will go to, to wipe out even the tiniest threat,". :roll:

With all your "rational explanations" logical leaps" and only "conclusions" I simply must have come to my own rational explanation that based on the accusations you leveled at AC employees it was a simple logical leap that I concluded that you disliked AC and it employees.

Perhaps the real reason this thread has not been closed is because AC and its employee's here do not want it closed. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FWIW, the Porter thread did not even come into the discussion about the changes on FT.

There was no pressure from any AC/AP employees/shareholders/purists or anything else.

The forum is now AC/AE, and the changes were entirely unrelated to any other airline.

Simon

Actually, Simon, it did. I, for one, raised it and there was at least one other person who agreed with me that some people were willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater to get rid of the Porter thread.

You all may have discussed it after the fact, but I can assure you, it had absolutely zero to do with the decision taken by the moderators, and never even came up.

Simon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×