AMALH747430 wrote:One large thread as in the mega “2022 XX airline fleet (and/or network, news, etc..)” or “2022 XXX airport” threads.
Those threads don't get 400+ posts in the first 24 hours, they're up all year, and most average 6-10 posts per day. They're a little easier to follow.
AMALH747430 wrote:Which are inconsistent as well because there are different threads for fleet, network, and news for some airlines but one mega thread for others.
This is done based on user request. I combined the United thread into one for two years, and we got so many complaints that we went back to seperate threads. If you don't like the inconsistency, neither do I, but you'll have to take it up with the masses.
AMALH747430 wrote:Not to mention the mess and truncated discussions that it causes on January 1.
This is done as a compromise based on user request. We don't want to do that either.
AMALH747430 wrote:Discussing the effects of a merger on the rest of the US industry is totally germane to a merger discussion, especially here where we’re discussing the first major consolidation in the US ULCC segment. They aren’t separate discussions, they’re part and parcel of each other. It would be akin to discussing a hurricane without discussing the damage it caused, or discussing a car accident and not discussing the traffic backup it caused.
They are totally germane, but having them combined in the same discussion is your opinion, which is an opinion not shared by everyone else. It's not unreasonable for some users to want to have a strict merger discussion and another discussion discussing the affects on the rest of the industry. You've made it clear that this is your opinion, but the dozens of users who have reported posts and complained about it seem to disagree with you.
AMALH747430 wrote:However, policing a thread like that and forcing a new one to discuss part of the topic is unnecessary, creates more work for the moderators, and stifles discussion. I get that sometimes things go way off topic and need to be shut down, but this seemed needless and heavy handed. A good discussion was growing out of that thread because that particular facet gets down to a core issue with any merger in any industry.
We're doing what people are expecting from us. Not everyone is going to agree or be supportive. We have to make decisions based on what we think is best for discussion, which is what we've done here. Most of us have moderated here for 5-10 years or more, so we've been through these types of discussions a few times, and we generally know what seems to be the better plan in most situations. We don't always get it right, but I believe we have in this case. I am aware that you disagree, but unfortunately we cannot satisfy everyone's wishes.