How should AFF receive new poster "rants"......

[juddles]

Hi all,
am not really sure how to frame this, but due to a recent thread, I was left wondering about a few issues.
Essentially, this is about how the general AFF community should respond to first-time posters "with a grudge".

IE someone new appears and posts what is usually known as a "rant" - airline "X" did YZ to them, etc. This is a common thing, and usually said new posters disappear within a few days - for whatever reasons.

I understand that many negative things affect travellers, and when fighting a huge company, the chance to let loose here is attractive.

But in this recent thread it was claimed that AFF as a whole is not welcoming to new people (a claim I totally reject).

There are many sides to this. My personal position is that each and every thread should stand on its own merits. But it appears many think that a new poster should not be questioned. As that may scare them away from AFF?

I may be wrong, but in all the myriad threads I have seen, there is no barrier to new members. The only barrier ever raised seems to be common sense.

If a new member just wants airtime to bag whatever airline , etc, and to not scare him off we must simply agree with whatever they post, this seems garbage to me. Waste of time all round.

Opinions?

 

[burmans]

We should judge them on the facts, simple. I don't agree that in general we are welcoming at all, yes it is certainly true that many first time posters tell a one sided story and have a grudge but some grudges are in fact valid. There is a great propensity of some here to attack early, attack often, to assume they have an absolute right to be heard and if they don't get as much information that in their opinions they deserve to abuse the OP in quite strident terms.

My view is definitely that we have a right to question but posters have a right to respect, I.e. question respectfully. Far too many here make early accusations that are not supported by the evidence, including fraud, illegality, lying, deceit. This is in my view way over the line and in my view accusations people wouldn't be making if they didn't have some anonimity as afforded by the forum. For some basic levels of respect has gone out the door.

 

[serfty]

Kid Gloves!

If you disagree with a post by any member (old or new), there is nothing wrong with politely posting that disagreement.

In doing so, make it clear you do not agree with the post. Do not disparage the member, nor continue to rehash the same point.

For some it seems all two hard in a 140 character world.

 

[RooFlyer]

Being a venue for having a whinge is a good way to get new people into AFF. And that's good I think. Especially, as in a recent case, when the ranter asked for opinions on their case.

In general they should be listened to with sympathy and respect and not attacked by the airline fans out there because they haven't put their case forward like a QC might. More, if they, newbies, don't conform with what some, or indeed many think is the standard of 'disclosure' that is 'required' to be believed, then they should be given a break.

They are newbies, for goodness sake. If they hang around hopefully we'll all benefit.

One of the reason many of the beginners disappear quickly is because of the hostile reception they get from 'old hands' who simply can't believe their favourite airline could behave in such a manner or if all documents haven't been posted for all to scrutinise. I have doubted a few new ranters, but I hope I've shown a bit of respect and encouragement in doing so.

The key aspect here is "newbie".

Give 'em a break.

 

[juddles]

We should judge them on the facts, simple. I don't agree that in general we are welcoming at all, yes it is certainly true that many first time posters tell a one sided story and have a grudge but some grudges are in fact valid. There is a great propensity of some here to attack early, attack often, to assume they have an absolute right to be heard and if they don't get as much information that in their opinions they deserve to abuse the OP in quite strident terms.

My view is definitely that we have a right to question but posters have a right to respect, I.e. question respectfully. Far too many here make early accusations that are not supported by the evidence, including fraud, illegality, lying, deceit. This is in my view way over the line and in my view accusations people wouldn't be making if they didn't have some anonimity as afforded by the forum. For some basic levels of respect has gone out the door.

Thank you burman for opening the floor. I get where you are coming from.

I must suggest, meekly, that in many recent such threads it appears to me (I acknowledge I may perceive things wrong), that the weight of what is an "accusation" has shifted way too far. I started this thread because of someone (an OP) who accused Virgin of stealing from them. A truly serious accusation. Nothing was offered by the OP to substantiate this, but the thread ended up with a tirade from some against those who simply asked for more detail from the OP.

The dynamic in this thread was scary for me. Anyone who did not simply agree and nod in hatred of airlines, anyone who just asked for more detail, was attacked, by AFF members!! How is this good?

 

[juddles]

Being a venue for having a whinge is a good way to get new people into AFF. And that's good I think. Especially, as in a recent case, when the ranter asked for opinions on their case.

In general they should be listened to with sympathy and respect and not attacked by the airline fans out there because they haven't put their case forward like a QC might. More, if they, newbies, don't conform with what some, or indeed many think is the standard of 'disclosure' that is 'required' to be believed, then they should be given a break.

They are newbies, for goodness sake. If they hang around hopefully we'll all benefit.

One of the reason many of the beginners disappear quickly is because of the hostile reception they get from 'old hands' who simply can't believe their favourite airline could behave in such a manner or if all documents haven't been posted for all to scrutinise. I have doubted a few new ranters, but I hope I've shown a bit of respect and encouragement in doing so.

The key aspect here is "newbie".

Give 'em a break.

Rooflyer, I really respect your input and opinions. But please help me out here - can you tell me who / how the poster in that thread was attacked?? This is what I do not get???

 

[juddles]

What am I missing?

 

[RooFlyer]

The dynamic in this thread was scary for me. Anyone who did not simply agree and nod in hatred of airlines, anyone who just asked for more detail, was attacked, by AFF members!! How is this good?

I think you'll find that one person's 'questioning' is another members 'attack'.

I will always differentiate in any reply I give on the basis of : is the poster a newbie, relatively new, or an experienced AFFer. If the latter, might they "know" me, and how much do I need to explain my thinking, or will they know where I am coming from?

But this thread is about newbies having a rant. Good luck to em. It's theraputic. Unless I think the newbie is truly having a lend ( and there's been a few I can recall) in general I'll go into bat for them.

 

[juddles]

.....
But this thread is about newbies having a rant. Good luck to em. It's theraputic. .....

If you get rid of the conspiracy theories, I think that is exactly it - having a vent is theraputic. I love, as a fellow human being, that people can vent and reduce stress.

But I also reserve the right to call "bs" when that is too obvious

 

[RooFlyer]

Rooflyer, I really respect your input and opinions. But please help me out here - can you tell me who / how the poster in that thread was attacked?? This is what I do not get???

In the thread you are talking about, the OP was strongly taken to task for redacting a doc they posted.

Even after the OP did a mia culpa and acknowledged, with good humour, they they shouldn't have done so, AND after the OP said the issue had been resolved by the airline in their favour, one member ( not you) continued to have a go at the OP for the redaction.

I thought that was poor form, and I said so.

I probably wouldn't have become so engaged if the OP wasnt a newbie.

 

[juddles]

Should AFF members agree with whatever a new member rants about? Just so they are not offended, or feel attacked? I have seen exceptionally reserved and calm, gentle contradictions, of what a ranter posts, and these are perceived as attacks.

 

[RooFlyer]

We'll all perceive things differently juddles. A newbie will likely perceive things more sensitivly than us old stagers.

You didn't know I was a champion for the downtrodden, did you?

 

[juddles]

In the thread you are talking about, the OP was strongly taken to task for redacting a doc they posted.

Even after the OP did a mia culpa and acknowledged, with good humour, they they shouldn't have done so, AND after the OP said the issue had been resolved by the airline in their favour, one member ( not you) continued to have a go at the OP for the redaction.

I thought that was poor form, and I said so.

I probably wouldn't have become so engaged if the OP wasnt a newbie.

Rooflyer, that is a very selective assessment. The hidden paragraph was crucial to the whole story. Not only did the OP redact it, but when constantly questioned about it, he LIED. He said it was minor details about the upgrade request. Later it turned out it was VA specifically saying they had researched all emails etc and that the charges were correct. This went against everything the OP had posted. Hiding this sort of thing, even if it gets resolved later, is clear selectivity of one's position.

 

[juddles]

This is why I posted this thread - it is my fear that when new posters chuck a rant, if you do not blindly agree with them, you are your self attacked.

 

[moa999]

I think I was the first to query the redaction, as at least on reading the letter there appeared to be information missing (something that seems all to common with first time posters).

But any requests for additional information should be done in the spirit of assistance not denigration.

 

[Milboo]

What I’ve seen is that no matter what the person has posted - if they’re ranting about a certain airline then a pack does rush in to defend said airline at all costs. Regardless of the issue.

I’ve never quite understood why people are so defensive of a corporation like that. It’s not a personal attack but some treat it like it is.

 

[juddles]

We'll all perceive things differently juddles. A newbie will likely perceive things more sensitivly than us old stagers.

You didn't know I was a champion for the downtrodden, did you?

I respect someone who is a champion for the truly downtrodden. But if you just let one pretender get through, you are no longer a champion for the downtrodden, - you become in the eyes of those watching just one of the huge pool of fools.

 

[RooFlyer]

Sorry juddles, not going to rehash that one. I left that thread because it was simply going over old, and by that time irrelevant stuff. It may be time to leave this one for the same reason.

If that OP hangs around, you and others will be entitled to take their posts with a grain of salt.

 

[jenib]

I was surprised by some of the reactions to the newbie - who had a serious problem with an airline and was asking for help.

I've seen the "they must be hiding something", "there are two sides to the story" type responses on another community (related to cruise lines) and frankly I was surprised to see it on an Australian ff site.

Personally, I hope that we don't fall into the trap of being smart a**es like I have seen on the other site, where the posts from newbies reduce over time and the community stagnates. The other site has started to readjust and the smart a**ses seem to have been pulled into line but I know lots of people have stopped posting there.

 

[Kerrodt]

Bear in mind that some “newbies” are nothing more than a Phoenix profile to write up a rant filled story full of half truths or pure fiction of a controversial nature just to stir up an online bunfight. They stir things up and quickly disappear to leave the real members having an argument amongst themselves. This isn’t anything unique to AFF.

Whenever I read a new thread that seems a bit too much of a rant I take a look to see how many posts they’ve made in the past. If it’s less than 10 I usually move on unless what they have said is utterly offensive or blatantly incorrect.

My advice to any poster, new or established, would be that before you write up your rant, make a post that’s asks a few questions about your situation to clarify your understanding of the proper processes or procedures that you think have fallen apart and caused you grief. The experience and knowledge on AFF will almost certainly provide you with a base of truth that you can then construct a valid argument to air your grievance in a civil manner.