Timeshare Units for Travel Agents to peddle

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

Hey, the original Sightings girl with another suggestion!

To us old folks, the forum headings OY seem simple, but to a newbie they are confusing. Everyone knows that no one on the Internet reads the fine print, or anything resembling instructions regardless of what size the print is.

So folks posts ads on Buying Selling Renting, stuff to exchange on Exchanging, etc.

It just seems natural that when you see Exchanging that your first thought is for a direct exchange, to see if someone might want to swap with you, and if you are trying to sell a timeshare and google takes you to TUG and you see Buying Selling Renting, you just say "Cool" and post an ad.

When they see Ask RCI, some just post about RCI. Over Here there is a forum for each exchange company, so if you want to talk about anything RCI you post on RCI.

OY there is not a General Timeshare discussion forum, so if a topic does not fit into any of the others it is to go on the Lounge. The Lounge-like forums Over Here don't have timeshare discussions.

Even after 8 years OY I find myself asking, "Where should I post this?" from time to time. For instance, given the forums OY, where should I have posted my recent polls, say, "Should RCI Rent or Sell Deposited Weeks?" Is that for the Exchanging forum, the Buying Selling Renting Forum, The Lounge?

People just do stuff that is not allowed without thinking too much about it or feeling they are doing wrong.

A long way to get to the point, which is that the rules for Ask RCI are significantly different than the rules for the other forums, which accounts for a lot of the monitoring that needs to be done. Sorta like the Sightings rule OY, some post the results to searches not knowing that is allowed only on the Sightings Board.

TUG should make the Ask RCI forum a forum where the original poster is the only one to ask a question, with no more questions or comments following the OP. Wonder if their software allows it?

[Hostelling Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Hostelling]

The only problem with them doing that would be that if they decided that they were going to be a rental company and not an exchange company, where would they get the properties to rent, they would not have an exchange pool to raid!!!

I think RCI sucks as a company. But that's probably for different reasons than those who loath RCI's rental activities.

I believe that RCI should change it's business model to 100% rentals or 0% rentals. Just decide already. I wish they would just admit which way they want to go and change all of their policies to reflect such as change. If they did, it would be easier to deal with. All the people who want to be in an exchange company could just quit and go elsewhere.

I recall reading in a recent thread, I think it was from an angry timeshare salesman, something about a clearing house of timeshare inventory that exchange companies access in order to boost their inventory.

[opkansas Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close opkansas]

TUG unquestionably WILL delete or close Ask RCI posts to protect RCI, and Dave will use double standards OY. I have seen too much of that myself.

Why were these replies not moved, instead of deleted?

This is but one more instance where the conduct by RCI is simply outrageous. They are looting the exchange system, ripping off members and undermining their affiliated resorts.

I hope this info has been passed on to the class action attorneys!

YES IT HAS!

[Dave M Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Dave M]

I'll weigh in since I have been severely criticized in this thread.

Deleting posts from an Ask RCI thread
First, there were a grand total of about three or four posts which I deleted from the thread in question, contrary to the OP's assertion there were "ABOUT 20 POSTS" to the thread. As I recall, every one of those three or four posts was a commentary such as, "I'm curious as to why Madge hasn't yet answered this question" or "I, too, would like to know the answer." Not a single post had any information that would provide any helpful information to the OP in the thread.

Thus, since those posts were slowing down Madge's response by several days, I invoked the rules of the forum to help the OP get a quicker response to Madge. I find it curious that the OP in this thread is criticizing me for trying to assist in getting a prompt answer from RCI, even after being directed to the explanatory thread.

Carolinian’s Suggestion and Comment
Carolinian makes an interesting suggestion, which I believe is worth considering. That is that where there are discussion posts on an Ask RCI thread that should be removed, we might consider moving them to a new thread, likely on the Exchanging forum. That wouldn't have made sense in this situation, because the posts that were deleted added nothing to the OP and wouldn't have made sense in a separate thread. However, I can see that there are some situations where, rather than simply directing those who might want to comment to start their own thread on the Exchanging forum, the moderators could facilitate such discussion by moving rather than deleting discussion. If moving such discussion doesn't make sense without the OP, the moderator can "copy" the entire thread to the other forum, deleting the extraneous posts only in the Ask RCI thread.

It's also worth noting that comments or discussion by other than Madge in an Ask RCI thread are not automatically deleted. Some limited discussion is allowed, even though that’s contrary to the posted rules for the forum, particularly where it follows Madge's response or where it doesn't slow her response, such as for a post made at approximately the same time as the OP's post in an Ask RCI thread.

As for Carolinian’s comment that "TUG unquestionably WILL delete or close Ask RCI posts to protect RCI", I don't believe there has ever, as far as I know, been a legitimate thread (see below) deleted from that forum, although some threads that don't pose a question to RCI have been moved to another forum, typically the Exchanging forum. That is in keeping with the rules for the forum, which provide that the forum is only for questions directed to RCI. As for threads that have been closed, I count five since August 1 (that's as far back as I went) that are closed:

• Two closures were to threads that posed no question for RCI to respond to. One of those was transferred to another forum. Thus, there was no purpose to the threads in that forum.
• One closure was to a thread wherein the OP was wondering how to find another question that had been asked on the forum. A moderator located the original question and linked to it and then, since there was no question for RCI, closed the "wondering" thread.
• One closure was a duplicate post (not permitted on TUG).
• One closure was to a request for an explanation of Ask RCI rules. I provided an explanation and then, since there was no question for RCI, I closed the thread. I also provided mechanics for the OP to follow up if there were still any unanswered questions on the rules.

The last thread is the only one I closed during that period.

Thus, there appear to be no threads that were closed during that period "to protect RCI", as Carolinian asserts. If there are some, I would appreciate being directed to them.

TUG’s “Be Courteous" Rule
I do recall that in the past - prior to August 2006, although I did not look back - there were some posts on that forum that failed to follow the "Be Courteous" TUG BBS rule. Posts that attack RCI or Madge in a discourteous manner are unnecessary. Even the most controversial questions can be asked politely. The post in question in the OP of this thread is an example of an attacking post that is asked in a courteous manner. The OP is asking why RCI isn't honoring their commitment. Fair question! We don't delete questions merely because the question might make Madge or RCI uncomfortable.

If there are future posts in that forum that run afoul of the “Be Courteous” rule, the rule will be again be enforced. My normal procedure, when deleting such a post, is to contact the OP and suggest that there might be a way to word the question, such as was successfully done with the question quoted in the OP of this thread, without being a you-know-what!

Being a Moderator
I’m enough of a realist to recognize that I’m not a perfect moderator. There are many, many moderating situations where significant judgment is involved. I’m sure my judgment differs from that of some other moderators who might do something differently in a very-close-call situation. That’s no different than two police officers who stop two motorists, each of whom is speeding by the same X miles per hour over the limit. The first officer gives a ticket and the second gives a warning. Both officers presumably did what they thought was right in the circumstances.

Similarly, the job of a moderator is tough because there is no textbook for every situation that a moderator might come across telling us how to handle that particular situation. Accordingly, two moderators, like the police officers, might handle the same situation differently. There is no way to avoid that, other than to discuss obvious situations that should be handled differently next time.

In fact, there was such a situation on the Ask RCI forum within the last three weeks, where a moderator closed a thread on the Ask RCI forum for what appeared to me to be a legitimate question for RCI. I had some discussion behind the scenes with the moderator, who subsequently decided to reopen the thread and let Madge answer the question.

[urple2 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close urple2]

Personally, I do not post a lot here or over there, but I stay out of the politics and disagreements and just learn and share about Timesharing.

The moderators on both of these boards do a wonderful job. I'm sure at times, it is a thankless job, but I would think most of us are very grateful for these Forums.

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

I only occaisionally visit the Ask RCI board at TUG. I find Madge MUCH less candid than the former II rep, CraigU on the old Ask II board, and also much less candid than Bootleg when he posted on both forums on RCI issues.

Another reason is that early on, I had several questions where Madge gave a general and evasive answer, and I asked for more specifics. The moderators closed the threads before Madge respnded to the followups saying the question had been answered. Obviously RCI did not want to give any more specifics and the TUG moderators facilitated that by closing the thread.

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

For information tempered with just the right amount of company policy and loyalty, compassion, honesty, sincerity, and realism, everyone needs an Inside Guy.

But that is not going to happen!

[opkansas Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close opkansas]

FROM DAVE M:
Deleting posts from an Ask RCI thread
First, there were a grand total of about three or four posts which I deleted from the thread in question, contrary to the OP's assertion there were "ABOUT 20 POSTS" to the thread. As I recall, every one of those three or four posts was a commentary such as, "I'm curious as to why Madge hasn't yet answered this question" or "I, too, would like to know the answer." Not a single post had any information that would provide any helpful information to the OP in the thread.

The comments such as: "I'm curious as to why Madge hasn't yet answered this question" or "I, too, would like to know the answer." I believe that these comments were EXTREMELY IMPORTANT and should have been retained because IF a LARGE number of people express their frustration, more solidarity would come in this quest against our "alleged" oppressor.

There recently was a POLL started by someone reference RCI and Rentals. I THOUGHT IT WAS OF SIGNIFICANT VALUE. But I was disappointed with the small numbers of members who expressed their opinions. To me, the most important element is not the answers, but the acknowledgement of the QUESTIONS facing us reference RCI.

Centuries ago, Cicero asked a question that NO ONE IN THE WORLD COULD ANSWER. The question was:

"WHAT IS THE ANSWER?"

Of course the question could not be answered as there was not any formulation of a question. In my opinion, deleting the responses stopped the interest in the thread until it was opened it up again in a different manner. The responses and the interest have been great.

[JLB Please excuse me, I'm a Dick. Not a moron just a Dick Find all posts View Profile Close JLB]

Again, touching on something that has to do with the differences on the two sites. The same poll has gotten more response Over Here, because of the poll feature, which keeps it on top and out front. Plus, a person can opt to be anonymous, not so much to protect themselves from Big Brother, but to be able to express an opinion some may not necessarily want others on these forums to see, as some place those who opin in a lesser light, or label them.

OY, the same poll, because of the lack of the poll feature, means that the poll threads go down the page. Out of sight, out of mind. And a person could not respond without being labeled RCI Lover or RCI Basher by some.

JMHO.

Someone

There recently was a POLL started by someone reference RCI and Rentals. I THOUGHT IT WAS OF SIGNIFICANT VALUE. But I was disappointed with the small numbers of members who expressed their opinions. To me, the most important element is not the answers, but the acknowledgement of the QUESTIONS facing us reference RCI.

[T. R. Oglodyte Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close T. R. Oglodyte]

The comments such as: "I'm curious as to why Madge hasn't yet answered this question" or "I, too, would like to know the answer." I believe that these comments were EXTREMELY IMPORTANT and should have been retained because IF a LARGE number of people express their frustration, more solidarity would come in this quest against our "alleged" oppressor.

To state your point differently, you believe that the purpose of the "Ask RCI" board at TUG should be changed.

Right now, the purpose of that board is to enable a person to ask a question of RCI, and get a response to their question, whatever that response might be. To that end the forum has established posting guidelines.

By your comment above, you are clearly taking exception to the application of those guidelines. You prefer that the question and thread be managed to provide a gauge of opinion regarding RCI in lieu of the previously established purpose of facilitating replies from RCI to questions posed.

That's certainly one approach. I trust that you will understand that others might not agree that threads in the Ask RCI forum should be redirected from their original purpose of allowing people to ask questions and get answers.

I also wonder if the person who asked the original question in that thread concurs with the hijacking his/her question for other peoples perceived higher and greater purposes?

[Arkansas Winger Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Arkansas Winger]

My thoughts on this

To quote the forum rules at TUG

FORUM RULES. READ THIS before posting in this forum!

The sole purpose of this forum is to provide a place to enter comments and questions directly to RCI regarding company policy, rules, procedures, ratings, products and services, etc, and to receive responses to those comments and questions directly from RCI.

My view on the subject is if anyone posts after the OP, in the Ask RCI forum, then it is no different than rudely interrupting someones conversation if they were standing there talking. If you want to make a comment about the post you should start a new thread quoting the post, most probably in the Exchanging Forum.

The other option would be not to frequent the site if you can't agree with the rules. Example: You come visit me, you don't smoke in my house. You don't agree with my rules then don't come see me.

[opkansas Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close opkansas]

To state your point differently, you believe that the purpose of the "Ask RCI" board at TUG should be changed. MY POSTS HAVE NOT BEEN MADE ON TUG. I REALLY DO NOT CARE WHAT TUG IS DOING. THIS GROUP IS MUCH MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN TUG.

Right now, the purpose of that board is to enable a person to ask a question of RCI, and get a response to their question, whatever that response might be. To that end the forum has established posting guidelines. I BELIEVE THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE LADY ASKED?

By your comment above, you are clearly taking exception to the application of those guidelines. You prefer that the question and thread be managed to provide a gauge of opinion regarding RCI in lieu of the previously established purpose of facilitating replies from RCI to questions posed.
AGAIN - SHE ASKED A QUESTION - I RESPONDED! MANY OTHERS HAVE RESPONDED AND WE DO NOT HAVE AN ANSWER!

That's certainly one approach. I trust that you will understand that others might not agree that threads in the Ask RCI forum should be redirected from their original purpose of allowing people to ask questions and get answers. I BELIEVE THE LADY ASKED A QUESTION AND EXPECTED AN ANSWER!

I also wonder if the person who asked the original question in that thread concurs with the hijacking his/her question for other peoples perceived higher and greater purposes?

I ASKED HER AND KNOW THE ANSWER. MAYBE YOU SHOULD ASK HER ALSO - PRIVATE MESSAGE PLEASE! IF YOU CONSIDER TRYING TO GET FAIR EXCHANGES FOR RCI WEEKS MEMBERS A HIGHER AND GREATER PURPOSE - YOU BET!