What a useless thread aimed at starting a witch hunt amongst members.
This is a forum where members spend their spare time, sometimes people are busy sometimes they are not. Don't make this a job that people have to perform in addition to their real life duties. It will only result in them going inactive sooner.
Started by a member who himself was thrown out of T.T, so clearly any "nobility" in this cause is baseless. The objective of the think tank was to bring sanity. Granted, it hasnt worked out in many cases(
and I am the first to admit that) but where it has, it has worked wonderfully. Many discussions outside the forum are "guided" and kept on track where possible based on their support.
Contrary to the usual rant based idea that Think tanks should post frequently is based on flooding this forum with ideas (
as if we dont have enough already) of "What if the PAF had 35 gazillion dollars?", "What if M.M Alam fought as a tank gunner in the battle of Chawinda, we might have won it".
"What if the Pakistan Army flew the fighters and the airforce fought on the ground?", "What if the Navy ditched all its submarine for WWII battlecruisers fitted with missiles". "What if pigs flew?"
I would rather wait 6 months for one good idea(
which does come), than have them churning out nonsense every three hours.
What agitates many members here is the title itself. The role that most PDF Think Tank Analysts fulfill has zero resemblance to what real world think tank staff do, so the title creates expectations that cannot be met. If the title were changed to something more accurate, like "PDF Cadre," I suspect that 99% of the complaints would disappear.
@MastanKhan This is a tidy way to close the circle. We discussed this very issue shortly after I first joined PDF, you may recall:
Think Tank Analysts and Site Staff
Between the titled users I missed at the time, and the appointments that have been made since, there are probably in excess of 100 titled users on PDF now, so the appropriate conclusion to draw is that there is nothing selective about the title. Most users are confounded by the apparent conflict between the stated criteria in this thread and the actual TTA appointments. Instead, one should study the particular behavior patterns of users who have been appointed to TTA status over the last year to discern what the true criteria are for elevation. This was hinted at by
@Syed.Ali.Haider 's clever and subtle comments in the writer's contest thread predicting who will be appointed next to the TTA role.
The PDF staff have their own criteria and their own vision for how PDF should develop, and will not be influenced to change. Therefore, one can accept this under the rubric of "their site, their rules," or one can decide that it's time to move on and look for a better fit elsewhere.
I do not disagree with this issue, but that is compounded by my very issue with all the other titles of "SENIOR, ELITE" and so on. These are based on who posts more nonsense first rather than who actually posts good stuff. I am not sure how to take an ELITE member whose time is usually spent posting pictures of women in skimpy clothes.
There is NOTHING elite about posting more or SENIOR or so on. We have members here who joined in 2008 and have only posted 300 times with each of those worth reading, and members who joined last year who have posted 20000 pieces of trash but have that SENIOR title to them.
That being said, the "PDF Cadre" moniker aside, there has been induction of good posters within the ranks to offset any "Cadre" complaints and they do their title Justice.
At the end this is an online forum, with anyone capable of stating who they are. Chances are that leave a few, most are quite the opposite to what they claim to be here. The internet gives that ability to claim anonymity to fat couch potato men to claim they are the next incarnation of Angelina Jolie. But that anonymity also means that someone does not get hunted down for their opinion and shot in the head because we have no shortage of nuts in Pakistan.
At the end, this is all much ado about something that is being addressed by better informed people.
