Member Suspension Appreciation/Depreciation Thread - Page 28 - Cyclingnews Forum

Go Back   Cyclingnews Forum > Feedback > About the forum

About the forum Drop in, give us some feedback and talk to the team

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #271  
Old 02-20-13, 19:59
Dr. Maserati Dr. Maserati is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom375 View Post
I agree with this, i don't read the forum all the time but when i do i usually go back over specific threads for a period of time. It is usually obvious where that thread has derailed, it is usually a spat or something between members and you can see it develop. it shouldn't be so difficult to detect especially when directed to the heat of the moment exchange. -> Just go back. From memory Susan has a full time job so is not as easy (unless its her full time job to monitor the forum) but other mod/ads etc should have the time the spats are always in the same forums!!!
But it is rarely that easy.
A quick recent example - an LA thread derailed with discussion on Clinton that lead in to US politics. But Clinton was fairly introduced, as it was linked to an article - and the rebuttal was fair because it corrected a comment made. This evolved in to a discussion/debate.

Another example - in the Sky (or any team/riders) thread you have one group who assume anyone says rider/team X,Y or Z dopes is trolling - the other will think that any claim the X.Y or Z is not doping, is trolling.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom375 View Post
There should also be a more standardised way of bannination so that at least members have less right to discriminate against mods/admin directly. at the moment it seems a bit arbitrary hence the backlash against Joachim being banninated from one side of the forum. It also protects them from criticism against protection as was done when Hog was banned for only a week. Don't think ads or mods need that, anyway ideas probably pointless.
I am against lifetime bans - but 'standardization' only works for same offense, while both were trolling, Joachims level was much higher than TheHogs, so varying sanctions would apply.
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 02-20-13, 20:17
Froome19's Avatar
Froome19 Froome19 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 3,085
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Maserati View Post

I am against lifetime bans - but 'standardization' only works for same offense, while both were trolling, Joachims level was much higher than TheHogs, so varying sanctions would apply.
The problem is that I see with the Hog's ban is that it was obvious from the second that he was banned that when the Hog did come back he was not going to change his style of posting whatsoever. So what did the banning achieve? The Hog is never going to get banned extensively if he continues posting like he is so what is the point of the mods banning him. Admittedly "maybe" it makes him a bit timid but after a while he is back.The 3 strikes thing and you are out which is stickied everywhere is a good idea. If a poster has been banned multiple times you do get the idea that he is not going to get any better. Why bother to ban him again?

The mods seem to think that they need a serious offence in order to ban a poster permanently of for an extended period of time. I don't see it that way, if a poster has been banned before and is still causing trouble then why stick with him?

The problem with standardization is that everyone and their best friend believes that their situation is unique. Because he stole my teddy first or whatever. With so many mods who all have varying opinions and ways to deal with issues there is always then going to be a discrepancy in how they react compared with other mods and the rules will be upheld differently. It would be all so much easier if there was mods training school. But until then..
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Pistolero View Post
Gratz to Cav.
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 02-20-13, 20:38
Dr. Maserati Dr. Maserati is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froome19 View Post
The problem is that I see with the Hog's ban is that it was obvious from the second that he was banned that when the Hog did come back he was not going to change his style of posting whatsoever. So what did the banning achieve? The Hog is never going to get banned extensively if he continues posting like he is so what is the point of the mods banning him. Admittedly "maybe" it makes him a bit timid but after a while he is back.The 3 strikes thing and you are out which is stickied everywhere is a good idea. If a poster has been banned multiple times you do get the idea that he is not going to get any better. Why bother to ban him again?
But you do not know exactly why TheHog was banned.
So you cannot say that he is back doing what he got banned for again.

I agree they are trolling - but its subtle, and unless a mod follows (and looks back) at every post it wont get picked up. Any single post will not trigger action.

The same cannot be said of others - Joachim being a prime exampke.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Froome19 View Post
The mods seem to think that they need a serious offence in order to ban a poster permanently of for an extended period of time. I don't see it that way, if a poster has been banned before and is still causing trouble then why stick with him?
Again, I am against life bans - they are counter productive as a perma banned person will set up a new account, and will flagrantly ignore the rules, rinse repeat.

I would agree that the increasing ban which was in place was a much better option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froome19 View Post
The problem with standardization is that everyone and their best friend believes that their situation is unique. Because he stole my teddy first or whatever. With so many mods who all have varying opinions and ways to deal with issues there is always then going to be a discrepancy in how they react compared with other mods and the rules will be upheld differently. It would be all so much easier if there was mods training school. But until then..
Sorry, not really sure what you are saying here.

Banning should be a last option, so i can see why mods would offer a warning first. Unless the mods put in severe 'rules' then there will always be some inconsistency which is perfectly understandable.
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 02-20-13, 20:46
Tom375's Avatar
Tom375 Tom375 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Maserati View Post
But it is rarely that easy.
A quick recent example - an LA thread derailed with discussion on Clinton that lead in to US politics. But Clinton was fairly introduced, as it was linked to an article - and the rebuttal was fair because it corrected a comment made. This evolved in to a discussion/debate.

Another example - in the Sky (or any team/riders) thread you have one group who assume anyone says rider/team X,Y or Z dopes is trolling - the other will think that any claim the X.Y or Z is not doping, is trolling.



I am against lifetime bans - but 'standardization' only works for same offense, while both were trolling, Joachims level was much higher than TheHogs, so varying sanctions would apply.
True my good Doctor.. true. This sort of thing has happened to me a couple of times- in fact it happened to me today in the Pistorius forum where Homeopathic testosterone was brought up as this was part of the trial today unfortunately we got a bit side tracked, but i don't think anyone was deliberately derailing the thread, it was just a sort of side issue that come up and provided a bit of a laugh.

These situations are usually best moved on by a mod just coming in as Susan does and just saying "right back on topic"
I think the point is that you can usually see how this has happened sometimes its innocent - something related to the thread originally and just gone off track, but on other occasions you can see that its been brought about by deliberate baiting/trolling/personal attacks etc
I think there are certain threads such as the Sky and Armstrong ones which are more prone to deliberate derailment, baiting and personal attacks.
The Sky thread at the moment seems to me to have lost its value because there isn't really anything new to add there so people just go in there to wind each other up.

Anyway its not easy i appreciate that and no-one really knows what motivates different posters whether it be genuine or BS, can kind of tell over time though.
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 02-20-13, 20:52
Froome19's Avatar
Froome19 Froome19 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: London
Posts: 3,085
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Maserati View Post
But you do not know exactly why TheHog was banned.
So you cannot say that he is back doing what he got banned for again.
I can guess. And I have a feeling I would pretty accurate.

Quote:
Sorry, not really sure what you are saying here.

Banning should be a last option, so i can see why mods would offer a warning first. Unless the mods put in severe 'rules' then there will always be some inconsistency which is perfectly understandable.
I don't mind inconsistency though obviously I would prefer consistency, but my point is that everybody on here has their own opinion and their own belief about how things should be run and which things are fair and which are not. Sticking to rules and not varying from them is therefore very difficult when people are banging on the door every second with different excuses. The many mods do not help the situation.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Pistolero View Post
Gratz to Cav.
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 02-20-13, 21:22
ElChingon's Avatar
ElChingon ElChingon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: En el Internet, and Hiding from the UCI
Posts: 5,834
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Susan Westemeyer View Post
You obviously do not remember the circumstances which led to his ban.

Susan
I remember as clearly as I remember how a certain mod broke Dan's Tour time frame rules and not one thing was done. DAOTEC was left out to hang by taunts which are still there, unlike the mod's offensive posts which were for some odd reason removed, hummm... I still have the copy by the way.
__________________
CyclingNews Forum Member Number 1. (verified)
All my posts are of my own opinion.
October 10, 2012 The Reasoned Decision
Points: 10 CN Infraction Points
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 02-20-13, 21:30
Susan Westemeyer's Avatar
Susan Westemeyer Susan Westemeyer is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 7,312
Default

He was banned for insulting other members and then permanently banned for returning under another name while banned. Very much not allowed.

Susan
__________________
I dream of a better world, where chickens can cross the road without having their motives questioned.
Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 02-20-13, 21:44
Dr. Maserati Dr. Maserati is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froome19 View Post
I can guess. And I have a feeling I would pretty accurate.
That you have to guess means you do not know, simple.

But - why not post your opinion or guess?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Froome19 View Post
I don't mind inconsistency though obviously I would prefer consistency, but my point is that everybody on here has their own opinion and their own belief about how things should be run and which things are fair and which are not. Sticking to rules and not varying from them is therefore very difficult when people are banging on the door every second with different excuses. The many mods do not help the situation.
Sure, but again you appear to be looking for consistent sanctions for different levels of rule breaking.
Whatever way you want to slice it TheHog and Joachim were doing different things.
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 02-20-13, 21:47
Dr. Maserati Dr. Maserati is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,035
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElChingon View Post
I remember as clearly as I remember how a certain mod broke Dan's Tour time frame rules and not one thing was done. DAOTEC was left out to hang by taunts which are still there, unlike the mod's offensive posts which were for some odd reason removed, hummm... I still have the copy by the way.
I don't really remember Daotecs original 'offense' but you don't appear to rebut that they did something to get a sanction.
Coming back with a sock puppet or new account will make that a perma ban.

To the highlighted, then why not post them?
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 02-20-13, 22:24
ElChingon's Avatar
ElChingon ElChingon is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: En el Internet, and Hiding from the UCI
Posts: 5,834
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Maserati View Post
To the highlighted, then why not post them?
Welcome to the forum.
__________________
CyclingNews Forum Member Number 1. (verified)
All my posts are of my own opinion.
October 10, 2012 The Reasoned Decision
Points: 10 CN Infraction Points
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:41.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.