Log in:  

Register

Moderators

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

Moderators: Daniel Benson, Susan Westemeyer, Irondan

Re: Re:

12 May 2018 20:51

aphronesis wrote:
MarkvW wrote:
Beech Mtn wrote:Moderators should not post personal attacks like the following, which is quoted from the US politics thread and a discussion on criticism of John McCain:

Tonton wrote:I can point at some of his weaknesses and poor decisions too. I said that I disliked some of his stances, but he's more of an American that you or I will ever be.

I thought that you had some integrity, that you would appreciate such a public servant, in spite of all the rubbish that you post. I thought that you were not so bad. What happened to you?


Scott says he reported it. I tried to report it, and got the "already reported" message. So the mods have seen it. Thus far it apprears that no visible action has been taken, as the post still stands, unedited.

What happened to the polite new requirements for the politics thread?


I looked at that thread. Some rando accuses another rando of having a "persecution complex," then complains a gentle chiding by another poster deserves forum discipline.

Just let the snowflakes melt, Rupert.


And we know that you, having amassed 5000 posts saying nothing more than “cycling dopes, filthy, icky; Lance were the doperest” and sometimes ranging into the mod thread to denounce injustices in the virtual world, are beyond all snowflakery as it pertains here?


Exactly! And I can tolerate personal attacks from you quite easily.
User avatar MarkvW
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,228
Joined: 10 Aug 2010 20:13

12 May 2018 20:59

My good man. We all know that did not nearly rise to the level of a personal attack. It was a questioning of the criteria you’ve established by which to weigh in. (And why you feel the need to do so in this thread w/o creds but the biogrphical. But that’s OT.)
aphronesis
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,678
Joined: 30 Jul 2011 16:47
Location: Bed-Stuy

Re:

12 May 2018 21:02

aphronesis wrote:My good man. We all know that did not nearly rise to the level of a personal attack. It was a questioning of the criteria you’ve established by which to weigh in. (And why you feel the need to do so in this thread w/o creds but the biogrphical. But that’s OT.)


Exactly!
User avatar MarkvW
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,228
Joined: 10 Aug 2010 20:13

12 May 2018 21:07

There’s a history of the “randoms” in the pol thread.

Nice to see you. Hey I hear Lance still has terrible taste in music and art and was doing shots in a bar.
aphronesis
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,678
Joined: 30 Jul 2011 16:47
Location: Bed-Stuy

Re:

13 May 2018 05:00

Beech Mtn wrote:Moderators should not post personal attacks like the following, which is quoted from the US politics thread and a discussion on criticism of John McCain:

Tonton wrote:I can point at some of his weaknesses and poor decisions too. I said that I disliked some of his stances, but he's more of an American that you or I will ever be.

I thought that you had some integrity, that you would appreciate such a public servant, in spite of all the rubbish that you post. I thought that you were not so bad. What happened to you?


Scott says he reported it. I tried to report it, and got the "already reported" message. So the mods have seen it. Thus far it apprears that no visible action has been taken, as the post still stands, unedited.

What happened to the polite new requirements for the politics thread?


I reported it. First time ever reporting a post. The post in and of itself wasn’t all that bad but given the recent history on this board I felt as if Tonton was baiting me to ban me. I’ve been assured by another mod that wasn’t the case. I invited Tonton to PM me to discuss. So far no response.

Given the thickness of the ice and the slippery banana peel I’m standing on wrt this forum I’m confident, if reversed, had I questioned Tonton’s integrity, I would have - without a doubt - been banned forever. My opinion.
Instigating profanity laced tirades since 2009
User avatar Scott SoCal
Veteran
 
Posts: 11,640
Joined: 08 Nov 2012 16:47
Location: Southern California

13 May 2018 14:13

My sense has always been that it's a tricky thing for lots of mods to cruise into the contentious points of the politics thread without being perceived as having some flex behind their positions. Over time some have shown to be a lot more adept at this and nuanced on the issues than others. Alpe’s biases were known, but, to his credit, he stayed away from coming down on the topics that he wasn’t comfortable with when he was around for the discussions.

Tonton’s appearances have been more bluster than substance as if his positions should be assumed rather than elaborated. I would think you could disarticulate that stance without making an issue of personal integrity.
aphronesis
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,678
Joined: 30 Jul 2011 16:47
Location: Bed-Stuy

20 May 2018 17:38

Only a week ban for racism? Sounds very lenient to me.
User avatar Benotti69
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,517
Joined: 26 May 2010 09:09

Re:

21 May 2018 13:25

Benotti69 wrote:Only a week ban for racism? Sounds very lenient to me.


The comments made were borderline towards riders of certain nationalities. But from our view the intention was there and deserved some time out. It was also the first time we’ve had to deal with that poster, so we usually go for a reduced ban first time with harsher penalties for repeat offenders.
User avatar Pricey_sky
Moderator
 
Posts: 6,063
Joined: 12 Jul 2012 14:05
Location: Kidderminster, England

25 May 2018 18:14

Could something be done about posts that are completely unrelated to doping being posted in the Clinic? I strongly feel those posts should go in the Road section.
User avatar hrotha
Veteran
 
Posts: 15,727
Joined: 10 Jun 2010 20:45

04 Jun 2018 20:46

1.) El Pistolero has been banned until 8/5/2018 for trolling immediately after coming back from a ban for trolling.


Interesting, considering it's now 4/6/2018. :p
Aka The Ginger One.
User avatar RedheadDane
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,768
Joined: 05 May 2010 13:47
Location: Viking Land! (Aros)

Re:

26 Jun 2018 20:21

RedheadDane wrote:
1.) El Pistolero has been banned until 8/5/2018 for trolling immediately after coming back from a ban for trolling.


Interesting, considering it's now 4/6/2018. :p

:lol:

We need El Pistolero for the Tour!!!
User avatar Escarabajo
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,352
Joined: 16 Apr 2009 18:38
Location: USA - Central Time

Re:

26 Jun 2018 20:23

hrotha wrote:Could something be done about posts that are completely unrelated to doping being posted in the Clinic? I strongly feel those posts should go in the Road section.

I have seen it once before but the main reason was because he was expecting comments related to doping in the first place even if initially the topics were not related to it. Maybe that is the reason.

You would think that a lot of the power output posts are not related to doping but it is open to it all the time.
User avatar Escarabajo
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,352
Joined: 16 Apr 2009 18:38
Location: USA - Central Time

29 Jun 2018 10:03

I've not seen any reports about posts in the wrong place.We don't read every thread so if you have a problem with a post you need to report it. The function isn't just to complain about the poster, we're more than happy for people to use it to report things like this.
Vincenzo Nibali:
"I know how to ride a bike"

Reduce your carbon footprint, ride steel.
User avatar King Boonen
Administrator
 
Posts: 7,432
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 14:38

Re: Moderators

01 Jul 2018 00:04

Full Retard:

Stiller's film is, ostensibly at least, about Hollywood. The point it's making about people with learning difficulties is that the movies sanitise their plight. The character Stiller plays is a fading film-star who has himself just portrayed a gibbering, goofy dimwit in a film called Simple Jack. According to a colleague, this has ruined his career. His mistake was to go "full-retard". To win an Oscar you should only go "part-retard", like Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man or Tom Hanks in Forrest Gump.

This isn't just accurate and amusing; it's important. For decades, Hollywood colluded in the dismissal of disability by ignoring it. Its current practice of glamorising the subject is perhaps even more pernicious. Understanding of dementia was set back, rather than advanced, by its rosy misrepresentation in Away From Her. The movies' insistence that manic depression and autism come accompanied by good looks, unusual charm and near-magical powers hasn't endeared people with these conditions to the rest of us. It's increased the burden on them, by arousing unrealistic expectations of their capacities.

By using the word "retard", Stiller relocates those to whom it's applied back in the real world. By acknowledging the distaste they may inspire, he does them the service of taking their situation seriously. And he reminds audiences that cinema's reluctance to engage honestly with them is ultimately the fault of cinemagoers themselves, not the studios, which must work within the parameters of acceptability.



https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2008/sep/22/tropicthunder.benstiller
User avatar thehog
Veteran
 
Posts: 21,481
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 20:00

Re: Moderators

01 Jul 2018 11:06

thehog wrote:Full Retard:

Stiller's film is, ostensibly at least, about Hollywood. The point it's making about people with learning difficulties is that the movies sanitise their plight. The character Stiller plays is a fading film-star who has himself just portrayed a gibbering, goofy dimwit in a film called Simple Jack. According to a colleague, this has ruined his career. His mistake was to go "full-retard". To win an Oscar you should only go "part-retard", like Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man or Tom Hanks in Forrest Gump.

This isn't just accurate and amusing; it's important. For decades, Hollywood colluded in the dismissal of disability by ignoring it. Its current practice of glamorising the subject is perhaps even more pernicious. Understanding of dementia was set back, rather than advanced, by its rosy misrepresentation in Away From Her. The movies' insistence that manic depression and autism come accompanied by good looks, unusual charm and near-magical powers hasn't endeared people with these conditions to the rest of us. It's increased the burden on them, by arousing unrealistic expectations of their capacities.

By using the word "retard", Stiller relocates those to whom it's applied . By acknowledging the distaste they may inspire, he does them the service of taking their situation seriously. And he reminds audiences that cinema's reluctance to engage honestly with them is ultimately the fault of cinemagoers themselves, not the studios, which must work within the parameters of acceptability.



https://www.theguardian.com/film/filmblog/2008/sep/22/tropicthunder.benstiller


A plausible defence of the way that the phrase is used in that film, perhaps. But "relocating those to whom it's applied back in the real world', and 'taking their[mentally disabled people's] situation seriously' is absolutely no part of the intention of those who use the term in relation to doping in cycling or other sports.

There are plenty of possibilities in the language for suggesting that something is over-the-top, undisguised, blatant, unrestrained, ill-considered etc without using terms that are offensive. Referring to the technical use of the term serves only to highlight how inappropriate it is here: using it as something 'humorous' is simply immature.
User avatar Armchair cyclist
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3,999
Joined: 22 Mar 2010 17:28
Location: East of England, West of Ireland

03 Jul 2018 15:58

My heart goes out to all the moderators and admins who have the handle the aftermatch of the Froome case these days.. :D
User avatar Dekker_Tifosi
Veteran
 
Posts: 24,020
Joined: 13 Mar 2009 23:52
Location: Roermond, the Netherlands

03 Jul 2018 16:39

Same, the posts have been pretty crazy back and forth. Hard work for a thankless job for the most part.
User avatar SHAD0W93
Member
 
Posts: 803
Joined: 13 Aug 2011 03:50

Re:

03 Jul 2018 16:51

Dekker_Tifosi wrote:My heart goes out to all the moderators and admins who have the handle the aftermatch of the Froome case these days.. :D

Agreed. I'm a mod on another board and when a polarizing event happens it can be brutal. I know from experience how much members can help by avoiding quoting any offending posts.....the quoted items can pile up quickly and just add fuel to the fire.
yetiyeti
Junior Member
 
Posts: 150
Joined: 08 May 2013 15:36
Location: Canada

Re: Moderators

04 Jul 2018 01:49

FYI, I'm no longer a mod. I own my comments, but they are inconsistent with what mods should post. No excuses. I will self-inflict a ban on myself, it's only fair. It was a pleasure, an honor. At last I won't have to surf threads monitor members and fights. I will just enjoy being a member. Thanks to the mods, and Dan in particular. Time for my self-imposed ban now :) . Cheers.
User avatar Tonton
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,115
Joined: 17 May 2013 18:59

04 Jul 2018 12:52

The recent developments have led me to believe that there is a serious need to have mods who are Pro Froome or perhaps are atleast neutral.
Except pricey I do not think there is even one mod who is neutral.
Some of the posts I've read in the previous 2-3 days should have been immediate bans and even after reporting no bans have been issued on such comments.

PS: Tonton, you were a great mod but your comments on the Froome thread were illogical and so full of hate that I wondered what I'm doing on such a forum.
SeriousSam wrote: Peña Cabarga is like Froome's Mount Doom, the place where his great power was forged into fearsome weapon. He was never going to lose here
User avatar silvergrenade
Member
 
Posts: 1,657
Joined: 23 Jan 2016 17:30

PreviousNext

Return to About the forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Back to top