aphronesis wrote:I could quote dj's post and reconstruct it, but I'm busy and never learned that block quote. thing.
Umm, please don't do that.
TIA
Moderator: Irondan
aphronesis wrote:I could quote dj's post and reconstruct it, but I'm busy and never learned that block quote. thing.
That sort of sprawling conversation I get. Some threads are micro, some macro, they inevitably overlap. My issue is more about what happens when discussion of Rider X and Team Y and Race A starts taking over a thread about ... squirrels.King Boonen wrote:Lets Take Rider X on Team Y supporting Rider Z in Race A. Both riders have a thread, the team does and the race does and these threads are already large. Rider X is flagged for doping in Race A, where do you post that information and discuss it? Well it obviously belongs in Rider X's thread, but it's relevant to Team Y, Rider Z and Race A so arguably is should go in every thread. To make the choice harder, discussion of team-wide problems has gone on in the Team Y thread including Rider X and Rider Z.
fmk_RoI wrote:That sort of sprawling conversation I get. Some threads are micro, some macro, they inevitably overlap. My issue is more about what happens when discussion of Rider X and Team Y and Race A starts taking over a thread about ... squirrels.King Boonen wrote:Lets Take Rider X on Team Y supporting Rider Z in Race A. Both riders have a thread, the team does and the race does and these threads are already large. Rider X is flagged for doping in Race A, where do you post that information and discuss it? Well it obviously belongs in Rider X's thread, but it's relevant to Team Y, Rider Z and Race A so arguably is should go in every thread. To make the choice harder, discussion of team-wide problems has gone on in the Team Y thread including Rider X and Rider Z.
jonas334455 wrote:Hi, I got the following message disaproving a post of mine:
"Hi, I believe this to be a sockpuppet account of the user *******. I'm
guessing you forgot your password? If that's correct please reset it and
use that account. If you can't please post in the moderators thread. Other
posts from this account will be disapproved and may lead to a permanent ban
for both accounts.
Cheers,
KB."
This is not true and I don't know where this guess comes from.![]()
Same IP? Posting currently from my business-machine in quite a big corporation.
Edit: By the way, the first post got approved?
Edited by KB to remove other username.
fmk_RoI wrote:That sort of sprawling conversation I get. Some threads are micro, some macro, they inevitably overlap. My issue is more about what happens when discussion of Rider X and Team Y and Race A starts taking over a thread about ... squirrels.King Boonen wrote:Lets Take Rider X on Team Y supporting Rider Z in Race A. Both riders have a thread, the team does and the race does and these threads are already large. Rider X is flagged for doping in Race A, where do you post that information and discuss it? Well it obviously belongs in Rider X's thread, but it's relevant to Team Y, Rider Z and Race A so arguably is should go in every thread. To make the choice harder, discussion of team-wide problems has gone on in the Team Y thread including Rider X and Rider Z.
Merckx index wrote:Irondan, what is a "no contact" order? Does that mean you can't interact with some specific other poster on the forum (sounds unlikely and unenforceable), or does it only refer to PMs between them? Or something else entirely?
And is this something new, or has it been in effect for a long time, and I just wasn't aware of it? I assume it's meant to keep two or more posters who are stoking each other up to back off. It sounds almost like a partial suspension, in which you're allowed to keep posting in general, but have some privileges curtailed.
There is one simple rule: anyone who refers to the Ronde van Vlaanderen as the Ronde van Vlaanderen will rot in hell.RedheadDane wrote:Or discussion about what you should call various races (in what language you should refer to them) in a specific rider's thread...
fmk_RoI wrote:There is one simple rule: anyone who refers to the Ronde van Vlaanderen as the Ronde van Vlaanderen will rot in hell.RedheadDane wrote:Or discussion about what you should call various races (in what language you should refer to them) in a specific rider's thread...
One day, the mods will come up with a tool that sends an electric shock direct to your keyboard when you type the Ronde van Vlaanderen instead of the Ronde van Vlaanderen.
Irondan wrote:fmk_RoI wrote:There is one simple rule: anyone who refers to the Ronde van Vlaanderen as the Ronde van Vlaanderen will rot in hell.RedheadDane wrote:Or discussion about what you should call various races (in what language you should refer to them) in a specific rider's thread...
One day, the mods will come up with a tool that sends an electric shock direct to your keyboard when you type the Ronde van Vlaanderen instead of the Ronde van Vlaanderen.
I can fix that....
Irondan wrote:Irondan wrote:fmk_RoI wrote:There is one simple rule: anyone who refers to the Ronde van Vlaanderen as the Ronde van Vlaanderen will rot in hell.RedheadDane wrote:Or discussion about what you should call various races (in what language you should refer to them) in a specific rider's thread...
One day, the mods will come up with a tool that sends an electric shock direct to your keyboard when you type the Ronde van Vlaanderen instead of the Ronde van Vlaanderen.
I can fix that....
Edit: See... It already works!
fmk_RoI wrote:Irondan wrote:Irondan wrote:fmk_RoI wrote:There is one simple rule: anyone who refers to the Ronde van Vlaanderen as the Ronde van Vlaanderen will rot in hell.RedheadDane wrote:Or discussion about what you should call various races (in what language you should refer to them) in a specific rider's thread...
One day, the mods will come up with a tool that sends an electric shock direct to your keyboard when you type the Ronde van Vlaanderen instead of the Ronde van Vlaanderen.
I can fix that....
Edit: See... It already works!
Irondan wrote:Merckx index wrote:Irondan, what is a "no contact" order? Does that mean you can't interact with some specific other poster on the forum (sounds unlikely and unenforceable), or does it only refer to PMs between them? Or something else entirely?
And is this something new, or has it been in effect for a long time, and I just wasn't aware of it? I assume it's meant to keep two or more posters who are stoking each other up to back off. It sounds almost like a partial suspension, in which you're allowed to keep posting in general, but have some privileges curtailed.
It means that over the past month I've been an intermediary between two posters that don't like each other and like to bait and troll each other in the public forum and PM's. I told them numerous times to ignore each other by putting each other on their "foes" list which one of them did and one of them didn't. The one that did use the foes list decided to read the forum as a "guest" to circumvent the foes list and read the other person's comments and the person that didn't use the "foes" list ignored my direction altogether.
With all due respect, I beg to differ with you about the enforceability of this measure, as it's being enforced as we speak.
This is as much detail as I'm comfortable or willing to go into on this matter.
Cheers
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
Back to top