Log in:  

Register

Moderators

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

Moderators: Daniel Benson, Susan Westemeyer, Irondan

Re:

04 Jul 2018 13:23

silvergrenade wrote: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.


Agree
User avatar Bot. Sky_Bot
Member
 
Posts: 1,076
Joined: 20 Aug 2017 12:52

04 Jul 2018 17:56

what's with the blue mods
Brullnux
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,359
Joined: 31 Mar 2015 14:41

04 Jul 2018 18:00

Their liberals
User avatar mrhender
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,656
Joined: 11 Jul 2013 07:54

04 Jul 2018 18:02

The point is not to have "pro-Froome" mods to argue the case of one side in these situations. The point of moderating the board is to treat things impartially. That does not preclude the moderator having their own opinion, nor should it preclude them voicing that opinion, so long as they are able to take that out of the picture when they are in mod mode. Tonton has several times used "mod hat on" "mod hat off" type comments to demonstrate when they are voicing their opinion as a member of the board, and when they are voicing their opinion with the theoretical impartiality of a moderator. If they feel that the current situation makes it impossible to maintain objectivity when being asked to moderate discussions, and for that reason they do not feel it appropriate to remain a moderator at this time, then that is also very fair.

For what it's worth, while the Clinic often oversteps the mark quite dramatically with regards what it considers adequate evidence of doping, I've seen an awful lot of comments on the "in favour of Froome/Sky" side of the debate that are clearly designed with no intention other than provocation too, it's been far from one-way traffic in that respect. And some of those reported posts may be ones where a private reprimand is all that is needed or even where the mods simply don't agree that the post merited punishing. And at the moment, it is very difficult to divorce the goings-on in Clinic matters from discussing Froome's race calendar, performance and prospects in the PRR board without reference to Clinic matters, since they've shaped his entire 2018 season to date, and I'm sure each and every moderator has their own opinion as to where the line is to be drawn; it would set an absurd precedent to close the PRR thread down entirely so long as Froome remains without suspension, especially when the likes of Valverde have their own threads running happily alongside, but at the same time policing the PRR thread on Froome during the Tour is going to be an absolute nightmare for the mods, since the volume of posting goes up dramatically and keeping track of where that line is crossed at any given moment is inevitably going to be difficult. In the visceral reaction to the decision on Monday morning I can totally understand Tonton's outburst in that thread, and even if you legitimately believe Froome to be clean or, as seems to be ever more commonly the case, believe him to not be any dirtier than any of his contemporaries and therefore undeserving of the apparent singling out that he gets (as I have said before however, there are certain perfect storms of factors, some of which he can help and some of which he can't, that explain why Sky in general and Froome in particular are especially difficult for many fans to accept), you also have to accept that the way in which the case has been dropped has some concerning ramifications for future enforcement of doping regulations, which are potentially harmful for the sport which we all profess to love to at least some degree (and even those who are turning their back or at least claiming to be must love the sport to some level otherwise such a thing wouldn't be such a hammer blow to them).
User avatar Libertine Seguros
Veteran
 
Posts: 19,738
Joined: 20 Feb 2010 11:54
Location: Land of Saíz

Re:

04 Jul 2018 18:06

mrhender wrote:Their liberals

ah, the old blue/red problem with us/europe. i assumed it mean they were nordic cool
Brullnux
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,359
Joined: 31 Mar 2015 14:41

Re: Re:

04 Jul 2018 18:11

Brullnux wrote:
mrhender wrote:Their liberals

ah, the old blue/red problem with us/europe. i assumed it mean they were nordic cool


Lol true. Here in dk its the other way round to.
User avatar mrhender
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,656
Joined: 11 Jul 2013 07:54

Re:

04 Jul 2018 18:48

Libertine Seguros wrote:The point is not to have "pro-Froome" mods to argue the case of one side in these situations. The point of moderating the board is to treat things impartially. That does not preclude the moderator having their own opinion, nor should it preclude them voicing that opinion, so long as they are able to take that out of the picture when they are in mod mode. Tonton has several times used "mod hat on" "mod hat off" type comments to demonstrate when they are voicing their opinion as a member of the board, and when they are voicing their opinion with the theoretical impartiality of a moderator. If they feel that the current situation makes it impossible to maintain objectivity when being asked to moderate discussions, and for that reason they do not feel it appropriate to remain a moderator at this time, then that is also very fair.

For what it's worth, while the Clinic often oversteps the mark quite dramatically with regards what it considers adequate evidence of doping, I've seen an awful lot of comments on the "in favour of Froome/Sky" side of the debate that are clearly designed with no intention other than provocation too, it's been far from one-way traffic in that respect. And some of those reported posts may be ones where a private reprimand is all that is needed or even where the mods simply don't agree that the post merited punishing. And at the moment, it is very difficult to divorce the goings-on in Clinic matters from discussing Froome's race calendar, performance and prospects in the PRR board without reference to Clinic matters, since they've shaped his entire 2018 season to date, and I'm sure each and every moderator has their own opinion as to where the line is to be drawn; it would set an absurd precedent to close the PRR thread down entirely so long as Froome remains without suspension, especially when the likes of Valverde have their own threads running happily alongside, but at the same time policing the PRR thread on Froome during the Tour is going to be an absolute nightmare for the mods, since the volume of posting goes up dramatically and keeping track of where that line is crossed at any given moment is inevitably going to be difficult. In the visceral reaction to the decision on Monday morning I can totally understand Tonton's outburst in that thread, and even if you legitimately believe Froome to be clean or, as seems to be ever more commonly the case, believe him to not be any dirtier than any of his contemporaries and therefore undeserving of the apparent singling out that he gets (as I have said before however, there are certain perfect storms of factors, some of which he can help and some of which he can't, that explain why Sky in general and Froome in particular are especially difficult for many fans to accept), you also have to accept that the way in which the case has been dropped has some concerning ramifications for future enforcement of doping regulations, which are potentially harmful for the sport which we all profess to love to at least some degree (and even those who are turning their back or at least claiming to be must love the sport to some level otherwise such a thing wouldn't be such a hammer blow to them).


Good post.

To add just a few things without going into great detail.

1. The anti-froome concern with mods is historically kinda moot. Look at the ban list.. many many bans for people who are notable sky critics.

2. You cant have mods without opinions. All humans have opinions. You can ask them to supress them but is that the way to go? That said, i think its normal for mods to hold back a little while "on the job" The alternative is robots modding. Not sure that is advisable just yet.

3. In my experience there has always been a call for diversity on the mod team. Both with personality and opinions. To ensure that as many sides of a case was considered(why mods rarely act on their own).

4. I dont think there are many pro-froome posters volunteering for mod duty. So you cant force a specific 50/50 scenario at all times. One could argue they dont want to volunteer because they might fear abuse/ridicule over supporting/beleiving froome. That may be a valid concern. But lets not forget it goes both ways. The current mods are bashed for exactly the opposite. So there is no winning.
User avatar mrhender
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,656
Joined: 11 Jul 2013 07:54

04 Jul 2018 20:20

We have as far as I can see 4 very active mods now Tonton retired. Pricey_sky, who as his username suggests is a Sky/Froome fan, but very rational and objective either way. King Boonen, who seems to be quite neutral but definitely not anti-Froome. Irondan who I believe isn't the biggest Froome fan but is also quite neutral. And Red Rick who could be considered "anti-Froome".

So, I don't think we need a pro-Froome moderator as silvergrenade suggests. Mods should be objective when modding anyway.

Edit: I forgot Valv.Piti. I don't think he is either pro or anti-Froome.
User avatar LaFlorecita
Veteran
 
Posts: 30,592
Joined: 15 May 2011 09:53
Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands

Re:

04 Jul 2018 20:53

Brullnux wrote:what's with the blue mods


Blue mods? I can only see the usualy red and green ones.
Aka The Ginger One.
User avatar RedheadDane
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,818
Joined: 05 May 2010 13:47
Location: Viking Land! (Aros)

Re:

04 Jul 2018 21:35

LaFlorecita wrote:We have as far as I can see 4 very active mods now Tonton retired. Pricey_sky, who as his username suggests is a Sky/Froome fan, but very rational and objective either way. King Boonen, who seems to be quite neutral but definitely not anti-Froome. Irondan who I believe isn't the biggest Froome fan but is also quite neutral. And Red Rick who could be considered "anti-Froome".

So, I don't think we need a pro-Froome moderator as silvergrenade suggests. Mods should be objective when modding anyway.

Edit: I forgot Valv.Piti. I don't think he is either pro or anti-Froome.

I think is rather anti-Froome. But what must be pointed out, he WAS ABLE to admit one thing: the masterpiece of Finestre'2018. And it must be absolutely appreciated! On the other side was one of our Admins, who "was out", just after a few km of Finestre.
User avatar Bot. Sky_Bot
Member
 
Posts: 1,076
Joined: 20 Aug 2017 12:52

Re: Re:

04 Jul 2018 21:57

RedheadDane wrote:
Brullnux wrote:what's with the blue mods


Blue mods? I can only see the usualy red and green ones.

Valv.Piti has become blue
Brullnux
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,359
Joined: 31 Mar 2015 14:41

04 Jul 2018 22:43

As Flo mentioned above, I don't see the need for a pro Froome mod to be added. In the current group we all have our likes and dislikes, but everyone is objective when moderating this forum.

If somebody was added who was just pro Froome and dismissed other points of view, they would cause a lot more trouble than not. In my opinion, the current group works well together because we are fair and reasonable to all, regardless of who posters support.
User avatar Pricey_sky
Moderator
 
Posts: 6,072
Joined: 12 Jul 2012 14:05
Location: Kidderminster, England

04 Jul 2018 22:58

Im not neutral, Im probably leaning towards anti-Froome without being as 'anti' as many on the boards here :p

Im going the same way as Tonton, out. Couldn't really find that much motivation to moderate. Thats maybe also why Im blue!
"Es el mejor con y sin"
WORLD CHAMPION
User avatar Valv.Piti
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,577
Joined: 03 Aug 2015 00:00
Location: Dinamarca, Aalborg

05 Jul 2018 01:43

Pricey Sky is and has always been straight on. If other Froome fans can’t find measured representatives they might want to question other factors.
aphronesis
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,727
Joined: 30 Jul 2011 16:47
Location: Bed-Stuy

05 Jul 2018 02:28

If only we could all get along and express opinions, than debate them without getting upset at each other.
User avatar SHAD0W93
Member
 
Posts: 844
Joined: 13 Aug 2011 03:50

05 Jul 2018 08:24

To be honest it seems incredibly mis-guided to attempt to pick a moderator with specific criteria for which riders/teams they support, moderation should be devoid of any bias if at all possible and I think we manage that very well within the current team (that includes our out-going mods too).

I've pointed it out several times before I believe but I'll make the point again. We are not here to moderate opinion (unless it is particularly abhorrent and has no place on the forums). People are free to express their opinions as much as they want, in a non-trolling way of course.., and if they do it in a calm and polite manner they will likely never hear from the mod team.
Vincenzo Nibali:
"I know how to ride a bike"

Reduce your carbon footprint, ride steel.
User avatar King Boonen
Administrator
 
Posts: 7,466
Joined: 25 Jul 2012 14:38

05 Jul 2018 09:08

I have absolutely no problem with moderators having strong, emotional opinions, just saying.
It's total nonsense to suspect a mod would ban another user just for supporting the "wrong" rider.
User avatar spalco
Veteran
 
Posts: 5,890
Joined: 01 Feb 2011 18:13
Location: Vienna

15 Jul 2018 11:58

Benotti69 has been banned for one month - per management decision.


just about 100% of bans above contained a fair provision 'banned for...'

would it be not fair to expect that even a 'management decision' contain a reason ?

most posters know that this site is british owned and that benotti was often critical of a a certain british team and its lead rider...

to exclude the uncomfortable speculation of a bias, particularly when it was NOT the mods but a 'management decision' i think (and i do realize the potential hammer for me speaking my mind), would it not be fair to include the banning reason ? like in 100% other cases....
DJPbaltimore:'John Kerry is an honorable person and would not call out the Russians if there was not evidence', 'the 2 of you are russia stooges'
in foreign policy there are no eternal friendships or eternal enemies, only eternal interests
User avatar python
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,908
Joined: 25 Sep 2009 01:01

Re: Re:

15 Jul 2018 19:00

Brullnux wrote:
RedheadDane wrote:
Brullnux wrote:what's with the blue mods


Blue mods? I can only see the usualy red and green ones.

Valv.Piti has become blue


Looks just black to me.
Or maybe he retired from mod-duties in the meantime.
Aka The Ginger One.
User avatar RedheadDane
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,818
Joined: 05 May 2010 13:47
Location: Viking Land! (Aros)

Re: Re:

15 Jul 2018 20:11

RedheadDane wrote:
Brullnux wrote:
RedheadDane wrote:
Brullnux wrote:what's with the blue mods


Blue mods? I can only see the usualy red and green ones.

Valv.Piti has become blue


Looks just black to me.
Or maybe he retired from mod-duties in the meantime.

I'll have to go check out what color Valv.Piti's handle ended up because I was doing some things with groups that changed it briefly (or so I thought). Hopefully there wasn't too much confusion but the main reason that Valv.piti's handle changed colors and I should include Tonton too, is that they both retired from active duty moderation recently.
Darryl Webster wrote:
"Nothing seems to blind peeps as much as patriotism does it!"
User avatar Irondan
Administrator
 
Posts: 7,540
Joined: 30 Apr 2014 02:13
Location: Seattle, WA

PreviousNext

Return to About the forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Back to top