• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

A Theory

Page 9 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Anonymous

Guest
Alpe d'Huez said:
Well, you will answer direct questions when asked, and post facts about the sport when prompted or compelled to do so.

Yes, I do. "Compelled?" I post quite a bit about things other than this, so if your insinuation is that I am Rex's equal in some way, then you obviously are only looking at posts that get flagged. Ease up, I have been a member here for a long time, and to put me in the same category as that troll (one you guys don't seem to be able to keep banned) is pretty ridiculous in all honesty. Show me where I have been banned and just keep coming back with a new email address and/or IP address. In fact, I would like to see just one instance if you are going to suggest I am anything like him.
 

Rex Hunter

BANNED
Dec 18, 2009
187
0
0
Visit site
Thoughtforfood said:
Yes, I do. "Compelled?" I post quite a bit about things other than this, so if your insinuation is that I am Rex's equal in some way, then you obviously are only looking at posts that get flagged. Ease up, I have been a member here for a long time, and to put me in the same category as that troll (one you guys don't seem to be able to keep banned) is pretty ridiculous in all honesty. Show me where I have been banned and just keep coming back with a new email address and/or IP address. In fact, I would like to see just one instance if you are going to suggest I am anything like him.

Well for the record you were banned for a few days for posting obscene material, but because you are part of the in crowd you got it lifted. Others don't have that luxury.

Sorry if I come off as a whiney pants but we all know I wouldn't get away with the stuff you post in a million years. Looks like the mods are finally actually realising this hypocrisy.

No hypocrisy, no whining. Either we are all allowed to abuse, insult, and spam threads with off topic attacks on people, or nobody gets to do it.
 
Rex Hunter said:
Well for the record you were banned for a few days for posting obscene material, but because you are part of the in crowd you got it lifted. Others don't have that luxury.

Sorry if I come off as a whiney pants but we all know I wouldn't get away with the stuff you post in a million years. Looks like the mods are finally actually realising this hypocrisy.

No hypocrisy, no whining. Either we are all allowed to abuse, insult, and spam threads with off topic attacks on people, or nobody gets to do it.

And this you know despite that you only registered very recently and you claim that you are not one of our resident trolls? Nice try.

Edit: Your constant "woe is me" shtick is tiresome by the way, please drop it in what ever next incarnation we see you in.
 
Rex Hunter said:
Well for the record you were banned for a few days for posting obscene material, but because you are part of the in crowd you got it lifted. Others don't have that luxury.

Sorry if I come off as a whiney pants but we all know I wouldn't get away with the stuff you post in a million years. Looks like the mods are finally actually realising this hypocrisy.

No hypocrisy, no whining. Either we are all allowed to abuse, insult, and spam threads with off topic attacks on people, or nobody gets to do it.

Why are you whining, you are yet to be banned, just listen to what the mods tell you and you can make a positive contribution.

Most of the posters from the last page make a positive contribution in almost every thread they post in be it the clinic, cafe or general forum. Perhaps you should aspire to those heights, rather than just despise them for "preferential treatment". Knowledgeable members who are able to make positive contributions on most occasions, deserve favourable treatment when it comes to infringements in comparison to someone who hasn't really proven themselves.

Prove yourself as a positive contributor and you will be seen on the same level. This probably means posting outside of Lance threads/The Clinic, which coincidentally were the topics our resident disruptor with a geographical and IP relation to yourself (but of course not you) also liked to post in.

No this has nothing to do with a member's worship level of Lance. You only have to look at dimspace, Mountain Goat etc to realise that members who aren't "HATORS" can still be constructive and positive, respected by the "mob".
 

Rex Hunter

BANNED
Dec 18, 2009
187
0
0
Visit site
B.Rasmussen said:
Your constant "woe is me" shtick is tiresome by the way, please drop it in what ever next incarnation we see you in.

I'm bored to tears of it. Hopefully we won't ever have to talk about this again....:rolleyes:

Nite folks.
 
Rex Hunter said:
On the IP business. My IP is part of a block for my regional area. So if you banned my IP - which has happened before - then you will also block anyone who has the same internet service provider in the south east of England. Given I use the biggest internet service provider in this part of the world that's probably a few million people that won't be able to access CN. But I'd be okay because I can change my ip at the flick of a switch, so to speak. Only innocent people will get hurt, again.

This is crap. It is not like IPs are handed out randomly from a large pool. The ISP will subdivide their IP range into subnets, and those subnets are further subdivided into smaller subnets. The divisions are used to route packets to their final destination. Assuming the forum software supports it, an IP ban could start with a specific IP address and then be expanded bit by bit until the subnet you are on is completely blocked. Your neighbors might be collatoral damage, but it is not like the whole south of England would be affected.

It is also nice for you to admit that you are such a troll that you have been banned in the past.
 
Rex Hunter said:
Because you matched all the IPs from a poster that keeps getting banned, confirming it is the same poster from a block of similar shared IPs, and then you noted they were all very different from other current posters. This is why your information safely concludes no sock puppet programme related activity is going on from that repeatedly banned poster. Hopefully this is now clear and you can stop doing the Columbo impression.
As noted clearly by other posters, there are both dynamic IP addresses, and proxy use of IP addresses. I pointed out that your blocks were similar to those in the past.

After RaceRadio pointed out that there is a difference between an /24 and single IP, you replied:

Rex Hunter said:
No, my IP is part of a block of IP’s
This is not the same as my matching all IPs from someone who was banned in the past (who had changing IPs, as I clearly noted). This does NOT prove that you and that person are one and the same. But it does not at you imply mean that you are not based on my research. Twisting my statements to your benefit quite frankly aggravate me.

Either you have flatly lied to divert focus away from the question at hand, did not read the posts, or simply do not understand the discussion.

Rex Hunter said:
You didn't actually use the word trolling, but you made two posts that singled me out for trolling activity, without actually citing anything, that clearly implies I was trolling.

Clearly? The warnings I gave you were what I would give to anyone, as witnessed by warnings, and infractions I have given to others. This is not the same as singling anyone out by any objective standard.

As I stated, your failure to answer direct and pointed questions that are pertinent to the discussion, then act like you are being persecuted are in my mind worthy of the then even handed criticism I gave you. And I responded in what I feel was an appropriate manner.

This is not the same as singling someone out or name calling them as a “troll” that you accused me of doing. Once again, twisting my statements to benefit yourself, or inoculate yourself from criticism. By your standards, I could interpret many of your reactions towards my inquiries are accusatory of me “trolling”.

Regarding your statement that I was singling you out from the so called “sock puppets” I asked:

“That is not what I was exclusively discussing, and I don’t recall using that term. Please show where I did.”

You wrote:
Rex Hunter said:
I don't know what you are discussing then. Please clarify so there can be no more confusion.
As noted above, you are taking my words out of context, and interpreting them in unethical ways for your benefit.
Rex Hunter said:
I'm genuinely bemused at why you and Susan have suddenly taken great offense to me saying the rules are applied inconsistently.

Because they are not. I have directly explained why I have criticized you for contradictions, and manipulation of the conversation and my, and others words. I have asked you directly, and repeatedly to show in any objective and logical light to why said rules are being applied inconsistently, and your replies to me have been to use more of the same tactics of misinterpreting my statements in a manner that no reasonable person would, without directly answering the questions.

Rex Hunter said:
Don't worry, I'm not going to try to get you the sack or anything.
I’m not worried.

Rex Hunter said:
Has someone made a complaint on my behalf?

Since you have asked, no. Not one.

Contrary to what you may have others believe, I have given you no infractions, though plenty more to other people. I have also openly and directly through PM’s warned several people on here to stay on track, not just you. I have deleted quite a few posts, and locked several threads, but none of them yours.

So, I will ask you once again. Please show me where the rules are inconstantly applied, and unfairly to you by myself, or any of the other moderators.

And as I stated directly, as I will to anyone, if you do feel that I, or anyone else on this site, is singling you out or treating you unfairly, I suggest you contact the administrators about it.
 
Rex Hunter said:
I'm bored to tears of it. Hopefully we won't ever have to talk about this again....:rolleyes:

Nite folks.

This is why you're a troll. You were called out clearly and succinctly here:

And this you know despite that you only registered very recently and you claim that you are not one of our resident trolls? Nice try.

...and you pointedly edit this out of the comments and ignore it in your response.

You simply cannot stay on topic because you post nothing but sh!te. You never answer direct questions or challenges because you can't. You're a troll. Not because of your "opinions", but because you do not engage in the conversations at hand, and spend all your time whining off-topic and baiting like you've done in this thread. You're a troll. Please get lost.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
1
0
Visit site
As you can see his only goal is to kill the discussion, and it appears it has worked. He does not care if what he posts is wrong or questioned but it is only his intention to cause confusion, disruption and get attention. I have heard that there is medication that can help these people.
 
Sorry, but this has all gotten too funny.

Rex, you think you could get me fired from CN because of what I have said to you? Go ahead. If they would fire me for that, then I would be happy to leave.

The mods hate all anti-Lance people? What nonsense. I have no idea where most people stand on the issue, but most importantly, I don't care. As long as someone is civil, knowledgeable and reasonable, they can write here as far as I am concerned.

And most important -- they need to address the topic under discussion!

Susan
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
Visit site
I like these topics. Because I start to ignore them when the trolls come in, then I dive back in 27 pages later and a topic about whether armstrong really meant X when he said Y has turned into something completely random like

- "no, you boil the water before putting the carrots in"
- "no, first you put the carrots THEN you boil it"

it's just too funny :D
 
issoisso said:
I like these topics. Because I start to ignore them when the trolls come in, then I dive back in 27 pages later and a topic about whether armstrong really meant X when he said Y has turned into something completely random like

- "no, you boil the water before putting the carrots in"
- "no, first you put the carrots THEN you boil it"

it's just too funny :D

I hear your carrots were claiming to be organic, but there is evidence linking them to GM crops. They should be taken out of the boiling water and given to the French for a "le crunch" test. If they fail, they should sit on a shelf for two years.

The irony here being, this post is actually the closest post in pages, to being "on topic".

More than enough for moi........
 
issoisso said:
I like these topics. Because I start to ignore them when the trolls come in, then I dive back in 27 pages later and a topic about whether armstrong really meant X when he said Y has turned into something completely random like

- "no, you boil the water before putting the carrots in"
- "no, first you put the carrots THEN you boil it"

it's just too funny :D

Yeh if I miss a big topic I usually only read the first few pages then the last few. A great example of this is the big thread on this week's Astana situation.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Susan Westemeyer said:
I don't care. As long as someone is civil, knowledgeable and reasonable, they can write here as far as I am concerned.

And most important -- they need to address the topic under discussion!

Susan

ithink thats the point susan, amidst the OP getting flack, and rex getting flack and publicly told off by mods within the thread, the likes of moose mcwotsit etc where left free to bully and taunt as much as they liked with little or no recourse..

as someone on the outside of the conversation i think the way the two sides of the argument where treated where very different, and i think personally the side that behaved worse got away scot free.. personally, whatever rex may or may not have said is beside the point, on this one, its a bit of a basso situation.. hes getting punished, maybe fairly, but there are others who are just as doped as he is..
 
I apologize if anyone feels that they have not been appropriately fussed at.

However, I stand by what I said earlier:


The mods hate all anti-Lance people? What nonsense. I have no idea where most people stand on the issue, but most importantly, I don't care. As long as someone is civil, knowledgeable and reasonable, they can write here as far as I am concerned.

And most important -- they need to address the topic under discussion!


I really do not care whehter anyone is pro- or ant-Armstrong or anyone or anything else. Behave yourself on the forum and you will not have trouble with the mods, no matter what your standpoint.

Susan
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
dimspace said:
ithink thats the point susan, amidst the OP getting flack, and rex getting flack and publicly told off by mods within the thread, the likes of moose mcwotsit etc where left free to bully and taunt as much as they liked with little or no recourse..

as someone on the outside of the conversation i think the way the two sides of the argument where treated where very different, and i think personally the side that behaved worse got away scot free.. personally, whatever rex may or may not have said is beside the point, on this one, its a bit of a basso situation.. hes getting punished, maybe fairly, but there are others who are just as doped as he is..

Dim - I always enjoy your contributions, as you are well able to debate and are always respectful and good humoured.
But I think you missed what happened earlier on this thread. "Moose" was asked by Susan to stop posting the 'fail' pic's and he complied immediately.

I do agree that posting pic's - while funny - does not promote debate, but I think the thread was rather a pointless exercise in the first place with no serious intention of being productive.

As for our friend Rex - they have been banned before under their different usernames for their disruptive posts. I have always felt that their sole intention on here is to run threads in to many posts so that they become unreadable - which - if true - is a serious issue for any forum.
 

Rex Hunter

BANNED
Dec 18, 2009
187
0
0
Visit site
Alpe d'Huez said:
As noted clearly by other posters, there are both dynamic IP addresses, and proxy use of IP addresses. I pointed out that your blocks were similar to those in the past.

This is not the same as my matching all IPs from someone who was banned in the past (who had changing IPs, as I clearly noted). This does NOT prove that you and that person are one and the same. But it does not at you imply mean that you are not based on my research. Twisting my statements to your benefit quite frankly aggravate me.

Well it doesn't prove it 100% because I could be using a proxy for these other users, but the fact I didn't bother doing that with previous accounts makes that unlikely, doesn't it?

Either you have flatly lied to divert focus away from the question at hand, did not read the posts, or simply do not understand the discussion.

I drew probable conclusions.


Clearly? The warnings I gave you were what I would give to anyone, as witnessed by warnings, and infractions I have given to others. This is not the same as singling anyone out by any objective standard.

Well I only said you did it once. I wouldn't worry about it.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Dr. Maserati said:
But I think you missed what happened earlier on this thread. "Moose" was asked by Susan to stop posting the 'fail' pic's and he complied immediately.
.

yeh. i missed that....

anyway... im off, laptop battery is nearly out... 6 hours left on the coach with only the wife and cycling weekly for company..
 

Rex Hunter

BANNED
Dec 18, 2009
187
0
0
Visit site
red_flanders said:
This is why you're a troll. You were called out clearly and succinctly here:

If you read the thread then you will see he already knows the answer to that question, so is being disingenious. He's trying to Columbo me.
 

Rex Hunter

BANNED
Dec 18, 2009
187
0
0
Visit site
The mods hate all anti-Lance people? What nonsense.

Actually my point was the precise opposite of this. Maybe you are addressing another poster, I don't know.

I have no idea where most people stand on the issue, but most importantly, I don't care. As long as someone is civil, knowledgeable and reasonable, they can write here as far as I am concerned.

I think you are easily influenced by the majority though. That's natural but can be annoying. I think we've all cleared the air.
 
Rex Hunter said:
Well it doesn't prove it 100% because I could be using a proxy for these other users, but the fact I didn't bother doing that with previous accounts makes that unlikely, doesn't it?

You know if someone is using a proxy because the IP address resolves to nothing/some very weird company/some 3rd world country. Someone who uses a proxy isn't going to resolve to BT.

There is no need for anyone who gets banned to change their IP as they don't need to, just need a new e-mail address and voila. Dynamic IPs simply aid the situation if forums are run by people without sufficient experience to clearly detect multiple accounts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.