A Theory

[Susan Westemeyer]

Rex: Stop the personal discussions. Either you discuss the topic at hand or you don't stay anything. Last warning.

Susan

 

[Rex Hunter]

Rex: Stop the personal discussions. Either you discuss the topic at hand or you don't stay anything. Last warning.

Susan

You are aware that I did not start the "personal discussion" in this thread, aren't you? Yet you go after me again.

 

[Wallace]

But the trolling and the personal attacks are so much more interesting than the topic...

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

You are aware that I did not start the "personal discussion" in this thread, aren't you? Yet you go after me again.

I didnt say you started it. I have asked you to write something pertaining to the topic, preferably something reasonable and logical.

A large majority of your posts are simply "poor old me" and I for one am tired of it.

Susan

 

[Escarabajo]

nah.. youve not been rude to me...

to other replies...

i do actually spend a fair amount of time in the clinic, i just dont post as much mainly due to not being as well informed as many of the more regular posters, so not much of what i would have to say would contribute, so i tend to shut up..

as for the bullying, i think there is a fair bit, although to be fair, im always the last to know who has multiple names and logons, i dont pay enough attention to all that so the bullying may be aimed at them (although to be honest, if someone is being a troll then several members sensibly complaining to the mods about that person, is probably better than people just flooding the place with fail pictures, and abuse.. kind of reduces them to the same, or possibly even a lower level.)

But no race radio, you escaped my mild tirade, it was more a few slightly newer (or more infrequent poster) members i was referring to.. the old hands who have been here forever i can cope with

Fair enough. I am glad that you read the Clinic more than I thought initially. I know you are one of the oldest members with a lot of knowledge on cycling so your input is considered valuable.

On the other off topic subject, Susan and Alpe, read what Ferminal said about just banning the user instead of the IP. It is just easier. To me it is very easy to identify this guy, I mean, very easy. Just pay attention to the way he writes and the way he answers to other posters. Just look at the other thread, how many times does people has to tell him (Rex Hunter) that the French authorities did not open a case because of dope, but instead the case was opened because of the equipment (whatever it is) which is illegal for sports use according to WADA regulations? How many times do posters have to repeat this? So I usually ignore him or try to, but other posters do respond to him. Even if we ignore him he makes his statements without a reply, so it is a loose-loose situation. I guess the only option is for everybody to ignore him, but then he changes his username, and then provokes the senior posters again and off we go again. Besides trolls have this characteristic of telling a lie or saying something really stupid to provoke other posters. That’s why they are called trolls.

Sorry for being off topic, but for this thread I really don’t mind at all.
Thanks.

 

[Rex Hunter]

A large majority of your posts are simply "poor old me" and I for one am tired of it.

By singling me out in a thread that had a couple of off topic pages before I turned up, which another mod was taking part in, and is a thread that was filled with insults and pictures with captions further back, you're not really doing much to lessen the 'poor old me' perception.

 

[Rex Hunter]

I don't know if this is off topic or on topic? Since it's about me I have to answer it:

Just look at the other thread, how many times does people has to tell him (Rex Hunter) that the French authorities did not open a case because of dope, but instead the case was opened because of the equipment (whatever it is) which is illegal for sports use according to WADA regulations?

So? When did I dispute this? In fact that was my point. It's against the rules but there is obviously a duel use defense that will make it easier for them to defend themselves than if blood bags or dope were found, lessoning any potential penalty. There is no duel use for blood bags and dope.

For making this point I'm a troll?

 

[Anonymous]

my thoughts after reading even more of this

+whether rex has previously been somebody else, i dont know, and frankly is of little importance to me.
+the constant fail signs and pictures, in my opinion where far more distruptive to the thread and more childish than anything the OP may have done or said.
+i think susan is being a little unfair singling out one person. he is clearly not the only one on this thread who has been personal, or off topic. In fact i think some others have been far worse.. personally i think for moderating comments like that should be done in pm, not in public as it can inflame an already volatile situation

the simple answer is, if you dont want to read what someone has to say, put them on ignore. I have done it to two people and it works very effectively (except when people quote the person you are ignoring)

i think the phrase "all as bad as each other" springs to mind..

whilst being as neutral as possible...

what i have noticed is that the couple of people who where doing most of the abusing, and fail related posts seem to have gone quiet.. almost like they like to stir things up and then stand back and watch

 

[Rex Hunter]

my thoughts after reading even more of this

+whether rex has previously been somebody else, i dont know, and frankly is of little importance to me.
+the constant fail signs and pictures, in my opinion where far more distruptive to the thread and more childish than anything the OP may have done or said.
+i think susan is being a little unfair singling out one person. he is clearly not the only one on this thread who has been personal, or off topic. In fact i think some others have been far worse.. personally i think for moderating comments like that should be done in pm, not in public as it can inflame an already volatile situation

the simple answer is, if you dont want to read what someone has to say, put them on ignore. I have done it to two people and it works very effectively (except when people quote the person you are ignoring)

i think the phrase "all as bad as each other" springs to mind..

whilst being as neutral as possible...

what i have noticed is that the couple of people who where doing most of the abusing, and fail related posts seem to have gone quiet.. almost like they like to stir things up and then stand back and watch

Fair comment.

Whilst we're on this issue, I think I recall it was you that was a bit offended by the use of mental illness as an insult that is popular around here. It's probably best that people cut out a lot of that stuff.

 

[this_is_edie]

OMG what a bunch of whiners. I was debating about engaging in the forum and went through a few threads just to see, and sheesh in between the obvious poster using multiple names and doing his best to disrupt, and the whining, well it's just too much for me.

See now you're turned me into a whiner. enough. ciao.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Thanks to all for the IP info. I'll see what I can do to find out more. There are two really geeky IT engineers where I work. I may see if I can get their assistance.

If someone is being a troll then several members sensibly complaining to the mods about that person, is probably better than people just flooding the place with fail pictures, and abuse.. .

Several of these I have taken down, or closed threads on. I can't monitor every last post, but if something offends you, then report it.

I should note that far and away I get more reports about two posters than any other.

At least Alpe d'Huez has confirmed that I have never had any sock puppets. We can finally put that one to bed once and for all.

I have? Please show exactly where I said that. Explain why that is a clear definition of my confirmation of that. And do not take my wording out of context.

This is an important issue to me, as I am a moderator and trying to be fair and impartial.

It's kind of ridiculous when the person uses very similar screennames, but are allowed to go on as if they are a new person.

Agree, very annoying. Which is something we are all trying to avoid happening. The CF forums were invaded by a bitter troll named Tom Morris who was banned multiple times, hacked the boards, and by many accounts soured the entire site. I think we'd all like to have that avoided here.

There are also programs and sites that allow you to compare text to see if the same writing style is used. I'll look into that.

By singling me out in a thread that had a couple of off topic pages before I turned up, which another mod was taking part in.

You have definitely not been singled out. This thread has also discussed posters such as British Pro Cycling, Ban Pro Cycling, Arbiter, Sprocket01, MaxPower, Great White, and a few others. As you have assured us that you are not any of these people, then your claim of being singled out isn't true, is it?

I would appreciate a direct answer to this question.

 

[Ripper]

not really.. i dont think its much of a secret that there are a handful of people round here who like bullying others, but dont offer too much themselves..

the original theory is clearly a little off tangent, but i dont think he deserves the pack bullying thats going on in places..

OK, on topic (sort of) ...

Dim, mea culpa re: the bullying; sometimes guilty and my apologies to you and the OP.

As to the 'Theory' - I think the overwhelming majority don't agree with the hypothesis, so perhaps this thread has run its course (after 300+ posts)?

 

[Anonymous]

I should note that far and away I get more reports about two posters than any other.

Please tell me I made top 2.

 

[Anonymous]

Please tell me I made top 2.

you dont even make it into my top five all time forum arsehole list im afraid...

must try harder

 

[Rex Hunter]

I have? Please show exactly where I said that. Explain why that is a clear definition of my confirmation of that. And do not take my wording out of context.

I thought that was the clear implication of your confirmation that, contrary to speculation, other posters on the board who the regulars don't like, have completely different IP addresses. Whether that was your intention or not, surely your actions have put to bed the sock puppet lie?

This is an important issue to me, as I am a moderator and trying to be fair and impartial.

Well, you are laid back most of the time - apart from that infortunate post yesterday where you accused me of trolling without trying to cite anything. There was a little problem with Susan copping out by blaming me for thread disruption rather than standing up to the bully troll gangs, but I think she has a greater understand of this now, now it's been pointed out to her by me and others, so I think we're cool.

You have definitely not been singled out. This thread has also discussed posters such as British Pro Cycling, Ban Pro Cycling, Arbiter, Sprocket01, MaxPower, Great White, and a few others. As you have assured us that you are not any of these people, then your claim of being singled out isn't true, is it?

I think you're being a bit disingenious here. You were discussing how to ban people with sock puppets.

What was the problem with this previous poster? Why do you want to ban them? Isn't this the heart of the matter? We don't ban people because a bunch of bullies, who can't cite any credible trolling, don't like them. That's what we've learnt here.

I'm sick of talking about this to be honest. I don't know why it was started.

 

[Rex Hunter]

To be honest there was always going to be a bit of heated discussion over the past week due to the latest news. Unless anything else controversial hits cycling news then everything will calm down a bit now anyway.

 

[Ripper]

Sigh ... ...

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Whether that was your intention or not, surely your actions have put to bed the sock puppet lie.

Why do you say this? Please be specific in your answer.

Well, you are laid back most of the time - apart from that infortunate post yesterday where you accused me of trolling without trying to cite anything.

Please show where I accused you of "trolling". I do not recall using that terminology. A direct cut and paste, not taking out of context, would be appreciated.

I think you're being a bit disingenious here. You were discussing how to ban people with sock puppets.

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

I was commenting on your claim that you were being singled out, I then asked for a direct answer to how you had been singled out, and showed examples of other members being criticized. You responded by saying:

What was the problem with this previous poster? Why do you want to ban them? Isn't this the heart of the matter? We don't ban people because a bunch of bullies, who can't cite any credible trolling, don't like them. That's what we've learnt here.

.
That is not an answer.

I will ask you again. Please show how you have been singled out, and be specific.

Please tell me I made top 2.

Don't push me right now.

 

[Anonymous]

you dont even make it into my top five all time forum arsehole list im afraid...

must try harder

I must be mellowing with age...dang.

Hey Alpe, chill bro. I was just joking around.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Well, you will answer direct questions when asked, and post facts about the sport when prompted or compelled to do so.

 

[Rex Hunter]

Why do you say this? Please be specific in your answer.

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.

Please show where I accused you of "trolling". I do not recall using that terminology. A direct cut and paste, not taking out of context, would be appreciated.

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.
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=127703&postcount=463
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=127811&postcount=491

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

I don't know what you are discussing then. Please clarify so there can be no more confusion.

I was commenting on your claim that you were being singled out, I then asked for a direct answer to how you had been singled out, and showed examples of other members being criticized. You responded by saying:
.
That is not an answer.

I will ask you again. Please show how you have been singled out, and be specific.

Susan this thread (and countless previously) and you in the linked thread yesterday. You responded that you have warned other people etc.

This is really getting boring to be honest.

 

[Hugh Januss]

This is really getting boring to be honest.

You know what I have found works really good for me, when I find something is boring me, I stop doing it.

 

[red_flanders]

Never mind. Sorry for the rant.

 

[Rex Hunter]

You know what I have found works really good for me, when I find something is boring me, I stop doing it.

But the mods keep asking me Columbo type questions. I got a PM saying this has been taken all the way to the head of CN.

 

[Rex Hunter]

I'm genuinely bemused at why you and Susan have suddenly taken great offense to me saying the rules are applied inconsistently. Don't worry, I'm not going to try to get you the sack or anything (even if I was able to). Has someone made a complaint on my behalf? I thought it was open and transparent that this is primarily a forum for people who dislike Armstrong, and only a few extremely polite and mild mannered people who disagree with this are allowed on. But now, all of a sudden, everyone seems to be falling over themselves to prove this is not the case. "You mean to say there have been gangs of trolls who have impunity from the moderators who target people who disagree with them? Well I am shocked, I tells you!". What exactly has happened? Has someone new takenover? Bizarre.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gf8NK1WAOc