Armstrong discussions

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 9, 2009
640
0
0
D-Queued said:
<major snip>

Moreover, you began an open debate, based on new and subjective criteria, about what content you like and do not like. New rules? No notice?
<end major snip>

New rules? No notice? - Barrus' sig has been up for a while, and if you read the threads about moderating this really should not come as a big surprise.

Also, I do not think the mods have time to PM everyone as you suggested - can you try to understand that they are overloaded and cut them some slack?

Read, think before you post (there is a sticky on that), and maybe get a feel for which way the wind is blowing.

I learn a lot from many of the subforums here; I would like to continue to do that without the incessant posturing by two sides on certain topics.
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
5
0
BroDeal said:
This is classic. In a thread about moderating posts about Armstrong in threads where they don't belong, Scribe starts an Armstrong doping argument. Nice.

BTW, grouping that Vrijman crack in with the other examples was way overreaching.

And another one. They come rolling in. Looking for fights in all the wrong places.

All I did was comment on DQ's lenghty post trying to describe how Girona had EVERYTHING to do with Armstrong. Fact of the matter is, no one (aside from polish) is interested in it anymore. Time to let it go and stop injected it into every single friggin thread.
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
1
0
BroDeal said:
This is classic. In a thread about moderating posts about Armstrong in threads where they don't belong, Scribe starts an Armstrong doping argument.
This is easily some of his best work.
 
Aug 9, 2009
640
0
0
BroDeal said:
This is classic. In a thread about moderating posts about Armstrong in threads where they don't belong, Scribe starts an Armstrong doping argument. Nice.

BTW, grouping that Vrijman crack in with the other examples was way overreaching.

Maybe you missed post he was responding to. Or maybe you didn't, in which case my previous post is undoubtedly psychic.
 
Jun 20, 2010
181
0
0
Having been a pretty naive passive fan to the cycling sports over the past 20 years I've had a pretty abrupt awakening to the nasty side of the business. But even I've grown tired of the 6 degrees of separation game that goes on around here in regards to LA and crew. Personally I'd like nothing better than to see reference to him on a daily basis banned by both sides.
 
Cal_Joe said:
Maybe you missed post he was responding to. Or maybe you didn't, in which case my previous post is undoubtedly psychic.

The point is that a thread about preventing Armstrong talk derailing threads is itself derailed by Armstrong talk, and it is being purposely done almost as an affront to the moderators. It is times like these when I think the moderators should come down with a heavy hand. Of course, this is the reason why an a-hole like me would not make a good moderator; I'd reach a breaking point, start thinking, "This is __________!," and start handing out vacations.
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
5
0
BroDeal said:
The point is that a thread about preventing Armstrong talk derailing threads is itself derailed by Armstrong talk, and it is being purposely done almost as an affront to the moderators. It is times like these when I think the moderators should come down with a heavy hand. Of course, this is the reason why an a-hole like me would not make a good moderator; I'd reach a breaking point, start thinking, "This is ________!," and start handing out vacations.

No. The point is, it's guys like you who are rolling through all the threads, looking to kick up dust with anyone who won't toe the line on this Armstrong fascination. DQ, who is in here FIRST arguing about the merit of Armstrong discussions in other topic threads, gets a free pass in your head because he shares your brain.
 
Aug 9, 2009
640
0
0
BroDeal said:
The point is that a thread about preventing Armstrong talk derailing threads is itself derailed by Armstrong talk <snip>

And it was not done by the poster you are attacking. For God's sake man, read the thread. One other possibility is that you have D-Queued on ignore - if that is the case, reverse that ignore and read the entire thread.

Don't really know how to put it much plainer than that.
 
Dec 7, 2010
5,507
0
0
Guess what?
The Wall Street Journal isn't done with articles about Armstrong and neither is SI. So it's completely ridiculous to expect The Clinic to be so. I fully understand Barrus' frustration (to put it lightly) when other threads are dragged down the same old path or when members can't be bothered to research previous threads about same. But others here shouldn't expect a reprieve from the topic anytime soon.

It's as if The Clinic represents a group of seismologists who have been anticipating an eruption of epic proportions. Now, with Novitsky and friends priming the lava, don't expect everyone just to walk away and say, "Yeah, we've been standing here too long. Let's go home before this thing blows."

There seems to be two separate debates unfolding here:
1.The mods are tired of discussions all dissolving into the same toxic brew.
2. Some members don't want to hear about LA of FL ever again regardless of context.

These shouldn't be treated as the same issue. They are not.
 
scribe said:
No. The point is, it's guys like you who are rolling through all the threads, looking to kick up dust with anyone who won't toe the line on this Armstrong fascination. DQ, who is in here FIRST arguing about the merit of Armstrong discussions in other topic threads, gets a free pass in your head because he shares your brain.

Cal_Joe said:
And it was not done by the poster you are attacking. For God's sake man, read the thread. One other possibility is that you have D-Queued on ignore - if that is the case, reverse that ignore and read the entire thread.

Don't really know how to put it much plainer than that.

Errr... wasn't it my post in another thread that started this thread?

How on earth could my commenting on post possibly that be out of line????

So, point to Bro_deal.

Me, I am still trying to figure out where my post went.

If you don't want to read what I post, then take your own advice and put me on ignore.

After all, isn't that the mechanism for this? Not some spurious new filter?

This whole dialog appears more motivated to get my posts *edited* from the clinic altogether - this time under a spurious 'weariness' rationale.

Funny, Floyd and Will tried the same thing on DPF.

They went down. I continue to post.

Dave.
 
Aug 9, 2009
640
0
0
D-Queued said:
Errr... wasn't it my post in another thread that started this thread?

How on earth could my commenting on post possibly that be out of line????

So, point to Bro_deal.

Me, I am still trying to figure out where my post went.

If you don't want to read what I post, then take your own advice and put me on ignore.

After all, isn't that the mechanism for this? Not some spurious new filter?

This whole dialog appears more motivated to get my posts *edited* from the clinic altogether - this time under a spurious 'weariness' rationale.

Funny, Floyd and Will tried the same thing on DPF.

They went down. I continue to post.

Dave.

My understanding of this subforum is to discuss mod issues/ actions. Your post (#19 in this thread at this time) discussed LA, George, Tyler, Floyd, Girona, Hein, Vrijman, Carmichael, and many other tangents. I do not know why you tried to discuss issues that would have not have received any notice IF you had discussed them in an appropriate forum thread.

By all means, continue to post.

Oh, another heads up - discussing "Floyd...Will...DPF" etc has also received a non approval here by the mods. Read some more threads in this subforum - it may explain a thing or two. Really - read some more of the threads.
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
1
0
scribe said:
And another one. They come rolling in. Looking for fights in all the wrong places.

scribe said:
And another one. Like dozens of midgets rolling out of a tiny car.
My post not meant as a critique. For the first time I was laughing with you. I guess you weren't joking, in which case well, I'm still laughing. If you look for a fight, it's easy enough to think you have found one. I just don't know why you'd bother looking for a fight on a cycling forum.
 
Jun 16, 2009
3,035
0
0
Granville57 said:
There seems to be two separate debates unfolding here:
1.The mods are tired of discussions all dissolving into the same toxic brew.
2. Some members don't want to hear about LA of FL ever again regardless of context.

These shouldn't be treated as the same issue. They are not.

Absolutely correct.

To clarify for a few people, I would point out that this is not a Barrus only initiative. Barrus has clearly publicised it but the rest of the Mods support the effort to end the ridiculous off topic trolling in the name of LA.

Therefore:

1. discussion of LA in one of the pre-existing LA threads is obviously fine.
2. Introduction of LA into a non-LA thread in a trolling manner will result in the post being edited and/or the poster being educated via pm and/or suspension.
3. Creation of a new LA thread needs to be very very clearly due to new information or it will be treated as 2. There are more than sufficient threads to add to if necessary.

(as has been highlighted by several people - this is not an Anti-Lance campaign. This is effectively an Anti-Lance-Spam campaign. If you want to discuss him, find the appropriate open thread and add your thoughts there)
 
Cal_Joe said:
My understanding of this subforum is to discuss mod issues/ actions. Your post (#19 in this thread at this time) discussed ... many other tangents. I do not know why you tried to discuss issues that would have not have received any notice IF you had discussed them in an appropriate forum thread.

By all means, continue to post.

Oh, another heads up - discussing "..." etc has also received a non approval here by the mods. Read some more threads in this subforum - it may explain a thing or two. Really - read some more of the threads.

Got it. Thanks! My bad!

Now, back to the point.

If a thread discusses something directly within the orbit of cyclist xyz, what rule prevents observing the orbital relationship?

Since this particular thread is really about my posts - what about a simple inmail from the mods or others?

'Hey Dave - really like your posts for the most part, or not, but could you try and avoid perpetuating the 'rider xyz rule'

Why is that so hard?

Is that a fair question for this thread?

Dave.
 
Martin318is said:
Absolutely correct.

To clarify for a few people, I would point out that this is not a Barrus only initiative. Barrus has clearly publicised it but the rest of the Mods support the effort to end the ridiculous off topic trolling in the name of LA.

Therefore:

...
2. Introduction of LA into a non-LA thread in a trolling manner will result in the post being edited and/or the poster being educated via pm and/or suspension.
...

(as has been highlighted by several people - this is not an Anti-Lance campaign. This is effectively an Anti-Lance-Spam campaign. If you want to discuss him, find the appropriate open thread and add your thoughts there)

And all I am asking for is said 'education'!!!

Dave.
 
Martin318is said:
Absolutely correct.

To clarify for a few people, I would point out that this is not a Barrus only initiative. Barrus has clearly publicised it but the rest of the Mods support the effort to end the ridiculous off topic trolling in the name of LA.

Therefore:

1. discussion of LA in one of the pre-existing LA threads is obviously fine.
2. Introduction of LA into a non-LA thread in a trolling manner will result in the post being edited and/or the poster being educated via pm and/or suspension.
3. Creation of a new LA thread needs to be very very clearly due to new information or it will be treated as 2. There are more than sufficient threads to add to if necessary.

(as has been highlighted by several people - this is not an Anti-Lance campaign. This is effectively an Anti-Lance-Spam campaign. If you want to discuss him, find the appropriate open thread and add your thoughts there)

One last time Lance Armstrong as a reference point is going to be brought up in almost any thread involving doping in cycling if you can not handle that then maybe you should be posting or moderating on a Golfing forum.
Just sayin'
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
5
0
pedaling squares said:
My post not meant as a critique. For the first time I was laughing with you. I guess you weren't joking, in which case well, I'm still laughing. If you look for a fight, it's easy enough to think you have found one. I just don't know why you'd bother looking for a fight on a cycling forum.

Well, I'm a lover not a fighter. No idea how anyone would think any dif. ;)
 
Hugh Januss said:
One last time Lance Armstrong as a reference point is going to be brought up in almost any thread involving doping in cycling if you can not handle that then maybe you should be posting or moderating on a Golfing forum.
Just sayin'

There are at least 31 mentions of '*****' or '*********' in the thread (don't want to continue any spamming here):

Pat throws Hein under the (USPS) bus?

That thread is about Pat and Hein. USPS is only parenthetical.

This is off-topic ** spamming and why have these posts not been edited and/or the poster(s) 'educated' or 'suspended'?

Fair is fair.

Dave.
 
Aug 9, 2009
640
0
0
Hugh Januss said:
No, Dave's post was initially in the proper forum. The mods moved it and then Scribe continued it here. Not anyone else.

If the mods moved it, impossible to tell if the post originated in this thread or elsewhere.

It would have been polite to point that out to Scribe before your attack. Or point it out to anyone else. Some folks do not read every post on every thread, and have no idea if a post originated outside of the thread.
 
Cal_Joe said:
If the mods moved it, impossible to tell if the post originated in this thread or elsewhere.

It would have been polite to point that out to Scribe before your attack. Or point it out to anyone else. Some folks do not read every post on every thread, and have no idea if a post originated outside of the thread.

Those folks should read more before getting on their high horse.
 
Oct 29, 2009
2,578
0
0
D-Queued said:
Since this particular thread is really about my posts - what about a simple inmail from the mods or others?

'Hey Dave - really like your posts for the most part, or not, but could you try and avoid perpetuating the 'rider xyz rule'

Why is that so hard?

Is that a fair question for this thread?

That is a fair question Dave.

Maybe it could have been handled better, or more personal, in your case. But that "handled better" that people frequently ask for involves asking for a luxury that we haven't had for a while behind the scenes: enough time and hands to behave "ideal". All these "just one PM to me" add up rapidly on a site like this, especially when the Clinic is smelling blood or getting psyched up.

So what you have seen, and this is something we have flagged up frequently over the last weeks, is that few hands have been flat out on a whole hosts of fronts, and we have asked on more than one occasion for regulars to work with us. Some of you did, some of you did mostly. Not all of you did.

What you ended up was mods who were firefighting, and unfortunately, the quickest way if you have made the same point time and time again in PMs to individuals, is to draw a very sharp and public line in the sand.

When we do, some people assume it doesn't apply to them, or feel they can ignore it, and then get really "you could have given me a soft warning" or "why did you not nudge nudge" before. We have, publicly, openly, over and over. And with several people, privately too. When we get trapped in some Groundhog Day without getting much response from the key players, especially when we are chucking bucket loads of time at and effort at it to to it gentle, that's when you see the sharp lines appear. Which from that point on, apply to all. We will still apply some discretion, but public warnings are to be taken seriously. You might not have caused it, but ignoring it will make you part of the problem too, if people catch my drift.

It sounds like you were caught out at the more annoying side of the line, something that maybe never would have occurred if the few mods were not getting stretched thin and thus got stressed a bit. On the other hand, it would also not have occurred if people, including yourself, had taken the visual cues to drop some of the more disruptive type of posts in threads (I am not saying they were meant that way, just how they tend to pan out given our past experience), and the more gentle mod requests more to heart.

We will be getting new hands on deck soon, so hopefully we'll be able to get to a more "ideal" interaction with individual members soon, and we will have to rely less on the one glove suits all approach. It might well be that the tempers on all sides, and the stress at this end, will subdue a bit. I guess, with the upcoming race calendar, and the possible doping distractions/attractions/issues, we, as a posting community, will all have to give and take a bit, to avoid things getting ugly.

Some things won't go away. There will be times when we will be less lenient with members who ignore simple requests, or who decide that a certain day is a good moment to have a personal tantrum, or who feel that now is a good moment to take another member on with a frontal assault.

And we will expect members to show some respect to others here, and know when to fall in line a bit, for the good of the whole, rather than keep droning on about one personal hang-up.

Anyone with half a brain will realise what days are not good days to see what you can get away with. In the end, you are dealing with mods who will show predictable human reactions to keep having to come back to the same issues over and over, or be called into very petty arguments between adults who should know better and just let some things fly.

We will keep trying to figure out what issues are playing up,and how we can fix them as well as we can, so it makes most sense, or most people will have peace with it. Hopefully, with more hands on board soon, we can be more effective and constructive too.

In the end, none of the mods are here to spoil people's fun and enjoyment. That is not the same as letting everyone have it their way.

Your request for a less blunt and more personal approach has been heard. Ideally, I think most mods, if not all, would prefer that. I do however think you seriously underestimate the time sink that that is, and that is time that comes directly out of us mods having time with our families and dear ones. And trust me, that has suffered quite a bit over the last couple of months.

So, if everyone can relax a bit, and give all of us time and space to address the various (and at times conflicting) wishes that people have, in a more creative way, that would be good. In the end, hopefully, for everyone.

So no, we don't want you to stop discussing Lance, far from it. But we do want everyone to reflect in which thread it is added value, or the key point, and in which thread it might get in the way of a more focussed discussion.

And if you feel that you have an angle worthy of a thread in its own right, we won't stop you creating one. At worst, we might divert it, or merge it. In very rare cases we might close it. That rarely happens, and when it happens, on the whole, no-one is missing out on much.

I guess the key is self-reflection. Does my point have enough merit here? Is the discussion I am having with one or two others over 10+ posts derailing the entire thread? Etc.

If more people applied that consistently, and were less keen to confront the same few over the same few issues, I suspect the mods would be a lot less in people's faces than they have been.

A few posters still expect from mods to come in and clean up after they had their fun. Or are unwilling to give an inch when asked to tone it down a bit.

People who are so inflexible that they on the one hand expect that people give them all the room they want, but are unwilling to make any room for others to have a bit of fun or "different" debate space too will, probably, keep finding me in their way, at some point.

You get what you give here, on the whole.