Closing and Locking Threads

[Granville57]

Bump.............

If you do consider it though Francois....could we amend it slightly....make it like celebrity death match?....arrange some one on ones? Invite Bucky back and get him and Chris E together to go over the space shuttle thing uncensored?.....TFF versus Cal Joe?....Flicky versus....well, kind of anyone?....Doctor Maserati versus....himself? I'd pay to watch, honestly!

Bump bump...

...it seems that at least one reason that the debates about “group think” go on for so long, and become so vitriolic, is that there is nowhere to actually have that debate.

Can we give that debate a home all its own?

How about:
The Clinic Cage-Match Challenge!

Anyone who dared could enter, and I have no doubt that they would find willing sparring partners. But, if they only offered senseless babble, they might just find themselves sitting alone in there with their corner-stool, bucket, and dangling mouth-guard. But that would be the only tolerated arena for such behavior.

 

[Cal_Joe]

it seems that at least one reason that the debates about “group think” go on for so long, and become so vitriolic, is that there is nowhere to actually have that debate.

Can we give that debate a home all its own?

If I remember correctly, there is a social group set up for that express purpose - "A place for forum members to discuss the sociology/pathology of positive feedback loops/self reinforcing communities/groupthink as regards to the Cycling News forums."

Have to admit it is not very active, but includes Hugh Januss and Wonderlance as participants, two stellar forum members.

 

[Francois the Postman]

OK, ok....

I saw the post but wasn't sure how to reply to it.

First, there seems to be a small disconnect. There is a huuuge gap between what I think is fun or offensive, or entertaining, or whatever, and what I think I consider to be appropriate here. I can argue at the same time that something should not be seen as offensive, or even fully agree it is not, and still deem it to be wholly inappropriate on this site. I can and have, chuckled away at some posts, and still slapped folk on the wrist for it. I know this to be the case for the other mods too.

Many many actions are taken from the site's pov, and not because of my pov. Hard as some may find to believe that.

Secondly, it ain't up to me to create new areas as we see fit, even less so areas that are relaxing the rules that are built into the very fabric of the site, even if I personally dislike some of these.

Thirdly, when I am approached in my mod function, I can spout pretty easily about modding issues that we as mods have covered liberally, are clearly covered by the intent of the guidelines, and, sometimes, without having to go back to the mods and ask what others have to to say.

For some reason Fight Club has not been a pressing topic in there.

Now, the suggestion, at first glance, seems to create an area that makes little sense from a cycling pov. The only sense it would make is if you think of this as a community.

Well, some folk are here so often, that it is obvious that we feel at home here, and home isn't all about the cycling. See Cafe, et al. A room for the adults who like it juicy? It might be functional, it might be entertaining, or both.

So when I saw TFF suggestion, with the right people and in the right spirit, speaking on my personal title, I can see it work in some instances. I would smirk all the way through it, with some, I expect. From a "we are a community point of view", with the right warning signs up, an making sure don't just stumble in there by mistake, ignoring that it isn't my call, so personally speaking, anyone participating or walking through the door is an adult and makes their own choice, as far as I am concerned.

I have seen these things in the past where even things that started out as fun became something else entirely, mind you. And you can't oblige folk to partake either.

That is if you can take CN out of the equation. Which we can not. They are the starting point.

It is also thinking about the ideal, which it won't be. There will be plenty who can't handle it in the right/screwy spirit, and some who will set out to ruin that corner too, or manipulate it for their private entertainment. And it will become something that will spill back into the real forum too. I credit each and every one of you's of finding one way or another to have some Death Match cage rattling, no matter how clever we try to capture the spirit of the principle that nothing that has anything to do with it would spill back.

Apart from that,

It kinda really really is beyond my current "pay grade", so to speak. It is adding a level outside the current structure, and I suspect would not be welcomed by the powers that be. But creating it in discussion with you guys and us goes beyond our mandate, even if we could do it from a technical pov.

So I wasn't really saying much, as I don't know what reply to give to it.

I felt my answer would be pretty unsatisfactory, and probably not quite thought through well anyway. I left it hanging there for any other mod to chime in on, but you guys appear to want to hear from me, and are on a bumpy ride to make the point.

I can take it up with the powers that be, but don't tie me to their answer. And I kinda know what the answer will be. A lot shorter than this one, I think. But I can certainly raise it.

[Francois, last seen washing hands in the corner, whilst picturing the posters for the first slug-fests].

 

[pedaling squares]

Fight Club

Bump.............

I think it would generate a lot of laughs and probably just as much mayhem. But there is no part in starting up a fight club until BroDeal comes back. All title contenders should be around to take part.

EDIT:
First one on one match would be BroDeal vs BroDeal (the guy who stole his username and signed up at forum inception).

 

[Anonymous]

OK, ok....

I saw the post but wasn't sure how to reply to it.

First, there seems to be a small disconnect. There is a huuuge gap between what I think is fun or offensive, or entertaining, or whatever, and what I think I consider to be appropriate here. I can argue at the same time that something should not be seen as offensive, or even fully agree it is not, and still deem it to be wholly inappropriate on this site. I can and have, chuckled away at some posts, and still slapped folk on the wrist for it. I know this to be the case for the other mods too.

Many many actions are taken from the site's pov, and not because of my pov. Hard as some may find to believe that.

Secondly, it ain't up to me to create new areas as we see fit, even less so areas that are relaxing the rules that are built into the very fabric of the site, even if I personally dislike some of these.

Thirdly, when I am approached in my mod function, I can spout pretty easily about modding issues that we as mods have covered liberally, are clearly covered by the intent of the guidelines, and, sometimes, without having to go back to the mods and ask what others have to to say.

For some reason Fight Club has not been a pressing topic in there.

Now, the suggestion, at first glance, seems to create an area that makes little sense from a cycling pov. The only sense it would make is if you think of this as a community.

Well, some folk are here so often, that it is obvious that we feel at home here, and home isn't all about the cycling. See Cafe, et al. A room for the adults who like it juicy? It might be functional, it might be entertaining, or both.

So when I saw TFF suggestion, with the right people and in the right spirit, speaking on my personal title, I can see it work in some instances. I would smirk all the way through it, with some, I expect. From a "we are a community point of view", with the right warning signs up, an making sure don't just stumble in there by mistake, ignoring that it isn't my call, so personally speaking, anyone participating or walking through the door is an adult and makes their own choice, as far as I am concerned.

I have seen these things in the past where even things that started out as fun became something else entirely, mind you. And you can't oblige folk to partake either.

That is if you can take CN out of the equation. Which we can not. They are the starting point.

It is also thinking about the ideal, which it won't be. There will be plenty who can't handle it in the right/screwy spirit, and some who will set out to ruin that corner too, or manipulate it for their private entertainment. And it will become something that will spill back into the real forum too. I credit each and every one of you's of finding one way or another to have some Death Match cage rattling, no matter how clever we try to capture the spirit of the principle that nothing that has anything to do with it would spill back.

Apart from that,

It kinda really really is beyond my current "pay grade", so to speak. It is adding a level outside the current structure, and I suspect would not be welcomed by the powers that be. But creating it in discussion with you guys and us goes beyond our mandate, even if we could do it from a technical pov.

So I wasn't really saying much, as I don't know what reply to give to it.

I felt my answer would be pretty unsatisfactory, and probably not quite thought through well anyway. I left it hanging there for any other mod to chime in on, but you guys appear to want to hear from me, and are on a bumpy ride to make the point.

I can take it up with the powers that be, but don't tie me to their answer. And I kinda know what the answer will be. A lot shorter than this one, I think. But I can certainly raise it.

[Francois, last seen washing hands in the corner, whilst picturing the posters for the first slug-fests].

No, good response. The problems you raised with something like that are legitimate and insightful.

I envisioned it as a place where you guys could toss people instead of tossing them with a ban. You could just throw their argument (and the distinction you guys make, which is very logical, is when the post becomes about the other poster and not their topic) in there and completely remove it from the thread. I know it is simple and fraught with "what if's?" but I posted it only as a suggestion anyway (and quite honestly, also as a way for me to not get banned for flaming someone. So there is a selfish motive.)

Thanks for posting, and if it ever happens, I promise to use it for what it is...I am sure that assuages all of your warieness...

 

[Anonymous]

I think it would generate a lot of laughs and probably just as much mayhem. But there is no part in starting up a fight club until BroDeal comes back. All title contenders should be around to take part.

EDIT:
First one on one match would be BroDeal vs BroDeal (the guy who stole his username and signed up at forum inception).

Bro will probably be back in a few months. He gets p!ssed and swears off every now and then. He did it a few times back in his cyclingforums days, but he always returned. Maybe this time will be different, but I hope not. He is fun to have around.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You are under no obligation to adhere to my rules. However, I have seen you pick words apart to an inane level and I set rules to debate you. This is my prerogative since I am not obligated to engage you. On the flip side if you don't like it you can choose to pass me by. I'm not trying to be difficult I'm trying to save my sanity.

How many times I posted yesterday plays no part in this discussion. What matters is if I debated you on all 5 questions it would have been a HUGE time commitment. One that would have ended with me giving up. So I said lets break it down and see how it goes, I felt confident I could commit enough time to debate you on a single question but you didn't like that idea. This is why I made the rule which has only been substantiated for ME in this very thread.

I didn't ask for a debate - I asked (5) questions to back up your claims all you had to do was post some quick examples and that would have ended your 'obligation' to back up what you claimed.

Unlike you I have made no precondition on how you answer the questions.
You can start from the bottom and work your way up - you can start in the middle, you can even shuffle them if you wish.
You could have even said you were busy, so I will answer only 2.
Instead you have come up with reasons not to answer it - that is your choice to.

At this stage I don't care whether you answer them are not.

 

[Hugh Januss]

No, good response. The problems you raised with something like that are legitimate and insightful.

I envisioned it as a place where you guys could toss people instead of tossing them with a ban. You could just throw their argument (and the distinction you guys make, which is very logical, is when the post becomes about the other poster and not their topic) in there and completely remove it from the thread. I know it is simple and fraught with "what if's?" but I posted it only as a suggestion anyway (and quite honestly, also as a way for me to not get banned for flaming someone. So there is a selfish motive.)

Thanks for posting, and if it ever happens, I promise to use it for what it is...I am sure that assuages all of your warieness...

You know the more I think about this option the more I realize that it wouldn't really solve anything. To be honest most of the fun in flaming someone lies in doing it within the context of whatever debate is raging, and getting away with it. If that makes me a troll........well then guilty as charged.

 

[JPM London]

No, good response. The problems you raised with something like that are legitimate and insightful.

I envisioned it as a place where you guys could toss people instead of tossing them with a ban. You could just throw their argument (and the distinction you guys make, which is very logical, is when the post becomes about the other poster and not their topic) in there and completely remove it from the thread. I know it is simple and fraught with "what if's?" but I posted it only as a suggestion anyway (and quite honestly, also as a way for me to not get banned for flaming someone. So there is a selfish motive.)

Thanks for posting, and if it ever happens, I promise to use it for what it is...I am sure that assuages all of your warieness...

Like a prison? Can other posters "visit"?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I took your post as a justification of you opening a new thread, but more as a protest about it still being closed, despite my own instruction-words. It looks you have a different angle.

The word-picking and legalising is still starting to get to me. You aren't happy with a poster saying something and not backing it up. Fair enough. You made that point. You also seem to think that that means it should be retracted.

I'll be honest - this I don't get.
There is nothing legalise in my point - I have not looked up the rules of the forum & argue 'paragraph Y says this'.

My point is really simple.
I questioned someones claim and decided to open a thread in the appropriate forum so as not to derail the original LA thread.

Forget rules, isn't it plain common sence and in the spirit of the forum to not go OT??

Yet, it gets closed down - and from both yourself & JPMs posts it appears I should have continued it on the original thread or take it to PMs?

To the blue - no, in fact I gave them the opportunity to answer it any way they wish. If they can back it up, it ends the debate if they retract it, it ends the debate.

In a murder trial, sure. On a cycling site where people speculate and voice all sorts of stuff. Nah. Sorry. We share opinions and facts. There is no requirement for anyone to argue why they arrive at an opinion. Or dig up the bodies when someone demands an autopsy. It can be nice if they do, it might say something about the opinion if they don't. But if it they duck it, or ignore it, just find way to deal with that, as here it's fine.

Murder trial!!! Ha, ok - am, don't they have 'sidebars' to discuss separate issues in trials too?
Indeed isn't that why there are separate forums to discuss different topics?

One of the great things in this CN forum is that pretty much any topic can be added and that there is an appropriate place for it.

I rarely question someones opinion - as even with the same data or facts people can interpret it differently.
However I do question people facts -because I like to do my own fact checking, or perhaps I believe their info to be erroneous and sometimes because it can throw up new or better information.

Sure, if someone cannot back up there facts then that ends the matter.

And it is not as if he had levelled a far out claim with real-life consequences to anyone either. He said that in his mind the folk in the Clinic were a bit x,y and z. People have made the general sweeping cases about fans and posters there for ages, and I have never seen you rip up the turf like this. Something about this particular statement got under your wig, and I think you should just let it fly.

Firstly - gross exaggeration, but I have often requested people to link or back up their claims, I see nothing wrong with that and have no problem someone doing the same to me.

The only difference was that I opened a separate thread to do so - because I have been accused of trying to derail threads when I question posters.

WE (as mods) just expect it to be honestly held. I think JRT does. He went out of his way not to insult, or finger-point. That makes sure it is even more likely to remain. That post will stay.

Feel free to question it. But like this? It's a bit much, and getting a bit too much rapidly, IMO.

I'm assuming you mean the post in the LA thread?

I wasn't asking for it to be removed.

(ok, it was OT, but JRT merely responded to some other OT post and I fully understand there is a fine line when it comes to what is or is not an OT post).

 

[Anonymous]

Like a prison? Can other posters "visit"?

Sure, you just need to know that the visits are conjugal and you might hear some things from this guy that aren't terribly friendly.

 

[Anonymous]

You know the more I think about this option the more I realize that it wouldn't really solve anything. To be honest most of the fun in flaming someone lies in doing it within the context of whatever debate is raging, and getting away with it. If that makes me a troll........well then guilty as charged.

Sure, but there is still a "get away with it" even in that scenario, you just have to hone your jedi troll skillz a little more to fit. If you just stay where you are, you will never be known as Darth Hugh Januss.

 

[usedtobefast]

That is a really stupid idea, you inbred hillbilly hick moran.

yer gonna have to stand in the corner for that
my kin aint that stoopid.