Interesting piece on Livestrong

[HL2037]

Ok, I believe that Armstrong doped but I seriously don't get you guys spending so much time talking about him, searching for blogs and posts on other sites simply to rip on those people. Why is it that any Armstrong thread on any cycling forum gets turned into ripping on anyone who does not say Armstrong is the scum of the earth? I simply don't get that mentality, it really smacks of insecurity.

No, I am not trying to rip on anyone in this thread, I am hoping someone will try to present to me the reason for resorting to these kinds of things in an intelligent and logical manner. Thanks.

Oh wouldn't you like to know

 

[Stingray34]

Post Count: 2

Post 1: defends Shack jersey, rips Saxo

Post 2: Comes a knockin in the clinic, asks for LA hate explanation and subtle dig at psychological well-being of posters

 

[Velodude]

Ok, I believe that Armstrong doped but I seriously don't get you guys spending so much time talking about him, searching for blogs and posts on other sites simply to rip on those people. Why is it that any Armstrong thread on any cycling forum gets turned into ripping on anyone who does not say Armstrong is the scum of the earth? I simply don't get that mentality, it really smacks of insecurity.

No, I am not trying to rip on anyone in this thread, I am hoping someone will try to present to me the reason for resorting to these kinds of things in an intelligent and logical manner. Thanks.

Obviously you have never visited the Google forum rec bicyles racing.

 

[Stingray34]

Obviously you have never visited the Google forum rec bicyles racing.

methinks he owns it

 

[MarkvW]

Ok, I believe that Armstrong doped but I seriously don't get you guys spending so much time talking about him, searching for blogs and posts on other sites simply to rip on those people. Why is it that any Armstrong thread on any cycling forum gets turned into ripping on anyone who does not say Armstrong is the scum of the earth? I simply don't get that mentality, it really smacks of insecurity.

No, I am not trying to rip on anyone in this thread, I am hoping someone will try to present to me the reason for resorting to these kinds of things in an intelligent and logical manner. Thanks.

While I understand attacking the people who serve the Kool-Aid, I don't understand attacking the people who are only drinking it.

 

[doolols]

Why is it that any Armstrong thread on any cycling forum gets turned into ripping on anyone who does not say Armstrong is the scum of the earth? I simply don't get that mentality, it really smacks of insecurity.

Yep, we're really, really insecure

 

[The Plediadian]

Ok, I believe that Armstrong doped but I seriously don't get you guys spending so much time talking about him, searching for blogs and posts on other sites simply to rip on those people. Why is it that any Armstrong thread on any cycling forum gets turned into ripping on anyone who does not say Armstrong is the scum of the earth? I simply don't get that mentality, it really smacks of insecurity.

No, I am not trying to rip on anyone in this thread, I am hoping someone will try to present to me the reason for resorting to these kinds of things in an intelligent and logical manner. Thanks.

For an argument to be relevant, facts need to be shared, pro and con.
As soon as news becomes prejudiced and one sided, ideas become irrelevant. Thusly instead of a forum it becomes a pulpit, (or a soapbox.)
It can be said about this particular site, or when a sporting body, or sporting individuals use their management skills to spread propaganda.

 

[Stingray34]

For an argument to be relevant, facts need to be shared, pro and con.
As soon as news becomes prejudiced and one sided, ideas become irrelevant. Thusly instead of a forum it becomes a pulpit, (or a soapbox.)
It can be said about this particular site, or when a sporting body, or sporting individuals use their management skills to spread propaganda.

Thusly bring back factsforlance.com They're the facts

 

[The Plediadian]

Thusly bring back factsforlance.com They're the facts

Yes, excellent sense of humor you possess sir.
If a poster would like to point out fallacies with the now defunct website factsfor.lance.com it might be a good beginning towards proving an argument.

 

[Stingray34]

Yes, excellent sense of humor you possess sir.
If a poster would like to point out fallacies with the now defunct website factsfor.lance.com it might be a good beginning towards proving an argument.

You've come here for an argument? But this is Abuse.

Jokes are only funny when their punchlines are true.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

To all users: Please remember that all viewpoints are allowed here. Treat one another politely

To the newcomers: Look how long this thread is. You cannot reasonably expect to step into the thread and start it over from the beginning. Please pose specific questions or points of view -- and of course, be prepared to accept opposing viewpoints.

Susan

 

[Velodude]

Yes, excellent sense of humor you possess sir.
If a poster would like to point out fallacies with the now defunct website factsfor.lance.com it might be a good beginning towards proving an argument.

I believe, sir, the self destruction of factsforlance.com tacitly drew its own conclusion:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/alexmassie/7013339/no-more-facts-for-lance.thtml

It seems that, in cycling as everything else, when the facts become intolerable it's no longer credible to insist upon them. That being the case it's not, perhaps, a great surprise that the Facts for Lance website appears to have disappeared.

 

[The Plediadian]

I believe, sir, the self destruction of factsforlance.com tacitly drew its own conclusion:

facts for Lance is/was as silly as John Cleese doing the silly walk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wippooDL6WE

 

[Race Radio]

An important part of Livestrong is the Armstrong myth. For a myth to succeed it is important to have a well crafted story so people who are normally intelligent feel comfortable suspending rational thought and repeat the talking points.

The key chronicler of the Armstrong myth was Sally Jenkins. She wrote his books as well as churned out barely believable cheer leading articles.

Is anyone surprised that another questionable sports person turned to Sally to help craft his myth?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...usky-scandal/2012/01/13/gIQA08e4yP_story.html

 

[Oldman]

An important part of Livestrong is the Armstrong myth. For a myth to succeed it is important to have a well crafted story so people who are normally intelligent feel comfortable suspending rational thought and repeat the talking points.

The key chronicler of the Armstrong myth was Sally Jenkins. She wrote his books as well as churned out barely believable cheer leading articles.

Is anyone surprised that another questionable sports person turned to Sally to help craft his myth?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...usky-scandal/2012/01/13/gIQA08e4yP_story.html

I never considered that LA might start appearing in a wheelchair and discussing his conversations with the Almighty as a defense posture...no offense to JoePat. It's going to be difficult to keep Livestrong accounting folks quiet...they didn't see anything in the showers so they have nothing to be afraid of except the IRS.

 

[Louison]

To all users: Please remember that all viewpoints are allowed here. Treat one another politely

To the newcomers: Look how long this thread is. You cannot reasonably expect to step into the thread and start it over from the beginning. Please pose specific questions or points of view -- and of course, be prepared to accept opposing viewpoints.

Susan

Based on your first point this thread should have been deleted long ago since it pretty much based on not allowing certain viewpoints and not being polite to those that have a different viewpoint. Heck, I was insulted/attacked simply for asking a question about the motivation for the way people act in threads like this.

About your second point, I never asked for the thread to be restarted I simply posted specific questions about the attitudes and actions. I have yet to see an actual opposing viewpoint, I only see insults/attacks. Perhaps you should take a better look at this thread as a whole.

 

[MacRoadie]

Perhaps you should take a better look at this thread as a whole.

Perhaps she should take a better look at your IP address...

 

[Louison]

Post Count: 2

Post 1: defends Shack jersey, rips Saxo

Post 2: Comes a knockin in the clinic, asks for LA hate explanation and subtle dig at psychological well-being of posters

Who cares how many posts I have before I posted in this thread.

Actually all I did was discuss cycling fashion and gave legitimate style reasoning for my opinions.

And in response to my post here I received exactly what I was asking about, not a response to my actual question. Interestingly you also went and looked at my posts to come up with ammo to go after me, something else I mentioned that you guys do a lot.

I guess you guys don't want to have an actual discussion but simply want to have people pat you on the back for having the same opinion and rip on anyone you can find posting anywhere.

Oh, well I guess I will stick to other topics that posters want to have actual discussions about.

 

[Louison]

Perhaps she should take a better look at your IP address...

I deleted the post since it's clear that I struck a nerve with you. I am sorry if you were offended.

 

[doolols]

Interestingly you also went and looked at my posts to come up with ammo to go after me, something else I mentioned that you guys do a lot.

This forum, in common with just about every other forum on the internet, has a history, and members of that forum form the history. Now, when someone new comes along, and within a couple of posts, starts to make controversial statements and criticises other members of the forum, then it's perfectly natural to ask "who is this person?" Members ask it, and mods / admins ask it.

It's like walking into a bar where you've never been before, and proclaiming that you don't like it or the people in it. Prepare for a slightly hostile reception.

 

[Race Radio]

Ok, I believe that Armstrong doped but I seriously don't get you guys spending so much time talking about him, searching for blogs and posts on other sites simply to rip on those people. Why is it that any Armstrong thread on any cycling forum gets turned into ripping on anyone who does not say Armstrong is the scum of the earth? I simply don't get that mentality, it really smacks of insecurity.

No, I am not trying to rip on anyone in this thread, I am hoping someone will try to present to me the reason for resorting to these kinds of things in an intelligent and logical manner. Thanks.

I did not search out the link, it was sent to me.

If you read this thread, and others, you will note that posters are confronted when they present a absurd defense of Wonderboy's indefensible actions or they open a topic that has been discussed to death by a repeated troll

The reaction by the groupies is always the same, they ignore the very valid points raised by Gifford and smear him. Just at they did with many before him. They do not do this in a "Intelligent and logical manner" but in an increasingly irrational manner as they ignore reality and attack the messenger.

In any social situation, online or in person, nobody should not be surprised if when they spew irrational nonsense that people question them. The more irrational the nonsense the more extreme the response.

 

[Anonymous]

Ok, I believe that Armstrong doped but I seriously don't get you guys spending so much time talking about him, searching for blogs and posts on other sites simply to rip on those people. Why is it that any Armstrong thread on any cycling forum gets turned into ripping on anyone who does not say Armstrong is the scum of the earth? I simply don't get that mentality, it really smacks of insecurity.

No, I am not trying to rip on anyone in this thread, I am hoping someone will try to present to me the reason for resorting to these kinds of things in an intelligent and logical manner. Thanks.

If you want to know the answers to the questions you ask, read the thread. Asking everyone to do your heavy work is pretty bad manners. Plus, you just started posting and nobody gives a flying **** about what you want to know the people who post here. That's kind of how interweb forums work. But you sound like you have a familiarity with intetweb forums, and even this particular interweb forum, so you'll to excuse us if we don't jump to answer your question. It appears you already know the answers you seek.

And I personally believe this is the best insecurity party on the world wide interwebs, so why would I go anywhere else?

 

[thehog]

Bill Gifford is on Tour chats tonight..... 9:30pm EST.

 

[fatandfast]

Bill Gifford is on Tour chats tonight..... 9:30pm EST.

I was one of 4 people listening. I laughed out loud after finding out there are so many levels below public access TV.

 

[Aleajactaest]

If you want to know the answers to the questions you ask, read the thread. Asking everyone to do your heavy work is pretty bad manners. Plus, you just started posting and nobody gives a flying **** about what you want to know the people who post here. That's kind of how interweb forums work. But you sound like you have a familiarity with intetweb forums, and even this particular interweb forum, so you'll to excuse us if we don't jump to answer your question. It appears you already know the answers you seek.

And I personally believe this is the best insecurity party on the world wide interwebs, so why would I go anywhere else?

Reading this screed won't help anyone get facts as the stuff posted here is seldom fact, mostly just opinion. What it is, is constitutionally protected hate speech, on both sides. There is no give and take, no reasoned discourse. Just a lot of people with preformed opinions talking past each other.

I am reminded of the definition of a zealot: Someone who can't change their mind and won't change the subject.

Additionally, the reason new people don't post here often is because when they do something curses at them in their first 6 posts and they leave.