Landis thread shut down!

[TShame]

Apparently, if you speak in favor of Lance Armstrong, your thread can be shut down even if it is one of the most popular threads in the last two days.

What is wrong with the original post as such:

I believe that Landis doped just as he confessed...HGH,EPO, test patches, and blood.

I have grave doubts that any rider on UPS, especially Armstrong would jeopardize his entire career by doing drugs in full view of the whole team, including Landis. No way. Even on other teams where riders have confessed to doping, none of them did so in front of other riders.

As to Landis statement that Periro said he would defend the yellow through the final time trial because he had a fresh transfusion....total lie. What rider would ever tell a rival that he just doped? especially when the TdF title was at stake?

Landis knows that these stories can not be verified by anyone else. However, attacking the reputation of other riders in an effort to justify his use of drugs and cheating is worse than his other crimes.

Administrator says"if the thread starter comes online and explains a few things to me or some other mod, perhaps this thread will be opened again, or perhaps he'll be banned."

What in bloody hell? Threatening me? What a pompous ***. Explain? Do you not understand English? How is doubting Landis new version/third revision a reason to be banned? This person should be fired. Why didn't he remove some of the posters who just said nonsense and tried to insult me? those who added nothing to the subject but baseless accusations?

Another administrator says:"I am going to let this thread stand for now - pretty much for entertainment value ". So first, he KNOWS that Armstong has used dope! and that anyone who disagrees with him is laughable? And this site is journalism???
Then adds "you have said NOTHING that is new " All caps. Are you twelve years old? How is this not NEW. The Landis interview is NEW. The accusations are NEW. This discussion is NEW. Hmmm, sounded new to a lot of people (134 posts in just over a day. Sure some were idiots. Isn't the administrator supposed to remove them rather than threaten the creator of a civilized discussion?

Lastly, administration says "you refute so called baseless acusations that we can already see have a strong base to them" Oh, so you have proof beyond Landis newly created story?? You can prove that accusations against Armstrong are not baseless?? Are administrators here to voice their personal opinions? Do they often remove posts that conflict with their views? What control freaks for an open forum!

 

[euanli]

I see you've booked a 1st Class ticket on the 12:45 to Banned. Hope you enjoy the journey.

 

[Roland Rat]

Ah, the Lance Fanboy Breakdown. I think we'd better get used to this for a while.

Don't worry TShame, it'll pass, the next stage is bargaining, then depression but finally you'll achieve acceptance.

 

[Barrus]

AS previously you have one more chance:

Explain your attacks on the moderators, completely unwarranted and over the top. I have done so by pm, but shall do so in this thread as well. As the manner in which you speak against the Mods in general in this thread and Alpe in particular in this thread would be reason enough for a ban. Especially seeing as no measure has been taken against you at all and that this is not the correct place to air his grievances if you have legitimate grievances

If you come online again, or post again without answering these questions you will be permanently banned

as to what you wrote yourself:

Are administrators here to voice their personal opinions? Do they often remove posts that conflict with their views? What control freaks for an open forum!

1 yes, yes we are here for that reason
2 only if they do not follow forum rules and guidelines


No, Roland, the next step is him gone if he does not answer the questions I have posted for him

Also funny that he keeps on mentioning we should be fired, seeing as almost none of the moderators or administrators work for CN, especially not of those that are frequently online

 

[flyor64]

Good luck with this one...

I'd invite you to take your comments directly to the "moderators in question" via PM but that isn't your agenda now is it...

Here's the link to the moderators thread:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=7152

peace

ETA you still aren't responding to any of logical responses you received I see...

Still the highway workers analogy was classic

 

[TShame]

Well no surprise they have to quelch this thread too.

I am not even an Armstrong fan.

As to banning Roland....Who? I am tshame. It was my thread. I don't know any roland
"No, Roland, the next step is him gone if he does not answer the questions I have post for him"

It clearly appeared to be addressed to me, thus my anger.

 

[Barrus]

The comment was directed at Roland Rat, that if you, that being Tshame, does not answer the questions I posed, you (still being Tshame) would be banned as the next stage instead of bargaining

 

[TShame]

What a bunch of wimps.

By the way, cyclingnews edited out Landis statement that said "**** CN" for the article that said Landis wants doping legalized.

 

[Berzin]

Hey TShame,

close your eyes, click your heels three times and repeat after me-

"Lance never doped because he's just too fabulously awesome!!!"

"Lance never doped because he's just too fabulously awesome!!!"

"Lance never doped because he's just too fabulously awesome!!!"

 

[Barrus]

So your not going to answer the questions I posed? Am I reading that correctly? Again the qeustion is why did you immediately started to attack the moderators without any provocation and in completely the wrong part of the forum?

 

[TShame]

I am shocked but not surprised that my thread was attacked, shut down by administrators. Who are they to tell me I cant post about the new landis/armstrong chapter?

Explain myself??

 

[Martin318is]

TShame,
1. you created a thread and posed some questions
2. People responded with answers that suggested your idea was flawed and posed questions to you in return
3. You acted like a troll and completey ignored those questions and took your own topic off topic.
4. It got locked because YOU made it pointless.

As Barrus has quite reasonably said, if you want to discuss the topic then discuss it - but make another false acusation about a Mod or continue this 'poor me' topic in THIS thread and it will also be locked.

There are two mechanisms for your type of complaint - PM the mod or post in the Moderators thread.

 

[Barrus]

Let me try it again.

You started your previous thread with the following statement:

First, I am appalled by moderators statements. Can I not state my opinion without jeopardy? I am not making baseless accusations or posting hateful personal attacks. I do not want this thread buried in some miscellaneous thread about Armstrong or Landis. This is a separate, major issue using logic and basic human nature.

Why did you think this was necessary to attack the moderators in this fashion?

Secondly, after a simple post of Alpe including a youtube video of a great Warren Zevon song and not much else, you posted this:

If you are an administrator, we don't need your opinion. Delete a few of the trolls here, but let us have our own discussions without some 'supervisor' thinking he knows better than all of us. You should be fired for threatening a poster who sees Landis is untrustworthy.

Where was the threat? Who made the threat and when? Explain why you made this statement.

That is what I wanted you to explain, but you ignored that request several times

 

[Francois the Postman]

Just in case you missed it, no "Landis thread" was shut down, Yours was. After a long time. This went before it:

A comment to the mods about their replies to TShame in his lame 'I believe Lance' thread. I thought his critique of the mod(s) was off-base but was not really a harsh or personal attack. Didn't in my opinion deserve the attention it got from other mods.

I read it when the thread started and assumed it alluded the sticky I put in that was a cue for the Clinic to stop creating a new thread for each news item. And to see if the topic you were broaching wasn't already covered well by another existing thread.

The sticky's title is an instruction to read the sticky and then figure out how it applies to the post you were planning to make.

He read the sticky and totally missed the plank, since he wasn't posting a media link (the main objective of the sticky), nor did we stop him form posting his opinion.

He then went into some rant about us trying to stop his freedom to create a new thread for his opinion on a general issue.

I completely ignored it, as I thought it would be obvious to a casual observer who was way off base and over the top. "I am so oppressed here". Uh, nope.

Still, with that intro, I expected that we would get something good and new after that. It was regurgitated so often (and never moderated either), that it almost made me laugh. I pretty much ignored that too, although I would have preferred to stick it in a place that had covered that. There were so many, I thought I would just let it die, as I assumed that our regulars would be bored to tears of these sort of OPs.

I am almost amazed how keen folk are to set everyone "right" here (whatever that is in their eyes).

I hate the put down facepalm pictures, but hey, it really is not a thread that bothers me. Not worth my time. I think most people will take one look and leave it be too. Or ought to.

I then read an accusation of what a mod here is supposed to have done, without giving me any substantiation, just a random accusation. It doesn't rhyme with the behaviour of any of the mods I see posting here at the moment, but it does rhyme with someone who doesn't always seems to see what is actually written.

We work flat-out here trying to keep everyone happy, and keep the Clinic interesting, attractive, and entertaining. It doesn't help if people start to depict moderation here by inventing actions, or at best totally overstate the importance of maybe one post in relation to the vast amount of posts and work that is actually taken place.

I take this is indeed what drew Barrus in, I more than understand where is coming from, and why he insists on getting to the bottom of it.

There are some cracking threads up just now, I'd rather get petty and pedantic in those, to help keep the substance in those to a certain level.

It appears the poster has an issue with us of his own making. If he just wanted to vent and get on with things, instead of wanting to drive a point that wasn't there for starters home, I guess he wouldn't have got the attention he now has volunteered for.

Barrus has been dealing with it. I am sure that if Tshame engaged with the attempt by Barrus to get clarification and communication going, things will be resolved reasonably.

At this moment, NO ACTION has been taken, although he has been given a clear indication that we won't leave it hanging, since he appeared to have picked the wrong area to have a tizzy in.

Let's not put more coals on the fire before we are all stuck on positions that give us no space to show flexibility.

So it's all a bit of a storm in tea cup, as far as I am concerned.

 

[Francois the Postman]

TShame, we moderate for attitude, not opinion. This has nothing to do with liking any one rider, it has everything to do with you ranting against moderators and their interventions with your posts and threads, when we didn't do any of the sorts, until you are started to rant in area that was inappropriate. And making some accusations about mod actions on top, that you are still unwilling to address despite umpteen request by us to do so.

I think you completely misunderstood the sticky, and all this is a fall-out of your own (inappropriate) kicking against it and "the system" that put it there. The flaw appears to be your reading skill, not our intentions or behaviour.

Instead of reflecting, you keep adding more outrage and heat.

You also appear to misunderstand the relationship of the forum to Cycling News [ the rest of the site ], and the relationship of all mods bar one to Cycling News [ CN is pretty hands-off within reason, we are volunteers with no stake in CN, or benefits form CN, and most of us are also not too bothered what you think of Cycling News ].

Your attitude is key, calm down, talk, and we'll take it from there.

There is nothing here that is about the content or your pov on cycling issues. This is all about how you behave on this forum.

 

[Francois the Postman]

And you have three mods going through great lengths trying to explain what is going on, rather than what you claim or believe is going on. patiently. Giving you chance after chance. Three mods drawn in after you start a discussion point on the subject, 3 requests (again) to clarify the bit that is ALL our concern.

And then you go off-line. You are not helping.

 

[Ferminal]

And then you go off-line. You are not helping.

Now you know what posting in his thread felt like!

 

[Francois the Postman]

I know, but please stay out of this thread Ferminal. It is quite clear whose move it is and what is requested. I don't want this thread to become less clear than that before he engages with us about something he has been ducking for 2 days now. Creating new "mod outrage", when it is all of his own making.

"Apparently, if you speak in favor of Lance Armstrong, your thread can be shut down even if it is one of the most popular threads in the last two days."

Good grief.

Nope, if you open your OP with a baseless accusations about the fabric of this place, and then pile a few others in for effect, you get our attention alright. If you misunderstood, then ignore all we say and ask, ignore some very simple requests (substantiate or retract), and test our patience to boot..... what possible reaction did you think you were gonna get?

 

[Skandar Akbar]

Ah, the Lance Fanboy Breakdown. I think we'd better get used to this for a while.

Don't worry TShame, it'll pass, the next stage is bargaining, then depression but finally you'll achieve acceptance.

That's ok there is another thread going on where a Bassons fanboy breakdown is occuring.

Funny I thought tshame's thread was shut down because TFF and I were discussing bigfoot.

 

[Anonymous]

TShame,
1. you created a thread and posed some questions
2. People responded with answers that suggested your idea was flawed and posed questions to you in return
3. You acted like a troll and completey ignored those questions and took your own topic off topic.
4. It got locked because YOU made it pointless.

spot on the money!

 

[Francois the Postman]

[for clarity sake, some posts have been deleted between the mod comments here, the change from the gentle nod to the sharp line tone is a consequence of that].

OK, for the hard of hearing, EVERYONE out of this thread until we get a reply from the OP. We are dealing with it, the next move is his. And it better come quickly, given he walked out in the middle of a key conversation with 3 mods that he started.

 

[spetsa]

OK, for the hard of hearing, EVERYONE out of this thread until we get a reply from the OP. We are dealing with it, the next move is his. And it better come quickly, given he walked out in the middle of a key conversation with 3 mods that he started.

This is a thread on a public forum. Why don't you take it private or shut it down. To tell us, the posters, which by the way keep this concept viable, to stay out is insane!!!

 

[patricknd]

Let me try it again.

You started your previous thread with the following statement:


Why did you think this was necessary to attack the moderators in this fashion?

Secondly, after a simple post of Alpe including a youtube video of a great Warren Zevon song and not much else, you posted this:
Where was the threat? Who made the threat and when? Explain why you made this statement.

That is what I wanted you to explain, but you ignored that request several times

i'm assuming you warned alpe for his frivolous, off topic post right? because i noticed it wasn't removed. hmmmmmm