Member Suspension Appreciation/Depreciation Thread

[ElChingon]

i find it astonishing that people are rushing to judgement on sittingbison all because of what ebandit said???

i like ebandit and get on with him fine, but he does enjoy both baiting the hog and citing favouritism towards the hog at all turns (never mind that he was banned for a week -- the exact same punishment that ebandit is serving).

i don't always agree with the mods, but i am grateful for them and that they're willing to volunteer their own free time.

ffs, this place needs mods whether people like them or not. we may not be five year olds, but we sure act like them sometimes... since Susan cannot always be around to spank you (which many, even if not willing to admit it, would enjoy), give the new mod team a break and let them settle in.

Maybe you could give us the translator for that language converter you have.

 

[thirteen]

Maybe you could give us the translator for that language converter you have.

i doubt you'd understand it.

 

[cineteq]

ebandit had his own agenda which had nothing to do with "hoggie", and was in no doubt whatsoever about the "consequences" of his actions. ebandit flagrantly chose a course of action that inevitably led to his short ban, a course of action that would get any of us on this or any other forum given a holiday.

So ebandit wasn't banned for his......annoying..... way .....of writing............? Never mind.

 

[will10]

So ebandit wasn't banned for his......annoying..... way .....of writing............? Never mind.

it wasn't the

way it was written

it was more to do with

what he was writing about

who

which led to a short holiday

poor ebandit

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

i... asumed....

the... aim... was... two

troll... by... making

it... inpossible... to understood... what... saying...

 

[cineteq]

Thanks for the laughs guys!

i... asumed....

the... aim... was... two

troll... by... making

it... inpossible... to understood... what... saying...

it wasn't the

way it was written

it was more to do with

what he was writing about

who

which led to a short holiday

poor ebandit

 

[del1962]

What kind of redunculous statement is that? Guilty? Guilty of what? That I dont necessarily agree with your opinion about Sir Wiggo? About Sky??

So there we have it, proof of the pudding.... because I have an opinion about something you disagree with I am unsuitable as a mod? What a laugh. I dont see you or pmcg76 or Del suggesting any of the admins are unsuitable as a mod because of THEIR opinions on Sky or any other matter.

As to the "hoggie" issue, can't you read? How many times does it have to be explained. ebandits ban was nothing to do with "hoggie".

Absolutely nothing to do with you position on sky, it was your lack of knowledge of who was derailing threads and the general deroatory terms you use, I think there are some good mods and some crap ones, your in that second category, because you post childish crap like "sky fans leaping in jackboots", of course you may be the most balanced and fair person in the world, but from your posts it doesnt seem likely.

On e-bandit and Hoggie, why do the mods bow so much to the man child who calls himself theHog, if he can't handle the term Hoggie, then I suggest he does not post controversial stuff on an internet forum, but I suspect that he is not actually offened but pretending to be as he is a complete troll who should have been permanently banned if Joachim had to be banned permanently, but that would be asking for consistencey,

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Absolutely nothing to do with you position on sky, it was your lack of knowledge of who was derailing threads and the general deroatory terms you use, I think there are some good mods and some crap ones, your in that second category, because you post childish crap like "sky fans leaping in jackboots", of course you may be the most balanced and fair person in the world, but from your posts it doesnt seem likely.

Just a question, have you ever seen sitting_bison in 'moderator action'? I sure as hell have not.

Point is, in your case, you do not like him because he is a SKY-sceptic in your eyes, while sitting_b is just a sceptic, like almost all of us sceptics. But I guess you would like moderators not posting their opinions?

 

[ElChingon]

Depreciating the use of "_" for "."

Really man, some people need to read.

 

[ElChingon]

Forum policing suggestions

The problem between what you are saying and what can be done is in the forum members not the moderators. There on the site you give as an example the forum members do not feed the trolls and the moderators there (if there are any) can identify this and not ban forum members for steering the trolls away. Whereas here, if you steer the troll away the mods ban you for preventing them from voicing their opinion (which is actually troll rhetoric). Then if a CN forum member feeds the troll as in falling for their bait it is allowed till a certain amount of posters actually complain and a thread has gone so far off topic and total chaos has ensued then and only then is anything done.

So basically this forum welcomes/supports trolls and sock puppets which is why they keep coming back. Its has been suggested to ban both the troll and troll feeder but that has fallen on deaf ears as that would even endanger some mod's being banned, so no dice on that.

 

[Athame]

Just a question, have you ever seen sitting_bison in 'moderator action'? I sure as hell have not.

He did a respectable job today

 

[hiero2]

Maybe you could give us the translator for that language converter you have.

Uh, English? ElChingon - you do speak English, am I right?

 

[pedaling squares]

This forum would really blow without thehog. He's like drunk Uncle Randy sitting in the armchair. He makes a lot of noise, talks a lot of crap, creates the odd foul stench, and now and then you find out that some of his crazy theories are right on the money. You need those guys; they add character. It's the uptight nephew with one hand on his iPad and the other on his Pinarello who needs to go.

 

[hiero2]

The problem between what you are saying and what can be done is in the forum members not the moderators. There on the site you give as an example the forum members do not feed the trolls . . ..

El -- actually, I think you've got it. The mods are a limited quantity. The ability of the forum posters to create personal attacks, and illogical arguments, approaches infinity. One plus 1 = 2, and all that, and a limited number does not in any sense approach infinity.

The mods can't read every post. Simple. Fact. Therefore, some posts don't get read by mods. If those posts violate the rules of propriety - then the mods don't know. Simple, right?

Ditto - an analogy. The number of automobiles traveling in excess of the speed limit, at point x on freeway zbd is close to 70% (hypothetical, purely made-up). The number of tickets written for speeding violations at point x is 5% of the traffic (this ratio, however, does bear some semblance of reality). Are the ticketing officers somehow to blame for the speeders that were not ticketed? While the percentages will surely vary, this is to some degree an accurate representation, both of freeway speeding and tickets - and forum misbehavior. There are a lot of people on the forum breaking simple rules for polite and productive discussion. I don't think the mods can ever respond to each and every violation of simple etiquette, particularly given what a herd of cats we have here. They respond to what they find, and what they are alerted to, given the time they have available.

I know, speaking for myself, that I have 70+ complaints of forum behavior I have received that I have not been able to respond to. Oh, I would like to, but I just don't have that much time in my life!

 

[ElChingon]

Uh, English? ElChingon - you do speak English, am I right?

Yes, but since it seems you know what it means, please translate this:

.........
.........

Thanks,

 

[MarkvW]

This forum would really blow without thehog. He's like drunk Uncle Randy sitting in the armchair. He makes a lot of noise, talks a lot of crap, creates the odd foul stench, and now and then you find out that some of his crazy theories are right on the money. You need those guys; they add character. It's the uptight nephew with one hand on his iPad and the other on his Pinarello who needs to go.

But you could say similar things about that crazy DAOTEC guy.

 

[ElChingon]

El -- actually, I think you've got it. The mods are a limited quantity. The ability of the forum posters to create personal attacks, and illogical arguments, approaches infinity. One plus 1 = 2, and all that, and a limited number does not in any sense approach infinity.

The mods can't read every post. Simple. Fact. Therefore, some posts don't get read by mods. If those posts violate the rules of propriety - then the mods don't know. Simple, right?

Then, why is it when the troll's are called out by at least a hand full the mods do nothing?

The mods can't read everything yet can read a warning and only read the warned post but not what lead to it to realize what is going on, as seen by the hundred of threads that have either a lock or major removal of posts yet one ban? Did only one poster continue to cross the line or was it more than one as from what I know of arguments it is usually by more than one, or are arguments from just one poster?

Ditto - an analogy. The number of automobiles traveling in excess of the speed limit, at point x on freeway zbd is close to 70% (hypothetical, purely made-up). The number of tickets written for speeding violations at point x is 5% of the traffic (this ratio, however, does bear some semblance of reality). Are the ticketing officers somehow to blame for the speeders that were not ticketed? While the percentages will surely vary, this is to some degree an accurate representation, both of freeway speeding and tickets - and forum misbehavior. There are a lot of people on the forum breaking simple rules for polite and productive discussion. I don't think the mods can ever respond to each and every violation of simple etiquette, particularly given what a herd of cats we have here. They respond to what they find, and what they are alerted to, given the time they have available.

Yes, but the speeders are not still in the same position in time and space to be seen speeding, so no ticket. Yet! Here on the forum the posts are still there and can be re-read many times if not read for ever, not just the one flagged post. So your analogy seems to be quite a non-analogy. Then, in Europe there are some speed cameras on the highways which take a picture of said speeders and guess what, they get a ticket for speeding no matter if they are alone or in a pack of other speeders. So to continue spot banning makes those who were banned (and those who want fairness on the forum) rather angry as an equally offensive post is just above or below the offending post.

I know, speaking for myself, that I have 70+ complaints of forum behavior I have received that I have not been able to respond to. Oh, I would like to, but I just don't have that much time in my life!

Yet no ban? No slap on the wrist (CN Forum Infraction points). Yes, I guess we know now why you qualified as a mod

Clarity through obscurity once again

 

[Tom375]

Then, why is it when the troll's are called out by at least a hand full the mods do nothing?

The mods can't read everything yet can read a warning and only read the warned post but not what lead to it to realize what is going on, as seen by the hundred of threads that have either a lock or major removal of posts yet one ban? Did only one poster continue to cross the line or was it more than one as from what I know of arguments it is usually by more than one, or are arguments from just one poster?

I agree with this, i don't read the forum all the time but when i do i usually go back over specific threads for a period of time. It is usually obvious where that thread has derailed, it is usually a spat or something between members and you can see it develop. it shouldn't be so difficult to detect especially when directed to the heat of the moment exchange. -> Just go back. From memory Susan has a full time job so is not as easy (unless its her full time job to monitor the forum) but other mod/ads etc should have the time the spats are always in the same forums!!!
There should also be a more standardised way of bannination so that at least members have less right to discriminate against mods/admin directly. at the moment it seems a bit arbitrary hence the backlash against Joachim being banninated from one side of the forum. It also protects them from criticism against protection as was done when Hog was banned for only a week. Don't think ads or mods need that, anyway ideas probably pointless.

 

[ElChingon]

But you could say similar things about that crazy DAOTEC guy.

Yet another super fan banned for being a super fan proving once again this forum is no place for super cycling fans

 

[hiero2]

Yes, but since it seems you know what it means, please translate this:



Thanks,

Hmmmm - I don't see your quoted bit in the thread. Can you link to it so I can find the original?

 

[Froome19]

Hmmmm - I don't see your quoted bit in the thread. Can you link to it so I can find the original?

Lol

10 chars

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Yet another super fan banned for being a super fan proving once again this forum is no place for super cycling fans

You obviously do not remember the circumstances which led to his ban.

Susan

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I agree with this, i don't read the forum all the time but when i do i usually go back over specific threads for a period of time. It is usually obvious where that thread has derailed, it is usually a spat or something between members and you can see it develop. it shouldn't be so difficult to detect especially when directed to the heat of the moment exchange. -> Just go back. From memory Susan has a full time job so is not as easy (unless its her full time job to monitor the forum) but other mod/ads etc should have the time the spats are always in the same forums!!!

But it is rarely that easy.
A quick recent example - an LA thread derailed with discussion on Clinton that lead in to US politics. But Clinton was fairly introduced, as it was linked to an article - and the rebuttal was fair because it corrected a comment made. This evolved in to a discussion/debate.

Another example - in the Sky (or any team/riders) thread you have one group who assume anyone says rider/team X,Y or Z dopes is trolling - the other will think that any claim the X.Y or Z is not doping, is trolling.

There should also be a more standardised way of bannination so that at least members have less right to discriminate against mods/admin directly. at the moment it seems a bit arbitrary hence the backlash against Joachim being banninated from one side of the forum. It also protects them from criticism against protection as was done when Hog was banned for only a week. Don't think ads or mods need that, anyway ideas probably pointless.

I am against lifetime bans - but 'standardization' only works for same offense, while both were trolling, Joachims level was much higher than TheHogs, so varying sanctions would apply.

 

[Froome19]

I am against lifetime bans - but 'standardization' only works for same offense, while both were trolling, Joachims level was much higher than TheHogs, so varying sanctions would apply.

The problem is that I see with the Hog's ban is that it was obvious from the second that he was banned that when the Hog did come back he was not going to change his style of posting whatsoever. So what did the banning achieve? The Hog is never going to get banned extensively if he continues posting like he is so what is the point of the mods banning him. Admittedly "maybe" it makes him a bit timid but after a while he is back.The 3 strikes thing and you are out which is stickied everywhere is a good idea. If a poster has been banned multiple times you do get the idea that he is not going to get any better. Why bother to ban him again?

The mods seem to think that they need a serious offence in order to ban a poster permanently of for an extended period of time. I don't see it that way, if a poster has been banned before and is still causing trouble then why stick with him?

The problem with standardization is that everyone and their best friend believes that their situation is unique. Because he stole my teddy first or whatever. With so many mods who all have varying opinions and ways to deal with issues there is always then going to be a discrepancy in how they react compared with other mods and the rules will be upheld differently. It would be all so much easier if there was mods training school. But until then..

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The problem is that I see with the Hog's ban is that it was obvious from the second that he was banned that when the Hog did come back he was not going to change his style of posting whatsoever. So what did the banning achieve? The Hog is never going to get banned extensively if he continues posting like he is so what is the point of the mods banning him. Admittedly "maybe" it makes him a bit timid but after a while he is back.The 3 strikes thing and you are out which is stickied everywhere is a good idea. If a poster has been banned multiple times you do get the idea that he is not going to get any better. Why bother to ban him again?

But you do not know exactly why TheHog was banned.
So you cannot say that he is back doing what he got banned for again.

I agree they are trolling - but its subtle, and unless a mod follows (and looks back) at every post it wont get picked up. Any single post will not trigger action.

The same cannot be said of others - Joachim being a prime exampke.

The mods seem to think that they need a serious offence in order to ban a poster permanently of for an extended period of time. I don't see it that way, if a poster has been banned before and is still causing trouble then why stick with him?

Again, I am against life bans - they are counter productive as a perma banned person will set up a new account, and will flagrantly ignore the rules, rinse repeat.

I would agree that the increasing ban which was in place was a much better option.

The problem with standardization is that everyone and their best friend believes that their situation is unique. Because he stole my teddy first or whatever. With so many mods who all have varying opinions and ways to deal with issues there is always then going to be a discrepancy in how they react compared with other mods and the rules will be upheld differently. It would be all so much easier if there was mods training school. But until then..

Sorry, not really sure what you are saying here.

Banning should be a last option, so i can see why mods would offer a warning first. Unless the mods put in severe 'rules' then there will always be some inconsistency which is perfectly understandable.