Moderation

[fmk_RoI]

So @Extinction is banned again, as is @Gargamel35
Honestly it feels like the community is actively being shut down day by day.

Those recidivist mods, damn them to hell. It's like they're just not learning the lesson of their bans.

 

[Lequack]

No, that's not how you treat a community. You don't just ban people who are at the heart of the conversations. You moderate the content sure, if you delete offending posts frequently and tell people why they were deleted, they will learn. Banning just breeds resentment and kills communities.

 

[fmk_RoI]

You don't just ban people who are at the heart of the conversations.

"Leave my friends alone! Ban everyone else but leave my friends alone!"

That is not a community. That is a clique.

 

[BR2]

"Leave my friends alone! Ban everyone else but leave my friends alone!"

That is not a community. That is a clique.

That is complete nonsense. You act as if this about personal preferences. If you knew this community better you would know that Lequack is more a Slovenian leaning fan, and usually a very nice and friendly against everyone, the kind of person who I think never caused problems himself and is unlikely to riot for Logic and Extinction, hardcore Remco fans, just because he agrees with them.

Just as it is silly to think that I am a part of a clique with them, or that RedheadDane has her personal preferences among users - actually RedheadDane is the user who watches absolutely every cycling race she can catch, supports absolutely every rider (although Pinot is her favourite), and doesn't have anyone in the community that she would defend before others.

Some people just have a different stance on how to deal with a community and problematic posts, while Logic feels the rules are not applied equally and I would like explanations or at least a sign of how long the ban lasts, basically some communication from mods and admins.

But here you are, condescending as always, playing the admins adjutant just because you like to ridicule others.

 

[King Boonen]

No, that's not how you treat a community. You don't just ban people who are at the heart of the conversations. You moderate the content sure, if you delete offending posts frequently and tell people why they were deleted, they will learn. Banning just breeds resentment and kills communities.

The evidence would suggest otherwise.

 

[Netserk]

The evidence would suggest otherwise.

Sometimes you wouldn't notice that a post has been deleted a few hours later. Or just some minutes after, if the discussion is moving fast. Then it's hard to learn from it.

 

[King Boonen]

Sometimes you wouldn't notice that a post has been deleted a few hours later. Or just some minutes after, if the discussion is moving fast. Then it's hard to learn from it.

Speaking in generalities, I can say with absolute certainty that removal of posts and warnings do not stop those people getting banned for the same thing at future times.

 

[Lequack]

So why has this been happening just in the last time period? I've been a member for years and never before were there so many bans as nowadays, It's like something changed and now much simpler infractions are ban worthy.

 

[Netserk]

Speaking in generalities, I can say with absolute certainty that removal of posts and warnings do not stop those people getting banned for the same thing at future times.

Well, of course it's no magic wand. The question is not if it stops that behaviour, but if it affects it.

 

[King Boonen]

Well, of course it's no magic wand. The question is not if it stops that behaviour, but if it affects it.

From my experience here and elsewhere, no. The same people break the same rules, even if they temporarily stop when a public warning is issued. Even people who get caught up in a discussion they didn't start are the same people each time.

 

[King Boonen]

So why has this been happening just in the last time period? I've been a member for years and never before were there so many bans as nowadays, It's like something changed and now much simpler infractions are ban worthy.

Ok, but that's something different. My experience here and elsewhere is that people don't learn from warnings (and some not even from bans). They may stop for a period of time when warned, but they almost always end up breaking the same rule/s.

The difference here may be that admin are less likely to issue a public warning and more likely to ban rule breakers, but I'm afraid I don't know. Bans also ebb and flow, there's more around GTs, particulalry involving riders that divide opinion, than there are at other times of year.

 

[Netserk]

They may stop for a period of time when warned, but they almost always end up breaking the same rule/s.

So they do work to some degree.

I’d think private warnings that make sense would work even better.

 

[King Boonen]

So they do work to some degree.

I’d think private warnings that make sense would work even better.

No, the claim was they will learn, which clearly implies they will stop breaking the rules. They don't.

 

[Netserk]

No, the claim was they will learn, which clearly implies they will stop breaking the rules. They don't.

It does not. Learning loss is the norm.

 

[King Boonen]

Yes, when you don't practice it, that's not the case here. I'm not going to have a hypothetical discussion over interpreting what someone else means. I've passed on my experience ,you can do with it as you want.

 

[fmk_RoI]

I’d think private warnings that make sense would work even better.

Do you really think that people who are complaining about the injustice of bans are going to just accept private warnings?

In my experience that's just naïve.

How have bans, private warnings, public warnings and deleted posts you've been on the receiving end of impacted your behaviour?

 

[Netserk]

Plenty. The ban I received last year was quickly overturned, so I think my perception of where the line is when it comes to wishing harm on riders is quite well-calibrated. Before that I was banned for a week (I think) in 2021 for a personal attack on another poster, and since then even in the most heated moments I have restrained myself before the point calling others names. And sometimes that also means I delete a post a minute after it's posted, or edit out what I deem unnecessary.

I haven't received any personal warnings since my ban in 2021.

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

I deserved the ban I got last week. In fact, I deserved every ban I've ever gotten here. I went over the line, but I loved the post too much to delete it.

 

[Lequack]

A ban a day keeps the community away.

 

[fmk_RoI]

A ban a day keeps the community away.

If only they'd learn, if only they'd learn.

 

[Red Rick]

Community was actually the most active I've ever seen it there were 20 pages in the race thread before it had even started

 

[QueenStagiaire]

Community was actually the most active I've ever seen it there were 20 pages in the race thread before it had even started

Not that hard when you give people four more hours to complain about the state of cycling, but this community isn‘t going anywhere or dying.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Yes, when you don't practice it, that's not the case here. I'm not going to have a hypothetical discussion over interpreting what someone else means. I've passed on my experience ,you can do with it as you want.

If i can do with it as i want, i'll throw it in the garbage bin, thanks.

What a load of horsecrap. Welcome to real life, where not everything that is against the rules is fundamentally wrong. Not every minor infraction has to potentially lead to a ban "so people will learn". By the way, not sure if you got the memo, but you can't learn from anything if you don't know what you did wrong. Other people won't learn from your mistake, if there is nothing left to learn from. We do not need to be disciplined for making a joke that went over administrators' heads. This is not a jail or a 1930 catholic boarding school. And as far as "they need to learn" goes, what people see and learn, when people see a dozens of posts get away with trolling and doping insinuations on a daily basis, they will learn it is normal to do it. Singling out some offenders, or worse, those who break the rules as a reaction to others who break the rules, is not how you improve the situation. It's a blueprint for making it worse. Either you step in and do it right, or leave the community alone.

And maybe if admins/mods did actually try to step in and communicate, they would then learn that not everything has to be interpreted in the worst possible way. That it is possible for something that seems like an infraction, to be nothing else than a joke. And other people would also learn from it. But acting like a ninja who stealthily dishes out bans and removes posts without warning or without explanation, is not how people "learn". Quite the opposite.

To his credit, a few weeks ago was the first time i can remember Rick actually taking up an active role as moderator, a person who moderates, in a discussion. That doesn't happen nearly often enough.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

I got a notification a few minutes ago that my previous post was edited, for the reason: personal attack.
Though i do not agree with it being a personal attack (strongly stating you think someone is talking nonsense, is not a personal attack, imho) but this way of moderating should be the default "go to" in case mods/admins don't like to intervene in the actual discussion, imho. It is both clear which post is being edited, and for what reason. And if nothing else, it is reasonable.

 

[jmdirt]

There was a mod that used to frequently say "mod hat on" and then discuss what was happening and describe what would happen if it didn't stop. That was effective most of the time. They are not longer a mod obviously.