Moderation

[RedheadDane]

2X lifetime bans!

Skujins would have taken it as a compliment!

 

[Rechtschreibfehler]

I guess this isn't a new question, but what is the rational behind this absolute intransparency?

No opposing opinions? Discussion about the penalty-regime unwanted?

 

[Rob5091]

I guess this isn't a new question, but what is the rational behind this absolute intransparency?

No opposing opinions? Discussion about the penalty-regime unwanted?

Play the ball not the man (as they say in soccer).

 

[TourOfSardinia]

I guess this isn't a new question, but what is the rational behind this absolute intransparency?

No opposing opinions? Discussion about the penalty-regime unwanted?

Read Before Posting: Forum Rules

Welcome to the Cycling News Community! We extend a warm welcome to you and invite you to participate in the ongoing discourse here in the Cycling News forums! This is a place where you can share your thoughts with like-minded enthusiasts from across the globe! Before you begin, however, there...

forum.cyclingnews.com

 

[Red Rick]

I guess this isn't a new question, but what is the rational behind this absolute intransparency?

No opposing opinions? Discussion about the penalty-regime unwanted?

In my experience, the reason I preferred not to is simply cause it's a PITA. You can't make everyone happy, it's an extra time sink, and it's quite demotivating to do the moderation job if you have to defend yourself against criticism.

 

[Armchair cyclist]

Get as incensed as you like: address the issue in doing so, do not insult the poster.

 

[Armchair cyclist]

(as mod)
I know that @SHaines has been keen to close this thread. I argued for its retention as a place to discuss principles of moderation, and to try to find consensus on an approach. I believe it can continue as such and have a value, I think that he is less sure.

From Read before posting:Forum rules at the top of each section:
We will not allow forum posts that attempt to publicly discuss specific moderator action taken.

But the rule about discussion of moderation being not allowed remains, and given that I am also bound by that, and therefore cannot defend and explain my actions in regard to individual cases, I am not going to leave individual reactions to any sanctions or warning here. I am about to go back to the time I started as a mod her and remove all posts that could be construed as that.

The list of warnings that are available to moderators has in the last few days had 'Discussing Moderation' added to it (I hadn't suggested or requested it). I take that as meaning that those who provide the boards are getting more serious about the matter.

Publicly complaining about it is not the answer: that does not mean that you have no recourse. PM me to discuss it; PM @SHaines, or anyone else that you see in the Admins and moderators list (from the panel on the left of this screen, click Members, at the bottom of the first panel you will see Staff mambers, then Moderators); email community@futurenet.com.

 

[Red Rick]

I've always thought if this thread got locked people would probably still complain except they'd just do it in other threads more where it's not allowed so it just makes it more annoying to clean up.

Also sometimes people just ask a "what happened to x" question and posters will give the answer to each other.

 

[RedheadDane]

at the bottom of the first panel you will see Staff mambers

What will we see?

 

[Armchair cyclist]

What will we see?

I don't know these people: probably not fair for me to refer to them as poisonous snakes.

Staff members.

 

[kingjr]

Logic must get unbanned before the last week or at least before the final stage, if Remco somehow manages to win this thing we cannot have him banned.

 

[Lequack]

Logic must get unbanned before the last week or at least before the final stage, if Remco somehow manages to win this thing we cannot have him banned.

Damn he is banned again? This is getting ridiculous. The man can't even enjoy Remco in his best form again the top riders.

 

[Ripper]

Moderation question in general (I believe this was discussed previously, but I'm not sure if it was fully resolved) - are we are not allowed to call riders silly names? Vigomort, Toddly, etc.? I've heard reference that it is a form of trolling, but is that actually the case when the focus is not an interaction with one poster or on one particular rider? Or is it only allowed in certain forums?

For context, I had a post recently edited. I'm not too concerned about the specifics on that case, I just want to know how to move forward in a way that isn't going to require too much moderation

 

[Armchair cyclist]

Moderation question in general (I believe this was discussed previously, but I'm not sure if it was fully resolved) - are we are not allowed to call riders silly names? Vigomort, Toddly, etc.? I've heard reference that it is a form of trolling, but is that actually the case when the focus is not an interaction with one poster or on one particular rider? Or is it only allowed in certain forums?

For context, I had a post recently edited. I'm not too concerned about the specifics on that case, I just want to know how to move forward in a way that isn't going to require too much moderation

If I see something that is never going to serve any purpose other than gratuitously wind up the fans of another rider, and I am constantly being harassed to act on trolling, then I will act on this.

Please explain the benefit to rational discussion rendered by using names like Vingemort, skeletor, luck merchant, or Bambi.

 

[QueenStagiaire]

Please explain the benefit to rational discussion rendered by using names like Vingemort, skeletor, luck merchant, or Bambi.

It is entertaining and ‚grabs the reader’s attention’ and thus encourages more discussion than would happen otherwise. Of course this artificial ‚enhancement‘ could be considered not arguing in good faith and trying to offend other people but I consider it to be something that makes this more than a place where people read facts to each other.

 

[Armchair cyclist]

Is a place where people exchange insults about others preferable?
Is a place where phrases are chosen for little effect other than to irritate others better?

I cannot believe that more positive engagement with a post will occur because the last few letters of a rider's name are changed.

 

[Nick2413]

Vingomort and Skeletor come across as cool to me, luck merchant a bit cheeky and Bambi maybe starting to get into offensive territory. So many posters use varieties of most of these it seems commonly accepted as part of the forum culture imo.

 

[ManicJack]

Calling BroDeal..............

 

[hrotha]

Can we please not cater to excitable fans with a severe grass deficiency. If they get wound up by jokey nicknames for public figures, that's a them problem

 

[Ripper]

If I see something that is never going to serve any purpose other than gratuitously wind up the fans of another rider, and I am constantly being harassed to act on trolling, then I will act on this.

Please explain the benefit to rational discussion rendered by using names like Vingemort, skeletor, luck merchant, or Bambi.

Out of that list I can really only relate to Vingemort 🙂 And I use these names because they crack me up and make light of things often taken wayyyy too seriously. Also, I've been called out on being too harsh on Teddy the Pog, and not harsh enough on Viggo Johanesman, so I wanted to even things up.

In other words, I don't come up with these ridiculous names to wind up people ... I'm actually surprised that someone would be wound up by them at all

 

[Armchair cyclist]

So is 'loudmouth Belgian jerk' (which I have just removed multiple times) to be allowed?

If so, is there any limit as to how abusive you would want to see allowed?
If not, where does the line lie?

Vingomort and Skeletor come across as cool to me, luck merchant a bit cheeky and Bambi maybe starting to get into offensive territory.

Similar to the above questions: what is the qualitative difference between them? How is Vingomort less offensive than Bambi?

 

[James M]

How about not just deterring to stupid name calling and problem solved whats the problem

 

[Netserk]

Sometimes, various nicknames will be used without any malicious intent. I think it's important to not only allow that, but to acknowledge that such usage can be a positive contribution, even if it can also be perceived as iconoclastic.

Sometimes, in some context, that can be done excessively even while not intended maliciously. Fine to set a standard of what is excessive, and guide users as to what that is.

Sometimes, especially in an antagonistic context, it's either intended maliciously or is functionally equivalent. Perfectly fine to punish such usage.

 

[Netserk]

As an example, I don't think I've ever seen Skeletor used the least bit maliciously.

 

[Armchair cyclist]

As an example, I don't think I've ever seen Skeletor used the least bit maliciously.

To my mind, it is describing someone as ugly, other than human, incapable of sympathetic emotion: I don't do comic books, but Wikipedia describes the character as the arch enemy of the hero of the series.
Difficult to interpret that as any other than malicious.