• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Moderation

Page 7 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Yes... exactly... mods don't have to manage multiple sites, so they can take care of things that are specific for this site.

Come on... you don't in any way think it was a shame that thread got removed?
And then when the admins are required to do something..? That’s why things have been brought in line, because we went from site specific admin, to company wide admin. It’s just the way things go. If an admin has to check site specific policies every time they need to deal with something it massively increases their workload. It’s the same in any sector.

I’ve already implied I was for both threads remaining, because we’re not supposed to discuss it, but to be clear, I would have preferred both threads to remain.
 
And then when the admins are required to do something..? That’s why things have been brought in line, because we went from site specific admin, to company wide admin. It’s just the way things go. If an admin has to check site specific policies every time they need to deal with something it massively increases their workload. It’s the same in any sector.

And I thought the job of the admins were to make sure the code part of the forum was running smoothly, while leaving the day-to-day stuff to mods. Because, fact matters, there will always be site/forum specific policies. For example, lots of forums doesn't have a "please only discuss this particular topic in this specific sub-section!" policy, like our "Clinic Talk Rule". Otoh, forums dealing with (still-ongoing) fictional content are gonna have much stricter spoiler policies than our "Please try to not hint to results of other races in race-specific threads" rule.

And if you - and I pressume other mods - disagreed with the "SHUT DOWN THAT THREAD!" order, why didn't you try to convince the admins otherwise? I went back through the beginning of the "New Forum Discussion" thread, and it seems like at first, the "No-Necroposting" thread was very strict, but we were able to convince them that maybe common sense would be the best way foward. I mean... we recently had a 10+ year old thread resurrected, for horribly tragic reasons.
 
Last edited:
And I thought the job of the admins were to make sure the code part of the forum was running smoothly, while leaving the day-to-day stuff to mods. Because, fact matters, there will always be site/forum specific policies. For example, lots of forums doesn't have a "please only discuss this particular topic in this specific sub-section!" policy, like our "Clinic Talk Rule". Otoh, forums dealing with (still-ongoing) fictional content are gonna have much stricter spoiler policies than our "Please try to not hint to results of other races in race-specific threads" rule.

And if you - and I pressume other mods - disagreed with the "SHUT DOWN THAT THREAD!" order, why didn't you try to convince the admins otherwise? I went back through the beginning of the "New Forum Discussion" thread, and it seems like at first, the "No-Necroposting" thread was very strict, but we were able to convince them that maybe common sense would be the best way foward. I mean... we recently had a 10+ year old thread resurrected, for horribly tragic reasons.
Can't really answer any of that on the open forum. Sorry.
 
And I thought the job of the admins were to make sure the code part of the forum was running smoothly, while leaving the day-to-day stuff to mods. Because, fact matters, there will always be site/forum specific policies. For example, lots of forums doesn't have a "please only discuss this particular topic in this specific sub-section!" policy, like our "Clinic Talk Rule". Otoh, forums dealing with (still-ongoing) fictional content are gonna have much stricter spoiler policies than our "Please try to not hint to results of other races in race-specific threads" rule.

And if you - and I pressume other mods - disagreed with the "SHUT DOWN THAT THREAD!" order, why didn't you try to convince the admins otherwise? I went back through the beginning of the "New Forum Discussion" thread, and it seems like at first, the "No-Necroposting" thread was very strict, but we were able to convince them that maybe common sense would be the best way foward. I mean... we recently had a 10+ year old thread resurrected, for horribly tragic reasons.
We pushed back on a number of changes we disagreed with, but there's only so much we can do. We're essentially volunteers, and while we largely manage the forum on a day-to-day bonus, we have very little decision making capacity.
 
This forum should take a “no rules” approach and free every permanently banned member. The website traffic will go through the roof, I’m sure if it.

Rules are fine, as long as they make sense.
The "please don't discuss doping outside the clinic" rule makes perfect sense, especially we're dealing with a sport with a tainted a past as cycling.
Saying that "people shouldn't be able to get even basic information about mod decision, because that's how it's done everywhere" doesn't make sense. Or... maybe it makes sense to neurotypicals, what do I know?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BR2
Rules are fine, as long as they make sense.
The "please don't discuss doping outside the clinic" rule makes perfect sense, especially we're dealing with a sport with a tainted a past as cycling.
Saying that "people shouldn't be able to get even basic information about mod decision, because that's how it's done everywhere" doesn't make sense. Or... maybe it makes sense to neurotypicals, what do I know?
There seem to have been some bans lately that haven’t made much sense to me, particularly when I’ve seen far worse and more direct things be allowed. I think consistency is a problem and it would be nice to have some clarity because currently it looks like almost anything could result in a ban.
 
There seem to have been some bans lately that haven’t made much sense to me, particularly when I’ve seen far worse and more direct things be allowed. I think consistency is a problem and it would be nice to have some clarity because currently it looks like almost anything could result in a ban.
Exactly. At least 3 active posters have been banned the past week. I've seen the posts of one of them that I believe got them banned (since they have been removed) and it wasn't even that bad. There's been much worse. Now I'm getting a message from a staff member warning me about a random post I made that isn't even that bad. Not sure if I rather have no active admins or triggerhappy ban giving admins.
 
Just my 5 cents, not about anything specific. I don't mind banning the people who are actively being disruptive, like spamming, insulting everyone, etc. But active members who have been contributing to discussions her for years, I believe they deserve a warning, or at worst deletion of offensive posts, and only if they were to continue with such behavior would in my opinion a ban be necessary. It just a very tight knit community and losing the ability to interact can be harsh.

PS: On that note, I do really value the effort of the mods, it's not an easy job I know, and users seldom appreciate the work.
 
Last edited:
Just my 5 cents, not about anything specific. I don't mind banning the people who are actively being disruptive, like spamming, insulting everyone, etc. But active members who have been contributing to discussions her for years, I believe they deserve a warning, or at worst deletion of offensive posts, and only if they were to continue with such behavior would in my opinion a ban be necessary. It just a very tight knit community and losing the ability to interact can be harsh.

PS: On that note, I do really value the effort of the mods, it's not an easy job I know, and users seldom appreciate the work.

It is just not comprehendable to me why they don't seem to be looking for new mods at all. Or maybe they have been asking people privately and those declined, but I haven't see any public appeal for new mods while those just seem needed. Red Rick can't do everything on his own I think.

I just realized again, though, that I could never be a mod for more than spam-removal. fmkrol would long have been banned for life by me, lol.

But isn't there anyone out there who would do the job? Raise your hands!
 
Guys... I think I might have found the solution to the "Admins can't keep track of multiple forum-specific policies" issue.
In fact, it's a solution that's so obvious, when you think about it, it's a surprise nobody has... well... thought about it before.
Why not take policies that work on each forum, and introduce them to the other forums?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cookster15
There seem to have been some bans lately that haven’t made much sense to me, particularly when I’ve seen far worse and more direct things be allowed. I think consistency is a problem and it would be nice to have some clarity because currently it looks like almost anything could result in a ban.
I can say as a former mod in a couple of forums, yes. Consistency is a challenge. Non-paid labor tends to be inconsistent. Things are caught as they are reported (mostly) and seen (rarely). Since only a fraction of infractions (see what I did there?) are reported, you're going to get inconsistencies for sure. Penalties can seem inconsistent, but you really (really) have no idea what happens behind closed doors. Some folks don't react well to the most minor moderation and things can escalate which the other members can't see. Assume good intent from the mods, the notion that they have it out for anyone is paranoid and silly.

This is a free forum. Here's some free advice which is worth what you paid for it.
  • Softly encourage other members to be nice and stay on topic. We all fail here occasionally.
  • Report the violations you see. I know it feels like tattling and the normal reaction is to engage. Try to avoid it.
  • The moderation will be as good the reports the mods get.
  • Whining about all the rest is pointless.
 
Sure seems like it, given the general confusion about why certain posters were banned.
Lots of issues can be solved by a friendly reminder, and maybe a warning from the mods.

That is just an assumption and a few people agreeing with each other. We cant say that is the general consensus.

Just because you are the loudest dont mean everyone feels that way. Plenty of people that just mind their business.

I believe the mods give out warnings plenty of times to people. A ban does not come like a lightning strike and sometimes it might just be warranted, like sometimes it might not be warranted. It always gonna be a margin for error when there are humans involved, but discussing singular cases gets tedious. "Should this really have been banworthy?", it cant work like that.

The mods have to make a quick decision most times, when things get out of hand or is out of line. I trust that they in most cases make the right decision.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Monte Serra
But that doesn't really help if the general consensus is that some bans are too strict. We can't very well reverse-report:
"I feel like this post is perfectly fine, and does not warrant any sort of disciplinary action." That's like 99% of posts.
Not following. I wasn't talking about bans, my comments which you quoted referred to posts. All I'm saying is that instead of battling with trolling, negative, or off topic posts, just report them. It does take some restraint and intent.

Bans are another topic, but I also addressed that. You have NO idea what goes on between closed doors. Someone can post something which doesn't warrant a ban or a long ban, and lose their *** with the mods if that post is deleted, or they get a warning. Happens a surprising amount. That subsequent "behind closed doors" reaction can result in a ban. Which is all to say don't assume what you can (still) see is all there is to a ban. Bans usually happen after repeat behaviors.

I have no idea what went into any ban, and I'm not defending any particular ban. Just saying we have no idea what really went on, nor should we. The forum used to publish all the bans and have arguments about it in public. Ridiculous. Made being a mod a total pain. I'm happy they changed that well-intentioned (it was done in the spirit of transparency) but destructive policy.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Salvarani
Sure seems like it, given the general confusion about why certain posters were banned.
Lots of issues can be solved by a friendly reminder, and maybe a warning from the mods.
Except you don't know what reminders or warnings were or weren't given. Not all moderation is public, in fact a great deal of it isn't. I guarantee you mods aren't banning anyone, let along valuable posters, for nothing. Just assume good intent. You'll be right 99% of the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: King Boonen
The mods have to make a quick decision most times, when things get out of hand or is out of line. I trust that they in most cases make the right decision.

Several posters who had never had a reputation of causing trouble getting banned within days didn't make you question things?

Not following. I wasn't talking about bans, my comments which you quoted referred to posts. All I'm saying is that instead of battling with trolling, negative, or off topic posts, just report them. It does take some restraint and intent.

And people aren't going to report posts they don't find any issues with.
 

TRENDING THREADS