Moderation

[E_F_]

"Deliberately attempting to agitate other users."

Expressing your opinion on a rider by using a nickname does not equate trolling.

 

[Cookster15]

Expressing your opinion on a rider by using a nickname does not equate trolling.

That depends how that nickname might be perceived by others. Refer the comment above by @Tricycle Rider

Page 45 - Moderation

Page 45 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

forum.cyclingnews.com

I had to google Game of Thrones because I had never watched it, wiki makes it sound like this Joffrey character is sort of a combination of Nero and Caligula. If so that is indeed not very nice.

Now, imagine if you are a fan of the rider this nickname was directed at. Then consider that the term is repeatedly used by fans of other riders. This is deliberately attempting to agitate other users - trolling.

Message is simple, drop using Joffrey or similar derogatory character names which might trigger rival fan groups. Its not difficult and doesn't detract from the fun of coming here.

 

[E_F_]

That depends how that nickname might be perceived by others.

Trolling can't be defined just through how it is perceived, the important point is how it is intended.

Now, imagine if you are a fan of the rider this nickname was directed at. Then consider that the term is repeatedly used by fans of other riders. This is deliberately attempting to agitate other users - trolling.

I can imagine plenty of things being aggravating to plenty of users. Other users are constantly aggravated that I keep arguing for motor doping being a real possibility - and I know that. Still I keep speaking my mind, not because it aggravates other users, but despite of it.

Of course people will find a comparison with one of the most hated characters in recent popular fiction agitating, but what if that's actually how @Red Rick feels about Pogacar? To call it trolling, you'd have to make an assumption that he's deliberately winding people up. (He may have been, I don't know).

Message is simple, drop using Joffrey or similar derogatory character names which might trigger rival fan groups. Its not difficult and doesn't detract from the fun of coming here.

I'm not even coming down against this, necessarily. My problem is that I think you're going about this the wrong way when you unofficially make a rule against using potentially triggering derogatory nicknames and then refer to a rule that categorically does not disallow the usage of such nicknames.

Whether or not the nicknames should be allowed is a different matter. You could easily argue for a rule stating something along the lines of "you should aim to cause as little agitation as possible to express your opinion".

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Trolling can't be defined just through how it is perceived, the important point is how it is intended.

Precisely. That is what the definition that you took issue with says: "Deliberately attempting to agitate other users."

To call it trolling, you'd have to make an assumption that he's deliberately winding people up. (He may have been, I don't know).

So state what you do not like about the rider's conduct with examples and reasoned argument, don't just throw an insult about him.

My problem is that I think you're going about this the wrong way when you unofficially make a rule against using potentially triggering derogatory nicknames and then refer to a rule that categorically does not disallow the usage of such nicknames.

Absolutely not what either of us are doing. Read Cookster's reply to you:

That depends how that nickname might be perceived by others.

You could easily argue for a rule stating something along the lines of "you should aim to cause as little agitation as possible to express your opinion".

Which is pretty much a re-phrasing of the definition we have posted (not our invention: provided by the publishers). And that is where this rule is not really much different from the other one: Civility is compulsory. Aiming to wind up others is not civil, and no-one wanting to have civil conversation should be posting anything in the hope or expectation that it will cause aggravation to others.

 

[red_flanders]

If we still need a definition of trolling, I think I've found it.

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[SHAD0W93]

If we still need a definition of trolling, I think I've found it.

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

But they keep Andy as 2010.

 

[scribers]

If we still need a definition of trolling, I think I've found it.

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

That’s pretty cool though. He was effusive about being around the tour after all of these years

 

[red_flanders]

That’s pretty cool though. He was effusive about being around the tour after all of these years

Oh, 100%. He loves it.

But also trolling the UCI and Lappartient…hard. 😂

 

[Devil's Elbow]

After the strong warning that was put up before the Tour, it is disappointing that some posters have continued to either seek to have a go at each other, or set out to aggravate others. Some have served suspensions, others are very much on warnings.

We have a valuable place here: let's not spoil it: "Informed, animated and responsible chat about cycling is not easy to find on the internet: this place should deliver that."

There is no excuse for anyone not having read the rules, but in practice, they usually come down to two:

• Civility is compulsory
• No trolling (deliberately agitating others).

The most commonly seen form of trolling is gross rudeness about riders, which can only be assumed to be expressed with the intention of riling their followers. Whether we like a given rider or not, he has dedicated his life to the pursuit of the sport that we are entertained by, and (as we have seen this week) places himself in mortal danger on an almost daily basis in doing so, and thus is deserving of a level of respect. That is to be expected.

A particular form of undermining that has emerged recently is the greedy, "Joffroy" jibe. Be aware, this will be treated as trolling, and therefore will be likely to draw warnings and suspensions.

According to the very same forum rules you link to:

Utilize “MRI” for Most Respectful Interpretation of a fellow member’s intent when reading their posts

In my view, the moderation standard as announced above is in direct violation of this rule for multiple reasons.

gross rudeness about riders, which can only be assumed to be expressed with the intention of riling their followers

1) This assumes that negative nicknames are inherently intended to be ‘grossly rude’
2) You are quite literally applying the Least Respectful Interpretation by assuming the intention is to rile up the followers of a certain rider.

And as for the Joffrey nickname you use as an example: I always took that to imply ‘Pogacar is showing signs of tyrannical behaviour’, not ‘Pogacar is a sadomasochistic Nero-Caligula hybrid who has people tortured for his own pleasure’. Both are possible interpretations, but the first one is surely more reasonable and definitely more respectful. Yet going by posts like the below, moderation interpretation seems to be closer to the latter, which makes zero sense to me and is once again irreconcilable with the MRI rule. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the decision to hand out bans (!!!) for the use of this nickname is indefensible if the forum rules are to be applied in full (as they should). Handing out the most severe punishment for unjust reasons is IMO the cardinal sin as a moderator (or at least one that is trying to do their best, which I have no doubt both of you are).

That depends how that nickname might be perceived by others. Refer the comment above by @Tricycle Rider

Page 45 - Moderation

Page 45 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

forum.cyclingnews.com

Now, imagine if you are a fan of the rider this nickname was directed at. Then consider that the term is repeatedly used by fans of other riders. This is deliberately attempting to agitate other users - trolling.

Message is simple, drop using Joffrey or similar derogatory character names which might trigger rival fan groups. It’s not difficult and doesn't detract from the fun of coming here.

And this post contains yet another violation of the MRI rule. We are apparently now supposed to consider how posts ‘might be received by others’, or avoid any posts that ‘might trigger’ someone? So we are supposed to consider how other posters might interpret any given post negatively before posting? Is the threat of potentially unreasonable negative interpretations not precisely what the MRI rule is supposed to safeguard against?

In my view, the above means that moderation in this area is now completely out of order, as it basically amounts to moderators (subconsciously or deliberately) picking and choosing what rules should be used as a basis for moderation. I fail to see how posters can be expected to follow any given set of rules when the one moderators are working with is different from the one officially published. It is a level I never expected moderation on this forum to descend to, and frankly it makes me question whether I want to continue posting here. Because no, unlike the final line in the final post I quoted suggests, having to consider negative interpretations of every single post absolutely does ‘detract from the fun of coming here’.

 

[scribers]

What if I were to put a picture of Joffrey next to Vingo in the look-a-likes thread? Because they are visually similar. Moreso than most any other rider.

Would I then get Most Respectful Interpretation license to go with the interpretation in the vingo rider thread and race threads?

 

[RedheadDane]

What if I were to put a picture of Joffrey next to Vingo in the look-a-likes thread? Because they are visually similar. Moreso than most any other rider.

What if you put a picture of Jack Gleeson, while portraying the role of Joffrey?

 

[Red Rick]

I don't want to really want to complain, but I don't think mocking riders a little bit or holding negative opinions on riders is what should constitute trolling, and when the emphasis on the reception to a message outweighs what's actually the message itself, because that invites double standards in itself.

I think that's maybe the 2nd time in a short while I've gotten a short ban for something I meant in jest. I guess my jests may not be interpreted the most benevolent way due to my sunny disposition.

 

[Tricycle Rider]

I don't want to really want to complain, but I don't think mocking riders a little bit or holding negative opinions on riders is what should constitute trolling, and when the emphasis on the reception to a message outweighs what's actually the message itself, because that invites double standards in itself.

I think that's maybe the 2nd time in a short while I've gotten a short ban for something I meant in jest. I guess my jests may not be interpreted the most benevolent way due to my sunny disposition.

I think during the Tour especially you get fans posting who would not normally during the rest of the race season - I guess some of them are more touchy and report posts more often?

 

[noob]

I assume most name calling isn't trolling but rather a sign of the poster being highly affected and emotional. Trolling is usually a bit more sophisticated.

As someone who is literally a so called"snow flake" ❄️ I cherish the weird names of riders given by for example @Ilmaestro99 gives riders. Even riders I like. His names could easily be seen as trolling whereas I just find them creative and fun.

Also; are only riders represented in this rule or is it for example seen as offensive to mock the body of a mechanic? The mechanic are helping the riders so shouldn't he be respected for his work too? Is it fair to hate on Trine?

Can I call Armstrong Pharmstrong or does the rule only adhere to current riders etc.

I'm worried we'll end up like Asian fan girls where everything negative is censored, reported and blocked. Where anyone who doesn't love a certain idol is called a "hater".

"Report wars" is something I haven't seen mentioned here; it's when fans use the report button to silence opposition to their favorite, whom they find beyond criticism. The bigger the fandoom the more reporting.

 

[AmRacer]

I assume most name calling isn't trolling but rather a sign of the poster being highly affected and emotional. Trolling is usually a bit more sophisticated.

As someone who is literally a so called"snow flake" ❄️ I cherish the weird names of riders given by for example @Ilmaestro99 gives riders. Even riders I like. His names could easily be seen as trolling whereas I just find them creative and fun.

Also; are only riders represented in this rule or is it for example seen as offensive to mock the body of a mechanic? The mechanic are helping the riders so shouldn't he be respected for his work too? Is it fair to hate on Trine?

Can I call Armstrong Pharmstrong or does the rule only adhere to current riders etc.

I'm worried we'll end up like Asian fan girls where everything negative is censored, reported and blocked. Where anyone who doesn't love a certain idol is called a "hater".

"Report wars" is something I haven't seen mentioned here; it's when fans use the report button to silence opposition to their favorite, whom they find beyond criticism. The bigger the fandoom the more reporting.

Report wars only work if admin takes action accordingly. Otherwise, it's just spamming admin.