Moderation

[Red Rick]

In the very brief moment mods were slightly more lenient about the politics surrounding the protest issue, it instantly became a completely ****how where people instantly got accused of being among others but not limited to: fascism, sadism, being proponents of genocide. And mods please not I say this to illustrate the point.

If any of you thinks this forum as a community is capable of a civilized conversation about politics-adjacent topics because we are well cultured fans of the ciclismo, you lot are kidding yourselves.

Also, we can barely find moderators who are willing to moderate the forum, don't ask them to moderate such discussion, especially when you know that when people predictably get banned you are also complaining that people get banned.

 

[RedheadDane]

Much like how the clinic discusses doping specific to the sport

TBF, the clinic also have threads for various other sports, and even a thread where we - jokingly - accuse each other of being doped.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I wasn't talking about a general politics forum, just a forum where we could discuss the politics that are affecting the races themselves.

In other words, talking about how to deal with protests, OK
Discussing who is right in Israel vs Gaza, out of bounds

Much like how the clinic discusses doping specific to the sport

That is sort of the position I aimed for, but it very soon became apparent that opinions about the line that authorities should take in relation to protestors correlated so strongly to the same posters' opinions on the issue in Gaza that the issue became a proxy argument for the wider one.

Thus I was left with only really being able to retain comments about the race organisers' decisions about handling the case.

Hoping that this is about the last I will have to write here about moderation during La Vuelta (but that might be optimistic). Many thanks to those who made a real effort to restrain themselves in their comments, made supportive comments, and to those who, having fallen foul of the rule, PMed to hold their hands up, admit they went beyond the rules, and make it clear that they bear no grudge. I know that it is a subject that gives rise to strong feelings, and I had to bite my own tongue a lot. I take solace in the fact that I was accused with roughly equal frequency of being strongly biased in favour of both sides of the dispute.

And thanks to @Cookster15 : it was very good to have somebody with whom to discuss the more marginal cases.

There are enough rows, and people find it difficult enough to retain civility, when we are simply discussing the performances and potential of Primco van der Pogagaard: we certainly don't need the extra friction of venting our political positions.

 

[AmRacer]

Primco van der Pogagaard

 

[Netserk]

That is sort of the position I aimed for, but it very soon became apparent that opinions about the line that authorities should take in relation to protestors correlated so strongly to the same posters' opinions on the issue in Gaza that the issue became a proxy argument for the wider one.

While some have been very vocal on their position on the issue in Gaza, many others have not addressed that issue at all, so you cannot possibly say what their opinion correlate with.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

While some have been very vocal on their position on the issue in Gaza, many others have not addressed that issue at all, so you cannot possibly say what their opinion correlate with.

Correlation, by definition, is across a sample, not invariably accurate for every case, nor did I suggest that it was. But leaving comments on police action was only going to licence and exacerbate political comment.

 

[Rackham]

Personally speaking I'd recommend closing the IPT thread and associated conversations. It's impossible to have an actual chat about this issue if certain truths get removed for veering too closely to politics.

And the actual position espoused by many (kick IPT out of the race and sport) is also political in nature anyway.

 

[hrotha]

In the very brief moment mods were slightly more lenient about the politics surrounding the protest issue, it instantly became a completely ****how where people instantly got accused of being among others but not limited to: fascism, sadism, being proponents of genocide.

Not "people" in the abstract, but specific forumers who called the protesters "terrorists" and said they should be beaten up and/or thrown in jail. It's a rather curious selection of examples (for completely innocent illustrative purposes ofc) as if those accusations weren't responses to preceding, highly inflammatory, inherently political comments

 

[Red Rick]

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

Thank you for proving my point

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

If posts get deleted it's because they are not wanted on the board (and sometimes because they are innocent, but rely on deleted content for their context and meaning). Please stop posting recollections of contentious, and deleted, material.

 

[Ilmaestro99]

Personally speaking I'd recommend closing the IPT thread and associated conversations. It's impossible to have an actual chat about this issue if certain truths get removed for veering too closely to politics.

And the actual position espoused by many (kick IPT out of the race and sport) is also political in nature anyway.

If you can't have such a discussion on a cycling forum, about a cycling team, what's the point of having the forum? We are all adults. In my opinion is not a political situation. It's a sponsor that promotes a regime causing a humanitarian crisis. I think the discussion has been reasonable and I don't think comments on the situation should be classed as political unless they clearly deviate from the discussion into politics.

 

[Netserk]

Correlation, by definition, is across a sample, not invariably accurate for every case, nor did I suggest that it was. But leaving comments on police action was only going to licence and exacerbate political comment.

Has anyone posted an opinion on the issue in Gaza against the most vocal one? If not, it's only a correlation between the issue of the protests and whether or not to be silent on the issue in Gaza or not.

 

[Rackham]

If you can't have such a discussion on a cycling forum, about a cycling team, what's the point of having the forum? We are all adults. In my opinion is not a political situation. It's a sponsor that promotes a regime causing a humanitarian crisis. I think the discussion has been reasonable and I don't think comments on the situation should be classed as political unless they clearly deviate from the discussion into politics.

I doubt the rule here has anything to do with the expectation (or lack thereof) of our maturity and ability to discuss like adults. Frankly I'm of the view people should really be free to express their views here (& on a personal note I do find them interesting). It's stimulating.

But I feel the ban on political conversations (& its broad implementation) is evidently related to the forum owners wanting absolutely zero issues. Be it sponsorship related or other. It's a sort of Rubicon that shouldn't be crossed to keep things neutral.

That's why they have pour Armchair Cyclist here toiling away cleaning up the threads and removing our carefully thought out posts.

 

[Cookster15]

It's a very crappy hand, but it's also very easy to just say: "these are the forum rules and we are just going to apply them". These rules were created in different times, when the situation wasn't like it is now. With all the sportwashing, and protests, you can't keep this away from the forum. There needs to be a better solution then banning all conversations about it. It's silly.

The forum exists to discuss cycling - not politics or sportswashing. Just don't. Not sure why folks find it difficult to compartmentalize the issues.

 

[noob]

I just had this insight; this forum is for leisure, as is most sports watching.

That's why the clinic is hidden and that's why we don't discuss politics. It doesn't mean we hide from hiding it outside the forum.

But there are plenty of spaces to discuss politics outside the forum. Even politics and cycling combined.

There are also a need for spaces for people to flee mentally from that other world. This is such a space.

Even for those inside a war zone there will be times they have to not think of the war. It doesn't mean they're neglecting it. It just means people also need a space to just breath.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Has anyone posted an opinion on the issue in Gaza against the most vocal one?

Yes

 

[AmRacer]

The forum exists to discuss cycling - not politics or sportswashing. Just don't. Not sure why folks find it difficult to compartmentalize the issues.

Posters can hate on certain riders because they ride for a team Posters don't like due to all kinds of issues, including political ones.

 

[Netserk]

Yes

I haven't seen any, so I very much doubt it's possible to speak of strong correlations.

 

[AmRacer]

I haven't seen any, so I very much doubt it's possible to speak of strong correlations.

Maybe they got removed?

 

[Red Rick]

Maybe they got removed?

Possibly, but we're getting extremely vague here precisely because it's a censored subject and therefor nobody knows what anyone is talking about and therefor we're often just inferring what the other party means.

And some people struggle exteremely with the MRI guideline and rather do the opposite.

 

[Berniece]

The forum exists to discuss cycling - not politics or sportswashing. Just don't. Not sure why folks find it difficult to compartmentalize the issues.

Because there's a direct influence on cycling. Cycling teams are taking a political stance, so it makes sense to discuss that. Why is it so hard to understand that? Like I said, it's not like people are advocating to discuss the death of Charlie Kirk... The liberty to discuss the impact of protests during cycling and why they are happening. It's changing cycling, it has a huge impact on big races, and we decide to not discuss it at all...

 

[Rackham]

Because there's a direct influence on cycling. Cycling teams are taking a political stance, so it makes sense to discuss that. Why is it so hard to understand that? Like I said, it's not like people are advocating to discuss the death of Charlie Kirk...

I'm down for that. And the protests in the UK as well. And Poland's drone issue with Russia. Why not Russia and Belarus with their war-games as well?

In all seriousness I watch bike racing to escape real world issues. Everyone has an axe to grind, everyone has a big major problem. If all of this starts to impede on the running of the sport then we're cooked.

 

[Red Rick]

Because there's a direct influence on cycling. Cycling teams are taking a political stance, so it makes sense to discuss that. Why is it so hard to understand that? Like I said, it's not like people are advocating to discuss the death of Charlie Kirk... The liberty to discuss the impact of protests during cycling and why they are happening. It's changing cycling, it has a huge impact on big races, and we decide to not discuss it at all...

I haven't exactly seen people get banned for discussing the implications. There's several threads in the PRR section that do discuss the implications for races and teams.

 

[Izzyeviel]

From cycling weakly - this may interest some here

 

[Sciatic]

Because there's a direct influence on cycling. Cycling teams are taking a political stance, so it makes sense to discuss that. Why is it so hard to understand that? Like I said, it's not like people are advocating to discuss the death of Charlie Kirk... The liberty to discuss the impact of protests during cycling and why they are happening. It's changing cycling, it has a huge impact on big races, and we decide to not discuss it at all...

I'm down for whatever keeps the forum a place we can discuss cycling as we have been doing for more than 15 years. Choosing to hold a line on discussing politics shouldn't indicate we don't care about the topics at hand or are apolitical. I've been in plenty of marches and peace vigils--I can choose to involve myself there, but not bring it here. A lot of things in life are like that. Personally I would prefer if we could discuss the political side of cycling here but a small number of folks are simply not willing to be respectful and accountable to the rules (it seems a few don't care if temporarily banned), and given we don't have a paid staff of moderators, I would rather forego political discussions (regardless of their importance) in order to keep our traditional cycling discussions.