Moderation

[Armchair Cyclist]

then why not watch each race and have venues for those who only want to comment on that racec

We have: they are the race threads.

 

[aphronesis]

We have: they are the race threads.

And? Why not make them more inclusive?

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

They are on topic: nothing un-inclusive, yet alone exclusive, about that.

If you had seen something in TA, why would you be in such a hurry to post it in the PN thread?

 

[Red Rick]

Spoiler

If you can't watch multiple races at once then I consider it a skill issue.

No but I do think it's fair to ask how long after a race things should not be discussed, and I also ask how stringent it should be in regards to vague allusions rather than hard spoilers.

Spoilers don't even need to be specific for example. I might feel inclined to whine about Tirreno being boring in a Paris-Nice thread, and well experience veterans of the forum would have only been spoiled that it is a day ending in -day

 

[aphronesis]

They are on topic: nothing un-inclusive, yet alone exclusive, about that.

If you had seen something in TA, why would you be in such a hurry to post it in the PN thread?

I wouldn’t by default. But if comparisons or contrasts make sense, why not? Will tomorrow change knowing in waiting who won this afternoon?

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Spoiler

If you can't watch multiple races at once then I consider it a skill issue.

No but I do think it's fair to ask how long after a race things should not be discussed, and I also ask how stringent it should be in regards to vague allusions rather than hard spoilers.

Spoilers don't even need to be specific for example. I might feel inclined to whine about Tirreno being boring in a Paris-Nice thread, and well experience veterans of the forum would have only been spoiled that it is a day ending in -day

As I said in the notes I put in both race threads at the beginning of last week: I wouldn't expect it to be an issue that goes to formal warnings or anything. I can't imagine anyone thinking their enjoyment of a later race is spoiled by the example you give.

As to what time delay would be appreciated, I guess our American or Australian members should probably suggest how much after a race has happened they get the opportunity to watch "as live".

It's simply asking for considerate discretion: really not sure how that's controversial.

 

[Netserk]

To the point of your comment: then why not watch each race and have venues for those who only want to comment on that race?

like the specific race threads ?

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I wouldn’t by default. But if comparisons or contrasts make sense, why not? Will tomorrow change knowing in waiting for who won this afternoon?

And that is why I suggested that observations relevant to both races might be better suited for rider threads, or team threads.

"Will tomorrow change"? No
Is consideration for other forum members a reasonable expectation? I would say yes: will tomorrow be ruined if someone takes a couple of seconds to apply a spoiler mask, or keeps an observation to themselves for a few hours?

 

[Netserk]

Spoiler

If you can't watch multiple races at once then I consider it a skill issue.

No but I do think it's fair to ask how long after a race things should not be discussed, and I also ask how stringent it should be in regards to vague allusions rather than hard spoilers.

Spoilers don't even need to be specific for example. I might feel inclined to whine about Tirreno being boring in a Paris-Nice thread, and well experience veterans of the forum would have only been spoiled that it is a day ending in -day

24h should normally be enough time , but i dont see why one would need to make any references to tirreno in the paris nice thread

edit : rather , why one would need to make such references without using the spoiler tags

 

[aphronesis]

like the specific race threads ?

@Armchair Cyclist got there already. It’s a difference in preference and aesthetic. Worth the argument?

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

@Armchair Cyclist got there already. It’s a difference in preference and aesthetic. Worth the argument?

I think you are the only one making the argument: I'm not seeing anyone else thinking it is not perfectly reasonable, even though many have said it would not make a difference to them, because of their watching habits.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Forum is a mutable and changing context as you know. Old, white, male, etc and all the old criteria, it should be open to debate under the name?

I appreciate the shift in tone though.

I happen to be a reasonably old white male, but I really do not see what that has to do with anything. Would you like me to send all my posts for approval to my young, female, mixed heritage niece before posting?

So what is difficult or objectionable in being asked to place the coincidence that you might want to observe upon inside spoiler tabs?

 

[aphronesis]

I saw something upstream as did you. I am the one making the argument, but that doesn’t mean I’m the only one who believes it.

 

[aphronesis]

So what is difficult or objectionable in being asked to place the coincidence that you might want to observe upon inside spoiler tabs?

Sorry, I missed this. I was referring to the historic/classical definition of “forum” relative to the present and the digital naturalization of the term. My apologies if that’s not ready knowledge, but you can find it.

Genetics were not at all the point. I don’t know if nation states and nationality are more history than politics and a cycling forum could go either way as a reference point in the discussion.

On topic: have I cross posted or complained about race spoilers? I won’t believe so and they don’t bother me. So can the question be flipped to ask what’s hard for adults to deal with them?

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I saw something upstream as did you. I am the one making the argument, but that doesn’t mean I’m the only one who believes it.

I don't see it: I see one person saying that it shouldn't result in a lengthy ban, which has never been proposed or threatened.

What I do see is Potomac, Tour of Sardinia, jmdirt, noob, Cookster, Netserk, Sciatic, hayneplane either commenting in favour of avoiding spoilers or liking comments that promote such consideration.

 

[aphronesis]

You’re aware that I respect Cookster, but his position is compromised in this discussion by default. Everyone else, sure, but we all disagree. And you omit the possible agreements with the counter argument. Why not a poll?

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

So can the question be flipped to ask what’s hard for adults to deal with them?

Of course people can "deal with" them. If the plug were to be pulled on the forum altogether, we could "deal with" it. We all deal with far greater issues regularly. The resilience of adults here is not the issue.

But given the choice between disappointing somebody hoping to watch a race "as live", and avoiding disappointing them, I just don't see your issue.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Why not a poll?

knock yourself out

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

And you omit the possible agreements with the counter argument.

I believe I have referenced everyone who has, in words or by liking a post, expressed an opinion on the suggestion.

I would have included anyone that I had seen liking your argumentation, but there aren't any.

So thus far, that is 9 to 1.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I expect more from you. Per the previous post: it’s less my issue than the responses to the topic.

Maybe you are unfamiliar with the phrase: "knock yourself out" means "feel free to do what you propose".

 

[aphronesis]

Maybe you are unfamiliar with the phrase: "knock yourself out" means "feel free to do what you propose".

Never heard it. Thanks

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

You’re right. Read back or don’t; likes aren’t the point

Go on then, refresh my memory; quote the comments that are agreeing with you.

 

[aphronesis]

All you my friend.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

All you my friend:

I honestly have not seen any: prove me wrong.

 

[aphronesis]

I honestly have not seen any: prove me wrong.

In our current world, people are less willing and inclined than ever to take didactic positions. Why would I suggest posters who sympathize? You know this: one; and, two, why I would do work for you on that level? Philosophically sure, but that pays little.