Moderation

[Armchair Cyclist]

So I'm going to take that as you also not actually seeing anyone else taking your stand on this.

You are perfectly entitled to hold a minority opinion, but I'm not sure there is much more to discuss here.

 

[aphronesis]

So you got a moderator and 6-8 posters? My bad. Thanks for the dispensation on minority views.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Thanks for the dispensation on minority views.

It's not a dispensation: we all have that right. I know I am in a minority in objecting to the World Championship jerseys being described as "rainbow", and in dislike of mixed relays.

But hey, tomorrow won't change because of it.

 

[aphronesis]

It's not a dispensation: we all have that right. I know I am in a minority in objecting to the World Championship jerseys being described as "rainbow", and in dislike of mixed relays.

But hey, tomorrow won't change because of it.

Maybe a point is not acting as if it would? And we certainly don’t all have that right.

 

[AmRacer]

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?

You are free to create poll threads.

 

[aphronesis]

You are free to create poll threads.

I was unaware. Thanks.

 

[Cookster15]

Everyone else, sure, but we all disagree. And you omit the possible agreements with the counter argument. Why not a poll?

Please create a poll to gauge opinion. Its is fairly intuitive to do so. Reach out if you need assistance.

On your earlier reply to the other moderator, it is also unclear why introducing age, race, or gender is relevant to a discussion of forum rules or etiquette? If this was an attempt to disparage another point of view, then please don't.

 

[aphronesis]

Please create a poll to gauge opinion. Its is fairly intuitive to do so. Reach out if you need assistance.

On your earlier reply to the other moderator, it is also unclear why introducing age, race, or gender is relevant to a discussion of forum rules or etiquette? If this was an attempt to disparage another point of view, then please don't.

Maybe when the topic feels less contentious.


For example, my earlier reply (as I subsequently restated) was about the relative historicity of the notion of “forum” and how it can shift. Nothing more. The categories/criteria of age, race, gender as described can be applied towards me, so it wouldn’t be much of an argument. More importantly, there was nothing expressed or personal to disparage.

 

[jmdirt]

I have hesitated to offer my $.01. I'm rarely active in race threads because there were enough spoilers over the years that I don't want to risk it.

Even if spoiling the race for others isn't important, at the very least posting about race A in the thread for race B is off topic.

I tend to contribute post race in the rider threads with the exception of the GTs because stage threads get a lot of action.

 

[Cookster15]

More importantly, there was nothing expressed or personal to disparage.

To more than one observer it seemed a poor choice of words.

You do not wish to add a poll to verify your claimed "minority views" - minority views on what basis? I think based upon those who provided input I sense yours is the minority view.

Until you do create a poll please respect the general consensus that we don't want people spoiling live race discussion in this forum. There is also a spoiler feature you might wish to take a look at? It is under the 2nd ellipsis (next to smiles).

 

[aphronesis]

To more than one observer it seemed a poor choice of words.

You do not wish to add a poll to verify your claimed "minority views" - minority views on what basis? I think based upon those who provided input I sense yours is the minority view.

Until you do create a poll please respect the general consensus that we don't want people spoiling live race discussion in this forum. There is also a spoiler feature you might wish to take a look at? It is under the 2nd ellipsis (next to smiles).

It may have “seemed” that way, but, as noted, it was clarified above.

I don’t believe I have in the past, so it shouldn’t be an issue.

Edit: In any case, my terms were of principle and readership more than practice. Live races watched are mostly a case of holiday and/or accident. And given pre digital race access, so what?

Those conditions don’t hold, and I didn’t dispute the minority position, but for me, the middle paragraph above can also be indicative of the distortion and misunderstanding that aspects of this discussion took on the past few days.

 

[RedheadDane]

Random question: How do people feel about the thing some of us sometimes do, where we if a race is somewhat boring post in said race's thread to inform everyone that another race is more interesting?
Fine, as long as it's kept deliberately vague?

So:

"Come on over to [race], stuff is happening." = fine?

"Come on over to [race], [rider] has 1 minute with 20 km to go, [team] is pulling." = not fine?

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I don't think that the first could be considered anything that would spoil anyone's enjoyment of either race, no matter what order they are watched in.
The second is something that would be better hidden behind a spoiler mask. People might want to watch race B later from early on, to see how the break is formed.

 

[red_flanders]

Carnage today.

I mean on the forum. Can only wonder what happened!

 

[SHAD0W93]

Carnage today.

I mean on the forum. Can only wonder what happened!

They didn’t learn from The Looney Tunes’ season argument.

 

[Gratemans]

Carnage today.

I mean on the forum. Can only wonder what happened!

I hardly ever visit this part of the forum. But yeah, i was wondering as well. Guess we'll never know 😄

 

[Gratemans]

Random question: How do people feel about the thing some of us sometimes do, where we if a race is somewhat boring post in said race's thread to inform everyone that another race is more interesting?
Fine, as long as it's kept deliberately vague?

So:

"Come on over to [race], stuff is happening." = fine?

"Come on over to [race], [rider] has 1 minute with 20 km to go, [team] is pulling." = not fine?

That's exactly how I feel. Keep it vague and it's fine.
But actual spoilers? No.
Why would you? It's easy to just not mention it. And just as easy to use spoiler tags.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Carnage today.

I mean on the forum. Can only wonder what happened!

That's a problem with the way moderation takes place around here! I come home from a day of being more or less productive to find that heads have rolled and not IMO the most annoying posters but a portion of the solid core. What did they do? Don't know. How can I keep from the same fate? Don't know. And don't "follow the rules" as if that's not a moving target.

 

[red_flanders]

That's a problem with the way moderation takes place around here! I come home from a day of being more or less productive to find that heads have rolled and not IMO the most annoying posters but a portion of the solid core. What did they do? Don't know. How can I keep from the same fate? Don't know. And don't "follow the rules" as if that's not a moving target.

Feel ya. Felt that many times.

However, I wouldn't in any way conclude that's a moderation problem. Being annoying isn't against the rules, and I think it fair to assume that no one gets banned here without pretty clearly and repeatedly breaking rules. Don't know what happened, but I'd be fairly confident it wasn't good. Folks can take their lumps, happens to most of us.