Moderators

[python]

Be careful. The mods have decided they don't want anyone pointing out the obvious.

that...

or the obvious has been banned from the instant mod action list (according to the currently posted but clearly not enforced rules, nonetheless) b/c the obvious flamers bring a lot of clicks...

why would bpc (a troll who deserves my respect for never pretending to be anything but a defender of the armstrong myth - thus i never bother chasing him)... why should he expect a different mod treatment from the less honest but equally obnoxious and deluded defenders of the myth like chris e (only second to bpc in the number of bans) and his proxies (see the very up-thread) ?

i guess bpc is a true fanboy, as much as it is a delusion.

i reckon, the others, the same myth-adherents, but those who try to conceal their true feelings by derailing threads about their icon or the critics of their icons...

 

[patricknd]

that...

or the obvious has been banned from the instant mod action list (according to the currently posted but clearly not enforced rules, nonetheless) b/c the obvious flamers bring a lot of clicks...

why would bpc (a troll who deserves my respect for never pretending to be anything but a defender of the armstrong myth - thus i never bother chasing him)... why should he expect a different mod treatment from the less honest but equally obnoxious and deluded defenders of the myth like chris e (only second to bpc in the number of bans) and his proxies (see the very up-thread) ?

i will tell tell why... he is a bit easier target b/c he has no former (war hero) marines and ruggedly handsome cancer surviving fanboys from his home state defending him.

i guess bpc is a true fanboy, as much as it is a delusion.

i reckon, the others, the same myth-adherents, but those who try to conceal their true feelings by derailing threads about their icon or the critics of their icons...

fixed that for ya

 

[red_flanders]

If you think we are tailoring moderation to click rates you are wrong. You all seem to think we have more time than we do.

 

[mountainrman]

If you think we are tailoring moderation to click rates you are wrong. You all seem to think we have more time than we do.

I would very much appreciate an answer to the question I aked a couple of posts ago about "witchunt" resulting in thread closure: I still have no idea what it meant.

In between the usual suspects began derailing this thread, so it seems to have got lost in the process.
.
Are david walsh's comments in media off limits - My thread was commenting on a quote from that. Or was it the subsequent off topic replies that got that thread closed?

Would really love an answer!

 

[ebandit]

again.........trollin' along

mountainrman did you not read responses by other members to your post?

they agreed with my thought that your post was mere trollin'..............

quotes used out of context to back up your agenda which you express

again.....................and again

i guess a moderator agreed...............but i could be wrong................again

 

[LaFlorecita]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1088207&postcount=636

Seriously?

I'm surprised I didn't get a warning and by the way aren't there worse posts to moderate? I see lots of them.

 

[ElChingon]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1088207&postcount=636

Seriously?

I'm surprised I didn't get a warning and by the way aren't there worse posts to moderate? I see lots of them.

So we can start posting pic of Bert again, and depreciate as before, cool!

 

[Semper Fidelis]

that...

or the obvious has been banned from the instant mod action list (according to the currently posted but clearly not enforced rules, nonetheless) b/c the obvious flamers bring a lot of clicks...

why would bpc (a troll who deserves my respect for never pretending to be anything but a defender of the armstrong myth - thus i never bother chasing him)... why should he expect a different mod treatment from the less honest but equally obnoxious and deluded defenders of the myth like chris e (only second to bpc in the number of bans) and his proxies (see the very up-thread) ?

i will tell tell why... he is a bit easier target b/c he has no former (yet spineless) marines and cancer surviving fanboys from his home state defending him.

i guess bpc is a true fanboy, as much as it is a delusion.

i reckon, the others, the same myth-adherents, but those who try to conceal their true feelings by derailing threads about their icon or the critics of their icons...

Serious Question---Who is that dude you have for your Avatar?

Why did you Troll ChrisE into this when he can't defend himself?

that is Marine with a capital M,,,, BTW why did you feel free to call names?

 

[ebandit]

avatar

Serious Question---Who is that dude in you have for your Avatar?

Why did you Troll ChrisE into this when he can't defend himself?

serious question..........who is that dude in your avatar............

..is he a cyclist?

i'm sure chrisE will be ok....................he will give his share

upon his return

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1088207&postcount=636

Seriously?

I'm surprised I didn't get a warning and by the way aren't there worse posts to moderate? I see lots of them.

I did not moderate that posting, I commented on it. And yes, all points of view are accepted in this forum as long as they are properly presented.

The forum itself is NOT pro/anti any rider, team, etc.

Susan

 

[LaFlorecita]

I did not moderate that posting, I commented on it. And yes, all points of view are accepted in this forum as long as they are properly presented.

The forum itself is NOT pro/anti any rider, team, etc.

Susan

It was a joke.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

serious question..........who is that dude in your avatar............

..is he a cyclist?

i'm sure chrisE will be ok....................he will give his share

upon his return

Check out the larger version in the article. theHog posted the link in the LA financial thread. Take a look at background pictures.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthony...ating-lance-armstrongs-livestrong-foundation/

 

[ebandit]

now i see

Check out the larger version in the article. theHog posted the link in the LA financial thread. Take a look at background pictures.

now i see him.............floyd landis.....cooo...oool!

 

[Semper Fidelis]

now i see him.............floyd landis.....cooo...oool!

Here is a better look at it.

You like?

No Idea what I am doing wrong but here is the link. http://www.flickr.com/photos/38353662@N07/7850540522

 

[ebandit]

pictures

gone

 

[red_flanders]

The topic is "Moderators..."

Off topic posts have been...moderated. Please stay on topic.

 

[Aleajactaest]

I did not moderate that posting, I commented on it. And yes, all points of view are accepted in this forum as long as they are properly presented.

The forum itself is NOT pro/anti any rider, team, etc.

Susan

There are certain times when that seems not to be the case. Still, a laudable goal.

 

[Benotti69]

I did not moderate that posting, I commented on it. And yes, all points of view are accepted in this forum as long as they are properly presented.

The forum itself is NOT pro/anti any rider, team, etc.

Susan

I believe there are lots of points that are not acceptable no matter the manner presented. Sexism, racism, facism etc etc......

 

[mountainrman]

I believe there are lots of points that are not acceptable no matter the manner presented. Sexism, racism, facism etc etc......

There is a bag of worms.

The trouble with "sexism" arguments is in many respects women are different - particularly when it comes to sport. If you do not allow discussion of differences, you can end up with stupid political correctness arguments such as UK insurance companies no longer allowed to take womens life expectancy into account!

"Racism" can have similar problems. There is little doubt that certain races are better or worse genetically disposed which compounded with nurture and society norms of perseverance means they are potentially better or worse at sports which can be a relevant discussion. I remember a programme Colin Jackson (hurdler) did about whether race influenced performance - he was disappointed when tests proved that being jamaican genetically predisposed the likelihood of him having the "super fast twitch" fibres that were at the core of his performances. I guess he hoped it had more to do with just training and determination. Sadly genes matter more than anything else.

I have often wondered why altitude living rift valley ethiopians and kenyans do not feature higher in the international cycling stakes - since their aerobic performances are outstanding in distance running.

Finally - Fascism IS certainly alive in sport - the chinese culture and state is more or less the definition of fascist which has implications for the performance and structures of their sports teams who are full time paid by the state which gives a competitive advantage and because of that are more or less obliged to do what they are told (no doubt rued by a couple of disqualified badminton players!)

So arguments based on sex race and fascism may have a place on this forum!

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

I believe there are lots of points that are not acceptable no matter the manner presented. Sexism, racism, facism etc etc......

Those are not the opinions to which I was refering, obviously.

Susan

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

There is a bag of worms.
...
So arguments based on sex race and fascism may have a place on this forum!

There are actually some quite interesting points in here, but this discussion would be better held in another thread.

Susan

 

[frenchfry]

Just a comment, not meaning to criticise mods who have a tough job.

It appears that full blown trolling is accepted but a few bantering but slightly off-topic posts are not.

No big deal really, but it seems to me that trolling destroys threads much more than a bit of joking around.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Just a comment, not meaning to criticise mods who have a tough job.

It appears that full blown trolling is accepted but a few bantering but slightly off-topic posts are not.

No big deal really, but it seems to me that trolling destroys threads much more than a bit of joking around.

This i agree with.

 

[mewmewmew13]

This i agree with.

Me too.

The joking around, when not taken to the extreme, serves a purpose of lightening the mood and tenor of the differing opinions.

If it is completely taken away the whole thread may turn sour and mean spirited.

 

[Tom375]

Me too.

The joking around, when not taken to the extreme, serves a purpose of lightening the mood and tenor of the differing opinions.

If it is completely taken away the whole thread may turn sour and mean spirited.

Far too many people take themselves and what they say too seriously on this forum, hence they deserve to be ridiculed at some stage. Its an internet forum for f sake if they don't want to be in here get the f out don't reply etc..

P*ss taking is essential!