Moderators

[pedaling squares]

I disagree, Joachim. These folks are volunteers, forum members who put in their own time to keep things running smoothly (or to fark it all up). Regardless, for what we're paying them they need to be able to be cycling fans too. There is a line between being a fan and being a d!ck, and they are nearly always on the right side of that line.

 

[Joachim]

I'm not entirely sure what you are disagreeing with. Could you add a bit of clarification, please?

 

[pedaling squares]

I'm not entirely sure what you are disagreeing with.

Sorry, should have quoted to be more clear.

If Moderators wish to demonstrate any integrity, they need to at least abstain from participating, in a partisan way, in threads that are highly contentious

I think you can be a fan of a team/rider/whatever and still moderate effectively.

 

[thirteen]

I disagree, Joachim. These folks are volunteers, forum members who put in their own time to keep things running smoothly (or to fark it all up). Regardless, for what we're paying them they need to be able to be cycling fans too. There is a line between being a fan and being a d!ck, and they are nearly always on the right side of that line.

+1

eta: i don't think you were unclear at all.

 

[pedaling squares]

It's settled, then. La Flo for mod!

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Better moderation !

And how would you define "better moderation"?

Susan

 

[Joachim]

I think you can be a fan of a team/rider/whatever and still moderate effectively.

I agree, you can, but that doesn't mean it is always the case. I've not been posting here very long, but I have read CN for years, and dipped in and out of the forum for a while.

It hasn't taken me long to work out how things work here. My first interaction with an 'Administrator' was to be called 'a troll', in-thread, by a character called Ferryman. There was no substantiation given to this accusation, nor was it done by PM. It appears to be because I dared offer a counter-view to those offered by the majority of posters on the Clinic Sky threads. In particular, I challenged the sloppy thinking. This particular individual had voiced strongly partisan opinions on that thread, and his main concern was that I rattled the cage and got the inmates restless.

I ran a gauntlet of taunts and insults, as well as mocking photographs, however the moment I descended to that level I found myself with an 'infraction' for being 'insulting'.

Was there a connection between the attitude of Ferryman and the unpleasant behaviours mentioned above? Of course.

We then have 'The Parrulo Incident', for which no satisfactory explanation has been given, in amongst the total misunderstanding by some of the nature of Martins complaint. The language used in Parrulo's original post, before it was inexplicably edited out by Susan, was surprising at the very least. Parrulo has also been a vociferous and partisan participant in the topics which he then moderated.

Coincidence? No.

Look, I realise that Admin are doing some work for the rest of us, and I agree that there may be compromises that have to be made. But let's just be honest about it and accept that some moderators act without impartiality.

I can work with that, in fact I already am. I don't take any of this stuff very seriously, but let's just be honest about it. If Moderation here, to every level, is unaccountable, then just admit it. If it isn't then questions raised deserve answers.

 

[MarkvW]

And how would you define "better moderation"?

Susan

. . . Everything in moderation, including moderation.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Complaining on moderators; seen that, done that, so boooooring.

And really, how much moderation is being done in the Clinic? Totally not needed, only when people get out of line, like me every now and than.

The only thing I do not understand on the moderation of Parullo is when he called Vickers post 'SPAM'. And yes, it was a trolling/funny meant thread, in my opinion.

But no need to ban MV for a week. Communication is the key to succes.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I agree, you can, but that doesn't mean it is always the case. I've not been posting here very long, but I have read CN for years, and dipped in and out of the forum for a while.

It hasn't taken me long to work out how things work here. My first interaction with an 'Administrator' was to be called 'a troll', in-thread, by a character called Ferryman. There was no substantiation given to this accusation, nor was it done by PM. It appears to be because I dared offer a counter-view to those offered by the majority of posters on the Clinic Sky threads. In particular, I challenged the sloppy thinking. This particular individual had voiced strongly partisan opinions on that thread, and his main concern was that I rattled the cage and got the inmates restless.

Ferryman let you know that they had removed some posts. You then answered and they said your trolling had caused a stir.

So, you were informed the whys without any infraction, just given a friendly warning......

I ran a gauntlet of taunts and insults, as well as mocking photographs, however the moment I descended to that level I found myself with an 'infraction' for being 'insulting'.

Was there a connection between the attitude of Ferryman and the unpleasant behaviours mentioned above? Of course.

We then have 'The Parrulo Incident', for which no satisfactory explanation has been given, in amongst the total misunderstanding by some of the nature of Martins complaint. The language used in Parrulo's original post, before it was inexplicably edited out by Susan, was surprising at the very least. Parrulo has also been a vociferous and partisan participant in the topics which he then moderated.

Coincidence? No.

Look, I realise that Admin are doing some work for the rest of us, and I agree that there may be compromises that have to be made. But let's just be honest about it and accept that some moderators act without impartiality.

I can work with that, in fact I already am. I don't take any of this stuff very seriously, but let's just be honest about it. If Moderation here, to every level, is unaccountable, then just admit it. If it isn't then questions raised deserve answers.

.....And then you ignored that warning and got an infraction.
Sounds like you got very fairly treated.

 

[Froome19]

I agree, you can, but that doesn't mean it is always the case. I've not been posting here very long, but I have read CN for years, and dipped in and out of the forum for a while.

It hasn't taken me long to work out how things work here. My first interaction with an 'Administrator' was to be called 'a troll', in-thread, by a character called Ferryman. There was no substantiation given to this accusation, nor was it done by PM. It appears to be because I dared offer a counter-view to those offered by the majority of posters on the Clinic Sky threads. In particular, I challenged the sloppy thinking. This particular individual had voiced strongly partisan opinions on that thread, and his main concern was that I rattled the cage and got the inmates restless.

I ran a gauntlet of taunts and insults, as well as mocking photographs, however the moment I descended to that level I found myself with an 'infraction' for being 'insulting'.

Was there a connection between the attitude of Ferryman and the unpleasant behaviours mentioned above? Of course.

We then have 'The Parrulo Incident', for which no satisfactory explanation has been given, in amongst the total misunderstanding by some of the nature of Martins complaint. The language used in Parrulo's original post, before it was inexplicably edited out by Susan, was surprising at the very least. Parrulo has also been a vociferous and partisan participant in the topics which he then moderated.

Coincidence? No.

Look, I realise that Admin are doing some work for the rest of us, and I agree that there may be compromises that have to be made. But let's just be honest about it and accept that some moderators act without impartiality.

I can work with that, in fact I already am. I don't take any of this stuff very seriously, but let's just be honest about it. If Moderation here, to every level, is unaccountable, then just admit it. If it isn't then questions raised deserve answers.

I think you have mentioned the two mods who have generally been the source of complaints. Interestingly enough they are also the two most recent mods (red flanders is not counted). I would say that one of the main reasons I left the forum for Velorooms was because of a particular comment one of the above mentioned mods made in a similar context to what Joachim is describing. I am fine with being bandied with insults by posters like the Hog and I am willing to defend my own ground and retort back.. but when a mod does it then what?

 

[Froome19]

.....And then you ignored that warning and got an infraction.
Sounds like you got very fairly treated.

Fairly treated indeed.
But not fair in comparison to other posters on here.

 

[BroDeal]

Complaining on moderators; seen that, done that, so boooooring.

It looks like the pro cycling forum regulars have decided to transplant to The Clinic their tactic of warring on each other by looking for any excuse to report a post to the mods.

Tell us mods. How many of longtime The Clinic denizens are continually reporting posts?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Fairly treated indeed.
But not fair in comparison to other posters on here.

On every forum, worldwide, there is something called 'seniority', some peeps are more equal than others. Deal with it, in the real world it is the same. Moderators also have their preferences, they are only human.

It looks like the pro cycling forum regulars have decided to transplant to The Clinic their tactic of warring on each other by looking for any excuse to report a post to the mods.

Tell us mods. How many of longtime The Clinic denizens are continually reporting posts?

Looks like that. I reported this post!

In Holland we call this time of year, when no cycling/news, cucumber time: Making Fuzz About Nothing.

 

[Froome19]

On every forum, worldwide, there is something called 'seniority', some peeps are more equal than others. Deal with it, in the real world it is the same. Moderators also have their preferences, they are only human.Looks like that. I reported this post!

In Holland we call this time of year, when no cycling/news, cucumber time: Making Fuzz About Nothing.

True

To the first point. That may be the case but this forum has this problem to an extent which most other forums I have visited do not have the problem. And anyways what is to stop us from trying to level the field more? Just because it "may" be the norm does not mean it has to be that way

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Fairly treated indeed.
But not fair in comparison to other posters on here.

How would you know what other posters have been given?

 

[BroDeal]

How would you know what other posters have been given?

Obviously he and his posse are the ones making most of the post reports and they are not getting the result they hope for.

 

[Joachim]

Ferryman let you know that they had removed some posts. You then answered and they said your trolling had caused a stir.

No, he let everyone know he had removed some posts. I don't know what the posts were because nothing had changed since my last look.

your trolling has caused a stir

...is what I take issue with. There was no explanation of what that trolling was, nor, as far as I can remember, were any of my posts removed. If they were trolling, why weren't they removed? Geddit yet?

It's curious though, isn't it, I haven't backed down to any of the frankly pathetic attempts to bully me off the forum, I haven't changed anything in the content of my views or how I express them and yet now the insults seem to have resided a little. It is pretty much limited to the most hardened forum-bellends.

Admittedly, I don't bother responding to them, which is standard practice when dealing with trolls (do not feed them ), but I did have a little experiment with reporting some of the ones that I knew would be sanctioned if I had made them. I'm pretty sure that, even you, Dr M, know what the outcome was.

Again, I'm not personally affronted by any of this, I'm just a big disappointed with the depth of bad-faith bulls*** I have to wade through here.

Game playing apart, you know it as well as I do.

 

[ChrisE]

And how would you define "better moderation"?

Susan

No moderation. Why don't you and your "even handed" buddies take a vacation for awhile.

 

[Froome19]

How would you know what other posters have been given?

It gets to a point where you see some posters banned and not others.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

No, he let everyone know he had removed some posts. I don't know what the posts were because nothing had changed since my last look.



...is what I take issue with. There was no explanation of what that trolling was, nor, as far as I can remember, were any of my posts removed. If they were trolling, why weren't they removed? Geddit yet?

No, I don't gettit yet.
We're any of your posts removed - your above is vague.
Simple yes or no is fine.

It's curious though, isn't it, I haven't backed down to any of the frankly pathetic attempts to bully me off the forum, I haven't changed anything in the content of my views or how I express them and yet now the insults seem to have resided a little.

Admittedly, I don't bother responding to them, which is standard practice when dealing with trolls (do not feed them ), but I did have a little experiment with reporting some of the ones that I knew would be sanctioned if I had made them. I'm pretty sure that, even you, Dr M, know what the outcome was.

Again, I'm not personally affronted by any of this, I'm just a big disappointed with the depth of bad-faith bulls*** I have to wade through here.

Game playing apart, you know it as well as I do.

How would I know this?
You're new here, this is only our second interaction - you know nothing about me, how would know what I know?
Although, I do know about game playing - I've seen it before.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It gets to a point where you see some posters banned and not others.

Joachim wasn't banned. You even said that the way it was handled was fair.
So, again - how do you know what infractions others got?

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

No moderation. Why don't you and your "even handed" buddies take a vacation for awhile.

ha ha. You trying to get me fired?

Susan

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

No moderation. Why don't you and your "even handed" buddies take a vacation for awhile.

Like u see, there is no moderation here now. You see, those nasty mods are doing their jobs just fine, just like in the Clinic.

 

[Froome19]

Joachim wasn't banned. You even said that the way it was handled was fair.
So, again - how do you know what infractions others got?

I was not talking about Joachim.
And no I do not know what infractions everbody gets.

But I do know what has got others banned in the past.