Moderators

[Cyivel]

This was on about page 300 yesterday.

What da heck!

 

[Joachim]

Joachim has noted taking less abuse of late than in their initial posts on the board

Yes, I have, but that isn't due to any moderation. The abusive posts are still there. What interests me most is that I had a raging torrent of abuse, sneering comments, words like 'troll', 'shill'etc etc, the old troll photo of a dweeby geek at his pc that we've all seen years ago, and yet I was labelled a troll by a mod in-thread and told to 'tone it down'. Don't get me wrong, I'm not offended by any of the stuff that I've just listed. I know there are assparts on every forum, I just expect them to be dealt with by mods not legitimised by them.

Why has the abuse backed off? Probably because I've worked out who the biggest c**ks on the forum are and ignored them.

Happy New Year!!

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Yes, I have, but that isn't due to any moderation. The abusive posts are still there. What interests me most is that I had a raging torrent of abuse, sneering comments, words like 'troll', 'shill'etc etc, the old troll photo of a dweeby geek at his pc that we've all seen years ago, and yet I was labelled a troll by a mod in-thread and told to 'tone it down'. Don't get me wrong, I'm not offended by any of the stuff that I've just listed. I know there are assparts on every forum, I just expect them to be dealt with by mods not legitimised by them.

Why has the abuse backed off? Probably because I've worked out who the biggest c**ks on the forum are and ignored them.

Happy New Year!!

But you said up thread that you didn't have a post removed, that a mod came in and all seems calm after and that you got an infraction later.
Perhaps the mod in question sent many infractions to others, more serious ones.
You should be thanking the mod for their timely intervention.

 

[pedaling squares]

Also, are you sure you would like me to start correcting you when you're wrong?

Come on, Doc. Whether or not he replies, you are going pick ideas, sentences, nuances, even single words out of his posts and ask a series of questions that he will probably ignore. You will then accuse him of dodging your questions and changing the issue. It's been that way for thousands of arguments in dozens of threads. It's practically written into the CN software code. It drives everyone nuts, but it's inevitable. So don't ask, just go ahead with the nitpicking.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Come on, Doc. Whether or not he replies, you are going pick ideas, sentences, nuances, even single words out of his posts and ask a series of questions that he will probably ignore. You will then accuse him of dodging your questions and changing the issue. It's been that way for thousands of arguments in dozens of threads. It's practically written into the CN software code. It drives everyone nuts, but it's inevitable. So don't ask, just go ahead with the nitpicking.

This one is nice. Hahaha. I hope the doc will not analyze that...

 

[Joachim]

But you said up thread that you didn't have a post removed, that a mod came in and all seems calm after and that you got an infraction later.

Nice try there. The mod's choice of words encouraged the idiots, it didn't discourage them. They've backed off because I've stuck the idiots on ignore. Like any feeble-minded forum bullies, when they don't get the reward they seek from their actions, they go elsewhere. It's Pavlovian.

Perhaps the mod in question sent many infractions to others, more serious ones.
You should be thanking the mod for their timely intervention.

That's a non-sequitur. If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle. And with that, it's adieu from me to you.

 

[Ferminal]

. . . Everything in moderation, including moderation.

You always win

 

[Ferminal]

This was on about page 300 yesterday.

What da heck!

User CP -> Edit Options -> Number of Posts to Show Per Page

Make it 40, less shock!

 

[The Hitch]

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

Still waiting on some.detail for.this. Which posters were banned and which posters weren't?

Yes, I have, but that isn't due to any moderation. The abusive posts are still there. What interests me most is that I had a raging torrent of abuse, sneering comments, words like 'troll', 'shill'etc etc, the old troll photo of a dweeby geek at his pc that we've all seen years ago, and yet I was labelled a troll by a mod in-thread and told to 'tone it down'. Don't get me wrong, I'm not offended by any of the stuff that I've just listed. I know there are assparts on every forum, I just expect them to be dealt with by mods not legitimised by them.

Why has the abuse backed off? Probably because I've worked out who the biggest c**ks on the forum are and ignored them.

Happy New Year!!

In one of your first contributions to the forum you informed one of the most.sensible and well mannered posters from the sky sceptic side- will10, who in his few contributions to the sky threads generally provides sources, that you were putting him on your ignore list and gave absolutely no justification for why you were announcing this to the boards.

Yet despite announcing that the most respectable of posters on the sky sceptic side is still too disagreeable for your liking you find no trouble going toe.to toe with the hog or plucking out some.comment from months before you joined the forum to taunt dear wiggo with.

And you are surprised some people reacted the way you describe above

Rightly or wrongly new clinic posters showing off encyclopediic knowledge of previous discussions in the clinic does set off red lights in many posters thoughts for obvious reasons. And yes i know you've explained that by saying you read the forum.long before you joined.

Some of your future actions haven't helped either. You complain about " torrents of abuse" directed at sky fans implicating pretty much everyone who takes the sceptic attitude to sky as playing some.role, by refusing to name the culprits and claiming its a widespread phenomenon. but when it is suggested that you may want to bring the abuse to.mod attention you state that it is your right not to.

Do you want to stop the abuse directed at you or do you just want to cause chaos in the mod thread? Because if your.motive is indeed the former then you might want to consider if your actions are.not.in fact leading to the latter.

 

[Joachim]

The problem with you guys is you are locked away listening to each other reinforcing each others views to such an extent that when somebody like myself challenges these views, analytically, you genuinely believe it is trolling because you can't countenance any views other than your own. It's like a troop of chimpanzees jumping up and down when a stranger appears because they feel their hierarchy has been threatened.

You actually need people to challenge your views...not just live in your little echo chamber.

What I experienced was an sneering attempt to treat me with derision, and yes, after a while I applied the same tactics and watched the people squeal. I don't think you'll find much in the way of insults to others in my posts in contrast to what was flung my way. There are a few posters who I'm not going to waste any time on, either because they are abusive, boring or just plain stupid. To my utter surprise, two of the posters who I had anticipated (from reading their posts prior to joining) would be soon on that list have proved to be engaging, thoughtful and interesting...Liberty Seguros, and BroDeal. What I would simply say, is if you don't see any value in what I say then don't engage.

I've learnt some things whilst I've been here, and I always try to see things from others points of view, but there is a seam of bad logic that runs through some people's posts that I'm going to challenge. As for thehog, well, I'm just pointing out his fallacies. Maybe I'm feeding a troll but you'll have to give me a while to work out who the trolls are, too.

As for this thread, I've made my point. It needed making, and remember it was your good self who advised me to take action. I'm not going to name names, and frankly life's too short to keep pressing the mod report button. I think I've dealt with it myself effectively.

Edit: I haven't been clear. Im not tarring everyone from the sceptic side with the same brush. Far from it, the d1cks are in the minority. Pretty much everyone who is still here is polite, engaging and worthwhile

 

[Joachim]

In one of your first contributions to the forum you informed one of the most.sensible and well mannered posters from the sky sceptic side- will10, who in his few contributions to the sky threads generally provides sources, that you were putting him on your ignore list and gave absolutely no justification for why you were announcing this to the boards.

Yet despite announcing that the most respectable of posters on the sky sceptic side is still too disagreeable for your liking you find no trouble going toe.to toe with the hog or plucking out some.comment from months before you joined the forum to taunt dear wiggo with.
.

Ah, the old 'appeal to authority' tactic.

I couldn't care less who 'will10' is, nor do I care what your opinion of him is, frankly, but when somebody posts this...

Is this for real? The new Sky fanboy go-to line is "no-one knew Leinders' past when Brailsford hired him"?

....as their very first response to my very first post, they aren't getting any more of my time.

thehog is a different kettle of fish. He remains polite whilst pursuing his ridiculous lines of argument. He's enjoying himself, inoffensively, and to be honest I've developed a certain appreciation of him.

That is as far as I'm going to go 'naming names', as it will only inflame. Maybe that is what you are wanting. After all, you need to be honest about your angle in this.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I couldn't care less who 'will10' is, nor do I care what your opinion of him is, frankly, but when somebody posts this...

As a selfproclaimed longtime lurker you could have known will10 is quite a well constructive poster. And, often in the Clinic Sky threads. Since you have been posting for 99% in those, well, you fill in the blanks...

as it will only inflame

You have been inflaming the mods 'lack of credibility' the last days so why stop now?

 

[ChrisE]

I think the better solution is that you start a moderation free cycling forum. Then you can post in the style you prefer, and not have to deal with moderation and bans.

If your posting style is the one most people prefer, I would imagine your forum would take off like gangbusters.

At one time Glenn and I actually considered doing this, but I am too lazy and it would cut into my fishing and golf. I think it would be a good idea; the whiny crybabies on the forum and mods that pander to them based only upon the posters position have been the death of other cycling forums before.

I actually prefer "no style", and I have stated on here numerous time I am against bans and moderation. I guess my libertarian views come thru on this....whacks will start being ignored, idiots will get the insulting they deserve. That would be much easier than all of this BS, no?

 

[The Hitch]

The problem with you guys is you are locked away listening to each other reinforcing each others views to such an extent that when somebody like myself challenges these views, analytically, you genuinely believe it is trolling because you can't countenance any views other than your own. It's like a troop of chimpanzees jumping up and down when a stranger appears because they feel their hierarchy has been threatened.

You actually need people to challenge your views...not just live in your little echo chamber.

Now this is trolling.

Lets be clear, you complain that unidentified posters are abusive.to.you,

Yet you then offer an ugly psychiatric evaluation of a section of the forum which compares our behaviour to chimpanzees claims that we are incapable of rational thought, that we would forget the sky arguments we have read thousands of.times he moment you stopped repeating them to.us like to.children.

And if that wasnt enough you conclude that we are so locked away from.reason that we can't handle "analytical" challenges.to our opinion.
.
Most posters on the sky side.NEVER reply to anyone from our own side. The discussion continues past 10 000 past 11 000 posts because it is a DISCUSSION between one side and another where posters who believe sky are dirty reply to posters who believe.sky are clean and vice versa.

Your claim that posters who believe sky.are dirty actually just want to talk.to.themselves, live in their own world, can't handle.the fact that people hold different opinions and that they are mentally incapable of taking part in a discussion is clear.flaming baiting and trolling.

I couldn't care less who 'will10' is, nor do I care what your opinion of him is, frankly, but when somebody posts this...

....as their very first response to my very first post, they aren't getting any more of my time.

Will.was responding to you? i don't see any quotations. And i count no less than 3 posters who made the comment before you did.

 

[ebandit]

discuss

originally posted by The Hitch;1102422]Now this is trolling.

after all your the expert hitch

what's this about 'sides?'.......................................

from the dark side we have.................and now the 'good' guys

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Now this is trolling.

No, he is just genuine, doesn't want to insult, yet the Clinically Insane are I quote:

* chimps
* abusive, boring or just plain stupid
* the d1cks
* assparts
* the idiots

And last but not least, the mods cannot be trusted.

Please. Stop crying and take a good look in the mirror.

 

[Joachim]

Now this is trolling.

Lets be clear, you complain that unidentified posters are abusive.to.you,

Yet you then offer an ugly psychiatric evaluation of a section of the forum which compares our behaviour to chimpanzees claims that we are incapable of rational thought, that we would forget the sky arguments we have read thousands of.times he moment you stopped repeating them to.us like to.children.

And if that wasnt enough you conclude that we are so locked away from.reason that we can't handle "analytical" challenges.to our opinion.
.
Most posters on the sky side.NEVER reply to anyone from our own side. The discussion continues past 10 000 past 11 000 posts because it is a DISCUSSION between one side and another where posters who believe sky are dirty reply to posters who believe.sky are clean and vice versa.

Your claim that posters who believe sky.are dirty actually just want to talk.to.themselves, live in their own world, can't handle.the fact that people hold different opinions and that they are mentally incapable of taking part in a discussion is clear.flaming baiting and trolling.


Will.was responding to you? i don't see any quotations. And i count no less than 3 posters who made the comment before you did.

...and that, my friend, is a text-book example of the straw-man argument. Exaggeration and misrepresentation of an opponent's argument in order to make your position look more reasonable, and his easier to attack.

Keep going, I've nearly got a full-house on my bingo card.

Try this one next:

(∃x ∈ S : φ(x)) → (∀x ∈ S : φ(x))


EDIT: Ach! you were too late will10 has just gone for it on the Basso thread, so it's......aaaa.....BINGO!!!

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Closing my "Lance owes the Clinic an apology" was complete bull****. That was the greatest thread in a long time. This place ****ing sucks.

 

[BroDeal]

Closing my "Lance owes the Clinic an apology" was complete bull****. That was the greatest thread in a long time. This place ****ing sucks.

They also closed the "This forum blows" thread, a thread every forum should have so people can complain about things.

 

[ElChingon]

They also closed the "This forum blows" thread, a thread every forum should have so people can complain about things.

They also closed the sock puppet thread which they actually used to ban people, till

 

[ebandit]

trouble ahead

They also closed the sock puppet thread which they actually used to ban people, till

trouble was............members claims were not based on fact

i received lifetime ban based on accusations................which i proved to
be unfounded

thread became a location to lambast unpopular members

no need for a 'this forum blows' thread.............there are many threads to
complain in..................as if clinic members would miss the chance

chewie............'a lance needs to apologise thread' is not such a bad idea
but why? lampoon previous and existing members

 

[ChewbaccaD]

trouble was............members claims were not based on fact

i received lifetime ban based on accusations................which i proved to
be unfounded

thread became a location to lambast unpopular members

no need for a 'this forum blows' thread.............there are many threads to
complain in..................as if clinic members would miss the chance

chewie............'a lance needs to apologise thread' is not such a bad idea
but why? lampoon previous and existing members

Because they deserve lampooning.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

trouble was............members claims were not based on fact

i received lifetime ban based on accusations................which i proved to
be unfounded

thread became a location to lambast unpopular members

no need for a 'this forum blows' thread.............there are many threads to
complain in..................as if clinic members would miss the chance

chewie............'a lance needs to apologise thread' is not such a bad idea
but why? lampoon previous and existing members

Because they deserve lampooning.

Sup?

I heard that there was supposed to be some news on Lance this week??? What happened?

 

[ebandit]

?

Sup?

I heard that there was supposed to be some news on Lance this week??? What happened?

i heard him state that he had lost faith in his favourite sport..............

+ he will never again look to the cn forum for information

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

And how would you define "better moderation"?

Susan

Step one - be less arrogant and trigger happy
Step two - read threads fully before wading in with threats of bans.
Step three - make sure you understand the arguments being made before threatening posters
Step four - understand that banning or threatening people for accusing someone of trolling, while letting trolls troll is a really stupid way to moderate
Step five - understand that accusations of trolling are not always motivated by the fact that someone disagrees with a poster.
Step six - take the concerns of posters more seriously.
Step seven - explain your decisions more clearly and be more transparent and honest.
step eight - accept the validity of criticism. If everyone is criticising you it does not mean you are doing a good job, and stop trying to claim that it does. It means you are doing a very bad job.

In short - calmer, more intelligent and thoughtful moderation would be a small but significant step forward.