Moderators

[hiero2]

Which of the three required an inside view?

Y not ALL 3?

You have to admit, having been there provides you with some expertise.

 

[Netserk]

Y not ALL 3?

You have to admit, having been there provides you with some expertise.

Having two eyes and a brain provide me with expertise

 

[LaFlorecita]

Having two eyes and a brain provide me with expertise

Some people on this forum seem to lack both

 

[Netserk]

Some people on this forum seem to lack both

Well at least on a functional level

 

[ChewbaccaD]

After the temporary closure of a thread, new rules, veiled threats, it is right back to where it was. A cluster F*CK of bickering among self righteous tools.

This forum sucks bad and the moderators are worse.

Valuable post.

 

[Granville57]

Parental Controls

RE: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=21884

Calm down son. How many are actually responding? They may read and get turned off by the usual posters making the thread both unreadable and maybe just a bit intimidating.

First off: Not fair.

I promised to take the discussion to the Mod thread, and you...um...is that baiting or trolling? Either way, you did pose a question. So here we are.

How many are responding? Likely the same percentage that respond to most threads versus numbers of views. I'm not so vain as to imagine that my sense of humor is so unique that no one else would understand the subtext of what had been unfolding in that thread. In fact, other members clearly shared the same perspective, hence the meme that was developing.

Was it difficult to read the thread? Yupper skipper. That was kind of the point. Not every thread has to be spoon fed to the reader. Nothing wrong with presenting an entertaining challenge to break up the monotony.

A handful of members were clearly enjoying themselves.
The thread was getting attention.
Nothing obscene or offensive had been posted.
It would likely run its natural course in due time anyway.
So why the fuss?

Speaking only for myself here:
We've had a boatload of snow dumped on us recently.
It's friggin' cold outside.
It's the weekend.
I've got some spare time on my hands.
That might explain, at least in part, my own participation in the thread, and the nature of that participation.
Why is that a problem?

The only possible reason that I could imagine for mod intervention in that most-glorious-of-threads would be because they felt the OP was being publicly mocked and insulted. The only problem with that reasoning (if that were, in fact, the reason) would be that no sane moderator in the Universe would take the OP seriously (even on Planet Vulcan. Especially on Planet Vulcan).

(I refuse to even acknowledge the possibility that intervention was the result of the thread being flagged, because addressing that...would likely get me banned.)

If I must deconstruct the OP, highlighting the transparent absurdity and lack of believability of it, then so be it. But I'd really rather not, as doing so pretty much negates the whole point of the thread as it unfolded. You see, the obviousness of it was, well, so obvious that detailing the contradictions would have been easy, but far less entertaining. It's one of those things that if you have to explain it, well...

Not to mention, by intervening in the thread with parental overtones, you've likely only set off more reactions to it than might have occurred otherwise.









Unless that was your intent.

Which I would then applaud.

Raucously.

 

[Granville57]

Oh I see.

Now the thread in question has been completely nuked.

OK. Well if you don't tell anyone about, then I won't tell anyone about it. Then we can all just pretend it never existed.

Awesome.

*sniped for size*

 

[mewmewmew13]

harmless..

Gvill 57 quote:
"A handful of members were clearly enjoying themselves.
The thread was getting attention.
Nothing obscene or offensive had been posted.
It would likely run its natural course in due time anyway."

agree

 

[Fatclimber]

Maybe it was just relocated to the "Epic Thread" thread that has yet to reveal itself. Maybe I got the title wrong and it includes "inappropriate" or "preposterous", either way I wouldn't care, but would love to check in on it in the future.

I chuckled more reading that thread than any other. Maybe not more chuckles/view than any other, but definitely more chuckles/post.

Leave us a throw-away thread like that and I bet people will be less inclined to muck up the real ones. Just my $.02.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Disagree with the last part - I think you are blaming bad poster manners on the mods. Don't quite see that.



Said like someone with an inside view.



That sounds like an excellent plan. In my opinion, of course.





Huh? You lost me here - first you say we need more mods, and then you agree with Januss who says we should have fewer. Do what?

Frankly, I researched mod internal stuff going back to the beginning. I've even contacted and had some convos with the old crews. And after year one, there has been a pretty consistent search for leadership and direction. Imo, of course.

I am not sure of what term to describe the different roles.
My 2 cents - have an overall Mod (or 2) who has complete control. They are the person who decides the longterm bans and effectively the direction of the forum.

Then there is a separate group - who have limited access, authority and ability.
These are the people on patrol - who are already part of the particular discussion. If possible - they do not get to have access to IPs, or need to worry about sock puppets or major offenders. Their role is really general housekeeping, so threads do not spiral out of control.
I think that there would be better chances of getting people to volunteer for those roles. If there were 3 or 4 people to cover the 3 major timezones they would end up having less to do, as potential problems get sorted quickly.

 

[Granville57]

Gvill 57 quote:

What's with the shorthand, kitty?

And did you forget how to "quote"?

 

[mewmewmew13]

What's with the shorthand, kitty?

And did you forget how to "quote"?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

harmless..

Gvill 57 quote:
"A handful of members were clearly enjoying themselves.
The thread was getting attention.
Nothing obscene or offensive had been posted.
It would likely run its natural course in due time anyway."

agree

I knew a mod would get wind of the frivolity and nuke it sooner or later. It was like death or taxes. A CN Mod will always overreact when anyone is having fun. I feel pretty sure that ebandit whined to the mods about it because he didn't understand what all the fuss was about. CN Moderators: Stupid moderation decisions-R-us. Fu*king ridiculous actually.

 

[Parrulo]

I am not sure of what term to describe the different roles.
My 2 cents - have an overall Mod (or 2) who has complete control. They are the person who decides the longterm bans and effectively the direction of the forum.

You mean like having a couple admins and the rest being moderators?!!!! I wonder where i have heard that before . . .

also lol at complaining about an overreaction by using a big font and bold letters AKA the second calmest way to express oneself on the internet right after all caps, big font and bold letters.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Oh I see.

Now the thread in question has been completely nuked.

OK. Well if you don't tell anyone about, then I won't tell anyone about it. Then we can all just pretend it never existed.

Awesome.

*sniped for size*

Speaking as someone who was only mildly amused by the thing and didn't join in the r-tard fest of posting stuff that was by design almost as witless as the OP, making the whole thing disappear was an awesome choice of over-reaction. At a time when may posters are complaining about the heavy handed/inconsistent moderation, upping the ante by nuking an entire thread was just plain genius. Kudos.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

You mean like having a couple admins and the rest being moderators?!!!! I wonder where i have heard that before . . .

also lol at complaining about an overreaction by using a big font and bold letters AKA the second calmest way to express oneself on the internet right after all caps, big font and bold letters.

If that were the reason, you'd have a point. As it stands, it was homage to the thread itself.

Jumping to assumptions: Requirement 1 of the CN Moderation Team

 

[Parrulo]

I was joking as i don't even know what thread you are on about, but ok . . .

 

[ebandit]

soz!

I knew a mod would get wind of the frivolity and nuke it sooner or later. It was like death or taxes. A CN Mod will always overreact when anyone is having fun. I feel pretty sure that ebandit whined to the mods about it because he didn't understand what all the fuss was about. CN Moderators: Stupid moderation decisions-R-us. Fu*king ridiculous actually.

it's my fault.............no problem my shoulders are broad

forgive me for offending thee

Mark L

 

[Granville57]

At a time when may posters are complaining about the heavy handed/inconsistent moderation, upping the ante by nuking an entire thread was just plain genius. Kudos.

OK, I can't disagree with that. From a pure trolling perspective, it just might contain a bit of genius, if that were the intent. We may never know though.

What the mods failed to see, however, was that deep beneath the cynical layer of comedy, I was also attempting to make a serious point about how annoying it is when someone quotes an excessively lengthy post, in its entirety, immediately after the post itself.

I mean, it's not like we don't have the ability to simply "look up." It adds clutter to a thread, and is generally unnecessary. But it happens, repeatedly.

Now, if I were to point that out as it happens, it would likely come off as being more mean-spirited than I would prefer. Not to mention that the very act of doing so would be slightly derailing to the thread itself. Or some other member would likely chime in (because someone always does ) in defense of such idiotic quoting, thereby derailing the thread even further.

But now we no longer have a shining example to point to that would have perfectly illustrated the potential dangers of quoting 10,000 character missives in their entirety.

Oh well. I'll just have to come up with another way of making my point.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You mean like having a couple admins and the rest being moderators?!!!! I wonder where i have heard that before . . .

also lol at complaining about an overreaction by using a big font and bold letters AKA the second calmest way to express oneself on the internet right after all caps, big font and bold letters.

The titles Admin/Mods do exist, but in name only - and quite frankly, I have no idea of the distinction here on this forum.
But it is rather clear that it does not work, as your follow up post shows.

 

[Netserk]

The titles Admin/Mods do exist, but in name only - and quite frankly, I have no idea of the distinction here on this forum.
But it is rather clear that it does not work, as your follow up post shows.

Of course not. If you want to know the difference I guess you can google it.

 

[Netserk]

OK, I can't disagree with that. From a pure trolling perspective, it just might contain a bit of genius, if that were the intent. We may never know though.

What the mods failed to see, however, was that deep beneath the cynical layer of comedy, I was also attempting to make a serious point about how annoying it is when someone quotes an excessively lengthy post, in its entirety, immediately after the post itself.

I mean, it's not like we don't have the ability to simply "look up." It adds clutter to a thread, and is generally unnecessary. But it happens, repeatedly.

Now, if I were to point that out as it happens, it would likely come off as being more mean-spirited than I would prefer. Not to mention that the very act of doing so would be slightly derailing to the thread itself. Or some other member would likely chime in (because someone always does ) in defense of such idiotic quoting, thereby derailing the thread even further.

But now we no longer have a shining example to point to that would have perfectly illustrated the potential dangers of quoting 10,000 character missives in their entirety.

Oh well. I'll just have to come up with another way of making my point.

Dude, you could point it out through the report system

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Of course not. If you want to know the difference I guess you can google it.

I could.
Absolutely - I could.

It is exactly this sort of attitude that has set the tone of the forum.
I should not have to google anything to understand the general workings of a forum that I am a member.

Will google assist in showing was it mods or admins that were asleep at the wheel for most of the weekend?

 

[Netserk]

I could.
Absolutely - I could.

It is exactly this sort of attitude that has set the tone of the forum.
I should not have to google anything to understand the general workings of a forum that I am a member.

Will google assist in showing was it mods or admins that were asleep at the wheel for most of the weekend?

I'm not a mod, homie.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I'm not a mod, homie.

I know you aren't, and I made no reference to your current or former roles.
You popped in with a meaningless contribution.