Moderators

[Susan Westemeyer]

Anything wrong with that?

No, and I didn't say there was anything wrong with it. I was just curious.

Susan

 

[Ferminal]

I can't recall ever being critical about the moderation policies. I made some suggestions in regards to the sign up system on the site, and I also made a couple of comments saying that the users should grow some skin instead of worrying so much about people trying to spoil the fun for other (and this was not a reply to anything which was posted by a moderator).

Constructive criticism is still criticism

i.e. #722

But it seems I misread it anyway /comprehension fail.

 

[The Hitch]

I actually haven't seen WL's real account post in a while, I guess posting as WL just got too fun.

Real account
What is Wl's real account?

 

[Cobblestoned]

Can admins/mods change usernames ?
Not possible in profile.

I want a "Dr.", since many German forumites have a doctortitle now.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

No, we can't change user names. And I demand to know that your doctor thesis is all original work.......

Susan

 

[skidmark]

Check out WL's first posts. Nothing like the irreverent and funny poster we now have. If memory serves he went head to head with TFF and RR and supported BPC while, God forbid, using correct spelling and intelligent phrasing. I don't blame anyone for initially thinking it was a BPC sockpuppet. I don't know what led to the change in approach but when it happened I wondered if WL was a CN staffer just messing about on the side.

Well the fact that his avatar was literally a sock puppet didn't really help either...

 

[Hugh Januss]

Well the fact that his avatar was literally a sock puppet didn't really help either...

That was the most awesome part.

 

[Escarabajo]

I have to say that the Moderators have really cleaned a lot of the bad stuff in this Forum. They have done a good job. Remember the days of constant insulting and fights.

I got upset with one of them the other day but at the end of the day they are doing a great job.

Thanks.

 

[Anonymous]

Any further such references will lead to a temporary ban.

Some things are not funny.

Susan

Ah, the first "If you write something I don't like, I will ban you" post on this thread. I went back to see how long it took, and who did it. Neither was a surprise.

My question is this: why do we not have an area to tee off on moderators? I mean, considering the power you guys have in every other thread, can you not take criticism anywhere without pulling out the banhammer?

I deserved the two weeks off for what I wrote because I included cursing. No question. (we wont mention the second one that started as a day and increased to a week all in the matter of a few hours, and following some back room discussions)...ANYWAY,

Why such thin skin? I have seen several forums where there is just such a place. The rules are not wide open, but the mods there recognized that...(this is going to shock some of the mods here) sometimes, you are not paragons of virtue, and are not always acting in an impassioned, neutral manner. If someone points that out colorfully, but without cursing, why not let it stand? A little Hitler reference never hurt anyone...(please note that I am referring to the subject of the post quoted above, and not making that reference myself...wouldn't want to offend sensitive sensibilities...)

 

[usedtobefast]

Ah, the first "If you write something I don't like, I will ban you" post on this thread. I went back to see how long it took, and who did it. Neither was a surprise.

My question is this: why do we not have an area to tee off on moderators? I mean, considering the power you guys have in every other thread, can you not take criticism anywhere without pulling out the banhammer?

I deserved the two weeks off for what I wrote because I included cursing. No question. (we wont mention the second one that started as a day and increased to a week all in the matter of a few hours, and following some back room discussions)...ANYWAY,

Why such thin skin? I have seen several forums where there is just such a place. The rules are not wide open, but the mods there recognized that...(this is going to shock some of the mods here) sometimes, you are not paragons of virtue, and are not always acting in an impassioned, neutral manner. If someone points that out colorfully, but without cursing, why not let it stand? A little Hitler reference never hurt anyone...(please note that I am referring to the subject of the post quoted above, and not making that reference myself...wouldn't want to offend sensitive sensibilities...)

i must say, that the threat of getting whacked, is discouraging. i don't support a free for all, but the current environment is a bit heavy handed.
we are adults and i hope we are civil to one another, but i also think too
much of anything, makes things very dull and uninteresting. that make the forum obsolete. i realize it is a thankless job, but i thank you all for it.
as my university English professor said,"less is more".

 

[Dallas_]

Friendly advice

Ah, the first "If you write something I don't like, I will ban you" post on this thread. I went back to see how long it took, and who did it. Neither was a surprise.

My question is this: why do we not have an area to tee off on moderators? I mean, considering the power you guys have in every other thread, can you not take criticism anywhere without pulling out the banhammer?

I deserved the two weeks off for what I wrote because I included cursing. No question. (we wont mention the second one that started as a day and increased to a week all in the matter of a few hours, and following some back room discussions)...ANYWAY,

Why such thin skin? I have seen several forums where there is just such a place. The rules are not wide open, but the mods there recognized that...(this is going to shock some of the mods here) sometimes, you are not paragons of virtue, and are not always acting in an impassioned, neutral manner. If someone points that out colorfully, but without cursing, why not let it stand? A little Hitler reference never hurt anyone...(please note that I am referring to the subject of the post quoted above, and not making that reference myself...wouldn't want to offend sensitive sensibilities...)

Thoughtforfood, from where I am standing on the sidelines, your attitude to the mods is aggressive and unwarranted. ...just saying my opinion.

Mods, feel free to delete this post.


1: You are a big number poster(over 7000) which means you enjoy your time on the CN Forum. A big post count does not preclude you from a permanent ban.

2: Cyclingnews is not obliged to have a Forum. The way the forum is presented(interface) is by far the best I have seen on the net.

3: Apart from Susan, all mods are unpaid employees. They do not need attitude such as yours.

4: Your signature is among the best. I would not like to see it permanently disappear.

5: I am only giving you friendly advice Thoughtforfood, so take my advice or leave it.


Concentrate on posting in the relevant forums, which includes abiding by the rules. That is, talk to your keyboard same as you speak to your mother.


have a good day Thoughtforfood

 

[Kodiak]

I'm on numerous forums and all have thier rules to abide by. Here's something most fail to recognize. It's free, so we have no right to complain, we're not paying for it and we reside here at the whim and will of the folks who run this board. There are many other boards to choose from. Feel free to head there if you can't play by the rules here.

 

[Anonymous]

I respectfully disagree with both of you. I have been and am a member of more than this forum, and several were cycling related. Overmoderation kills a forum. If you need to see evidence, I suggest RBR and DP. Freaking ghostland because of the moderation.

In the last few weeks, the moderation here has become more aggressive. Fine. That is there right. I am merely suggesting that there be one place where we can address them without worrying that we will get the banhammer for expressing views that would be over the line elsewhere in the forum. I am not advocating telling someone to "f**k off" as I did and was banned for (2 weeks). I deserved that. I am talking about being able to express emotional content and opinion that might exceed the dictates of that required on every other thread.

Hey, if I am over the line for that, fine. Kodiak seems to believe that I don't have the right to complain. I find that quaint and quite quizzical considering he is complaining about my suggestion. Oh, you only think its right to complain regarding people who can't ban you. Well, how very typical.

 

[pedaling squares]

There is merit to your point, although I thought that this section of the forum and in particular this thread was a place where we could question or critique forum moderation. In fairness, I haven't reviewed the thread to see whether they respond to questions, but off hand I think that is the case. Has anyone been banned for critiquing moderation? That's not rhetorical, I don't know the answer. When you've been banned you have been perhaps the only member who has said "hey I deserved that" so you seem to know more than most where and why they draw the line.

A highlight of your post was the alliteration with 'q'. Nice, although it lacked pyrotechnics.

 

[Francois the Postman]

TFF, you are right, overmoderation can kill a forum, but so can undermoderation, when you end up with same few regulars shout at each other to their heart's content, driving out others. Trolls and anti-trolls having a go at each other spoiling it for all. In that case you or others might still judge it as lively. Others will complain that it has gone to pot in the other direction. We certainly had those complaints when you and others were running around more freely, as you would prefer.

There is probably a balance to be struck. We do listen to your feedback. I guess we really disagree about the sweet spot. Our sweet spot, obviously, isn't yours.

But we are hardly a wasteland here, I think you are being a wee bit alarmist with the comparison you draw. A casual glance shows that the debate in clinic is spirited as ever. I can't really see any opinion that is stopped from being vented. And we're hardly jumping on every colourful expression too.

If anything, since we got a wee bit more aggressive about a couple of niggles, debate has actually improved, imo.

Speaking for myself, and not for the mods, I do agree with you that folk in this thread should be given a bit more room to vent, within reason. I also agreed with Susan (behind the scenes), that some things should not be said under any circumstance.

You agree that what you wrote was inappropriate enough to warrant the ban, so we are not arguing about that. I actually reinstated the post in full for the duration of the ban, and you have now removed it yourself (thanks, and the PM is appreciated).

If I have one problem with you, it is that you are expecting "perfect mods", whilst being far from perfect yourself. I find it hard to deal with people who complain profusely, but have a lower standard for themselves than they demand from others. That might just be me.

I do agree that as mods we have a special responsibility, so I agree with that aspect of your observation.

Without exception, all mods take their role here very seriously, and try their best. And we all get things wrong at times. In the end we are human too. We do try to rectify errors, and certainly reflect on issues that might have been handled better.

It also looks like you have singled out one mod for special criticism. I deal with her day in day out, and she certainly sets high standards for herself.

I do find it a bit ironic that this complaint comes after you were ticked off about an intervention by me, with one of your posts. I won't repeat your immediate response to that action here, but your assumption was that I was trying to cover something up, and that reaffirmed your picture of me and the mods here, and you raced to this thread to vent at me, rather colourful.

In the meantime I was writing you a PM that stated that you were right to a point to feel disgruntled, that my action wasn't "as model" as I'd like it to be, so I expressed my regret to you that circumstances forced me to be a bit blunter there then I aim to be. That day wasn't a good day for me, so if you could give us a pass for a change, that would be nice. That sort of comment.

What I didn't tell you is that I was in the middle of a stressful project with long hours of overtime, I had literally just been informed that a member of my family was in her last weeks, and I still came here, voluntarily, to deal with reported stuff, which is sometimes serious, but often petty spats between a few who have it in for each other. The mods were seriously short of hands in that period. Something we have been telling you guys for a while. [and, I'm glad to report, a situation that is resolved]. All of us were putting in more hours than "ideal".

The vast majority of interventions are functional, rather than personal. Maybe on a bad day we do get a bit more agitated with some posters here. In the end we are no robots either. I guess when you over step the well publicized marks from time to time, our interventions might appear personal.

Sorry, long ramble again. Just see it as a sign that we really don't ignore your opinion on this.

I am fairly sure it won't make you like our moderation style more, but it does underscore, to me, that you at times assume far more than is taking place, and act on your interpretation of things, rather than the reality of things. And your version of "what is going on" is, in my eyes, often far too negative and certainly not reflective of the reality I experience behind the scenes. Make of that what you will.

Maybe Food for Thought?

But yes, the point you raised, about being able to be a bit more emotional, within reason, has already been raised amongst the mods. people who come here to make a point are probably charged. We should be well aware of that' Likewise, they should be aware that they are still addressing real people from the safety of an impersonal and anonymous keyboard. This isn't a free for all area. The one thing I will say, if you are going to have a go at anyone, I am probably your safest bet, as I even reinstated what you, in retrospect, judged as beyond the acceptable (even here). And no, that is no invitation to find out where the lines are. Think before you post stands, even here. We, and that includes me, won't tolerate everything.

But I'd rather see you give us the benefit of the doubt a bit more often. It seems, sometimes, that is justified.

And no, this isn't meant to stop you from giving us feedback. We do listen, it certainly is taken on board when we self-reflect. Which we do. I guess we don't always agree.

 

[Francois the Postman]

Has anyone been banned for critiquing moderation? That's not rhetorical, I don't know the answer.

I still have to find the first example of any instance where someone was banned for an opinion [exceptions: persistent racism, homophobia, that sort of thing, and often repeated by the poster after warnings by mods that it wasn't welcome here - one or two extreme posts qualified for an outright ban].

No-one has been banned for saying they were unhappy with a mod, or a moderation policy.

A couple have been banned for the manner in which they stated their point. If they had made the same point otherwise, they wouldn't have been given a cooling off period.

We moderate attitude, not opinion.

 

[Kodiak]

I respectfully disagree with both of you. I have been and am a member of more than this forum, and several were cycling related. Overmoderation kills a forum. If you need to see evidence, I suggest RBR and DP. Freaking ghostland because of the moderation.

In the last few weeks, the moderation here has become more aggressive. Fine. That is there right. I am merely suggesting that there be one place where we can address them without worrying that we will get the banhammer for expressing views that would be over the line elsewhere in the forum. I am not advocating telling someone to "f**k off" as I did and was banned for (2 weeks). I deserved that. I am talking about being able to express emotional content and opinion that might exceed the dictates of that required on every other thread.

Hey, if I am over the line for that, fine. Kodiak seems to believe that I don't have the right to complain. I find that quaint and quite quizzical considering he is complaining about my suggestion. Oh, you only think its right to complain regarding people who can't ban you. Well, how very typical.

no, merely stating that if it's too hard to play by the rules then don't hesitate to hang out somewhere else. I'm not the one whining.

 

[Francois the Postman]

Kodiak, he is free to discuss moderation here, and certainly in the way he did it in that post.

Having a strong voice that disagrees helps to keep us honest.

And the reason why we have this area in the first place is to to get honestly held feedback. TFF and a few others have strong views on moderation, and that they aren't too happy with the current mod style is no reason to tell 'em to go elsewhere.

I hate those type of debate killers, I dislike bullying people out of a discussion. I'd rather let argumentation do the talking.

 

[Anonymous]

TFF, you are right, overmoderation can kill a forum, but so can undermoderation, when you end up with same few regulars shout at each other to their heart's content, driving out others. Trolls and anti-trolls having a go at each other spoiling it for all. In that case you or others might still judge it as lively. Others will complain that it has gone to pot in the other direction. We certainly had those complaints when you and others were running around more freely, as you would prefer.

There is probably a balance to be struck. We do listen to your feedback. I guess we really disagree about the sweet spot. Our sweet spot, obviously, isn't yours.

But we are hardly a wasteland here, I think you are being a wee bit alarmist with the comparison you draw. A casual glance shows that the debate in clinic is spirited as ever. I can't really see any opinion that is stopped from being vented. And we're hardly jumping on every colourful expression too.

If anything, since we got a wee bit more aggressive about a couple of niggles, debate has actually improved, imo.

Speaking for myself, and not for the mods, I do agree with you that folk in this thread should be given a bit more room to vent, within reason. I also agreed with Susan (behind the scenes), that some things should not be said under any circumstance.

You agree that what you wrote was inappropriate enough to warrant the ban, so we are not arguing about that. I actually reinstated the post in full for the duration of the ban, and you have now removed it yourself (thanks, and the PM is appreciated).

Yes, and I offer no excuse because I don't follow the "baby, I am sorry I hit you, but I had a bad day. Sincerely, Ike Turner" line of apology.

If I have one problem with you, it is that you are expecting "perfect mods", whilst being far from perfect yourself. I find it hard to deal with people who complain profusely, but have a lower standard for themselves than they demand from others. That might just be me. I do agree that as mods we have a special responsibility. Without exception, all mods take their role here very seriously, and try their best. And we all get things wrong at times. In the end we are human too.

Really? That is your problem? I am pretty sure I took my medicine without flinching. I generally do. The reason is that I know that I am frequently wrong, and never expect more from others. What I would like, as suggested, is a forum to express disagreement without having to worry about being banned unless I cross a line.

Point 2: Please show me where I have ever "complain[ed] profusely" about this subject...oh wait, I haven't. But don't let that bring you down off your soap box. Everyone needs a good rant...only sometimes they might consider their irony contained therein. Just a suggestion.

It also looks like you have singled out one mod for special criticism. I deal with her day in day out, and she certainly sets high standards for herself.

No, there are two. I addressed one here, and another in a PM.

I do find it a bit ironic that this complaint comes after you were ticked off about an intervention by me on one of your posts. I won't repeat your reply, but your assumption was that I was trying to cover something up, and that reaffirmed your picture of me, and you raced to this thread to vent at me.

I find it a bit presumptuous that you didn't consider my rant had to do with you. It didn't. It came after the BS ban instituted by Martin (that started out as one day, and extended to 1 week after a moderation conference) over something that, while juvenile, was just me trying to be funny. I didn't insult anyone other than public figures and one banned member...oh yea, and myself.

But hey, why let facts stop you now, you are on a roll.

In the meantime I was writing you a PM that stated that you were right to a point to feel disgruntled, that my action wasn't "as model" as I'd like it to be, so I expressed my regret to you that circumstances forced me to be a bit blunter there then I aim to be. That day wasn't a good day for me, so if you could give us a pass for a change, that would be nice.

I got that, and was unable to respond immediately. However, I did so immediately upon return.

What I didn't tell you is that I was in the middle of a stressful project with long hours of overtime, I had just been informed that a member of my family was in her last weeks, and I still came here, voluntarily, to deal with stuff here, sometimes serious, but mostly petty spats between a few who have it in for each other. The mods were seriously short of hands in that period. Something we have been telling you guys for a while. [and, I'm glad to report, a situation that is resolved].

I am fairly sure it won't make you like our moderation style more, but it does underscore, to me, that you at times assume far more than is taking place, and act on your interpretation of things, rather than the reality of things. And your version of "what is going on" is, in my eyes, often far too negative and not reflective of the reality.

Maybe Food for Thought?

But yes, the point you raised, about being able to be a bit more emotional, within reason, has already been raised amongst the mods. This isn't a free for all area. The one thing I will say, if you are going to have a go at anyone, I am probably your safest bet. And no, that is no invitation to find out where the lines are. Think before you post stands, even here. We, and that includes me, won't tolerate everything.

But I'd rather see you give us the benefit of the doubt a bit more often. It seems, sometimes, that is justified.

And no, this isn't meant to stop you from giving us feedback. We do listen, it certainly is taken on board when we self-reflect. Which we do. I guess we don't always agree.

I could tell you the story of my week too. It doesn't excuse my actions. I generally apologize and move on because nobody is perfect, we all screw up, and if more people accepted this, apologized, and moved on, I think we would all accept the foibles of others better. That is why I don't engage in the "I was an a$$ to you, and I am sorry. Now let me tell you why I was in a bad mood." line of apology. The second part is always a qualification, and inherently negates the previous section to some extent. If I apologize, I apologize. If I am wrong, I admit it and move on. If I say "yes," it is a yes. If I say "no," it is a no. It really simplifies interaction.

Honestly, I am a bit offended by the "Hey, I accept your apology...now let me tell you why I think you are a twit" gestalt of your post. But hey, maybe you were having a bad day?

 

[Anonymous]

no, merely stating that if it's too hard to play by the rules then don't hesitate to hang out somewhere else. I'm not the one whining.

No, you are being a coward. There's a difference. Glad to see you recognize the first part of the equation.

 

[Cal_Joe]

<major snip> I am talking about being able to express emotional content and opinion that might exceed the dictates of that required on every other thread. <end snip>

I would always welcome opinion regarding moderation - makes for a healthy forum. As far as "emotional content" goes - how hard is it to convey an opinion in a somewhat civilised manner that addresses moderation without flaming a mod or other bashing?

If you want to add to any discussion regarding moderation, post relevant links, add some thought to your posts, and, as others have noted, think before you post.

 

[gregod]

...

We moderate attitude, not opinion.

Why moderate attitude?

I for one try to remain calm and respectful, that is just my style/personality. But a whole forum of that would frankly be quite boring. Emoticons are a poor substitute for emotion. Course language, personal attacks, etc. offer a much more accurate portrait of who one is debating as well as their credibility. Moderating the attitude of the discourse gives credibility to cranks.

Keep free speech free.

 

[Anonymous]

I would always welcome opinion regarding moderation - makes for a healthy forum. As far as "emotional content" goes - how hard is it to convey an opinion in a somewhat civilised manner that addresses moderation without flaming a mod or other bashing?

If you want to add to any discussion regarding moderation, post relevant links, add some thought to your posts, and, as others have noted, think before you post.

I would rather riff off the cuff. I am not here to make friends and influence people. I am here to spout my methamphetamine fueled pontifications regarding all things Armstrong. I just need a couple of goddesses, and a bigger bank roll, and I can leave here to pursue my true passion: Getting off Meth and free basing Charlie Sheen. Most people couldn't handle it. I can.

 

[Anonymous]

P.S. I don't really smoke meth. This is all natural baby.

 

[Anonymous]

Why moderate attitude?

I for one try to remain calm and respectful, that is just my style/personality. But a whole forum of that would frankly be quite boring. Emoticons are a poor substitute for emotion. Course language, personal attacks, etc. offer a much more accurate portrait of who one is debating as well as their credibility. Moderating the attitude of the discourse gives credibility to cranks.

Keep free speech free.

I think Alito was wrong too.