Moderators

[ILovecycling]

Well said. Do these violators every get sanctioned?

I think blocked ip adress,maybe airstream case

but we are OT

 

[Eshnar]

The fact that the poster isn't there. Whats the point in writing a response to someone in the clinic if they don't go and check it out.

And its not me that wants to respond. I know the poster's game and discussing it with them is just "feeding" them and a waste of time. But there are others who clearly had responses they wanted to give and have been denied that by the way the poster played it - posting the bait knowing it would get deleted just as responses started to come in ultimately frustrating his target audience even more.

uhm... if you accuse someone of trolling, you should at least be consistent and don't do his/her game, right? Here you're basically compaining that you can't feed trolls. Well, tough luck.

 

[the sceptic]

what was the trolling post? I dont see anything.

 

[Eshnar]

what was the trolling post? I dont see anything.

well, of course you don't see it anymore. Duh. Anyway it was in the Contador thread.

 

[Red Rick]

what was the trolling post? I dont see anything.

Basically, Hitch made a post in which he briefly mentioned Contador getting massively booed during the 2011 Tour team presentation. The post praised Contador's effort during that Tour, especially the 90km telegraphe attack, but Walkman thought it was necessary to say that it was a great thing that Contador was banned at the team presentation cause he's a huge doper.

That started a discussion in which I, Miburo, and others tried to call out Walkman for his bs

 

[sniper]

Mods,

I was thinking, would it be better if there was a separate thread like a "JV Q&A" one which could be stickied in the clinic. A number of questions were posed in the other thread and they get lost in the multiple discussions that have been going back and forth. Libertine Seguros had this problem with a good constructive question and myself and a few others also.

JV could come in as he pleases and respond when he can. We can still have the other discussion thread but at least questions won't get lost this way.

I think it would be much better for him and the forum in general.

+1, this was an excellent idea and long overdue.

 

[stutue]

My take on all of this is that moderation isn't a forum issue, it is an issue purely with the Clinic. From what I can see, most of the bans result from posts made in the clinic. I'm not critiscing the moderation, I wouldn't want to do it, but I do think there are quite a few posters kidding themselves about themselves. There are some very vocal members who portray themselves as the bastions of the forum but are playing exactly the same game as the people they are criticising by baiting and attacking en masse.

Its kind of pathetic, as is the faux-outrage and moral grandstanding about doping. In the grand scheme of things pro-cycling is just a commercial circus. It isn't some sort of athletic meritocracy. Even without the doping, races are still bought and sold. If people want to be outraged and spend their time and energy 'campaigning', consider putting their efforts into something that actually matters to people's lives....there are numerous areas.

 

[the sceptic]

My take on all of this is that moderation isn't a forum issue, it is an issue purely with the Clinic. From what I can see, most of the bans result from posts made in the clinic. I'm not critiscing the moderation, I wouldn't want to do it, but I do think there are quite a few posters kidding themselves about themselves. There are some very vocal members who portray themselves as the bastions of the forum but are playing exactly the same game as the people they are criticising by baiting and attacking en masse.

Its kind of pathetic, as is the faux-outrage and moral grandstanding about doping. In the grand scheme of things pro-cycling is just a commercial circus. It isn't some sort of athletic meritocracy. Even without the doping, races are still bought and sold. If people want to be outraged and spend their time and energy 'campaigning', consider putting their efforts into something that actually matters to people's lives....there are numerous areas.

Maybe you should take your own advice and go away then?

 

[mrhender]

My take on all of this is that moderation isn't a forum issue, it is an issue purely with the Clinic. From what I can see, most of the bans result from posts made in the clinic. I'm not critiscing the moderation, I wouldn't want to do it, but I do think there are quite a few posters kidding themselves about themselves. There are some very vocal members who portray themselves as the bastions of the forum but are playing exactly the same game as the people they are criticising by baiting and attacking en masse.

Its kind of pathetic, as is the faux-outrage and moral grandstanding about doping. In the grand scheme of things pro-cycling is just a commercial circus. It isn't some sort of athletic meritocracy. Even without the doping, races are still bought and sold. If people want to be outraged and spend their time and energy 'campaigning', consider putting their efforts into something that actually matters to people's lives....there are numerous areas.

You do know this is the moderators thread, not the "what I think of other posters thread" ?

 

[stutue]

What lies at the heart of most necessitation of moderation?

Answer: see above.

 

[The Hitch]

uhm... if you accuse someone of trolling, you should at least be consistent and don't do his/her game, right? Here you're basically compaining that you can't feed trolls. Well, tough luck.

I'm complaining that I can't feed trolls ? Where did you get that. I didn't respond myself to the post and said myself that I know you had to delete the discussion.

I'm saying that moderating plays into the hands if this type of trolling by stepping into the discussion after they had said their piece but before the none trolls can respond.

I'll post an illustration.

Walkman : contador is a doper but all my favourite riders aren't since they didn't test positive nananananana.
Contador fans :
Mod: no more talk on this subject
Contador fans:
Troll:

As such unless the mod sanctions the troll he is helping the troll to troll.

 

[Granville57]

Mods,

I was thinking, would it be better if there was a separate thread like a "JV Q&A" one which could be stickied in the clinic. A number of questions were posed in the other thread and they get lost in the multiple discussions that have been going back and forth. Libertine Seguros had this problem with a good constructive question and myself and a few others also.

JV could come in as he pleases and respond when he can. We can still have the other discussion thread but at least questions won't get lost this way.

I think it would be much better for him and the forum in general.

The problem I have with this is that it seems to frame Vaughters as The Clinic's circus monkey.

Read here!

Post There!

Discuss here!

Debate there!

I'm just not following the reason for this separation of Church and Thread.

Most conversations tend to ebb and flow anyway. I don't see where the clear lines of demarcation between these two threads is going to be drawn. As it is, it can be time consuming to track down older posts in the JV thread for reference or further questioning. Having two threads will only complicate this further. Having to remember where this or that was said will only dilute, and further complicate, the discussion, I believe.

 

[Red Rick]

I'm complaining that I can't feed trolls ? Where did you get that. I didn't respond myself to the post and said myself that I know you had to delete the discussion.

I'm saying that moderating plays into the hands if this type of trolling by stepping into the discussion after they had said their piece but before the none trolls can respond.

I'll post an illustration.

Walkman : contador is a doper but all my favourite riders aren't since they didn't test positive nananananana.
Contador fans :
Mod: no more talk on this subject
Contador fans:
Troll:

As such unless the mod sanctions the troll he is helping the troll to troll.

So much this.

The guy admitted to being warned by the mods, but is still implying clinic **** in the Contador thread. He doesn't listen when other people tell him to go to the clinic, cause the clinic prolly views his heroes as dopers too. The guy is a massive troll

 

[Benotti69]

..........

Its kind of pathetic, as is the faux-outrage and moral grandstanding about doping.........

And yet you cannot but help indulge yourself...........

 

[stutue]

I think you'll struggle to find a post where I've expressed any outrage about cyclists doping. In the grand scheme of things it isn't even a blip on my radar.

But that is by the by. I'm just trying to point out why the moderators have a very difficult task, made more difficult by the bad faith of some of the people they are moderating. And no, funnily enough, I wouldn't include you in that. I think you believe what you say.

 

[sniper]

The problem I have with this is that it seems to frame Vaughters as The Clinic's circus monkey.

Read here!

Post There!

Discuss here!

Debate there!

I'm just not following the reason for this separation of Church and Thread.

Most conversations tend to ebb and flow anyway. I don't see where the clear lines of demarcation between these two threads is going to be drawn. As it is, it can be time consuming to track down older posts in the JV thread for reference or further questioning. Having two threads will only complicate this further. Having to remember where this or that was said will only dilute, and further complicate, the discussion, I believe.

i see your point.
otoh,
calling JV out on halftruths and contradictions (as we've done plentifully e.g. with Walsh, without too many complaints) is deemed politically incorrect by some posters as we are then in risk of chasing JV away (which in itself is a valid point)
now, with the split, all politically correct debate can go in the sticky-thread.
the rawer uncut stuff can go in the new thread.
posters who don't like the uncut stuff can skip that thread and remain active in the other.
that said, i wouldn't mind if they are merged again either.

 

[Netserk]

i see your point.
otoh,
calling JV out on halftruths and contradictions (as we've done plentifully e.g. with Walsh, without too many complaints) is deemed politically incorrect by some posters as we are then in risk of chasing JV away (which in itself is a valid point)
now, with the split, all politically correct debate can go in the sticky-thread.
the rawer uncut stuff can go in the new thread.
posters who don't like the uncut stuff can skip that thread and remain active in the other.
that said, i wouldn't mind if they are merged again either.

And when JV posts in the other thread? He is free to post whereever he wants to, right?

 

[the sceptic]

I think you'll struggle to find a post where I've expressed any outrage about cyclists doping. In the grand scheme of things it isn't even a blip on my radar.

But that is by the by. I'm just trying to point out why the moderators have a very difficult task, made more difficult by the bad faith of some of the people they are moderating. And no, funnily enough, I wouldn't include you in that. I think you believe what you say.

So you dont like clinic posters, and you dont really care about doping. Yet you spend 90% of your time posting in the clinic and mostly arguing with people who think sky are doping. Most strange.

 

[stutue]

If you want to get personal take it to PM.

I'm not getting into petty bickering with you in public.

 

[sniper]

And when JV posts in the other thread? He is free to post whereever he wants to, right?

of course.

the big plus is that we will be spared posts like these

Why all the mockery from Digger and Sniper? I think JV provides some interesting data points whether you believe him or not. No need to drive off an inside viewpoint with insults.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

So you dont like clinic posters, and you dont really care about doping. Yet you spend 90% of your time posting in the clinic and mostly arguing with people who think sky are doping. Most strange.

Or telling them to go away and do something else.

Like that's gonna work. el oh el.

Goodness. The temerity of some people.

 

[Race Radio]

So you dont like clinic posters, and you dont really care about doping. Yet you spend 90% of your time posting in the clinic and mostly arguing with people who think sky are doping. Most strange.

Post, not poster

 

[hiero2]

I'm complaining that I can't feed trolls ? Where did you get that. I didn't respond myself to the post and said myself that I know you had to delete the discussion.

I'm saying that moderating plays into the hands if this type of trolling by stepping into the discussion after they had said their piece but before the none trolls can respond.

I'll post an illustration.

Walkman : contador is a doper but all my favourite riders aren't since they didn't test positive nananananana.
Contador fans :
Mod: no more talk on this subject
Contador fans:
Troll:

As such unless the mod sanctions the troll he is helping the troll to troll.

First - your example. Doesn't quite follow logically, since the "troll" is only mentioned in retrospect. I'll have to guess that you are positioning the fictional character "Walkman" as the "Troll".

As for you protestations of innocence? Ah, never mind, I shouldn't go there. But I will say I think the mods are doing a pretty good job.

The problem I have with this is that it seems to frame Vaughters as The Clinic's circus monkey.

Read here!

Post There!

Discuss here!

Debate there!

I'm just not following the reason for this separation of Church and Thread.

. . . Having two threads will only complicate this further. Having to remember where this or that was said will only dilute, and further complicate, the discussion, I believe.

Amusing hyperbole. I like it.

 

[RownhamHill]

The problem I have with this is that it seems to frame Vaughters as The Clinic's circus monkey.

Read here!

Post There!

Discuss here!

Debate there!

I'm just not following the reason for this separation of Church and Thread.

Most conversations tend to ebb and flow anyway. I don't see where the clear lines of demarcation between these two threads is going to be drawn. As it is, it can be time consuming to track down older posts in the JV thread for reference or further questioning. Having two threads will only complicate this further. Having to remember where this or that was said will only dilute, and further complicate, the discussion, I believe.

So he's not a performing monkey, but splitting the threads means it's harder for you to keep track of his posts?

 

[Granville57]

So he's not a performing monkey, but splitting the threads means it's harder for you to keep track of his posts?

My point is simply that there seems to be the implication that JV will cooperate with some sort of unwritten rule whereby he will engage with one thread, while "the rest of us" discuss him in another thread—which is a flawed premise.

And yes, keeping track of what is said in one thread is always easier than keeping track of what is said in more than one thread.