Moderators

[Race Radio]

You banned thehog for, and I quote:

"Thehog is banned for a month for deliberately disregarding a direct commitment (s)he made ."

Despite you guys trying to be cryptic and refusing to give details when people asked about it, we all know what happened. We also also watched RR try to bait thehog so he would get banned.

Nonsense.

Since when is asking for a poster to back up a claim baiting?

What is baiting? Posting invented nonsense on multiple threads designed to smear other posters and bait them into a conflict.

 

[Afrank]

You banned thehog for, and I quote:

"Thehog is banned for a month for deliberately disregarding a direct commitment (s)he made ."

Despite you guys trying to be cryptic and refusing to give details when people asked about it, we all know what happened. We also also watched RR try to bait thehog so he would get banned.

Umm...

Thehog has been banned one month for repeatedly ignoring warnings to stop trolling on the Armstrong thread.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1568621&postcount=412

Don't know where your getting that from, I never wrote it.

 

[Digger]

Nonsense.

Since when is asking for a poster to back up a claim baiting?

What is baiting? Posting invented nonsense on multiple threads designed to smear other posters and bait them into a conflict.

Like you in the whistleblower thread?


Anyway as I said already, you are the one who usually replies to him first when he comes back after a ban - so to say he has an obsession is ironic.

 

[sniper]

Hog is actually the one with the biggest lobby in here.

I don't think anyone comes close to his amount of tempbans, others get permbanned way sooner. That's just how it is, plain and simple.

most bans are because of aggressive, insulting posting style.
i don't think theHog can be accused of any such behavior.
really what harm does he do with his posting style?

 

[the sceptic]

You banned thehog for, and I quote:

"Thehog is banned for a month for deliberately disregarding a direct commitment (s)he made ."

Despite you guys trying to be cryptic and refusing to give details when people asked about it, we all know what happened. We also also watched RR try to bait thehog so he would get banned.

RR went off the deep end with his Froome defence and Horner obsession.

After he got called out on it by the Hog he has been working on a relentless campaign to get hog banned. Pretty childish if you ask me, but it is what it is.

 

[Race Radio]

Like you in the whistleblower thread?

I will ask again, what have a written on the Qui Tam case that is wrong? Feel free to respond to my specific post in the correct thread instead of clogging this one with more invented innuendo.

 

[red_flanders]

Oh, come on guys. Even thehog admits he's baiting people. Pretty silly to act like he's not doing anything intentional. He takes his bans like a man.

 

[Race Radio]

RR went off the deep end with his Froome defence and Horner obsession.
.

Might be one of your more ridiculous posts yet.

The only folks who think I defend Froome are those who ignore my posts and read some trolls intentional twisting of what I have written

 

[Digger]

Might be one of your more ridiculous posts yet.

The only folks who think I defend Froome are those who ignore my posts and read some trolls intentional twisting of what I have written

yeah I mean how could we have made that mistake - froome's performance on Ventoux was 'encouraging' you said.

 

[kingjr]

yeah I mean how could we have made that mistake - froome's performance on Ventoux was 'encouraging' you said.

Based on the 12 % number which he admitted on the same day that it was wrong. And he didn't make the number up but copied it from somewhere else without checking it iirc. You could argue he made the mistake that he wanted to believe that number. Which I think most cycling-fans would.

I mean, let's face it, we all have our suspicions about performances, but wouldn't we all love them to be proven wrong, if possible?

 

[Digger]

Based on the 12 % number which he admitted on the same day that it was wrong. And he didn't make the number up but copied it from somewhere else without checking it iirc. You could argue he made the mistake that he wanted to believe that number. Which I think most cycling-fans would.

I mean, let's face it, we all have our suspicions about performances, but wouldn't we all love them to be proven wrong, if possible?

no issue at all with the number being wrong - by god I have made mistakes - but the fact he thought it was encouraging at all is the point.

 

[kingjr]

no issue at all with the number being wrong - by god I have made mistakes - but the fact he thought it was encouraging at all is the point.

12 % slower than Mayo while soundly beating everyone else, i think that would have been a little bit encouraging at first glance. Not with regards to Froome alone, but more to the overall level of the contenders.

 

[Scott SoCal]

Oh, come on guys. Even thehog admits he's baiting people. Pretty silly to act like he's not doing anything intentional. He takes his bans like a man.

Yup.

I don't know if he should have been banned, but his trolling is so obvious it's maybe a good thing. If he's going to troll at least do it well.

 

[BroDeal]

Don't know where your getting that from, I never wrote it.

By "you" I meant a collective "you" referring to the mods. The quote was actually written by SB. When thehog was banned for it, people asked for an explanation. The mods refused to give details but people talk. We know what happened, and it is obvious that is still happening.

 

[the sceptic]

12 % slower than Mayo while soundly beating everyone else, i think that would have been a little bit encouraging at first glance. Not with regards to Froome alone, but more to the overall level of the contenders.

and then came the tailwind.

 

[Race Radio]

no issue at all with the number being wrong - by god I have made mistakes - but the fact he thought it was encouraging at all is the point.

Why do you lie?

 

[BroDeal]

yeah I mean how could we have made that mistake - froome's performance on Ventoux was 'encouraging' you said.

Don't forget the ridiculous and ever present tail winds. When people started posting maps showing the actual winds, the mods started shutting down all discussion that mentioned wind.

 

[kingjr]

and then came the tailwind.

There was a tailwind throughout pretty much the whole first part of the climb until they came out of the forest. While the effect certainly wasn't as big as it would have been in the open, it probably still enabled the riders to save energy throughout the whole forested part.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Hello, this is the "Mods are awful" thread. Take the tailwind etc somewhere else please and return to your pleasant business of mod-bashing here.

Ta.

 

[Race Radio]

Don't forget the ridiculous and ever present tail winds. When people started posting maps showing the actual winds, the mods started shutting down all discussion that mentioned wind.

The maps that showed a tailwind for the majority of the climb?

One of Hog's better trolls. Twisting my post that other climbs were better indicators of doping because of fewer variables to be me "defending" Froome

 

[BroDeal]

Hello, this is the "Mods are awful" thread. Take the tailwind etc somewhere else please and return to your pleasant business of mod-bashing here.

Ta.

Then let's get back to the deal to forbid thehog from replying to RR and RR's use of it to get thehog banned.

 

[MarkvW]

most bans are because of aggressive, insulting posting style.
i don't think theHog can be accused of any such behavior.
really what harm does he do with his posting style?

I agree. The worst that can be said about Hoggie's most recent post series is that he was posting some semi-sensical drivel. But it is also true that he was deliberately doing it in an inoffensive way. Meanwhile, we get drivel like pictures of Lance drinking wine amid a group of young women.

Maserati's been driven off and it's just a matter of time until thehog gets the same treatment.

 

[BroDeal]

I agree. The worst that can be said about Hoggie's most recent post series is that he was posting some semi-sensical drivel. But it is also true that he was deliberately doing it in an inoffensive way. Meanwhile, we get drivel like pictures of Lance drinking wine amid a group of young women.

Maserati's been driven off and it's just a matter of time until thehog gets the same treatment.

There is the ironic thing. When thehog comes back he makes an effort to post in a soft toned and reasonable manner. The Andreu Strategies crew may not like the content, but he is not offensive. He posts to lots of threads, unlike the obsessives who only care about Armstrong and which party he went to on the weekend. Yet he still gets banned.

 

[BigMac]

I find this sort of ganging on one poster by a bigger group very uncomfortable. And one person who crusades to get others banned accusing another one of lobying with the same intentions, ironic to say the least. I must add that I'm in no way taking parties here.

 

[Scott SoCal]

I agree. The worst that can be said about Hoggie's most recent post series is that he was posting some semi-sensical drivel. But it is also true that he was deliberately doing it in an inoffensive way. Meanwhile, we get drivel like pictures of Lance drinking wine amid a group of young women.

Maserati's been driven off and it's just a matter of time until thehog gets the same treatment.

Well then the rules should allow for inoffensive trolling. Like suggesting Lance had received tax dollars in the SCA payout because AIG may possibly have had some re-underwriting exposure with SCA when they paid LA in 2006 even though the federal bailout of AIG didn't happen until 2008.... Not to mention the accounting gibberish.

Near impossible to discuss anything other than clutter when he's that inane.

Maserati being driven off was a disgrace. Hog getting put in the pigsty was probably deserved.