Moderators

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

i dont quite understand the restrictions on certain common words usage.

i mean, the words like the bot, rancid etc are used in the leading printed media all the time. unlike a hundred or so of the active cn users, those words are read by hundreds of thousands daily.

what matters is if the bickering and a personally jibing attitude has displaced a constructive discussion. i can think of at least a dozen far more insulting words that would raise my flag. calling someone a skybot or a lancy poo or a clinic 12 is imo innocuous.

calling me a snake, instead of my stated handle, isn't

Calling somebody a bot implies that he cannot think doesn't it? I'd say it is a pretty straightforward insult.

Calling someone a bot implies they have been 'programmed' what to post. It sure does appear that way in certain threads, imho.

you could say the same about pretty much 90 % of the users here. Most of them have their opinions which do not change over time, so they end up saying the same thing over and over. Does that make them bots?

That's not true. Most peoples opinions do change over time. Just because on a big issue like did lance dope people continue to stay on the same side doesn't mean that they have inflexible opinions. Just look at the number of people who fought against lance who are now defending him on some level, or people who no longer trust jv. Hell I would venture that the majority of clinic posters entered the place far less cynical than we are now.

 

[blackcat]

solid posts on the main cycling forum about Cav's satus at GOAT were edited because I mentioned lipotropin and the mods wrongfully classified this as doping talk.

no, i was elucidating a sound point.

and lipotropin has ambiguous status is some WADA domociles and territories, hence, this should not be classified as doping talk. I was menioning weightloss. I mentioned Froome, Wiggins and Nibali. But I never said they were doping, I merely mentioned a weightloss supplement, a peptide, an amino acid, lipotropin. And they edited my post. Well, seems they classified what i wrote as about doping, and I think it was incorrectly classified as doping talk. It was not like I said, you can use lipotropin freely in some WADA signatory countries.

 

[Irondan]

Re:

solid posts on the main cycling forum about Cav's satus at GOAT were edited because I mentioned lipotropin and the mods wrongfully classified this as doping talk.

no, i was elucidating a sound point.

and lipotropin has ambiguous status is some WADA domociles and territories, hence, this should not be classified as doping talk. I was menioning weightloss. I mentioned Froome, Wiggins and Nibali. But I never said they were doping, I merely mentioned a weightloss supplement, a peptide, an amino acid, lipotropin. And they edited my post. Well, seems they classified what i wrote as about doping, and I think it was incorrectly classified as doping talk. It was not like I said, you can use lipotropin freely in some WADA signatory countries.

Lipotropin is doping talk on this forum.

It's classification wrt WADA is meaningless as we (mods) are not bound by WADA code.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

solid posts on the main cycling forum about Cav's satus at GOAT were edited because I mentioned lipotropin and the mods wrongfully classified this as doping talk.

no, i was elucidating a sound point.

and lipotropin has ambiguous status is some WADA domociles and territories, hence, this should not be classified as doping talk. I was menioning weightloss. I mentioned Froome, Wiggins and Nibali. But I never said they were doping, I merely mentioned a weightloss supplement, a peptide, an amino acid, lipotropin. And they edited my post. Well, seems they classified what i wrote as about doping, and I think it was incorrectly classified as doping talk. It was not like I said, you can use lipotropin freely in some WADA signatory countries.

Lipotropin is doping talk on this forum.

It's classification wrt WADA is meaningless as we (mods) are not bound by WADA code.

but did you read my posts. they were educational, and not fandom gone astray, they were overwhelmingly positive wrt Cav, and they needed the little bit of information to elucidate my theory as to Cav's disappointing 2015. It was a very good post, and number of posts. There must be something wrt plagiarising and editing that you cannot unilaterally my post to change the meaning or the point I am making.

 

[King Boonen]

Lipotropin is a pharmacological substance that does not have approval for human use by any health regulatory authority and as such is banned under section S0 of the WADA prohibited list. Discussing it is absolutely doping talk.

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

solid posts on the main cycling forum about Cav's satus at GOAT were edited because I mentioned lipotropin and the mods wrongfully classified this as doping talk.

no, i was elucidating a sound point.

and lipotropin has ambiguous status is some WADA domociles and territories, hence, this should not be classified as doping talk. I was menioning weightloss. I mentioned Froome, Wiggins and Nibali. But I never said they were doping, I merely mentioned a weightloss supplement, a peptide, an amino acid, lipotropin. And they edited my post. Well, seems they classified what i wrote as about doping, and I think it was incorrectly classified as doping talk. It was not like I said, you can use lipotropin freely in some WADA signatory countries.

Lipotropin is doping talk on this forum.

It's classification wrt WADA is meaningless as we (mods) are not bound by WADA code.

but did you read my posts. they were educational, and not fandom gone astray, they were overwhelmingly positive wrt Cav, and they needed the little bit of information to elucidate my theory as to Cav's disappointing 2015. It was a very good post, and number of posts. There must be something wrt plagiarising and editing that you cannot unilaterally my post to change the meaning or the point I am making.

I did read your comments and enjoyed them very much.

I know you put a lot of thought and effort into those posts.

I don't like editing comments at all, I feel it's the forum members responsibility to post within forum rules at all times.

Most of the time I delete comments that violate the 'doping talk in PRR forum rule', but with yours I edited it because I know the value of said comment.

I have no problem having another mod weighing in here with a different perspective.

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

I know you put a lot of thought and effort into those posts.

yes, that is how I described it, but in relative terms to a cycling forum. I am the first one to pot(criticise) and laugh(laff) at Cav, but I was giving him due credit there. atleast you recognise that I was attempting to be fair, and walk a fine tightrope not stepping of the rules of the procycling forum, (versus The Clinic) since I am a poster well known to traverse said rules. This time, I thought it was important to get my point across and walk the fine line.

 

[The Hitch]

I know the current mods like to adopt an innocent until proven guilty attitude.

But I just saw in one of the threads a poster who is clearly there just to do wind ups and has a history of posting provocative stuff (that others have posted before) and then disappearing, say something that was factually untrue, that they almost certainly knew was factually untrue, but clearly posted it to windup.

Then another innocent poster, unaware that poster A is only there to wind up, went and did research to disprove this theory. Of course poster A isn't even going to come back to that point.

I'm not identifying the thread or the poster, because its the principle of the situation that matters, not the identities.

I am posting this because I think its unfair that innocent posters have their time wasted like that by people they aren't aware are only here to play games.

 

[thehog]

I support Bernie's eyesore being banned again. Its very bad trolling going on from him at the moment and the bans work well.

 

[MarkvW]

Re:

I know the current mods like to adopt an innocent until proven guilty attitude.

But I just saw in one of the threads a poster who is clearly there just to do wind ups and has a history of posting provocative stuff (that others have posted before) and then disappearing, say something that was factually untrue, that they almost certainly knew was factually untrue, but clearly posted it to windup.

Then another innocent poster, unaware that poster A is only there to wind up, went and did research to disprove this theory. Of course poster A isn't even going to come back to that point.

I'm not identifying the thread or the poster, because its the principle of the situation that matters, not the identities.

I am posting this because I think its unfair that innocent posters have their time wasted like that by people they aren't aware are only here to play games.

I've PM'd people in the past about stuff like that.

 

[the sceptic]

Re:

I know the current mods like to adopt an innocent until proven guilty attitude.

But I just saw in one of the threads a poster who is clearly there just to do wind ups and has a history of posting provocative stuff (that others have posted before) and then disappearing, say something that was factually untrue, that they almost certainly knew was factually untrue, but clearly posted it to windup.

Then another innocent poster, unaware that poster A is only there to wind up, went and did research to disprove this theory. Of course poster A isn't even going to come back to that point.

I'm not identifying the thread or the poster, because its the principle of the situation that matters, not the identities.

I am posting this because I think its unfair that innocent posters have their time wasted like that by people they aren't aware are only here to play games.

I noticed a poster with a 2015 reg date who posts exactly the same way as previously banned trolls. I reported it to the mods of course.

 

[ebandit]

...........i notice old members trolling away......but i divvunt dare report it................

Mark L

 

[the sceptic]

Re:

...........i notice old members trolling away......but i divvunt dare report it................

Mark L

I only report really obvious trolls. I don't want to waste the mods time with excessive reporting.

 

[thehog]

Re:

...........i notice old members trolling away......but i divvunt dare report it................

Mark L

I notice the same trolls reporting posts incessantly.

 

[Beech Mtn]

This was posted in the clinic:

can we get a new thread about this Geraint Thomas book so it doesn't get buried in this one?

Should I buy it and print excerpts?

To which I bolded hog's question and replied (quoting from memory as best I can recall)

Trolling! You already know the answer to that.
The only good thing about these Skyborgs writing all these books is the fun taking them apart later on the forum/twitter.

Why was my post deleted?

I'm pretty sure Hoggy knows I loved his Walsh quotes from Mein Climb since we interacted back in a thread about it when it came out. Did some fool actually think I was seriously calling thehog a troll, rather than making a joke about trolling accusations? Surely calling the riders/staff Skyborgs can't be off limits in the clinic?

My post wasn't anything super important, so it's not a huge deal that it was deleted, but I would like to understand what the mods saw wrong with it that was reason for the deletion.

Thanks

 

[Beech Mtn]

No answer in the thread, no PM. Mods are active on the forum, so presumably my request has been seen.
As I said, the post itself wasn't a big deal. It wasn't some long piece that took a lot of time to write, so no great loss that it's gone.
An explanation would've been appreciated.
Giving up now and moving on with the weekend.

 

[ebandit]

chance

....it's a game of chance ....i had post deleted 'cos i started with....bottastic!

Mark L

 

[mrhender]

Re: chance

....it's a game of chance ....i had post deleted 'cos i started with....bottastic!

Mark L

Damn..

We are found out

Well, it was fun while it lasted..

 

[Beech Mtn]

Since I complained publicly, I'll put here a public thanks to Irondan for the PM. Appreciate him taking his time to communicate on the issue.

 

[MarkvW]

Fair moderation in the Armstrong forum. Appreciate it.

 

[DamianoMachiavelli]

I think it is pretty clear the moderators here have no interest in information being communicated through their forum, just the continual inane babble within the echo chamber. Anything else will be deleted.

Done here.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

I think it is pretty clear the moderators here have no interest in information being communicated through their forum, just the continual inane babble within the echo chamber. Anything else will be deleted.

Done here.

Why leave now. Don't let RaceRadio run you off.

 

[the sceptic]

Re:

I think it is pretty clear the moderators here have no interest in information being communicated through their forum, just the continual inane babble within the echo chamber. Anything else will be deleted.

Done here.

The LA thread only exists as group-think for the Andreu brigade. As soon as someone posts some common sense the mods will come running to the rescue and shut it down.

Don't give up though. It's always refreshing to read another perspective even if it only lasts for a few posts.

 

[mrhender]

Re: Re:

I think it is pretty clear the moderators here have no interest in information being communicated through their forum, just the continual inane babble within the echo chamber. Anything else will be deleted.

Done here.

The LA thread only exists as group-think for the Andreu brigade. As soon as someone posts some common sense the mods will come running to the rescue and shut it down.

Don't give up though. It's always refreshing to read another perspective even if it only lasts for a few posts.

Nope.

What we do though is try to keep things civil, on topic and impersonal.
And if not succeeding (somehow it ain't always easy) we remove the off topic personal little infights.

And sometimes there is collateral damage, but overall that is hard to avoid completely.

If anyone thinks we are shutting down simple communication of information, or common sense then I wholeheartedly disagree.

We would love to see the forum prosper with diversity in both poster background and opinions shared.

But that is dependent on the ability of members to post within forum rules and guidelines.

so that's that.

 

[DamianoMachiavelli]

Re: Re:

If anyone thinks we are shutting down simple communication of information, or common sense then I wholeheartedly disagree.

We would love to see the forum prosper with diversity in both poster background and opinions shared.

Sure you do. As my last post, I could urge people to take a look at threads from a few years ago and marvel at the number of posters who are now banned or no longer post. At the same time they could compare the lively and raucous posts that attracted readers and made it an interesting forum that used to be referenced in other social media. But instead I will sum up the situation with a simple anecdote: Floyd Landis joined this forum and was quickly perma-banned. That's some mighty fine moderating there, Lou.