Moderators

[Barrus]

Well that means he won I guess, since in his next incarnation he can bang on even more about how "biased" the moderation is here.

Funnily enough he has had more chances and more consideration from many of the moderators than a lot of other people would have had

 

[MacRoadie]

yep, no worries.

At the risk of "one more" post too many, that I think it's important to include the "armstrong faithful" in our discussions and maintain a debate based on facts. I believe it helps us uncover flaws in our own assumptions and besides, who the heck finds a one sided debate enlightening (or entertaining). I'm here to gain knowledge and most importantly take a break from my bleeping job which is killing me.

Carry on.

THIS is the deeper end result to allowing trolling (not here specifically but everywhere in general).

cat6cx, you're point is very well taken yet may be misplaced within the specific context of this thread.

No one here has any desire or intention to stiffle opposing views. Differing viewpoints add to the dialog and promote intelligent conversation. I, speaking only for myself, take no exception to ANY thoughful and rational points of view presented here, regardless of their alignment (or lack thereof) to my own.

When trolls are allowed to pervasively continue to post in thread after thread, the circumstance can and will arise where a new poster such as cat6cx will chose to join the dialog in a forum, possibly unaware of the history or motivation behind a certain forum member.

When that forum member is ultimately banned based on the totality of his posts and not a specific post (and possibly during debate with the new member), the potential for our new member to only see a ban based on a perceived differing view (and nothing else) increases.

Then the whole forum suffers from the perception that anyone who isn't on the "anti-Armstrong" bandwagon will be bullied by group-think and ultimately banned.

 

[cat6cx]

Thanks MacR,

I appreciate that.

I've never felt the moderators where motivated to control the direction of the discussion. To me they do appear to be trying to keep the discussion civil and on topic. I believe the moderators can also have an opinion and still be fair moderators.

I’m a new “poster”, but have followed the clinic closely since last May when the WSJ article broke ( I think it was last May) So I have good feel for the contributors. If I didn’t like the participants I wouldn’t be reading this forum and would not have joined. I like reading RR and I like reading Polish.
I can also understand why people are banned and don’t feel it’s related to their position on Armstrong.

Anyway I need to go post this link to bikezilla and some discussions he’s having with Strickland. Looks like I need to find my way back to the other thread.
http://bikezilla.blogspot.com/

 

[Francois the Postman]

Well that means he won I guess, since in his next incarnation he can bang on even more about how "biased" the moderation is here.

Well, I fully agree with the action Susan took today after much much discussion over the last few days (not with all the things that happened in the run-up). And he cannot say I haven't taken his pov and criticisms up seriously, and forward, or addressed his concerns at length, troll or not. If someone makes sound points I will first drop the rubbish-element and still make sure that those bits that I agree are worth (at least) hearing are indeed heard, and not thrown out with a troublemaker and conveniently ignored.

He's gone. Tone-deaf to the more productive route that was pointed out to him at length, and frequently. Folk who are leaving the path of all reasonableness shouldn't expect any in return. Not after having been given a fair shot.

But that doesn't negate the fact that there was more happening than just a troll trolling, or someone with an issue with moderators pulling out a lot of stops (visible and invisible). He wasn't the only one "doing stuff". Folk interacted on various levels. There are some reflections to be made by all involved, I think.

And thanks to those that didn't add fire to the flames, or fed the troll, or whatever you wanna call it.

As a side point, unrelated, but just for clarity's sake:

Some "normal" regulars (excuse the phrase) have raised similar concerns to me as this guy has, even over the last couple days, and just because someone gets expelled, that doesn't mean it was for points of order that he raised, let alone for asking probing questions to us. Nor will those concerns of some members get brushed away just because someone was loud, disruptive and obstructive, and also using those arguments during his days here.

 

[Cal_Joe]

I would like to publicly thank Francois for his well thought out and quite logical comments today in this forum and in the Clinic.

Chapeau.

 

[Cobblestoned]

What about unbanning DAOTEC for the Giro ?
I mean........it's Giro.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Since you forgave and let ChrisE come back, I would agree that DAOTEC should come back...unless there's a bigger story that we aren't aware of with him/her...

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Since you forgave and let ChrisE come back, I would agree that DAOTEC should come back...unless there's a bigger story that we aren't aware of with him/her...

WoW...

How long do you think that ChrisE served on suspension?

A heap longer than DAOTEC!

 

[ChrisE]

Since you forgave and let ChrisE come back, I would agree that DAOTEC should come back...unless there's a bigger story that we aren't aware of with him/her...

When somebody gets released from prison after serving their sentence, does that mean they were "forgiven"?

 

[Francois the Postman]

DAOTEC and ChrisE have a different posting history here, and a different track record of interacting with the site (public) and the mods (private) in general. Don't be surprised if that comparison with ChrisE means not much at all Glenn.

At the moment there has been no reason to look at DAOTEC case again, as there has been no approach by DAOTEC to the mods to discuss his case. I don't even recall if he has served the time he was initially given for the initial offense either.

Either way, he has been suspended for bypassing a ban, which is a serious breach of the site rules he accepted, and that apply to all of us. We have made it clear from the beginning that we would be open to an approach by him and listen to what he has to say, given the valuable contribution he has made over the years (albeit not with a clean record throughout), and we'll see where we stand after that.

There is a "contact us" link in the purple bar at the bottom of the forum pages. Since he hasn't used it, I can't see a single reason why we should just unban him. Giro time or not.

For clarity sake, ChrisE came back after the time of his suspension was served. He wasn't "unbanned".

 

[mewmewmew13]

When somebody gets released from prison after serving their sentence, does that mean they were "forgiven"?

I don't know...depends on what they did to get "banned" in the first place.

 

[ChrisE]

I don't know...depends on what they did to get "banned" in the first place.

The last time I checked several months ago the posts I got banned for were still up. Why don't you do a search and tell me if they deserve forgiveness, or if I should have been given the death penalty.

 

[Francois the Postman]

Knock it off, both of you. This subforum is for discussing the forum, and our behavior and policies, not each other's. If you have any problem with a poster, report it, or discuss it with us via pms. Public spats won't be tolerated.

 

[Anonymous]

can you leave bringing dao back till after the giro. There are going to be enough new threads created each day as it is without even more.

 

[Berzin]

Remember: Posts, not poster.

Why then do you mods turn a blind eye to the obnoxious trolling that goes on?

It's only a couple of posters who engage in this activity...are you guys really so overwhelmed that you can't come up with a more effective approach to discourage trolling?

 

[Benotti69]

Why then do you mods turn a blind eye to the obnoxious trolling that goes on?

It's only a couple of posters who engage in this activity...are you guys really so overwhelmed that you can't come up with a more effective approach to discourage trolling?

i think as posters on the forum we should ignore them. These guys post obvious obsfucation, never answers direct questions, change their angle and attack anything that is anti Gunderson, in this case Landis. Imagine taking UCI's side in anything in cycling. While Landis aint no angel, he never declared himself to be one, which seems to be the claims of Gunderson's drones.

I also think we should demand more form the cycling media and its so called 'journalists'.

 

[JRTinMA]

Why then do you mods turn a blind eye to the obnoxious trolling that goes on?

It's only a couple of posters who engage in this activity...are you guys really so overwhelmed that you can't come up with a more effective approach to discourage trolling?

You showed up in the thread and made comments about a poster, this is classic trolling. Based on your comments anybody with a different opinion is a troll?!?

 

[patricknd]

You showed up in the thread and made comments about a poster, this is classic trolling. Based on your comments anybody with a different opinion is a troll?!?

What do you expect from one of the stepford crowd?

 

[Anonymous]

I want to note that, contrary to Francois' assertion that I broke the rules, the pictures I posted contained ONLY animals. If there had been humans and animals, then I would have broken the rules. As such, the last ban was complete bull****. Sorry Francois doesn't understand the difference between the two. What I posted was funny as hell. What Francois did was his typical over reaction. He seems to over moderate sometimes, and that was one of those times.

Oh, and I read the whole "stop calling people trolls, and people can respect Armstrong, blah, blah, blah" he posted last week, and it ignores a simple reality: There are few to any people still defending the one balled wonder that are not purely trolls because you have to be blind and stupid (or a troll) to not see the reality of the Armstrong fraud. Worst decision you guys ever made making him a mod.

 

[Race Radio]

If a poster says that he is a lawyer and then in multiple posts shows that he has little understanding of the law it is legitimate to ask him what kind of lawyer he is.

 

[Anonymous]

If a poster says that he is a lawyer and then in multiple posts shows that he has little understanding of the law it is legitimate to ask him what kind of lawyer he is.

No it isn't because Francois says you have to invite them for tea and biscuits and talk nicey nicey to them because people with different opinions (regardless of how stupid or dishonest) deserve only respect....

Of course, now that BPC has Francois as a defender, that kind of stupidity will once again infect this place, and make posting here too much of a hassle to bother.

I find it interesting that in the last week after Francois posted his "you should be fair to people with idiotic opinions because I believe in a sense of propriety regardless of how ridiculous and transparently trolling their words are" post, the trolls have come out of the woodwork. Who'd a thunk?

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

All opinions are welcome here. Trolls are not. Insults are not.

Susan

 

[Hugh Januss]

Susan Westemeyer
Administrator

MacRoadie
Senior Member

cat6cx
Junior Member

palmerq
Moderator

Race Radio
Inner Circle Conduit

ChrisE
Contrarian

Thoughtforfood
Forum Hit Man

Polish
Official Forum Troll

flicker
Logic Suspension Device

Hugh Januss
Member at Large



Perhaps all we need is a wider range of titles, so that everyone can go about their various forum jobs without the constant specter of the ban hanging over them. As long as it is understood what their jobs are new members would find it easier to follow along.

 

[ChrisE]

I want to note that, contrary to Francois' assertion that I broke the rules, the pictures I posted contained ONLY animals. If there had been humans and animals, then I would have broken the rules. As such, the last ban was complete bull****. *snip*

This made me lol. Bravo.

Of course as usual I think you (and others like Berzin upthread) overplay the "troll" logic, and agree with Francois that people with different opinions should not be considered trolls per se. That is a position I have long taken. For example, I really do disagree with some of the things posted in this forum, so it is not a contrived disagreement to stir stuff up. Flicker has been so consistent for so long he has to believe what he says. Does that make him a troll because of that? I'm not sure about Polish, I admit....I found BPC funny though, mainly because of the wad you guys would get wound up in "debating" him.

Oh.....Hugh I disagree with alot of your titles of the various members in the previous post.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Oh.....Hugh I disagree with alot of your titles of the various members in the previous post.

Good job.........