Moderators

[Irondan]

IMO the term 'skybot' is intended as an insult, and adds nothing to discussion. Using the term 'cheer-leading' is relatively new and hasn't been pointed out as being disparaging until now. Even still, I don't know if we could classify it the same as 'skybot' or 'bot' or some of the other insulting terms.

I would say that it's a benign term until it's designed to be insulting, in which we (mods) would treat it as we would any other insult. We won't ban the word though, it would have to be taken on a case by case basis to determine the 'intent of use' of the word.

 

[djpbaltimore]

OK. Thank you for the clarification.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re:

OK. Thank you for the clarification.

But you should definitely try to get it banned dude. Get enough bans in place and you can turn The Clinic into your favourite BikeRetard forum in no time!

 

[djpbaltimore]

Relax.... I asked a question and I got my answer. Weren't you complaining about belligerent posts earlier?

FWIW, I have never posted at Bike Radar.

viewtopic.php?p=1846972#p1846972

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re:

Relax.... I asked a question and I got my answer. Weren't you complaining about belligerent posts earlier?

FWIW, I have never posted at Bike Radar.

viewtopic.php?p=1846972#p1846972

No, I wasn't complaining, but nice try.

 

[djpbaltimore]

Fair enough. There is no need to be so aggressive about things.

 

[Irondan]

Let's move on gent's...

 

[TheSpud]

Froome test data thread locked - no great surprise I guess. Turned out to be exactly the kind of thread I predicted.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Froome test data thread locked - no great surprise I guess. Turned out to be exactly the kind of thread I predicted.

I guess even more surprising is that you didn't participate in the thread but predicted its demise

I thought the thread was excellent. There's was some really good discussions about he data, the legitimacy of the faxes and the plausibility of the 2007 data, in particularly the weight and fat %. The peer review discussion was pertinent more so when the final report comes out in March.

Unsure why you didn't want to contribute to the thread.

 

[Jacques de Molay]

Re: Re:

...more so when the final report comes out in March.

I imagine the thread will be reopened then, but it probably shouldn't happen even a day early. As it was, looking back at the first few pages of the now-locked thread, it was definitely started too early. Speculation and chaos ran amok while readers sorted out the proper use of a comma. Let's have something definitive before veering off on too many tangents.

Facts would be nice as well. (Intentional spelling being used in the previous sentence)

 

[Irondan]

WRT the Froome Files thread, it's closed temporarily.

It will be re-opened at an appropriate time that has not yet been decided.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

...more so when the final report comes out in March.

I imagine the thread will be reopened then, but it probably shouldn't happen even a day early. As it was, looking back at the first few pages of the now-locked thread, it was definitely started too early. Speculation and chaos ran amok while readers sorted out the proper use of a comma. Let's have something definitive before veering off on too many tangents.

Facts would be nice as well. (Intentional spelling being used in the previous sentence)

The use of a comma was a small part of a 75 page thread, the facts presented on the 2007 faxes were interesting along with input for various sports scientists. Not sure why you would want all of that nullified.

"Most of the fundamental ideas of science are essentially simple, and may, as a rule, be expressed in a language comprehensible to everyone.” — Albert Einstein

 

[Jacques de Molay]

Re: Re:

The use of a comma was a small part of a 75 page thread, the facts presented on the 2007 faxes were interesting along with input for various sports scientists. Not sure why you would want all of that nullified.

Fascinating. I say "fist few pages," and you transform that into, essentially, "nullifying 75 pages."

As I said. Let's stick to the facts. Why on earth would I want to nullify pages that I, too, contributed to (even if some of my more labor-intensive posts have since been deleted by the mods)?

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

The use of a comma was a small part of a 75 page thread, the facts presented on the 2007 faxes were interesting along with input for various sports scientists. Not sure why you would want all of that nullified.

Fascinating. I say "fist few pages," and you transform that into, essentially, "nullifying 75 pages."

As I said. Let's stick to the facts. Why on earth would I want to nullify pages that I, too, contributed to (even if some of my more labor-intensive posts have since been deleted by the mods)?

Some interesting topics came to light; is sports science a science? And is selling coaching plans off the back of sports science and industry?

My own humble view is sports science is not really a science and yes it is an industry... coaching plans, testing services all take payment, so yes it's an industry.

 

[thehog]

Like arguing over cups of coffee

 

[Jacques de Molay]

Could a mod spin off a Peyton Manning thread from the current Doping in other Sports thread?

It deserves its own thread, but there's some good discussion already that should be part of it.

I believe it starts here
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?p=1850077#p1850077

Although the one subsequent post is not part of the Manning discussion.

 

[Jacques de Molay]

Could a mod spin off a Peyton Manning thread from the current Doping in other Sports thread?

So...I'll take that as a "No"?

 

[Irondan]

Could a mod spin off a Peyton Manning thread from the current Doping in other Sports thread?

So...I'll take that as a "No"?

No, you shouldn't take that as a no. I'm just very busy at the moment.

Please be a little patient and your request will be granted.

 

[Jacques de Molay]

No, you shouldn't take that as a no. I'm just very busy at the moment.

My comment was meant to be lighthearted. I've no doubt that you're busy, as you seem to be left alone with the bulk of the mod work around here.

Thanks in advance.

 

[mrhender]

Could a mod spin off a Peyton Manning thread from the current Doping in other Sports thread?

So...I'll take that as a "No"?

Hi Jacques

Are you still sure a Manning thread is a good idea on the basis of the posts in the thread?

I know dan said he would do it but he's been busy and meanwhile I just want to confirm, because then I can also do it.

As I read it most of the comments are more broad than just Manning as the discussion seems to vary from Manning, NFL in general, peds in general and also comparisons with other sports, wada and ethics.

I think my point is that I'am a little unsure if all those posts would "fit" in a Manning thread.
Unless that thread was more wide in it's OP?

I'am just thinking out loud here.

Thoughts?

 

[Jacques de Molay]

Thoughts?

After just reviewing it myself, I still think a separate thread is a good idea, but maybe just a general NFL thread, and not specifically Manning.

Here's why:
The General Doping thread serves a good purpose for updating random events (badminton, darts, ping-pong, etc) that usually only generate a couple of responses until the next transgression occurs.

The current discussion is much more robust, and is likely to drown out the original intent of the thread (or at least what the thread had become over time).

The NFL is interesting precisely because they are not bound to WADA, so that makes for a different discussion altogether. Not to mention the enormous commercial and financial aspects of the NFL.

I did search for previous NFL Clinic threads, but there only seems to be two or three, and from so many years ago that bumping them would likely only convolute things (take note, blackcat )

The Peyton Manning story is big news at the moment, and likely far from over, and the related discussions are all valid, so I still think that moving the discussion to an NFL Doping thread would be beneficial.

-------
Ooops. I just realized that I had confused the Doping in Other Sports thread with the General Doping thread.

Maybe just ignore everything I posted above.

Carry on...

 

[mrhender]

I agree with all that.

Would you mind open a thread and I'll move all the posts.

I think you'll do a good job on the OP

edit: nevermind about the confusion. I think the points still stand.

 

[Jacques de Molay]

Re:

Would you mind open a thread and I'll move all the posts.

I think the conversation will be wide-ranging, so I tagged it as an Al Jazeera thread, also, because in the interim, someone had posted the same thing in the General Doping thread.

But the conversation should start from this post, from BullsFan22:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?p=1850077#p1850077

As previously mentioned, the one post following that (about the Pakistani cricketer) should remain in the Doping in Other Sports thread, but all others could be moved to the new Al Jazeera thread.

I hope this makes sense.

 

[mrhender]

Okay, I'll get working.

 

[mrhender]

Re:

Okay, I'll get working.

Sorry Jacques, I forgot the simple thing that you cannot create an OP after the fact because the first posted post will always be first. I'll see if I can fix this in the admin panel later. Otherwise we can move another post of yours before the new OP and edit the content to your latest post. (confusing, I know)

Also I took the liberty to add a little in the topic title, because some might miss the meaning and continue posting in the other thread.