Moderators

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

What??? A newsworthy story that has got a lot of attention.

If you and hog wanted to post about Britain and doping,

Well some of us don't take the myopic view that Russian state doping is an isolated story that has absolutely nothing to do with the wider doping and political world.

We don't believe that everything happens in a vaccum.

For us every single doping story, is only part of the far larger battle between an elite of liars and cheats at the top of sports who control the media, the doping and the narrative, and a lower class of liars and cheats who have no power and find themselves at the mercy of the first group whenever a scapegoat is needed.

We don't care much for athletes being busted for asthma medication, or no name figure skaters being caught doping, because such busts mean next to nothing and have no impact on the wider system. Wake me up when someone with major sponsorship deals gets caught doping. Or even when Russia actually gets banned from the olympics.

But if that's too hard for you to understand, consider this story - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/13/pressure-russia-rio-2016-olympics-uk-anti-doping-obstructed
Or consider the fact that the head of the World Anti doping agency is a brit.
Or consider the fact that the last country to host the olympics before Russia was the United Kingdom. And last year, the narrative was strongly pushed that Russia disgraced these games, "our own games" by evily conspiring to dope in them, the bastards!!!!!

No, I won't apologize for thinking that the Western "we are clean narrative" and the "Russia was state doping" narrative, are strongly linked.

And any time, any no name athlete or no name beurocrat get caught doping, I will always think of the big fish that are getting away with it.

then all you had to do was take that drivel to the appropriate thread, like the "Brits don't dope" one or whatever, and have the echo chamber discussion you crave from it.

I'd like to call your bluff out on the echo chamber comment though. The main "clinic" opinion on doping is that sport is rife with doping, at all levels, across all nationalities, and that anti doping is a sham which scapegoats unmarketable athletes while focusing all its effort on protecting high level popular media friendly ones.

This is the opinion that everyone who is mocked as being part of the "clinic" holds, and it is also coincidentally an opinion held by the handful of academics who have devoted their lives to a study of doping, and by anyone else who has done any research into the subject.

Do you disagree with this opinion? Do you want to challenge it?

I remember when digger asked you a question 4 times and you ignored it all 4 times.

We both know why you ignored that question. Will you do the same here?

PS, is it really drivel for hog to point out that David Millar is a liar? Is that, still, such an uncomfortable truth to admit to? That one of your own nation could be a liar?

Maria Sharapova ...

 

[ebandit]

hitch

What???

But if that's too hard for you to understand

I remember when digger asked you a question 4 times and you ignored it all 4 times.

We both know why you ignored that question. Will you do the same here?

how many times hitch....it's not about the member..........

Mark L

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

What??? A newsworthy story that has got a lot of attention.

If you and hog wanted to post about Britain and doping,

Well some of us don't take the myopic view that Russian state doping is an isolated story that has absolutely nothing to do with the wider doping and political world.

We don't believe that everything happens in a vaccum.

For us every single doping story, is only part of the far larger battle between an elite of liars and cheats at the top of sports who control the media, the doping and the narrative, and a lower class of liars and cheats who have no power and find themselves at the mercy of the first group whenever a scapegoat is needed.

We don't care much for athletes being busted for asthma medication, or no name figure skaters being caught doping, because such busts mean next to nothing and have no impact on the wider system. Wake me up when someone with major sponsorship deals gets caught doping. Or even when Russia actually gets banned from the olympics.

But if that's too hard for you to understand, consider this story - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/13/pressure-russia-rio-2016-olympics-uk-anti-doping-obstructed
Or consider the fact that the head of the World Anti doping agency is a brit.
Or consider the fact that the last country to host the olympics before Russia was the United Kingdom. And last year, the narrative was strongly pushed that Russia disgraced these games, "our own games" by evily conspiring to dope in them, the bastards!!!!!

No, I won't apologize for thinking that the Western "we are clean narrative" and the "Russia was state doping" narrative, are strongly linked.

And any time, any no name athlete or no name beurocrat get caught doping, I will always think of the big fish that are getting away with it.

then all you had to do was take that drivel to the appropriate thread, like the "Brits don't dope" one or whatever, and have the echo chamber discussion you crave from it.

I'd like to call your bluff out on the echo chamber comment though. The main "clinic" opinion on doping is that sport is rife with doping, at all levels, across all nationalities, and that anti doping is a sham which scapegoats unmarketable athletes while focusing all its effort on protecting high level popular media friendly ones.

This is the opinion that everyone who is mocked as being part of the "clinic" holds, and it is also coincidentally an opinion held by the handful of academics who have devoted their lives to a study of doping, and by anyone else who has done any research into the subject.

Do you disagree with this opinion? Do you want to challenge it?

I remember when digger asked you a question 4 times and you ignored it all 4 times.

We both know why you ignored that question. Will you do the same here?

PS, is it really drivel for hog to point out that David Millar is a liar? Is that, still, such an uncomfortable truth to admit to? That one of your own nation could be a liar?

great post.

I don't see any indications that there would be a genuine, non-selective, global antidoping movement emerging.
Quite on the contrary. It seems highly selective.

And I don't see any real evidence of an anti-Brit agenda in the Clinic.
A poster like thehog used to go after Lance and Contador, too. That's being consistent. Not anti-brit.
The antidoping hypocrisy happens to be centered in Britain, at the moment. That's not thehog's fault.

 

[The Hitch]

Re: Re:

What??? A newsworthy story that has got a lot of attention.

If you and hog wanted to post about Britain and doping,

Well some of us don't take the myopic view that Russian state doping is an isolated story that has absolutely nothing to do with the wider doping and political world.

We don't believe that everything happens in a vaccum.

For us every single doping story, is only part of the far larger battle between an elite of liars and cheats at the top of sports who control the media, the doping and the narrative, and a lower class of liars and cheats who have no power and find themselves at the mercy of the first group whenever a scapegoat is needed.

We don't care much for athletes being busted for asthma medication, or no name figure skaters being caught doping, because such busts mean next to nothing and have no impact on the wider system. Wake me up when someone with major sponsorship deals gets caught doping. Or even when Russia actually gets banned from the olympics.

But if that's too hard for you to understand, consider this story - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/13/pressure-russia-rio-2016-olympics-uk-anti-doping-obstructed
Or consider the fact that the head of the World Anti doping agency is a brit.
Or consider the fact that the last country to host the olympics before Russia was the United Kingdom. And last year, the narrative was strongly pushed that Russia disgraced these games, "our own games" by evily conspiring to dope in them, the bastards!!!!!

No, I won't apologize for thinking that the Western "we are clean narrative" and the "Russia was state doping" narrative, are strongly linked.

And any time, any no name athlete or no name beurocrat get caught doping, I will always think of the big fish that are getting away with it.

then all you had to do was take that drivel to the appropriate thread, like the "Brits don't dope" one or whatever, and have the echo chamber discussion you crave from it.

I'd like to call your bluff out on the echo chamber comment though. The main "clinic" opinion on doping is that sport is rife with doping, at all levels, across all nationalities, and that anti doping is a sham which scapegoats unmarketable athletes while focusing all its effort on protecting high level popular media friendly ones.

This is the opinion that everyone who is mocked as being part of the "clinic" holds, and it is also coincidentally an opinion held by the handful of academics who have devoted their lives to a study of doping, and by anyone else who has done any research into the subject.

Do you disagree with this opinion? Do you want to challenge it?

I remember when digger asked you a question 4 times and you ignored it all 4 times.

We both know why you ignored that question. Will you do the same here?

PS, is it really drivel for hog to point out that David Millar is a liar? Is that, still, such an uncomfortable truth to admit to? That one of your own nation could be a liar?

Maria Sharapova ...

As I said...

We don't care much for athletes being busted for asthma medication

tennis is clearly rife with blood doping, steroids, things like Aicar and lord knows what else. They got her with some minor drug that wasn't even banned until a few months ago

 

[thehog]

Why this doping view of everything? She's offered up her blood results to prove she's clean, what more do you want?

Lest we forget, classic Gooner, all time best. Also who can forget the posts on clean Wiggins and how cycling is sport we can now "believe in". Lol!

 

[BigMac]

So if we could get back to dissing the mods instead of carrying on with off-topic discussion it'd be fantastic.

Thanks.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Re:

So if we could get back to dissing the mods instead of carrying on with off-topic discussion it'd be fantastic.

Thanks.

Someone posted an amusing reply in response to this, but I see it's gone. Are posters not allowed a sense of humour at the Mods' expense, even when invited? Does someone have a sense of humour bypass? Oh well!

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

So if we could get back to dissing the mods instead of carrying on with off-topic discussion it'd be fantastic.

Thanks.

Someone posted an amusing reply in response to this, but I see it's gone. Are posters not allowed a sense of humour at the Mods' expense, even when invited? Does someone have a sense of humour bypass? Oh well!

If the comment had said "Great Britain sucks" would it still be funny to you?

 

[wrinklyvet]

Re: Re:

So if we could get back to dissing the mods instead of carrying on with off-topic discussion it'd be fantastic.

Thanks.

Someone posted an amusing reply in response to this, but I see it's gone. Are posters not allowed a sense of humour at the Mods' expense, even when invited? Does someone have a sense of humour bypass? Oh well!

If the comment had said "Great Britain sucks" would it still be funny to you?

In the context, yes, probably. I'm not too proud to take a joke. It's always difficult to assess what amount of bad taste will be acceptable around the world, but the person in question was in California, I think, so it's an internal matter for you guys. I thought it hit just the right note in response but I suppose dignity is important.

 

[sniper]

have to agree with wrinklyvet on this one occasion.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

have to agree with wrinklyvet on this one occasion.

Well I don't exactly agree.

Was it a joke what Scott posted? Or was there something going on we don't exactly know about?

Also if you are a moderator I'm not sure that would have been taken as a joke. Additional I note he was not banninated so whats all the complaining about? The post was deleted. There are other ways to complain about moderation other than saying the moderators %#x.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

have to agree with wrinklyvet on this one occasion.

Well I don't exactly agree.

Was it a joke what Scott posted? Or was there something going on we don't exactly know about?

Also if you are a moderator I'm not sure that would have been taken as a joke. Additional I note he was not banninated so whats all the complaining about? The post was deleted. There are other ways to complain about moderation other than saying the moderators %#x.

yeah, i see what you mean.

to be sure, I'm not saying anything about the joke being funny. That's always a matter of taste.
Merely saying that I think it was clearly a (attempt at making a) joke. It wasn't meant to offend (afaict).
That said, the poster c/should probably have mollified it slightly by adding an emoticon.
I would propose either this one: or this one: , optionally topped off with this one:

Fwiw, I would probably have left it up if I were mod.
But if the mods thought it was tasteless or that it sets a wrong precedent, removing it was the right thing to do.
And in the end the removal of the joke is as harmless as the joke itself.

 

[hrotha]

I thought it was VERY obviously a harmless joke. "Can we go back to dissing the mods?" -> Someone disses the mods in a deadpan manner. Classic. The setup was asking for the punchline, really.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

I thought it was VERY obviously a harmless joke. "Can we go back to dissing the mods?" -> Someone disses the mods in a deadpan manner. Classic. The setup was asking for the punchline, really.

My opinion also was that the post was a joke.

That does not mean as a moderator they took it the same way we did.

There could have been something we don't know etc.

But cool you took up for Scott - very sweet and a nice touch.

 

[Scott SoCal]

Re: Re:

So if we could get back to dissing the mods instead of carrying on with off-topic discussion it'd be fantastic.

Thanks.

Someone posted an amusing reply in response to this, but I see it's gone. Are posters not allowed a sense of humour at the Mods' expense, even when invited? Does someone have a sense of humour bypass? Oh well!

If the comment had said "Great Britain sucks" would it still be funny to you?

So if we could get back to dissing the mods instead of carrying on with off-topic discussion it'd be fantastic.

We all have the ability to laugh (although it can be a challenge for some)... we also each share an ability to be tightly wound.

C'est la vie.

 

[Scott SoCal]

Re: Re:

have to agree with wrinklyvet on this one occasion.

Well I don't exactly agree.

Was it a joke what Scott posted? Or was there something going on we don't exactly know about?

Also if you are a moderator I'm not sure that would have been taken as a joke. Additional I note he was not banninated so whats all the complaining about? The post was deleted. There are other ways to complain about moderation other than saying the moderators %#x.

Rarely do I care enough to complain about the mods. BigMac invited a response that was on topic so I gave one. I'd imagine BM got a chuckle out of it but if not then there's not much to say. If this is to be a thread absent of humor then so be it.

 

[Maxiton]

Hats off to Maxiton for giving it a try, I know I wouldn't want this thankless (and unpaid) mod job.

Come back, Max, come back and post again as a regular poster! (Come back and join us filthy and unwashed masses again.

+1

From one snooker fan to another, nothing but respect for Maxiton.

Hopefully all is good with you, fam.

well said!
i,m washed though

pheee...eeew! max had been reet on my case..........

good member......too opionated to be mod

Mark L

+2

Yep.

Well done Maxiton for giving it a go. Hope to see Maxiton back posting!

+3

Cheers

Well said! Come back Maxiton we want you on the forum chapeau for giving it a go, it's a tough job

+4

Uhm... plus five!

(Yay for ridiculous first-page-post...

+6. Come back to politics thread, Maxiton.

Thank you for the support, my friends.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

Thank you for the support, my friends.

From out of Nowhere RKO!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsFVbOhvFfc

 

[Maxiton]

Re: Re:

Thank you for the support, my friends.

From out of Nowhere RKO!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsFVbOhvFfc

That's about right. Straight outta nowhere.

PS. Eat your vegetables.

 

[RedheadDane]

Re: Re:

have to agree with wrinklyvet on this one occasion.

Well I don't exactly agree.

Was it a joke what Scott posted? Or was there something going on we don't exactly know about?

Also if you are a moderator I'm not sure that would have been taken as a joke. Additional I note he was not banninated so whats all the complaining about? The post was deleted. There are other ways to complain about moderation other than saying the moderators %#x.

yeah, i see what you mean.

to be sure, I'm not saying anything about the joke being funny. That's always a matter of taste.
Merely saying that I think it was clearly a (attempt at making a) joke. It wasn't meant to offend (afaict).
That said, the poster c/should probably have mollified it slightly by adding an emoticon.
I would propose either this one: or this one: , optionally topped off with this one:

Fwiw, I would probably have left it up if I were mod.
But if the mods thought it was tasteless or that it sets a wrong precedent, removing it was the right thing to do.
And in the end the removal of the joke is as harmless as the joke itself.

Maybe the removal of the joke was a joke.
BigMac asked us to go back to diss the mods, Scott did, his post got removed, and now people are dissing the mods over the removal of the Joke.

 

[Scott SoCal]

Re: Re:

have to agree with wrinklyvet on this one occasion.

Well I don't exactly agree.

Was it a joke what Scott posted? Or was there something going on we don't exactly know about?

Also if you are a moderator I'm not sure that would have been taken as a joke. Additional I note he was not banninated so whats all the complaining about? The post was deleted. There are other ways to complain about moderation other than saying the moderators %#x.

yeah, i see what you mean.

to be sure, I'm not saying anything about the joke being funny. That's always a matter of taste.
Merely saying that I think it was clearly a (attempt at making a) joke. It wasn't meant to offend (afaict).
That said, the poster c/should probably have mollified it slightly by adding an emoticon.
I would propose either this one: or this one: , optionally topped off with this one:

Fwiw, I would probably have left it up if I were mod.
But if the mods thought it was tasteless or that it sets a wrong precedent, removing it was the right thing to do.
And in the end the removal of the joke is as harmless as the joke itself.

Maybe the removal of the joke was a joke.
BigMac asked us to go back to diss the mods, Scott did, his post got removed, and now people are dissing the mods over the removal of the Joke.

I see what you did there.

 

[Echoes]

Re: Re:

Rarely do I care enough to complain about the mods. BigMac invited a response that was on topic so I gave one. I'd imagine BM got a chuckle out of it but if not then there's not much to say. If this is to be a thread absent of humor then so be it.

wow the kid is becoming a censor now, getting offended for a mere joke. He's really fallen very low but that's hardly surprising...

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re: Re:

Rarely do I care enough to complain about the mods. BigMac invited a response that was on topic so I gave one. I'd imagine BM got a chuckle out of it but if not then there's not much to say. If this is to be a thread absent of humor then so be it.

wow the kid is becoming a censor now, getting offended for a mere joke. He's really fallen very low but that's hardly surprising...

Who's a kid?

 

[BigMac]

 

[TheSpud]

Re: Re:

What??? A newsworthy story that has got a lot of attention.

If you and hog wanted to post about Britain and doping,

Well some of us don't take the myopic view that Russian state doping is an isolated story that has absolutely nothing to do with the wider doping and political world.

We don't believe that everything happens in a vaccum.

For us every single doping story, is only part of the far larger battle between an elite of liars and cheats at the top of sports who control the media, the doping and the narrative, and a lower class of liars and cheats who have no power and find themselves at the mercy of the first group whenever a scapegoat is needed.

We don't care much for athletes being busted for asthma medication, or no name figure skaters being caught doping, because such busts mean next to nothing and have no impact on the wider system. Wake me up when someone with major sponsorship deals gets caught doping. Or even when Russia actually gets banned from the olympics.

But if that's too hard for you to understand, consider this story - https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/13/pressure-russia-rio-2016-olympics-uk-anti-doping-obstructed
Or consider the fact that the head of the World Anti doping agency is a brit.
Or consider the fact that the last country to host the olympics before Russia was the United Kingdom. And last year, the narrative was strongly pushed that Russia disgraced these games, "our own games" by evily conspiring to dope in them, the bastards!!!!!

No, I won't apologize for thinking that the Western "we are clean narrative" and the "Russia was state doping" narrative, are strongly linked.

And any time, any no name athlete or no name beurocrat get caught doping, I will always think of the big fish that are getting away with it.

then all you had to do was take that drivel to the appropriate thread, like the "Brits don't dope" one or whatever, and have the echo chamber discussion you crave from it.

I'd like to call your bluff out on the echo chamber comment though. The main "clinic" opinion on doping is that sport is rife with doping, at all levels, across all nationalities, and that anti doping is a sham which scapegoats unmarketable athletes while focusing all its effort on protecting high level popular media friendly ones.

This is the opinion that everyone who is mocked as being part of the "clinic" holds, and it is also coincidentally an opinion held by the handful of academics who have devoted their lives to a study of doping, and by anyone else who has done any research into the subject.

Do you disagree with this opinion? Do you want to challenge it?

I remember when digger asked you a question 4 times and you ignored it all 4 times.

We both know why you ignored that question. Will you do the same here?

PS, is it really drivel for hog to point out that David Millar is a liar? Is that, still, such an uncomfortable truth to admit to? That one of your own nation could be a liar?

Maria Sharapova ...

As I said...

We don't care much for athletes being busted for asthma medication

tennis is clearly rife with blood doping, steroids, things like Aicar and lord knows what else. They got her with some minor drug that wasn't even banned until a few months ago

Fair comment I guess, although the 'clearly rife' words are your forte when it comes to any sport. I'm not sure meldonium is such a small thing though given its 'legit' use in only a few countries ...