Moderators

[peloton]

Re: Re:

...cry me a river...forum has rules..those rules are expressed...how hard to follow?

Mark L

I've got no problem following them; I just was asking for clarification on why there seems to be an issue mentioning Amstrong specifically, but not other proven dopers in race thread. I realize his name has become somewhat synonymous with doping - but that doesn't erase the memory of the seven tours that he dominated. He won the most TdF on the road in history, and we can't mention him in a TdF race thread

He did. And you can talk about him all you like, just not in race threads. Simple.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

...cry me a river...forum has rules..those rules are expressed...how hard to follow?

Mark L

I've got no problem following them; I just was asking for clarification on why there seems to be an issue mentioning Amstrong specifically, but not other proven dopers in race thread. I realize his name has become somewhat synonymous with doping - but that doesn't erase the memory of the seven tours that he dominated. He won the most TdF on the road in history, and we can't mention him in a TdF race thread

He did. And you can talk about him all you like, just not in race threads. Simple.

OK, I'm not sure that answers the question as to why specifcially Armstrong and not other proven dopers. But, fair enough if that's the decision; I'm not going to labour the point because it's not such a big deal.

 

[peloton]

@DFA123 From my experience in the race threads, many clinic talk, be it streaks, Lance etc. it quickly becomes unreadable as people from both sides start arguing with each other. The live threads are busy enough, and really should focus on the race and riders who are in it.
We have the clinic for a reason after all.

 

[Praying Mantis]

You will be missed. For real. But I'd consider cutting the unpaid moderators some slack, it seems like a hard gig, particularly during the Tour. A series of subjective calls, to be sure, but I think they're doing an altogether pretty fair job. This is coming from someone who was also similarly (well, not quite to the same extent) frustrated by an unexplained deleted post not all that long ago. I actually think an explanatory PM is progress in that regard.

Moderating here is obviously hard, just reading through the last couple of pages makes that abundantly clear. The moderators are not paid, they do it because they enjoy using the forum and want to give something back. They won't always make the right call or the one you agree with and, this is pretty crucial, they do not read every post. They deal with the ones that are reported and the ones they happen across.

The funny thing is there are lots of posters here who manage to operate within the rules, it's really not hard.

Praying Mantis, that wasn't really directed at you, I can understand your frustration but if something is deemed off topic and deleted that's the moderators call. They have to deal with lots of stuff and maybe they delete something because they feel it could inflame something, has been reported or they just made a bad decision. Apparently with the new system once a post is gone it's gone so they can't do anything about it. I'd ask if you could cut them some slack, it's a tough gig and they're just trying to make the place as good as they can. You'll certainly be missed if you decide to leave.

I'd ask you to re-consider but it's true the moderation here is straight garbage.

Thank you very much for your Tour (& Vuelta) info threads and the Tour stage threads.

Hello,

I'd like to clarify some of the things I said earlier to avoid misunderstandings. I don't agree that the moderation here is generally garbage, much of it is very productive and useful.

For instance, I didn't complain when the thread I started about the Bahrain Cycling Team had a bunch of posts deleted and the thread was locked. It was clearly getting out of control, with people basically saying things like "Arabs are rapists." Not only off-topic but offensive, it would only spiral further out of control from there.

My comments were meant to express how I felt about my post getting deleted, and other such incidents I've read about. I can't be accused of not having a temper, but this perceived arrogance and lack of respect still gets under my skin days later. It wasn't God's own handwriting in my post, in fact it was pretty useless, like most posts are. But it's the principle, and to my own folly, I'm a principled person.

Deleting posts is such a harsh, heavy-handed form of moderation. It might not seem a big deal until it happens to you. Going into a discussion and casually deleting posts on very vague grounds without any notice is just wrong. IF there indeed was a need to moderate, why not just leave a mod comment adressing the matter? It's an easy enough thing to do, usually works just fine and leaves history as it was.

Making spontaneous comments in the forum is part of the fun. I don't think I should have to worry about them disappearing unless I clearly go against the basic rules in a very overt manner. If it feels like some unpredictable authority is hovering above me just waiting to slap the pen out of my hand, it's pretty easy to lose interest in even trying to post.

This is the sort of policy I find disheartening (from stage 19 thread):

Play nice all, I'm watching today. I will delete all posts that are off topic, with no explanation, so think twice before you post. I will not tolerate any baiting or trolling.
Hope we have a great stage

I shouldn't have to worry since I don't generally post off-topic, but it's such a strong deterrent to post because ultimately what's "off-topic" is so subjective. A few warnings would probably be enough to start with. It's seems oppressive.

I guess I could go on making informative posts that are unlikely to get deleted, but that would just turn into a job. It stings perhaps even more because I've made an effort the past weeks to be a positive contributor. Now, I don't demand special treatment, but it sure is this kind of petty thing that can completely make me lose interest. I've read the rules, and I respect them. I know what little mini-universe we're operating in here, it's a small corner of a media company's private site. A forum largely run by volunteers. It can't be easy for mods dealing with the torrent of new posts every day. Mistakes happen, too. Recognizing problems and taking action to improve the situation is something we all have to do though.


For me to be comfortable posting again, deletions would have to be regarded as something you avoid unless you really can't. If anything comes out of my little "drama" here, I wish it would be an open discussion on the deletion policy. What does it take to delete a post? When is a simple comment or reprimand enough? Should the poster be informed that their words were disappeared and why? It would seem that mods should need to confer a bit in private before the deletions start, because if you get it wrong, it's really insulting. Velvet glove, light touch is what I'm saying. Lately it's been a bit of a naked iron fist.


Me, I just try to live by that Golden Rule.

 

[peloton]

If you post within the forum rules, I'm not deleting anyone's posts. My remark today was mainly that I don't want to see multiple reports from people fighting with each other (which happened today even before the stage started), no one want's to read that page after page. Even less in a live thread with already many posts.

Stick with the forum rules and you have no problems.

 

[Cannibal72]

I know you guys are quite busy, but the Clinic is a bit of a mess at the moment as to where each conversation is. It might be an idea to merge the wattage thread and bits of the LeMond thread into the Sky thread, and parts of the rest of the LeMond thread into the Armstrong thread.

 

[peloton]

Thanks Cannibal, we'll look into it

 

[sniper]

Re:

I know you guys are quite busy, but the Clinic is a bit of a mess at the moment as to where each conversation is. It might be an idea to merge the wattage thread and bits of the LeMond thread into the Sky thread, and parts of the rest of the LeMond thread into the Armstrong thread.

I wanted to address this, too.

it would be good to see some of the Swart/Sky discussion be moved into the Sky thread (or the Froome data thread?), and the Armstrong/motor discussion into the Lance thread or one of the motorization threads.

(I'm no doubt co-guilty of taking the Lemond thread off topic, for which apologies.)

 

[Netserk]

Re:

@DFA123 From my experience in the race threads, many clinic talk, be it streaks, Lance etc. it quickly becomes unreadable as people from both sides start arguing with each other. The live threads are busy enough, and really should focus on the race and riders who are in it.
We have the clinic for a reason after all.

Why do you repeatedly compare Lance with steak? Steak jokes are obvious references to a doping excuse, it doesn't have anything to do with the PRR section. Lance Armstrong is a former pro, and he is very iconic. Why do you think Wiggins compared Sky with US Postal? It wasn't a clinic reference, but a racing reference. Froome is a superb climber and TTer with a superb team that can completely control a race. There is *no* rider more similar to him in that way than Armstrong, and that in itself has nothing to do with the clinic.

There simply isn't any good reason to censor (valid and non-clinic) Armstrong references in the PRR section, whilst allowing Coppi, Merckx, Hinault, Indurain, Pantani, Cipo, Ullrich, Riis, Mayo, Basso, Landis, Levi, Valverde, Contador, Ricco etc. references.

 

[peloton]

@Netserk Well for starters none of the riders except Lance are banned for life. And he flames the topics very fast.
You can post in the clinic all you want, but how hard is it to refrain from race threads?

 

[Netserk]

Why would anyone post that in the clinic? Fairly logical that when I want to comment on the way in which that Froome wins the Tour, from a pure racing POV, that I would do so in the PRR section.

It would be like saying that the kelderman thread should be moved to the clinic because it has Merckx in the title, despite the thread having absolutely nothing to do with the clinic.

 

[DFA123]

Re:

@DFA123 From my experience in the race threads, many clinic talk, be it streaks, Lance etc. it quickly becomes unreadable as people from both sides start arguing with each other. The live threads are busy enough, and really should focus on the race and riders who are in it.
We have the clinic for a reason after all.

Fair enough, thanks for clarifying. I agree that threads getting out of control helps no-one; it seems a bit inconsistent to just outlaw Armstrong, but I guess if he's the one name that derails threads more than any other then it makes sense.

 

[Tonton]

Of course, I may come across as biased, being a Moderator myself.

I wouldn't open up had I not read the final OP of this year's TdF by Praying Mantis. It hurts. For the past three months, I have had access to the moderator threads, and participated as much as my work schedule would allow it. Knowing the system from the inside, I can vouch for my colleagues and their integrity. I can't believe how much time they spend, trying to make this community a place where we can exchange thoughts, opinions, knowledge, a place where we can also disagree. Respectfully. And this sometimes requires action on our part. It's unfortunate, but see for example what lack of oversight did to YouTube. Let's agree that we don't want the CN forums to become that.

I'm not going to address the issue that Praying Mantis raised, I don't know what happened. But believe me when I say that when moving, deleting, editing posts, warning or banning, one wrong click can happen. I once mistakenly deleted a post: kwikki, I apologize. Being a Moderator is a lot of work, it may be a little overwhelming at times: reports keep coming, we monitor a lot of threads, try to nip toxic posts in the bud before feuds erupt, it's intense. Like Bruce/Jim Carrey as God answering prayers on his computer, really . Non-stop. We do your best.

We are not paid, we give our time to the cycling community because we love the sport. Moderators are not here to make anybody miserable, heck, I wish there was no need for Mods. But let's face it: not everyone is courteous or open-minded. Cycling fans are passionate, like in football. Some are hooligans, like in football. Sad, but true. But more often than not, if we all took a deep breath before hitting the "send" button, make sure that our post is respectful, within the rules, 90% of the actions, warnings, or bans would be avoided.

If you could see how Moderators communicate, ask each other for advice, sometimes disagree, work together for you, you would be amazed. I appreciate all of you, every member. And every Moderator, with special props for Irondan for his mentoring and on-going support.

 

[Jspear]

Of course, I may come across as biased, being a Moderator myself.

I wouldn't open up had I not read the final OP of this year's TdF by Praying Mantis. It hurts. For the past three months, I have had access to the moderator threads, and participated as much as my work schedule would allow it. Knowing the system from the inside, I can vouch for my colleagues and their integrity. I can't believe how much time they spend, trying to make this community a place where we can exchange thoughts, opinions, knowledge, a place where we can also disagree. Respectfully. And this sometimes requires action on our part. It's unfortunate, but see for example what lack of oversight did to YouTube. Let's agree that we don't want the CN forums to become that.

I'm not going to address the issue that Praying Mantis raised, I don't know what happened. But believe me when I say that when moving, deleting, editing posts, warning or banning, one wrong click can happen. I once mistakenly deleted a post: kwikki, I apologize. Being a Moderator is a lot of work, it may be a little overwhelming at times: reports keep coming, we monitor a lot of threads, try to nip toxic posts in the bud before feuds erupt, it's intense. Like Bruce/Jim Carrey as God answering prayers on his computer, really . Non-stop. We do your best.

We are not paid, we give our time to the cycling community because we love the sport. Moderators are not here to make anybody miserable, heck, I wish there was no need for Mods. But let's face it: not everyone is courteous or open-minded. Cycling fans are passionate, like in football. Some are hooligans, like in football. Sad, but true. But more often than not, if we all took a deep breath before hitting the "send" button, make sure that our post is respectful, within the rules, 90% of the actions, warnings, or bans would be avoided.

If you could see how Moderators communicate, ask each other for advice, sometimes disagree, work together for you, you would be amazed. I appreciate all of you, every member. And every Moderator, with special props for Irondan for his mentoring and on-going support.

Tonton you're the best with your modding. (All you guys are great) Giving detailed info/explanations when you aren't really obligated to do so. Kudos.

 

[Tonton]

Thank you JSpear. You're a great contributor on this forum. I just broke a spoke, got a flat, but I'll say it again: the climb in Pittsburg, I'll do it. You looked like Ullrich on it btw .

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I can vouch for my colleagues and their integrity.

Maybe not entirely fair to pick out one sentence from a much longer post, but on this point...

It would be good to know what instructions and code of practice the moderators are operating under, because if those mods' rules were made public, the rest of us would know whether they have operated with integrity.

I have recently found one moderator willing to adjudicate on a matter that he/she is directly involved in: is that within expected behaviour?

Another administrator wrote exceedingly disparagingly about posts that are undoubtedly made in good will, and for the benefit of the community here, but refused repeated requests to explain his/her posts: is that acceptable for someone with responsibility here?

Is there any formal recourse to complain about the conduct of admins, or to draw attention to their lack of action? If not, then the acceptance of someone's offer to help becomes licensing them to do whatever they wish here.

As I have said elsewhere, I want to respect and be grateful for the voluntary work done here, but the role of moderators is of itself less respectable if it is not accountable.

 

[Carols]

Of course, I may come across as biased, being a Moderator myself.

I wouldn't open up had I not read the final OP of this year's TdF by Praying Mantis. It hurts. For the past three months, I have had access to the moderator threads, and participated as much as my work schedule would allow it. Knowing the system from the inside, I can vouch for my colleagues and their integrity. I can't believe how much time they spend, trying to make this community a place where we can exchange thoughts, opinions, knowledge, a place where we can also disagree. Respectfully. And this sometimes requires action on our part. It's unfortunate, but see for example what lack of oversight did to YouTube. Let's agree that we don't want the CN forums to become that.

I'm not going to address the issue that Praying Mantis raised, I don't know what happened. But believe me when I say that when moving, deleting, editing posts, warning or banning, one wrong click can happen. I once mistakenly deleted a post: kwikki, I apologize. Being a Moderator is a lot of work, it may be a little overwhelming at times: reports keep coming, we monitor a lot of threads, try to nip toxic posts in the bud before feuds erupt, it's intense. Like Bruce/Jim Carrey as God answering prayers on his computer, really . Non-stop. We do your best.

We are not paid, we give our time to the cycling community because we love the sport. Moderators are not here to make anybody miserable, heck, I wish there was no need for Mods. But let's face it: not everyone is courteous or open-minded. Cycling fans are passionate, like in football. Some are hooligans, like in football. Sad, but true. But more often than not, if we all took a deep breath before hitting the "send" button, make sure that our post is respectful, within the rules, 90% of the actions, warnings, or bans would be avoided.

If you could see how Moderators communicate, ask each other for advice, sometimes disagree, work together for you, you would be amazed. I appreciate all of you, every member. And every Moderator, with special props for Irondan for his mentoring and on-going support.

Bravo, well said Tonton. I for one appreciate all the hard work the mods put in so we can share our love for this glorious sport in a decent environment.

Respect and Applause to all the mods!

 

[Benotti69]

Said it before. There are rules. Easy. No one pays to post here so bare that in mind before you complain. Mods don't get paid another consideration to make.

 

[lenric37]

The rules don't let you be human.

 

[Benotti69]

The rules don't let you be human.

This is digital, not biological

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I have just one question: how many times are people allowed to come back under a new name on this board? Cause, really, you have to be blind to not see what's going on in the nuthouse/clinic.

 

[Irondan]

Re:

I have just one question: how many times are people allowed to come back under a new name on this board? Cause, really, you have to be blind to not see what's going on in the nuthouse/clinic.

Maybe you should report your suspicions rather than trying to insult the moderators, who don't read every comment the second it's posted.

We try to root out all sockpuppets, I think that's fairly obvious.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I know you are a touchy fella Iran Dan but dont overdo it with your ''insulting''.

I only read every now and then and was surprised, thats all.

Cheers, and you are all doing a good job.

 

[CheckMyPecs]

Could we have a list of moderators by native language? Over the last couple of months there have been a few bans for foul or threatening language which I believe were not entirely justified, and I'm starting to wonder if this could be due to certain moderators being unable to appreciate the full nuances of English.

 

[Netserk]

Pricey is English, I think Irondan is an American. Red Rick suffers all the symptoms of being a Dutchie (but I don't think he's part of the mob)