Moderators

[frenchfry]

A quick visit to cyclingnews forums confirms my suspicion that a neutering prosess is underway, all according to the "rules" of course! Most of the interesting posters have either left, been banned for long periods, or continue to fight the transition to no avail. I suppose I couldn't really care less, but it is too bad that what was once an interesting place to hang out has evolved in this way. Maybe this is just a natural evolution, an inevitable maturing process. In any case, at least one "moderator" seems pretty pleased with himself for what is happening. Obviously, all those that think like myself must be wrong!

 

[RedheadDane]

Hey, just so CPM's actually pretty great work with the various index-threads doesn't get completely wasted, would it be possible for a mod - just every once in a while - to go in and keep them ajour?
You can edit other posters' posts, right?

A quick visit to cyclingnews forums confirms my suspicion that a neutering prosess is underway, all according to the "rules" of course! Most of the interesting posters have either left, been banned for long periods, or continue to fight the transition to no avail. I suppose I couldn't really care less, but it is too bad that what was once an interesting place to hang out has evolved in this way. Maybe this is just a natural evolution, an inevitable maturing process. In any case, at least one "moderator" seems pretty pleased with himself for what is happening. Obviously, all those that think like myself must be wrong!

You know, it is possible to be interesting and have your own opinions and still follow the rules.

 

[Netserk]

"That[present links to back up assertions]'s been a clinic rule for a long time."

No, it hasn't. It's in the guidelines. And it certainly hasn't been interpreted stiffly for as long as it has been there. For reference:

"Proof of point, opinions, and common knowledge: you can't just say "we know Bobby the Bod is doping". You have to provide some proof using linked sources or verifiable material. Or, you can just state "in my opinion". If, on the other hand, it is in the realm of "common knowledge", then it is acceptable to make an unverified statement. Be careful - common knowledge would apply, for instance, at the time of this posting, to Lance Armstrong. But allegations of current doping, and current riders, would not be "common knowledge" at this point. To be common knowledge, the "fact" has to have been published, widely read, and widely agreed with. This point is particularly applicable in The Clinic."

If you take it literally, then (if it was a rule) you'd have to enforce it every single time a rider, who hasn't been sanctioned (or the fact that they are doping have been "published, widely read, and widely agreed with"), is asserted as a doper. It doesn't happen.

...

Now, I haven't followed the latest Froome motor discussion, but wouldn't it be fair to assume that some (probably a fair share) of the "assertions" would (indirectly) fall under the "Or, you can just state "in my opinion""-clause that is written in the guidelines? I do get that some posters (like thehog) like to state opinions as fact, but it is my experience that the vast majority writes in a way where it is easy to read that it is not an absolute truth, but merely their point of view.

 

[Amnes2015]

i responded to this post with facts
viewtopic.php?p=2018103#p2018103

however my post was deleted , despite presenting FACTS with vido proof while the post i answered is a simple lie

why it was deleted? does the mod responsible for that has an agenda?

 

[Irondan]

Re:

i responded to this post with facts
viewtopic.php?p=2018103#p2018103

however my post was deleted , despite presenting FACTS with vido proof while the post i answered is a simple lie

why it was deleted? does the mod responsible for that has an agenda?

Saying that 99% of the comments posted in the clinic are lies etc, (I don't remember your comment verbatim) is enough to get your comment nuked.

Attacking the clinic as a new member is a red flag to mods. If you don't agree with what's being said in there that's fine. Please articulate yourself in a manner that doesn't attack the members of this forum.

 

[RedheadDane]

Hey, what about my little request up there?

 

[Pricey_sky]

Re:

Hey, what about my little request up there?

Sorry for the slow reply, i agree its a great thread, I will try and update it a couple of times a month if I've got the time.

 

[Amnes2015]

this is a reported post in froome thread in prr

Contador and Quintana never did the Vuelta after winning the tour, so compared to them, Froome is really really special.

I must have missed Quintana winning the Tour...

Let's wait for clinic shenanigans before throwing Froome under the bus. Until then, Quintana officially has two runner-up finishes.

observe how first 2 posts have nothing clinic

and suddenly a known clinic poster brings up the clinic, with a post that suggest a certainty of doping and only uncertain amount of time till official quintana will have some wins

but hey the report was resolved, there is no doping talk here in prr

so dear mod i can go freely in any gt winner thread posting hey lets wait, not throw him under the clinic bus, until then insert rider on 2nd place has a 2nd place ?

 

[Irondan]

Re:

this is a reported post in froome thread in prr

Contador and Quintana never did the Vuelta after winning the tour, so compared to them, Froome is really really special.

I must have missed Quintana winning the Tour...

Let's wait for clinic shenanigans before throwing Froome under the bus. Until then, Quintana officially has two runner-up finishes.

observe how first 2 posts have nothing clinic

and suddenly a known clinic poster brings up the clinic, with a post that suggest a certainty of doping and only uncertain amount of time till official quintana will have some wins

but hey the report was resolved, there is no doping talk here in prr

so dear mod i can go freely in any gt winner thread posting hey lets wait, not throw him under the clinic bus, until then insert rider on 2nd place has a 2nd place ?

How would you know that a report was filed, and much less resolved? That information is not available to you or anyone else outside the moderators group.

For your information, there was a board warning generated to the poster that was using clinic talk in the PRR. But hey, don't let me get in the way of your criticism towards mods....

 

[Netserk]

The same as with Vaughters.... Don't attack/insult him in his function as poster. When he isn't around, and when you are addressing him as a public figure, then I really don't see why it would matter if he has an account here or not.

 

[42x16ss]

Re:

this is a reported post in froome thread in prr

Contador and Quintana never did the Vuelta after winning the tour, so compared to them, Froome is really really special.

I must have missed Quintana winning the Tour...

Let's wait for clinic shenanigans before throwing Froome under the bus. Until then, Quintana officially has two runner-up finishes.

observe how first 2 posts have nothing clinic

and suddenly a known clinic poster brings up the clinic, with a post that suggest a certainty of doping and only uncertain amount of time till official quintana will have some wins

but hey the report was resolved, there is no doping talk here in prr

so dear mod i can go freely in any gt winner thread posting hey lets wait, not throw him under the clinic bus, until then insert rider on 2nd place has a 2nd place ?

http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=40002&sid=9ec4a9ed0e60a17c0a344d1d4ba36641

 

[Netserk]

Re:

The same as with Vaughters.... Don't attack/insult him in his function as poster. When he isn't around, and when you are addressing him as a public figure, then I really don't see why it would matter if he has an account here or not.

What happened to the post I was responding to (and my post before that)? Surely, they were both completely fine, one poster asking some questions while another tried to answer to the best of his abilities? Perhaps I'm just blind, but I don't think they have been moved to a more 'proper' thread either :O

 

[Pricey_sky]

The posts you were replying to come from a user who has now been banned. Posting comments which were ignoring the advice given from another mod, the posts replying to that have been moved.

 

[Netserk]

Ah, thanks. That makes sense.

 

[sniper]

Re:

The same as with Vaughters.... Don't attack/insult him in his function as poster. When he isn't around, and when you are addressing him as a public figure, then I really don't see why it would matter if he has an account here or not.

this is a good point.
i had some issues with this wrt Jeroen Swart. I insulted him as a public figure, but (to my knowledge) never insulted him in his function as a poster. I got a ban for insulting him, the argument being he was a member of the forum.
To be sure, I have no issue with the ban and no trouble conceding that I'd been too blunt there.
Just saying that sometimes there is a bit of a grey area here that might warrant some clarification or discussion.
For instance, what would happen if Dave Brailsford or Chris Froome would get an account here under their real name?
I could also see the hypothetical possibility of a troll signing up using their names, and then starting to report posts that insult them.

 

[Netserk]

Wasn't that in the same thread where he was active?

 

[sniper]

Amongst others...

 

[Netserk]

Then read my post again before misusing it.

 

[sniper]

https://media.giphy.com/media/MPuAxtmcrb904/giphy.gif

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

The same as with Vaughters.... Don't attack/insult him in his function as poster. When he isn't around, and when you are addressing him as a public figure, then I really don't see why it would matter if he has an account here or not.

this is a good point.
i had some issues with this wrt Jeroen Swart. I insulted him as a public figure, but (to my knowledge) never insulted him in his function as a poster. I got a ban for insulting him, the argument being he was a member of the forum.
To be sure, I have no issue with the ban and no trouble conceding that I'd been too blunt there.
Just saying that sometimes there is a bit of a grey area here that might warrant some clarification or discussion.
For instance, what would happen if Dave Brailsford or Chris Froome would get an account here under their real name?
I could also see the hypothetical possibility of a troll signing up using their names, and then starting to report posts that insult them.

There's no need to insult anyone on this forum but it happens so much there's no way we could keep people from doing it, kind of like rolling through a stop sign here in the US. Everyone does it, even the law abiding citizens.

My point is that we draw the line at forum members. I was never part of the JV threads when he was active, so as far as I'm concerned he's a public figure. Jearon Swart on the other hand is both, but to me he's a contributing forum member first, public figure second. I read it this way because he's very active.
If Chris Froome decided to become a member in the forum we would have to treat him the same as any other member, while he's active.

Please read what I just wrote about CF as being hypothetical, obviously he's not a member here and most likely will never be one. If by some chance he does become one the staff of the forum will discuss how we will handle his being a member to best suit all involved.

 

[sniper]

Thanks, that sounds very fair.

 

[Amnes2015]

i don't want to report 20 posts but
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=31228&p=2027089#p2027089

el pistolero

i saw new members banned after 1 day for much much less trolling than this

 

[Irondan]

Re:

i don't want to report 20 posts but
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=31228&p=2027089#p2027089

el pistolero

i saw new members banned after 1 day for much much less trolling than this

What member was banned after 1 day for not much trolling?

Can you link the post they were banned for?

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Is this another one of those Beef Eater vs. da dawg things?

 

[Irondan]

Re:

Is this another one of those Beef Eater vs. da dawg things?

I don't think so??