- Jul 30, 2011
- 7,539
- 107
- 17,680
- Status
Re: Re:
plenty of us have gotten a vacation from time to time, but his ban announcement hints at something more ominous. I've seen others post far worse
Pricey_sky said:
plenty of us have gotten a vacation from time to time, but his ban announcement hints at something more ominous. I've seen others post far worse
Re: Re:
the fact that Alpe participated in the discourse and was respected for his opinions and posting style made him an effective mod for a particularly prickly thread. I think his methods would serve as an ideal model for the other mods
Scott SoCal said:
the fact that Alpe participated in the discourse and was respected for his opinions and posting style made him an effective mod for a particularly prickly thread. I think his methods would serve as an ideal model for the other mods
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Please keep the discussion on-topic. The is a thread about the moderators, it is not a surrogate member suspension appreciation/depreciation thread.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Re: Re:
No, that wasn't the intention. You can comment on the moderators actions with relation to bans/suspensions. I think we'll even allow you to speculate on why you think we did it, as long as it doesn't take over the thread and stays on-topic, but other members are not to be dragged into the discussion.
blutto said:
No, that wasn't the intention. You can comment on the moderators actions with relation to bans/suspensions. I think we'll even allow you to speculate on why you think we did it, as long as it doesn't take over the thread and stays on-topic, but other members are not to be dragged into the discussion.
- Sep 25, 2009
- 7,527
- 1
- 0
Re: Re:
yes, this post is about your poor moderation, king boonen, so if you delete this post, like you just deleted the one i posted about the semper ban, you will prove the point.
king boonen is clearly abusing his moderating position and acting in a clear bias.King Boonen said:
yes, this post is about your poor moderation, king boonen, so if you delete this post, like you just deleted the one i posted about the semper ban, you will prove the point.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Re: Re:
Hi Python, it's not deleted, just moved. You involved another member in your discussion and this thread is about the moderators. You are free to re-post what you said without the references to another member of the forum.
python said:
Hi Python, it's not deleted, just moved. You involved another member in your discussion and this thread is about the moderators. You are free to re-post what you said without the references to another member of the forum.
- Sep 25, 2009
- 7,527
- 1
- 0
here's king boonen more on why you deleting my post re. the semper ban is the abuse of your moderation power.
at no point my post spoke of an appreciation or a depriciation of the semper ban. not one word. it was about a moderating action i did not understand that was the result of a poster complaint. did not take the side of anyone, nor criticized the mod action, just explained my feuding experience with semper, as a former moderator.
that you can't figure that a more nuanced approach may be needed than your primitive actions, does speak to you being unfit for the job. my opinion.
at no point my post spoke of an appreciation or a depriciation of the semper ban. not one word. it was about a moderating action i did not understand that was the result of a poster complaint. did not take the side of anyone, nor criticized the mod action, just explained my feuding experience with semper, as a former moderator.
that you can't figure that a more nuanced approach may be needed than your primitive actions, does speak to you being unfit for the job. my opinion.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Please see my previous post. I don't know if the member you referred to reported SF, but you seem to fundamentally misunderstand how rules work. SF's suspension was not a result of a member complaint, it was the result of his actions breaking forum rules.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Oh, if you do have a complaint about my or any other moderators actions that you don't feel has been sufficiently addressed then your best course of action is to contact the admin.
- Sep 25, 2009
- 7,527
- 1
- 0
Re: Re:
King Boonen wrote:
lets start with 'this thread is not about 'appreciation/ depreciation'. how can say this when the following post was left standing?
Merckx index wrote
so here a poster appreciates the semper ban, and not only you left it in the thread about modding, you did not notice that if it's left standing, i and anyone can read it and figure a poster complained..
you say, my post involved another member...but here that member, by the very fact of posting HERE involved himself in the. fully naming himself ! so me pointing to his handle to be more specific and better understood wrt to thoughts, was off-topic ? your interpretation is an obvious poor judgement or a bias.
and 3dly, you say i am free to re-post w/o referencing THAT 'secret 'poster who named himself...why would you not shoot me a quick pm if it was the only objection you had. i'd fix it w/o really understanding why. or i'd have no problem if you removed that handle as a part of your power.
i hope this did come across wrongly, b/c i did put an effort to explain why i think your actions were poor.
King Boonen wrote:
lets start with 'this thread is not about 'appreciation/ depreciation'. how can say this when the following post was left standing?
Merckx index wrote
so here a poster appreciates the semper ban, and not only you left it in the thread about modding, you did not notice that if it's left standing, i and anyone can read it and figure a poster complained..
you say, my post involved another member...but here that member, by the very fact of posting HERE involved himself in the. fully naming himself ! so me pointing to his handle to be more specific and better understood wrt to thoughts, was off-topic ? your interpretation is an obvious poor judgement or a bias.
and 3dly, you say i am free to re-post w/o referencing THAT 'secret 'poster who named himself...why would you not shoot me a quick pm if it was the only objection you had. i'd fix it w/o really understanding why. or i'd have no problem if you removed that handle as a part of your power.
i hope this did come across wrongly, b/c i did put an effort to explain why i think your actions were poor.
- Sep 25, 2009
- 7,527
- 1
- 0
Re:
i criticized and showed the actual examples of YOUR poor actions - deleting some and leaving other post that was clearly appreciating a ban of another member etc. why would you not acknowledge such an obvious thing ?
i can only speculate. and be sure, when and if i find it necessary, i will contact whoever i may need.
why would you point to such an obvious right i know i have or "any other mod'?King Boonen said:
i criticized and showed the actual examples of YOUR poor actions - deleting some and leaving other post that was clearly appreciating a ban of another member etc. why would you not acknowledge such an obvious thing ?
i can only speculate. and be sure, when and if i find it necessary, i will contact whoever i may need.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
MI's post is specifically commenting on the moderation, he even says it in his post that you've quoted and that the ban is irrelevant.
You implied that another member was involved in the suspension of SF and implied they were in some way to blame and should take your opinions and past interactions into account. This is wrong, off-topic for the thread and one of the reasons that appreciation/depreciation thread was closed.
We do, at times, edit posts where some content is off-topic but some isn't. The problem in this case was that your post had been quoted and an opinion offered on it. for me to edit your post I would have had to edit the quote as well. This possibly changes the meaning of the post so that the person who quoted feels that they no longer hold the same opinion. I'm not going to spend time sorting that out and checking that everyone is happy with edits etc. it's much easier just to remove the posts and allow you to repost the on-topic parts.
Again, you're more than welcome to repost the on topic parts. I could even PM you the post if you can't fully remember it.
You implied that another member was involved in the suspension of SF and implied they were in some way to blame and should take your opinions and past interactions into account. This is wrong, off-topic for the thread and one of the reasons that appreciation/depreciation thread was closed.
We do, at times, edit posts where some content is off-topic but some isn't. The problem in this case was that your post had been quoted and an opinion offered on it. for me to edit your post I would have had to edit the quote as well. This possibly changes the meaning of the post so that the person who quoted feels that they no longer hold the same opinion. I'm not going to spend time sorting that out and checking that everyone is happy with edits etc. it's much easier just to remove the posts and allow you to repost the on-topic parts.
Again, you're more than welcome to repost the on topic parts. I could even PM you the post if you can't fully remember it.
I would like to be able to show support for Semper as a poster, but I see where the mods have asked us not comment on his ban. For consistency's sake, I think Merckx' post appreciating the ban should be removed if we are not supposed to say yea/nay on bans in this thread.
I also think this post below on the closing on the suspension thread should be edited, because it does sound like bans are to be discussed here:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?p=2195497#p2195497
Finally, it seems like a decision has been made to moderate the politics thread (and maybe other threads in the general section too) more strictly than in recent years. I assume this is going on in concert with Alpe being removed as a mod. Notice I said seems and assume. The politics thread has had more leeway for years, and this was publicly discussed on this forum and announced back when Alpe said he'd moderate those threads. If things are changing now as far as rule enforcement, bans, and what is expected of posters in those threads, it would be appropriate for the mod team to make some sort of visible announcement in the "general" subforum about the changes so that posters know what to expect.
I also think this post below on the closing on the suspension thread should be edited, because it does sound like bans are to be discussed here:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/viewtopic.php?p=2195497#p2195497
Finally, it seems like a decision has been made to moderate the politics thread (and maybe other threads in the general section too) more strictly than in recent years. I assume this is going on in concert with Alpe being removed as a mod. Notice I said seems and assume. The politics thread has had more leeway for years, and this was publicly discussed on this forum and announced back when Alpe said he'd moderate those threads. If things are changing now as far as rule enforcement, bans, and what is expected of posters in those threads, it would be appropriate for the mod team to make some sort of visible announcement in the "general" subforum about the changes so that posters know what to expect.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Re:
Just to clarify, you can comment on our actions. So you can say "you feel that the ban was harsh for what occurred" if that is how you feel.
MI clearly says he doesn't care about the ban, he was commenting on the fact that the mods were aware of what was happening.
The main reason that thread was closed was because it was basically a place for members to troll each other and celebrate/denigrate each others actions and circumstances. the reason we are being fairly strict on what is allowed here is because we don't want the same thing to happen to this thread.
I'm fairly new to the team but I've been told that the Politics thread has always been moderated, even if many of the regular viewers might think it isn't. Regular contributors to that thread do report posts from time to time so that's a fair indication that some moderation is both wanted and required. We are still lenient in those threads but certain things are unacceptable and will force action to be taken.
This has nothing to do with Alpe being removed as a mod. I, and I'm sure others, have moderated those threads when Alpe was still a mod.
Beech Mtn said:
Just to clarify, you can comment on our actions. So you can say "you feel that the ban was harsh for what occurred" if that is how you feel.
MI clearly says he doesn't care about the ban, he was commenting on the fact that the mods were aware of what was happening.
The main reason that thread was closed was because it was basically a place for members to troll each other and celebrate/denigrate each others actions and circumstances. the reason we are being fairly strict on what is allowed here is because we don't want the same thing to happen to this thread.
I'm fairly new to the team but I've been told that the Politics thread has always been moderated, even if many of the regular viewers might think it isn't. Regular contributors to that thread do report posts from time to time so that's a fair indication that some moderation is both wanted and required. We are still lenient in those threads but certain things are unacceptable and will force action to be taken.
This has nothing to do with Alpe being removed as a mod. I, and I'm sure others, have moderated those threads when Alpe was still a mod.
Well, a second post because I've been told Semper may be permabanned. I really hope this does not happen. That seems way too severe. SF has his own perspective on things, and his life experience contributes to the issue discussions in the politics thread for sure.
I don't like permabans in general. It'll be an unpopular opinion, but I still don't think Ryo should've been permabanned. If someone breaks a rule, I think a short/medium ban is a good action to take. If they come back and break the rule again, then another ban (maybe longer) serves the purpose. A person will either behave or not be around very often. But letting them come back from bans gives them a chance to reform and still participate. For me, permabans should only be used for things like a poster who threatens another user, or is a spammer, or keeps making sockpuppets to circumvent bans.
I don't like permabans in general. It'll be an unpopular opinion, but I still don't think Ryo should've been permabanned. If someone breaks a rule, I think a short/medium ban is a good action to take. If they come back and break the rule again, then another ban (maybe longer) serves the purpose. A person will either behave or not be around very often. But letting them come back from bans gives them a chance to reform and still participate. For me, permabans should only be used for things like a poster who threatens another user, or is a spammer, or keeps making sockpuppets to circumvent bans.
- Jul 25, 2012
- 12,967
- 1,970
- 25,680
Re:
So as to stop the speculation, SF will not be permabanned for this recent problem. I don't believe that a permaban was ever mentioned by the mod team. We try to discuss everything but occasionally a mod will have to take action to stop something develop and then they might reserve the right to edit the length of the ban. If so we try to say so, so it doesn't seem like we're trying to do it without people noticing.
Permanbans are always a last resort, I also am not a fan of them. There are, however, some posters that will continually break the rules every time they come back and in these situations we either have a choice of continuously banning them each time and dealing with whatever fall-out they create (and likely enjoy creating) or stopping the cycle. We're not paid, we're all here because we like the forums and want to contribute and the more we have to deal with the less time we get to do that. We accept this but when particular users take up 90% of our time something is going to have to give. They are generally reserved for rude, aggressive, abusive posters or posters who just won't adapt. We're fully aware that posters are individuals and can let emotions get the better of them. We also understand that long term members can build up more of these incidents due to being around longer and this is all taken into account.
I guess what I'm trying to say is we try to understand when that kind of posting is wilfully disruptive and when it's just a poorly thought out action/reaction.
Beech Mtn said:
So as to stop the speculation, SF will not be permabanned for this recent problem. I don't believe that a permaban was ever mentioned by the mod team. We try to discuss everything but occasionally a mod will have to take action to stop something develop and then they might reserve the right to edit the length of the ban. If so we try to say so, so it doesn't seem like we're trying to do it without people noticing.
Permanbans are always a last resort, I also am not a fan of them. There are, however, some posters that will continually break the rules every time they come back and in these situations we either have a choice of continuously banning them each time and dealing with whatever fall-out they create (and likely enjoy creating) or stopping the cycle. We're not paid, we're all here because we like the forums and want to contribute and the more we have to deal with the less time we get to do that. We accept this but when particular users take up 90% of our time something is going to have to give. They are generally reserved for rude, aggressive, abusive posters or posters who just won't adapt. We're fully aware that posters are individuals and can let emotions get the better of them. We also understand that long term members can build up more of these incidents due to being around longer and this is all taken into account.
I guess what I'm trying to say is we try to understand when that kind of posting is wilfully disruptive and when it's just a poorly thought out action/reaction.
- Apr 30, 2014
- 9,605
- 393
- 22,381
Re: Re:
If you've seen far worse posts did you report them?
Moderators can't possibly read every comment that's posted, these "far worse" comments were probably not read by mods. This is why we have the report system and mods depend on forum members to do their part in helping out by reporting comments that violate forum rules and the website's T.O.S.
Nothing ominous about Semper Fidelis's ban, it is what it is and nothing more.patricknd said:
If you've seen far worse posts did you report them?
Moderators can't possibly read every comment that's posted, these "far worse" comments were probably not read by mods. This is why we have the report system and mods depend on forum members to do their part in helping out by reporting comments that violate forum rules and the website's T.O.S.
- Jul 27, 2010
- 5,121
- 883
- 19,680
Since I'm getting a lot of (unwanted) ink here, I want to clarify some points. If in the process I post things not allowable in this thread, I apologize, but I think these are issues that people upset about the mods' action should be aware of:
1. In case anyone wonders, I did not report SF. I have never reported any other poster here, and it's very unlikely I would. Whenever I feel I'm being trolled/attacked/whatever, my response is simply to ignore that poster.
2. Before SF was suspended, another poster PMd me, asking me why SF was being so rude to me. So it's not as though only one mod, out of everyone else in the forum, thought SF's behavior was breaking rules (and no, the poster who PMd me also did not report SF).
3. I said in my post upthread that I don't care if SF is banned or not. I'll add that I hope he's not permabanned. I'm generally against permabans for anyone. I value some of SF's contributions, and even if I didn't, that wouldn't justify IMO a permaban.
4. All of that said, I think people who are questioning the suspension should be aware that this was not an isolated incident. In addition to four OT posts attacking me in the politics thread in the past few weeks, SF has a history of taking gratuitous shots at me out of the blue. Not often, not enough to be upsetting to me, but on occasion. This goes back to the Clinic/LA days.
5. Finally--and this may be very difficult for Westerners to wrap their heads around--I feel some pain in this experience. I'm not talking about the pain of being under personal attack, but the pain of being involved in a situation where someone gets suspended and others cry foul. IOW, the pain of disrupting the flow of discussion.
The Western view is generally that someone is wrong and someone is right, and as far as who followed forum rules and who didn't, I think that's correct. But whenever someone is suspended as a result of an interaction with me, I view myself as part of that process, even if that was not my intention. I take some responsibility for this outcome, even if I didn't break any rules, didn't try at any point to elicit negative feelings from another poster, didn't even respond directly to any of his posts until finally the distortions became too blatant and too easy to refute.
Trust me, I'm not gloating about this, I'm not at all happy about what happened. I'll go even further and say that I feel I've failed whenever someone gets (what I perceive as) nasty towards me. I try to set a very high bar, in which I'm sensitive enough to others to understand what they don't like about me, and even if that something is part of who I am, something I'm not in the slightest bit ashamed of, I expect myself to be able to find a way to work around that. Whenever I don't, and of course it happens, particularly in political discussions, I note that failing before moving on.
1. In case anyone wonders, I did not report SF. I have never reported any other poster here, and it's very unlikely I would. Whenever I feel I'm being trolled/attacked/whatever, my response is simply to ignore that poster.
2. Before SF was suspended, another poster PMd me, asking me why SF was being so rude to me. So it's not as though only one mod, out of everyone else in the forum, thought SF's behavior was breaking rules (and no, the poster who PMd me also did not report SF).
3. I said in my post upthread that I don't care if SF is banned or not. I'll add that I hope he's not permabanned. I'm generally against permabans for anyone. I value some of SF's contributions, and even if I didn't, that wouldn't justify IMO a permaban.
4. All of that said, I think people who are questioning the suspension should be aware that this was not an isolated incident. In addition to four OT posts attacking me in the politics thread in the past few weeks, SF has a history of taking gratuitous shots at me out of the blue. Not often, not enough to be upsetting to me, but on occasion. This goes back to the Clinic/LA days.
5. Finally--and this may be very difficult for Westerners to wrap their heads around--I feel some pain in this experience. I'm not talking about the pain of being under personal attack, but the pain of being involved in a situation where someone gets suspended and others cry foul. IOW, the pain of disrupting the flow of discussion.
The Western view is generally that someone is wrong and someone is right, and as far as who followed forum rules and who didn't, I think that's correct. But whenever someone is suspended as a result of an interaction with me, I view myself as part of that process, even if that was not my intention. I take some responsibility for this outcome, even if I didn't break any rules, didn't try at any point to elicit negative feelings from another poster, didn't even respond directly to any of his posts until finally the distortions became too blatant and too easy to refute.
Trust me, I'm not gloating about this, I'm not at all happy about what happened. I'll go even further and say that I feel I've failed whenever someone gets (what I perceive as) nasty towards me. I try to set a very high bar, in which I'm sensitive enough to others to understand what they don't like about me, and even if that something is part of who I am, something I'm not in the slightest bit ashamed of, I expect myself to be able to find a way to work around that. Whenever I don't, and of course it happens, particularly in political discussions, I note that failing before moving on.
- Sep 25, 2009
- 7,527
- 1
- 0
Re:
1st off, if you are 'getting a lot of (unwanted) ink' you've asked for it. not a dig at all but a statement of fact.if you DID not thank a mod for his action publicly (an action that, lets be clear, banned semper), you'd never see the 'unwanted ink'... a little suggestion: if you thanked dan privately which i am sure was an option for an intelligent poster like yourself, none of the inking of your handle would have happened. btw, i did more that once even when dan banned me, chose a private way to appreciate his actions. simply, b/c i needed NOT to look fake or be felt sorry fore in PUBLIC. PRIVATE or PUBLIC was your choice, a legitimate choice,thus, you need to be responsible for YOUR choice.
2nd, i agree 100%, in fact i endorse it b/c i know you for a long time, with the rest you posted about YOURSELF... your feelings, your nature, your philosophy, your opinion of the western perceptions etc etc. the trouble is, if we are to go by the moderating standard laid and enforced, this all is strictly off-topic here. let me be clear, i do think your explanations do belong here and are eloquent, but they need be removed if we are to take the mod explanation (quoting verbatim) applied to my post that was removed.
and, btw, in my post that was deleted by king boonen and which i still consider an abuse, I NEVER criticized you or any mods. or even tried to white wash semper. in fact i gave you a compliment as an intelligent poster. as someone who knows a lot of history btwn me and semper that was turbulent rand reminicent of your concerns.
the thing i said that seemed not to fit the the view of a mod that removed my post, is this. very literally. while referring to my long and firce conflict with semper as a mod , i gave him a credit for being reflective and sincere when he felt an applogy was due. my fault was to wish the same outcome btwn you and semper.
i dare the mod who deleted my post or any mod that has an ability to to still read it to contradict me with the actual things i said. obviously since my post was deleted i speak from memory. but i am brutally sincere and honest.
let's start with this quote. and i will keep it as shot, simple and factual as i can.Merckx index said:
1st off, if you are 'getting a lot of (unwanted) ink' you've asked for it. not a dig at all but a statement of fact.if you DID not thank a mod for his action publicly (an action that, lets be clear, banned semper), you'd never see the 'unwanted ink'... a little suggestion: if you thanked dan privately which i am sure was an option for an intelligent poster like yourself, none of the inking of your handle would have happened. btw, i did more that once even when dan banned me, chose a private way to appreciate his actions. simply, b/c i needed NOT to look fake or be felt sorry fore in PUBLIC. PRIVATE or PUBLIC was your choice, a legitimate choice,thus, you need to be responsible for YOUR choice.
2nd, i agree 100%, in fact i endorse it b/c i know you for a long time, with the rest you posted about YOURSELF... your feelings, your nature, your philosophy, your opinion of the western perceptions etc etc. the trouble is, if we are to go by the moderating standard laid and enforced, this all is strictly off-topic here. let me be clear, i do think your explanations do belong here and are eloquent, but they need be removed if we are to take the mod explanation (quoting verbatim) applied to my post that was removed.
you sure did not gloat the ban. that much is clear...but didn't you appreciate the ban ? you put it very civilly and politely. but you even counted the number of personal attacks. thus, a double standard is more than clear.King Boonen said:
and, btw, in my post that was deleted by king boonen and which i still consider an abuse, I NEVER criticized you or any mods. or even tried to white wash semper. in fact i gave you a compliment as an intelligent poster. as someone who knows a lot of history btwn me and semper that was turbulent rand reminicent of your concerns.
the thing i said that seemed not to fit the the view of a mod that removed my post, is this. very literally. while referring to my long and firce conflict with semper as a mod , i gave him a credit for being reflective and sincere when he felt an applogy was due. my fault was to wish the same outcome btwn you and semper.
i dare the mod who deleted my post or any mod that has an ability to to still read it to contradict me with the actual things i said. obviously since my post was deleted i speak from memory. but i am brutally sincere and honest.
- Jul 12, 2012
- 8,975
- 591
- 19,080
Re:
You've hit the nail on the head there, its always been a question to me over the years how the politics thread has been given freedom compared to most other threads on this forum. We've decided no more free passes in there. It should be moderated the same as the other 100 or so other threads we have to moderate on this message board, we shouldn't give any leeway just because 'that's the way its always been'.
If members want the thread to remain open, they will have to adhere to the rules in the politics thread like everyone else, otherwise it may get locked.
Beech Mtn said:
You've hit the nail on the head there, its always been a question to me over the years how the politics thread has been given freedom compared to most other threads on this forum. We've decided no more free passes in there. It should be moderated the same as the other 100 or so other threads we have to moderate on this message board, we shouldn't give any leeway just because 'that's the way its always been'.
If members want the thread to remain open, they will have to adhere to the rules in the politics thread like everyone else, otherwise it may get locked.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2025 stage 20: Verrès – Sestrière, 205 km- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 1K
-
Tour de Suisse 2025 - Men's (June 15- June 22)- Started by Tricycle Rider
- Replies: 147
-
Giro d'Italia Giro D'italia 2025 Stage 16: Piazzola sul Brenta – San Valentino- Started by YavorD
- Replies: 1K
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2025 Stage 17: San Michele all’Adige – Bormio, 155 km- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 742
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia stage 19 Biella – Champoluc 166km- Started by YavorD
- Replies: 664
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 30K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram