• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Moderators

Page 426 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

53*11 said:
King Boonen said:
Mod hat on:


We have removed a very large number of posts from this thread that were either against the rules or part of the conversation. We are trying very hard to allow conversation to flow and not limit it and this includes allowing some personality in people's posting style. You are free to write what you want and respond to what you want within the forum rules. However, the large number of arguments and reports recently mean we will be keeping a very close eye on these discussions. Please bare this in mind when you post.

Cheers,

KB.
well done KB. you've shut down an illuminating thread that was developing and now they are back to discussing JTL, ffs.
If you have a problem with moderation, you discuss it here.

If you thought the removed posts were illuminating (they were funny last time you mentioned them...) I'd suggest you just go back to the start of that thread, and pretty much any other clinic thread that involves Sky, and fill your boots.
 
Aug 6, 2015
2,963
0
0
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
portugal11 said:
I would like to know why I was banned for one week... it would be hilarious if I was banned by valv piti.
King Boonen said:
portugal11 has been banned for a week for trolling and baiting.
King Boonen banned you, and the other moderators with that decision as well.
but where did I troll?? man, there were 2 more users who were upset with valv piti's comments. what I can't even understand is how a user who has been banned more than 3/4 times, was invited to be a mod. cheers
 
Aug 3, 2010
633
0
0
How in the world can you allow the continued trolling and baiting by a certain individual in the Froome clinic thread. This forum is getting worse and worse in this regard.
 
May I ask how to get in touch with the moderators with regards to a ban to discuss how/why if there is a problem/misunderstanding with a ban? If you're banned, then you cannot sign in to find out how/why the ban was determined, until after the ban has expired. Suppose it is down to interpretation and if whoever made the complaint, user or mod, determines it deserves a ban. If something is said in jest but someone decides its made with malice then would it not be fair to be able to explain the meaning of the post instead of a straight ban. Yes, some users are on here just to cause problems but some may just be misunderstood. Also, would it be appropriate to show the post that caused the ban (in the suspensions section) so the user can understand why the ban was implemented and maybe think about what they type before posting, maybe the way it was worded could cause confusion?

I've been banned twice, first one a while ago and so can't remember what it was for, and one recently where I was supposedly banned for making fun of a crash! (If it came across like that then I consider myself told off, but it wasn't intentional).
 
wheresmybrakes said:
May I ask how to get in touch with the moderators with regards to a ban to discuss how/why if there is a problem/misunderstanding with a ban? If you're banned, then you cannot sign in to find out how/why the ban was determined, until after the ban has expired. Suppose it is down to interpretation and if whoever made the complaint, user or mod, determines it deserves a ban. If something is said in jest but someone decides its made with malice then would it not be fair to be able to explain the meaning of the post instead of a straight ban. Yes, some users are on here just to cause problems but some may just be misunderstood. Also, would it be appropriate to show the post that caused the ban (in the suspensions section) so the user can understand why the ban was implemented and maybe think about what they type before posting, maybe the way it was worded could cause confusion?

I've been banned twice, first one a while ago and so can't remember what it was for, and one recently where I was supposedly banned for making fun of a crash! (If it came across like that then I consider myself told off, but it wasn't intentional).
Hi, you can pm one of us for an explanation once the ban has expired, although the explanation is likely going to be what was posted in the suspension thread. The post was discussed between the mods and any joking about riders crashing is something we come down on heavily. It does come down to the mods interpretation of the post once it has been reported or seen, that's really the only way and we try as hard as we can to be fair and consistent. I've just looked back at the post, my advice would be just avoid any kind of joking about crashes, it's too easy to misinterpret people's intentions and generally it's just people trying to troll, even if that's not what you were trying to do.

We're not going to start sharing the posts that get people banned because many of them are offensive and have been removed to avoid arguments and discussions that drag other users in. We also don't want to end up in an endless debate about the phasing and content of the posts, we do this job voluntarily and this would take up much too much time. This is one of the few forums I've been on that both announces bans with reasons and has a thread where moderator actions can be questioned. I like that, but remember we are all members who joined to discuss cycling and we still want to do that, so we don't really want to get caught up in long discussions about posts.

Cheers,

KB.
 
King Boonen said:
wheresmybrakes said:
May I ask how to get in touch with the moderators with regards to a ban to discuss how/why if there is a problem/misunderstanding with a ban? If you're banned, then you cannot sign in to find out how/why the ban was determined, until after the ban has expired. Suppose it is down to interpretation and if whoever made the complaint, user or mod, determines it deserves a ban. If something is said in jest but someone decides its made with malice then would it not be fair to be able to explain the meaning of the post instead of a straight ban. Yes, some users are on here just to cause problems but some may just be misunderstood. Also, would it be appropriate to show the post that caused the ban (in the suspensions section) so the user can understand why the ban was implemented and maybe think about what they type before posting, maybe the way it was worded could cause confusion?

I've been banned twice, first one a while ago and so can't remember what it was for, and one recently where I was supposedly banned for making fun of a crash! (If it came across like that then I consider myself told off, but it wasn't intentional).
Hi, you can pm one of us for an explanation once the ban has expired, although the explanation is likely going to be what was posted in the suspension thread. The post was discussed between the mods and any joking about riders crashing is something we come down on heavily. It does come down to the mods interpretation of the post once it has been reported or seen, that's really the only way and we try as hard as we can to be fair and consistent. I've just looked back at the post, my advice would be just avoid any kind of joking about crashes, it's too easy to misinterpret people's intentions and generally it's just people trying to troll, even if that's not what you were trying to do.

We're not going to start sharing the posts that get people banned because many of them are offensive and have been removed to avoid arguments and discussions that drag other users in. We also don't want to end up in an endless debate about the phasing and content of the posts, we do this job voluntarily and this would take up much too much time. This is one of the few forums I've been on that both announces bans with reasons and has a thread where moderator actions can be questioned. I like that, but remember we are all members who joined to discuss cycling and we still want to do that, so we don't really want to get caught up in long discussions about posts.

Cheers,

KB.
Thank you!
 
Oct 6, 2009
4,660
0
0
Moderators should not post personal attacks like the following, which is quoted from the US politics thread and a discussion on criticism of John McCain:

Tonton said:
I can point at some of his weaknesses and poor decisions too. I said that I disliked some of his stances, but he's more of an American that you or I will ever be.

I thought that you had some integrity, that you would appreciate such a public servant, in spite of all the rubbish that you post. I thought that you were not so bad. What happened to you?
Scott says he reported it. I tried to report it, and got the "already reported" message. So the mods have seen it. Thus far it apprears that no visible action has been taken, as the post still stands, unedited.

What happened to the polite new requirements for the politics thread?
 
Aug 10, 2010
5,235
0
0
Re:

Beech Mtn said:
Moderators should not post personal attacks like the following, which is quoted from the US politics thread and a discussion on criticism of John McCain:

Tonton said:
I can point at some of his weaknesses and poor decisions too. I said that I disliked some of his stances, but he's more of an American that you or I will ever be.

I thought that you had some integrity, that you would appreciate such a public servant, in spite of all the rubbish that you post. I thought that you were not so bad. What happened to you?
Scott says he reported it. I tried to report it, and got the "already reported" message. So the mods have seen it. Thus far it apprears that no visible action has been taken, as the post still stands, unedited.

What happened to the polite new requirements for the politics thread?
I looked at that thread. Some rando accuses another rando of having a "persecution complex," then complains a gentle chiding by another poster deserves forum discipline.

Just let the snowflakes melt, Rupert.
 
Re: Re:

MarkvW said:
Beech Mtn said:
Moderators should not post personal attacks like the following, which is quoted from the US politics thread and a discussion on criticism of John McCain:

Tonton said:
I can point at some of his weaknesses and poor decisions too. I said that I disliked some of his stances, but he's more of an American that you or I will ever be.

I thought that you had some integrity, that you would appreciate such a public servant, in spite of all the rubbish that you post. I thought that you were not so bad. What happened to you?
Scott says he reported it. I tried to report it, and got the "already reported" message. So the mods have seen it. Thus far it apprears that no visible action has been taken, as the post still stands, unedited.

What happened to the polite new requirements for the politics thread?
I looked at that thread. Some rando accuses another rando of having a "persecution complex," then complains a gentle chiding by another poster deserves forum discipline.

Just let the snowflakes melt, Rupert.
And we know that you, having amassed 5000 posts saying nothing more than “cycling dopes, filthy, icky; Lance were the doperest” and sometimes ranging into the mod thread to denounce injustices in the virtual world, are beyond all snowflakery as it pertains here?
 
Aug 10, 2010
5,235
0
0
Re: Re:

aphronesis said:
MarkvW said:
Beech Mtn said:
Moderators should not post personal attacks like the following, which is quoted from the US politics thread and a discussion on criticism of John McCain:

Tonton said:
I can point at some of his weaknesses and poor decisions too. I said that I disliked some of his stances, but he's more of an American that you or I will ever be.

I thought that you had some integrity, that you would appreciate such a public servant, in spite of all the rubbish that you post. I thought that you were not so bad. What happened to you?
Scott says he reported it. I tried to report it, and got the "already reported" message. So the mods have seen it. Thus far it apprears that no visible action has been taken, as the post still stands, unedited.

What happened to the polite new requirements for the politics thread?
I looked at that thread. Some rando accuses another rando of having a "persecution complex," then complains a gentle chiding by another poster deserves forum discipline.

Just let the snowflakes melt, Rupert.
And we know that you, having amassed 5000 posts saying nothing more than “cycling dopes, filthy, icky; Lance were the doperest” and sometimes ranging into the mod thread to denounce injustices in the virtual world, are beyond all snowflakery as it pertains here?
Exactly! And I can tolerate personal attacks from you quite easily.
 
My good man. We all know that did not nearly rise to the level of a personal attack. It was a questioning of the criteria you’ve established by which to weigh in. (And why you feel the need to do so in this thread w/o creds but the biogrphical. But that’s OT.)
 
Aug 10, 2010
5,235
0
0
Re:

aphronesis said:
My good man. We all know that did not nearly rise to the level of a personal attack. It was a questioning of the criteria you’ve established by which to weigh in. (And why you feel the need to do so in this thread w/o creds but the biogrphical. But that’s OT.)
Exactly!
 
Nov 8, 2012
11,640
0
0
Re:

Beech Mtn said:
Moderators should not post personal attacks like the following, which is quoted from the US politics thread and a discussion on criticism of John McCain:

Tonton said:
I can point at some of his weaknesses and poor decisions too. I said that I disliked some of his stances, but he's more of an American that you or I will ever be.

I thought that you had some integrity, that you would appreciate such a public servant, in spite of all the rubbish that you post. I thought that you were not so bad. What happened to you?
Scott says he reported it. I tried to report it, and got the "already reported" message. So the mods have seen it. Thus far it apprears that no visible action has been taken, as the post still stands, unedited.

What happened to the polite new requirements for the politics thread?
I reported it. First time ever reporting a post. The post in and of itself wasn’t all that bad but given the recent history on this board I felt as if Tonton was baiting me to ban me. I’ve been assured by another mod that wasn’t the case. I invited Tonton to PM me to discuss. So far no response.

Given the thickness of the ice and the slippery banana peel I’m standing on wrt this forum I’m confident, if reversed, had I questioned Tonton’s integrity, I would have - without a doubt - been banned forever. My opinion.
 
My sense has always been that it's a tricky thing for lots of mods to cruise into the contentious points of the politics thread without being perceived as having some flex behind their positions. Over time some have shown to be a lot more adept at this and nuanced on the issues than others. Alpe’s biases were known, but, to his credit, he stayed away from coming down on the topics that he wasn’t comfortable with when he was around for the discussions.

Tonton’s appearances have been more bluster than substance as if his positions should be assumed rather than elaborated. I would think you could disarticulate that stance without making an issue of personal integrity.
 
Re:

Benotti69 said:
Only a week ban for racism? Sounds very lenient to me.
The comments made were borderline towards riders of certain nationalities. But from our view the intention was there and deserved some time out. It was also the first time we’ve had to deal with that poster, so we usually go for a reduced ban first time with harsher penalties for repeat offenders.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS