Moderators

Page 433 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I hope the entire non-cycling sub forum doesn't get shut down. I suspect the majority of other threads there are more civil.
I don't know how rambunctious they get in the cricket thread being I don't open it, but I would agree most threads in the cafe are civil and some are even helpful.

Politics is such a volatile topic that any politics forum on the internet can turn ugly quickly, and I think the biggest problem is that posters cultivate an animosity toward each other that then carries over into other threads. So for that reason it might be for the best that the politic threads remain closed.
 
Reactions: jmdirt
I don't know how rambunctious they get in the cricket thread being I don't open it, but I would agree most threads in the cafe are civil and some are even helpful.

Politics is such a volatile topic that any politics forum on the internet can turn ugly quickly, and I think the biggest problem is that posters cultivate an animosity toward each other that then carries over into other threads. So for that reason it might be for the best that the politic threads remain closed.

LOL, don't think I've ever opened the cricket thread either. However the NFL thread is very civil and there are fans of multiple teams including rival teams in there. No need for Sam Wyche's speech where he told the Cinci fans they are better than Cleveland. (I was watching that game on TV when he made that speech to the crowd to get them to stop throwing things on the field.) Heck threads like the movie and tv threads lend themselves to civility and finding new movies/series to watch.
 
Reactions: jmdirt
Most of the threads in the non-cycling forum are definitely more civil,
Let's keep in mind that the amount of civility is roughly inversely proportional to the amount of controversy. Posters in other threads who are more civil aren't that way because they're nicer or calmer than posters in the politics thread. They're more civil because it's easy to be civil when the stakes aren't very high or important. Whether Contador or Froome has had a better career, or whether one musician is more appealing than another, are questions that really aren't that earth-shakingly important to fans of those topics. What happens to someone's country matters a whole hell of a lot more, particularly to those who believe they have little power to change the system.

I'm sure anyone who has ever complained about the politics thread gets very angry and incivil over certain issues, it's just that when that happens, it's rationalized as justifiable. If you see a parent abusing a child, e.g., you probably won't approach that parent and politely suggest that he or she stop treating the kid that way. You will likely get very angry, and you will believe with all your heart that you should be angry--that only by being angry can you emphasize how deeply you believe that that behavior is wrong, not something up for debate. Much incivil behavior in political discussions is like that; social issues can become very personal and immediate. It's just that those not passionate about those issues don't recognize that in other circumstances they would behave pretty much the same way.

I think the biggest problem is that posters cultivate an animosity toward each other that then carries over into other threads.
That was certainly the rationale in the Daily Peloton forum. But it can work the other way, too, as political rivals often found common cause vs. LA, e.g.
 

nevele neves

BANNED
Jun 3, 2019
315
83
880
Let's keep in mind that the amount of civility is roughly inversely proportional to the amount of controversy. Posters in other threads who are more civil aren't that way because they're nicer or calmer than posters in the politics thread. They're more civil because it's easy to be civil when the stakes aren't very high or important. Whether Contador or Froome has had a better career, or whether one musician is more appealing than another, are questions that really aren't that earth-shakingly important to fans of those topics. What happens to someone's country matters a whole hell of a lot more, particularly to those who believe they have little power to change the system.

I'm sure anyone who has ever complained about the politics thread gets very angry and incivil over certain issues, it's just that when that happens, it's rationalized as justifiable. If you see a parent abusing a child, e.g., you probably won't approach that parent and politely suggest that he or she stop treating the kid that way. You will likely get very angry, and you will believe with all your heart that you should be angry--that only by being angry can you emphasize how deeply you believe that that behavior is wrong, not something up for debate. Much incivil behavior in political discussions is like that; social issues can become very personal and immediate. It's just that those not passionate about those issues don't recognize that in other circumstances they would behave pretty much the same way.



That was certainly the rationale in the Daily Peloton forum. But it can work the other way, too, as political rivals often found common cause vs. LA, e.g.
The DPF forums were much better than here. So many characters and so many usa cycling members frequenting that web site. Vaughn like him or not had a good thing going there.
Here at these forums you have many young adults and they lean much more into the censorship and cancel culture views.
 
Reactions: FrankB and GVFTA
The DPF forums were much better than here. So many characters and so many usa cycling members frequenting that web site. Vaughn like him or not had a good thing going there.
Here at these forums you have many young adults and they lean much more into the censorship and cancel culture views.

Members were warned about taking digs and little swipes previously on this thread. Perhaps take a lead from the member you quoted who actually raised some good debate and opinion, without the need for moderator intervention.
 

GVFTA

BANNED
Jul 5, 2018
223
133
1,230
Members were warned about taking digs and little swipes previously on this thread. Perhaps take a lead from the member you quoted who actually raised some good debate and opinion, without the need for moderator intervention.
Better change the name of the thread to moderator appeasement only, if you are going to attempt to censor any criticism of the forum or it's moderators. Good grief.
 
Better change the name of the thread to moderator appeasement only, if you are going to attempt to censor any criticism of the forum or it's moderators. Good grief.
Not at all, for example, the reply to my post from Merckx Index was not appeasement in the slightest. It really isn’t that difficult to stay within the rules laid out by the developers.
 
so what you want me to do is edit the post to state "in my opinion" there is a censorship cultural aspect to the politics threads locking?

I was curious if we started a thread about -

politicians in various countries / regions of countries that are for or against sharing the road with motorized vehicles?

should a cyclist in certain parts of their local cycling region carry some type of weapon for personal protection?

so many more of those types of topics should be able to be discussed. maybe they are , as I have not the time to search in the off topic forums.

I'm not going to write a book similar to merckx ludwig because it is tiring for me and i'm grammatically challenged. but a book is not necessary to have an opinion or to discuss.

If that is your opinion, that’s fine, my point is there are ways to get that opinion across which does not break forum rules.

As for the point about certain aspects of political discussion, as far as I’m aware, the developers have said any Political chat is no longer allowed and either threads would need to be closed or posts deleted if it went any further.
 
Oct 22, 2019
21
39
130
The DPF forums were much better than here. So many characters and so many usa cycling members frequenting that web site. Vaughn like him or not had a good thing going there.
Here at these forums you have many young adults and they lean much more into the censorship and cancel culture views.
I would agree with that assessment. After DP died off I would read the forums here from time to time, and I think that the current state of the forum here is pretty dull compared to the Old DP, or even CN years ago. I joined here a couple of months ago but unless things here heat up considerably as racing picks up, I doubt I’ll stick around, especially without the politics thread since it’s election time and that’s certainly the most interesting time for discussion.
 
Reactions: GVFTA

GVFTA

BANNED
Jul 5, 2018
223
133
1,230
I would agree with that assessment. After DP died off I would read the forums here from time to time, and I think that the current state of the forum here is pretty dull compared to the Old DP, or even CN years ago. I joined here a couple of months ago but unless things here heat up considerably as racing picks up, I doubt I’ll stick around, especially without the politics thread since it’s election time and that’s certainly the most interesting time for discussion.
Couldn't agree more. Never in my wildest dreams did I think that people on the Slowtwitch Forum would be making fun of the CN forum, but that is exactly what is happening. The Lavender Room is full of political discussion and many there seem to be aware of the happenings here. Much more cycling discussion there than in the past also.
 
Reactions: nevele neves
Let's keep in mind that the amount of civility is roughly inversely proportional to the amount of controversy. Posters in other threads who are more civil aren't that way because they're nicer or calmer than posters in the politics thread. They're more civil because it's easy to be civil when the stakes aren't very high or important. Whether Contador or Froome has had a better career, or whether one musician is more appealing than another, are questions that really aren't that earth-shakingly important to fans of those topics. What happens to someone's country matters a whole hell of a lot more, particularly to those who believe they have little power to change the system.

I'm sure anyone who has ever complained about the politics thread gets very angry and incivil over certain issues, it's just that when that happens, it's rationalized as justifiable. If you see a parent abusing a child, e.g., you probably won't approach that parent and politely suggest that he or she stop treating the kid that way. You will likely get very angry, and you will believe with all your heart that you should be angry--that only by being angry can you emphasize how deeply you believe that that behavior is wrong, not something up for debate. Much incivil behavior in political discussions is like that; social issues can become very personal and immediate. It's just that those not passionate about those issues don't recognize that in other circumstances they would behave pretty much the same way.



That was certainly the rationale in the Daily Peloton forum. But it can work the other way, too, as political rivals often found common cause vs. LA, e.g.
I don't disagree with any of this, and I don't mind if people want to discuss politics. That is as long as any animosity between politics posters stays contained in the area where it belongs... recently some crap had spilled over into the beer thread where I was being drawn into things and was made to feel like I'm supposed to take sides with one party or the other, I didn't appreciate that at all.

If it was up to me I would have the aforementioned parties take a timeout for a while, I wouldn't close their playground entirely. But it isn't up to me, so, yeah.
 
I did not expect you to take sides. There’s no side to take as far as I was concerned. The dialogue you and I have is the dialogue we have. How you engage with others is irrelevant to me. The situation you describe is not limited to politics though: arguments have migrated from there to the clinic and back. Posters have also brought their issues with me to the beer thread, music thread, philosophy, love, etc. : mostly because they disagree with how I write as much as what I write. Ultimately it’s my feeling that a political philosophy should be all encompassing: from love to social committments, but that people should be able to recognize at any step of the way what their biases and ideologies are and how these inflect their emotions and values. We saw this break down during the SOTU. This is part of what Merckx was saying about people being unreflexive or self-aware at more charged levels. Unfortunately it’s not just a personal issue: contemporary media has moved away from nuanced and complex discussion of issues toward polarizing absolutes of right/wrong and good/bad.

I have incredibly strong opinions about music, think there’s a lot of crap out there that completely evades my comprehension. At the same time I know a lot of people hate much of what I listen to. But as long as they don’t reject it categorically without recognizing its value and can discuss whatever it is that moves them in their choices, them I’m happy to recognize their differences as they are with me.
 
Last edited:
How on Earth do you find it ok for Aphronesis to start a politically charged thread after all your changes a month ago?
What thread did he start? He mentioned something about drug prices and control on an existing thread. He just provided a name for people who want to know more. Surely that's within the rules?

As some of us pointed out a while ago, it's going to be impossible to avoid politics in some discussions. A country's policies towards containing the virus are political. How can we discuss the virus without mentioning the effect these policies might have? Sporting events are beginning to be shut down all over Italy and some other countries. That is a political decision. It's now impossible to discuss bike racing completely devoid of politics. Just the other day, I pointed out that private companies are now allowed to do testing for the virus in the U.S. That was a political decision, as was the Administration's budgeting $8 billion to prepare for the virus. No one in the CN forums seems to have a problem with discussing this kind of politics, and it would be weird if they did, since CN itself is leading the discussion.,

If the criterion is passionate argument over conflicting views, again, it will be impossible to avoid during a discussion of he virus. I already see a lot of disagreements about what should be done in the thread on the virus in the pro racing forum. It may have not reached the degree of nastiness we saw on occasion on the old politics threads, but it could when increasingly stricter controls are put in place.

I do think the mods have done a pretty good job so far threading this needle. It's one thing to discuss what governments and other political organizations are doing or aren't doing, it's another to use these points to make a more general case for or against certain leaders or parties. I think this is more in the spirit of the ban on politics, as opposed to the letter.
 
Last edited:

GVFTA

BANNED
Jul 5, 2018
223
133
1,230
What thread did he start? He mentioned something about drug prices and control on an existing thread. He just provided a name for people who want to know more. Surely that's within the rules?

As some of us pointed out a while ago, it's going to be impossible to avoid politics in some discussions. A country's policies towards containing the virus are political. How can we discuss the virus without mentioning the effect these policies might have? Sporting events are beginning to be shut down all over Italy and some other countries. That is a political decision. It's now impossible to discuss bike racing completely devoid of politics. Just the other day, I pointed out that private companies are now allowed to do testing for the virus in the U.S. That was a political decision, as was the Administration's budgeting $8 billion to prepare for the virus. No one in the CN forums seems to have a problem with discussing this kind of politics, and it would be weird if they did, since CN itself is leading the discussion.,

If the criterion is passionate argument over conflicting views, again, it will be impossible to avoid during a discussion of he virus. I already see a lot of disagreements about what should be done in the thread on the virus in the pro racing forum. It may have not reached the degree of nastiness we saw on occasion on the old politics threads, but it could when increasingly stricter controls are put in place.

I do think the mods have done a pretty good job so far threading this needle. It's one thing to discuss what governments and other political organizations are doing or aren't doing, it's another to use these points to make a more general case for or against certain leaders or parties. I think this is more in the spirit of the ban on politics, as opposed to the letter.
Thread on plastic. In and of itself it is not political and has veered in a non political direction in it's short existence, however the OP slammed Trump while claiming China is doing more than he is to curb the environmental problems plastic can cause. THAT IS POLITICAL.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY