Moderators

[gregod]

i have a question for the mods. who are all of these people with "editor-in-chief" in their title? there seems to be a number of them, all with just a few postings. the title editor-in-chief implies one person. is one person creating many different names? how else can there be more than one?

cheers.

 

[krebs303]

what does it mean when a poster is 'Editor in Chief' as opposed to 'Junior Member' or 'Senior Member'?

Its a glitch which occurs when someone has between 5 and 10 posts

cccccccccccccccccccc

 

[gregod]

Originally Posted by Barrus View Post
Its a glitch which occurs when someone has between 5 and 10 posts

thanks krebs. how weird.

 

[JRTinMA]

I'm curious why you banned Damiano M. I know it was technically a sock puppet account and I pointed that out a month ago but he wasn't posting on his other account. In seems the right thing to do was nothing or ban both of them. Then again, maybe I had the wrong two accounts matched for sock puppets.

 

[Martin318is]

Policy is the second account is always permanently banned if it hasn't been organised with the moderators first. If the account was set up while the user was using the first account or the first account was temp suspended then the first account is permanently banned also.

Where the first account was not being used in overlap with the new one, then discussion is had with the member to see what can be resolved.

 

[The Hitch]

If i may ask, what was Damiano Machiavellis other account?

Also why was the brilliant WL thread closed. Usually theres a note in the thread but this time there is none (unless Waterloo sunrise has become a mod).

 

[patricknd]

If i may ask, what was Damiano Machiavellis other account?

Bro deal.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Bro deal.

I was thinking that....
but is BroDeal still around? I liked his posting...

 

[Martin318is]

Yes, BroDeal is entirely free to post.

 

[kielbasa]

Yes, BroDeal is entirely free to post.

As he was back in May, and yet...

 

[The Hitch]

Damiano was Bro deal? They seemed very very different to me.

Very different.

Also the WL is being swept under the rug?

 

[patricknd]

my post from the lemond appreciation thread was removed without explanation. what is wrong with this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgTh61OxoC0&feature=related

but there's no censorship here, is there?

 

[Animal]

Can anyone parse and comprehend this verbal diarhhoea? Someone wishes they were a lwayer?

All,
Following the success of the Tour de France strikes system in managing the forum, it has been decided to keep it on as the ongoing moderation process to make sure the forum discussion stay polite and interesting. It is called Three Strikes and You're Out.

Basically,

All infractions will be given a 1 month expiry period.

Someone with no current infractions will receive a warning which is considered to be strike one.

A second active infraction will result in a 24 hour suspension (second strike)

A third active infraction will result in a 1 month suspension. (strike three).


When returning from a 1 month ban, the member will still carry 2 strikes for the month, meaning any further poor behaviour that month will earn a new 1 month suspension.

At moderator discretion, certain offences will bypass this system completely, such as spamming, threats of violence, returning while suspended, etc. The cases can result in anything up to and including a permanent ban.
No exceptions!

All strikes causing 1 month suspensions are reviewed automatically by the moderation team to ensure the penalty is appropriate.

What are violations? This covers the listed rules of the forum, and things which really are more or less common sense:

obscenities, including trying to avoid the forum filter; insults; other offensive statements; going off-topic after a mod has said to stop; generally doing anything a mod has said not to. .... and this list is not all-inclusive.

Situations not covered in this system such as: Sock puppets, spammers, severe trolling, abuse, threats, etc will be dealt with as usual and may receive anything from a short to permanent ban from the forum.

Anyone who receives a sanction (first, second or third) will of course be notified of the action taken in the infraction email.

All infractions have a 1 month expiry. Therefore it is possible to get a warning each month without being suspended, however once you HAVE been warned, any further actions that month will result in some form of suspension.

We simply want to insure that the Cyclingnews forum remains a place for everyone to virtually sit down together for a pleasant chat about our favourite sport!

 

[Martin318is]

I've removed the misquote you inserted.

as to the rest it is very clearly a combination of the existing list of rules and an announcement that the 3 strikes system will be staying permanently.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I think Daniel wishes to "ensure" that the forum remains a place for everyone to remain pleasant together. Unless Daniel is willing to take out an insurance policy so he can claim against moderators for not doing their jobs properly. And given how much trouble the moderators have regulating the clientele, I'd say that a fair few insurance companies would No Quote that.

 

[Anonymous]

Nobody as far as I know drinks Fosters in Australia[/B] as I don't think it is even sold here (I have never seen it for sale, the only time I've seen it for sale is in London), so the joke is rather lame. But you don't think that calling people 'inbreed convicts' will actually rile people up? It's a poor troll attempt.

You lose.

Dude, that is part of what makes it funny to everyone NOT Australian. I bet you don't eat at Outback Steakhouse either.

As for Susan's comment about not "baiting" people, again, if the mods are going to try to stop that, the post count on this forum will drop by half from all of the deletions they will now need to make. This is the internets, peoples bates other internets peoples.

 

[Amsterhammer]

Just as an experiment, at least initially, how about setting up an unmoderated 'free for all' sub-forum where people can swear, bait, and in general do anything they want (except post porn or outright libel, for example)? You can always shut it down if it threatens to get out of hand.

In my own experience of many other forums, ranging from the strictly moderated, to the loosely moderated and to the un-moderated, most people are capable of a reasonable degree of self moderation if they know that that is the price of posting 'freedom'. Also, unfettered speech is often very funny.

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

Just as an experiment, at least initially, how about setting up an unmoderated 'free for all' sub-forum where people can swear, bait, and in general do anything they want (except post porn or outright libel, for example)? You can always shut it down if it threatens to get out of hand.

In my own experience of many other forums, ranging from the strictly moderated, to the loosely moderated and to the un-moderated, most people are capable of a reasonable degree of self moderation if they know that that is the price of posting 'freedom'. Also, unfettered speech is often very funny.

I think the problem here is the forum is a reflection of the website also. More 'free' forums I have participated in, generally aren't as professional as this.

I will say this tho, I have only been on one other 'professional' forum, and the moderators there, were seriously nazi's... the mods here are actually not so bad, even if users get banned they can generally come back etc.. I have never even been suspended, and I think at least 40% of my posts are either baiting or insulting another user. A forum with no banter and insults, is a place I wouldn't want to be a apart of.

 

[krebs303]

As my friend from NYC used to say "There is no conversation if there is no contradiction."

 

[Martin318is]

Just as an experiment, at least initially, how about setting up an unmoderated 'free for all' sub-forum where people can swear, bait, and in general do anything they want (except post porn or outright libel, for example)? You can always shut it down if it threatens to get out of hand.

In my own experience of many other forums, ranging from the strictly moderated, to the loosely moderated and to the un-moderated, most people are capable of a reasonable degree of self moderation if they know that that is the price of posting 'freedom'. Also, unfettered speech is often very funny.

This idea has been raised several times (including many times in this thread) but it doesn't match up with the goals for this forum. It isn't free standing as it is part of the main news site. a sub forum like that would mean that the swear filter would need to be turned off on the entire forum due to the software and the mods would have a lot of extra work.

 

[Martin318is]

As my friend from NYC used to say "There is no conversation if there is no contradiction."

An argument is a collected set of statements intended to support a proposition, it isn't just saying "No it isn't"

(points to those that spot the misquote)

 

[pedaling squares]

I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument or the full half-hour?

 

[krebs303]

An argument is a collected set of statements intended to support a proposition, it isn't just saying "No it isn't"

(points to those that spot the misquote)

Obviously you've not argued with New Yorkers

 

[Dr. Maserati]

An argument is a collected set of statements intended to support a proposition, it isn't just saying "No it isn't"

(points to those that spot the misquote)

No it isn't.

 

[Martin318is]

2 out of 3 is a pretty good hit rate. Well done guys. Of course this leads to the most philosophically appropriate line:

"Look, I don't want to argue about that!"

which pretty much sums up a lot of issues that are seen on forums of all types.

As was pointed out earlier, people generally need to disagree to some extent to make a conversation "interesting". It is how people interact within that disagreement that make it acceptable or not, within the conventions of their society. That society is in part defined and guided by itself but also by its host who places restrictions around it.

The upshot of all of this is that if you are in a real life social group that doesn't accept gratuitous swearing you don't do so in that social group if you still wish to participate in the conversations there. You find an outlet (like a pub later that night) and swear your head off there.

In the context of CyclingNews, this site does not intend to host a 'lawless' pub within itself where the rules contradict the governing rules of the site. That outlet needs to be outside of this forum. Virtually everyone here regularly visits other social sites with looser rules. There are more than enough places to engage in that type of behaviour if you wish without needing it here too.