Moderators

[oldborn]

That was not member's call for ban, that was communist Snitch at action, after all it is not so hard to push report button only .
Hopefully mods here are too smart and my ban is result of mine choice, I got official and non official warnings but choose to ignore it, nothing bad.
Is there any parental communist control on this forum, if yes I would choose on function for Snitch
It is interesting that most loudly members post reporters aka snitchers actually do not ride or own bike

 

[Granville57]

I got official and non official warnings but choose to ignore it...

Uh huh.


Your attempts at vitriol would be much more effective with even a slightly better grasp of the English language. Trust me.

 

[The Hitch]

Just curious...was Oldborn's ban a result of the member's call for it?

Also, before you take this post the wrong way, I wanted to add here a favorable impression of the moderators' actions (actually non-actions) in the midst of the heated Hitchen debate. As an observer, it was growing more uncomfortable by the post. The arguments presented by the principals were, for the most part, articulate and persuasive...one poster being tactically logical while the other presenting a passionate, beautifully expressed position. My growing concern was that we were witnessing a ticking time bomb which would only lead to injury of one if not both members. I have come to appreciate, in this forum, the contributions of all of the members involved. It was like watching a fight between your own siblings.
I wanted to express my appreciation to the mods (I think it was Susan and Alpe...possibly more) for not closing the thread and thus allowing it to run its course. I'm hopeful that no parties suffered too greatly as a result.
However, the ban of a member should not be decided on by another member request (at least in the general forum)? I trust that this action was made independently.

I guess an important factor to add is, "the rules".

This is what I rely on
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=14953

I can safely assume, I am one of the "principles" you refer to

But I never felt a risk of "injury" because I stayed well within the rules, as did most of the thread.

I only reported 1 poster, and that was long after the mods gave that poster several warnings in public.
I only reported the poster because I felt I could make a good argument that some rules (which I highlighted) had been broken.

The rules are key. I always do my best to stay well within them, and if I get a warning I make sure not to do whatver Ive been warned of again.

As such I did not feel at risk of a ban, and I did not expect anyone else in the thread (with one obvious exception) to get one.

 

[Havetts]

Seriously Oldborn.. "Snitch"? Couldn't you think of something better? Not really smart to start provoking again, unless you want to get banned.. obviously

 

[Granville57]

Closing the Christopher Hitchens thread seems to me like rewarding the baiting and trolling. It would appear that some members didn't feel we had the right to have the discussion at whatever lengths we were comfortable with. And a quick review of the past 24 hours will reveal that some of us actually were having a discussion—one that had content and value.

But others were apparently very uncomfortable with that, and unable to avoid the thread. So now it's been closed—after three whole days.

So who wins here?

 

[Quixote]

Uh huh.


Your attempts at vitriol would be much more effective with even a slightly better grasp of the English language. Trust me.

Seems like a "below the belt" shot. I understand that tempers are running high and I think that this remark is out of character. Time for all parties to go back to neutral corners (or the Cat Thread...if that's your preference).

 

[Granville57]

My remark wasn't/isn't meant, in any way, to disparage those for whom English is a second, third or fourth language. What confounds me, is that there a few members for who that is clearly the case, but they insist on using excessively wordy attacks on others in a way which often leaves me unable to make much sense out of what they're trying to say.

So if they believe that their tirades carry some sort of extra sting due to the long-winded nature of their posts, I just want to assure them that they do not. No offense whatsoever meant towards anyone for whom English is a second language. On the contrary, I have the utmost respect for those whose multi-lingual abilities surpass mine, which would easily be the majority of members on this forum.

 

[The Hitch]

Closing the Christopher Hitchens thread seems to me like rewarding the baiting and trolling. It would appear that some members didn't feel we had the right to have the discussion at whatever lengths we were comfortable with. And a quick review of the past 24 hours will reveal that some of us actually were having a discussion—one that had content and value.

But others were apparently very uncomfortable with that, and unable to avoid the thread. So now it's been closed—after three whole days.

So who wins here?

Agree. Especially since the thread closes with a laughable complaint from a poster that the thread has too many posts (since he doesn't like it).

And then the thread closes.

 

[Martin318is]

Agree. Especially since the thread closes with a laughable complaint from a poster that the thread has too many posts (since he doesn't like it).

And then the thread closes.

Actually his complaint was that it got that size because people responded to the baiting and trolling. Given the brief read I have given the back half of the thread, I agree. It has devolved into being a source for continued trolling.

 

[boomcie]

Actually his complaint was that it got that size because people responded to the baiting and trolling. Given the brief read I have given the back half of the thread, I agree. It has devolved into being a source for continued trolling.

Yo Martin

I hope we're not talking about Amsterhammer's complaint here, because his complaint was about the absolute importance of people's deaths. He literally linked this to how big certain threads were supposed to become according to his gospel.

His god complex is getting way out of hand. That's not a personal attack, that's just me being amazed by how blind you are to his peremptory behavior...

 

[The Hitch]

Actually his complaint was that it got that size because people responded to the baiting and trolling. Given the brief read I have given the back half of the thread, I agree. It has devolved into being a source for continued trolling.

He is not complaining about baiting and trolling, the only person he blames for the ammount of posts in the thread is me, and this is made very clear in the easiest way possible.

Jesus wept. We've got fourteen pages on the death of a somewhat controversial journalist whom the vast majority of people have never even heard of, for the one and only reason that one CN poster is so infatuated with the man that he's taken his name as his nick and his picture as his avatar, and because he feels the need to respond to every comment that is less than adulatory!

and his complaint is clearly that a thread he does not like has too many posts, so requests it shut

No one in their right mind could believe that this man deserves ten times the attention of, say, Vaclav Havel. Enough already, please!

He voices the exact same opinion in another thread

As long as posters are able to maintain some sense of proportion about the relative importance of the deceased in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Amsterhammer]

Yo Martin

I hope we're not talking about Amsterhammer's complaint here, because his complaint was about the absolute importance of people's deaths. He literally linked this to how big certain threads were supposed to become according to his gospel.

His god complex is getting way out of hand. That's not a personal attack, that's just me being amazed by how blind you are to his peremptory behavior...

So, this little vendetta of yours against me is the latest manifestation of your self-admitted boredom? You have deliberately mis-read and mis-interpreted what I wrote. I expressed an opinion, as I am entitled to do. My opinion is not gospel. The fact that the Hitch topic was locked right after my post was pure coincidence, I did not ask for it to be locked, nor did I report it.

As for god complex, that really is highly amusing coming from someone who thinks he's entitled to spam the board with pointless blah and get away with it just because he's "bored".

 

[Martin318is]

The closing of the Christopher Hitchens thread had nothing to do with Amsterhammer's post.

 

[boomcie]

To reinforce what Palmerq said - and to rule a line in the sand permanently because it has gotten beyond a joke.

##############################################

THIS thread is for the discussion of moderation on this site. It is not for conversations between members, it is not for discussion of people's posting styles.

From this point on, any such post will receive an infraction. If this leads to a suspension then you have been clearly warned and the moderators will not change the decision.

You also cannot claim to have not seen the warning as these have been posted in this thread more than 10 times in the last few months

#############################################

So, this little vendetta of yours against me is the latest manifestation of your self-admitted boredom? You have deliberately mis-read and mis-interpreted what I wrote. I expressed an opinion, as I am entitled to do. My opinion is not gospel. The fact that the Hitch topic was locked right after my post was pure coincidence, I did not ask for it to be locked, nor did I report it.

As for god complex, that really is highly amusing coming from someone who thinks he's entitled to spam the board with pointless blah and get away with it just because he's "bored".

Please treat accordingly and note that my own post was clearly about the moderation on the site, as was requested in your recent edict.

 

[The Hitch]

The closing of the Christopher Hitchens thread had nothing to do with Amsterhammer's post.

Well it was the trolling of people who wanted it closed. As El chignon says in his thread, wouldn't it be better if those trolling just be told, rather than have their way and get a thread they want closed, closed.

Besides the main person responsible for the bad vibes on the thread, seems to have gotten the message.

 

[Martin318is]

Well it was the trolling of people who wanted it closed. As El chignon says in his thread, wouldn't it be better if those trolling just be told, rather than have their way and get a thread they want closed, closed.

Besides the main person responsible for the bad vibes on the thread, seems to have gotten the message.

All I can tell you at this point is that I finally got an internet conncetion today after being offline since Saturday and I was greeted by a barrage of mess centring around that thread. Yes, perhaps if I were to take the time to read every post and split them on their merits the thread could probably be re-opened provided it stayed on topic and wasnt a bait factory.

However, Is there really that much left to be said on the topic of his death that it warrants my going to that effort? If there is, shouldn't the thread be rebadged as something more accurate? Such as "The life and works of.." rather than passing itself off as an in memorium thread?

Tell you what - I'll meet you half way - Make a list of the post numbers for posts that should be split out and I will review those ones, remove as appropriate, and rename and reopen the thread.

 

[ElChingon]

All I can tell you at this point is that I finally got an internet conncetion today after being offline since Saturday and I was greeted by a barrage of mess centring around that thread. Yes, perhaps if I were to take the time to read every post and split them on their merits the thread could probably be re-opened provided it stayed on topic and wasnt a bait factory.

However, Is there really that much left to be said on the topic of his death that it warrants my going to that effort? If there is, shouldn't the thread be rebadged as something more accurate? Such as "The life and works of.." rather than passing itself off as an in memorium thread?

Tell you what - I'll meet you half way - Make a list of the post numbers for posts that should be split out and I will review those ones, remove as appropriate, and rename and reopen the thread.

Leave the votes and cancel the rest. Too bad we can't make poll only threads with no comments. Yet another forum feature for the future?

 

[Martin318is]

Leave the votes and cancel the rest. Too bad we can't make poll only threads with no comments. Yet another forum feature for the future?

Votes?

I was talking about reopening the Christopher Hitchens thread - not talking about your epitaph thread... sorry

 

[ChrisE]

Actually his complaint was that it got that size because people responded to the baiting and trolling. Given the brief read I have given the back half of the thread, I agree. It has devolved into being a source for continued trolling.

So who were the people trolling besides oldborn? I guess what he was doing was trolling....he was just saying a bunch of stupid rambling stuff. It was like he was smoking something.

 

[Kvinto]

i wonder what were you expecting? the thread about Hitchens was doomed to be closed sooner or later, 'cause it's utterly stupid to enter a thread about someone's death with "What were your views on the man?"

 

[Cobblestoned]

Promise you, Mike and me will solve this quickly. We'll see.
So far, digger and martin, have a nice day.

This will not stand and I won't accept such allegations, such wrong games, and beeing put in a line with JRT for nothing.

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

Promise you, Mike and me will solve this quickly. We'll see.
So far, digger and martin, have a nice day.

This will not stand and I won't accept such allegations, such wrong games, and beeing put in a line with JRT for nothing.

 

[GreasyMonkey]

So this is OK?

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=748347#post748347

It would seem this is far more deserving for a post-it "holiday" than the majority or so-called infractions.

He clearly (albeit indirectly) labelled Texpat as a drug-mule, which there is no proof, rumour or suggestion of any kind to my reading, and yet is allowed to get away with it.

 

[Race Radio]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=748347#post748347

It would seem this is far more deserving for a post-it "holiday" than the majority or so-called infractions.

He clearly (albeit indirectly) labelled Texpat as a drug-mule, which there is no proof, rumour or suggestion of any kind to my reading, and yet is allowed to get away with it.

Calling a poster a drug mule is fine.....just don't call someone who floods the board with babble a troll.

 

[GreasyMonkey]

Calling a poster a drug mule is fine.....just don't call someone who floods the board with babble a troll.

OK Boss... So we can happily label said babblers as "Dope(y) Donkeys" then.