Moderators

[Dr. Maserati]

DrMas, here is the link to Ashendens microdosing experiment I mentioned in that thread:
"Current markers of the Athlete Blood Passport do not flag microdose EPO doping"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21336951



Ashenden said it

Recently, i have been accused of posting 'off-topic' and "hijacking' threads.
In fact I have been warned more than once of the consequences of doing so.

But 'letting common sense be my guide' since a mod posted the above, i believe i have every right to reply.

Let CSBYG - do you really think Dr. Michael Ashenden who has spent his academic life and spent millions developing the Biological passport then as Benotti claimed, "dismissed the biopassport as not working"?

Of course not. And your extract confirms that. It will always need refinement, both doping and anti-doping evolve.
But Ashenden has never ever "dismissed" it as "not working". You cannot paraphrase something that someone did not say and is still working on.

 

[sittingbison]

...I have every right to question someone on their post.
I do not need (or want) links to every thought or keystroke, I am not that pedantic ....

Common sense tells me you don't know when to desist even when everyone is politely asked to do so by moderators in an attempt to move the conversation along when it was in danger of clogging. To the extent you took your polite and informative private discussion into a public forum.

DrMas your question in that thread was answered, maybe not by Benotti but by several others including myself. And to be honest I'm still unsure as to your motives, as you also admitted you also thought the ABP does not work while insisting Ashenden never said suchlike when he clearly has major reservations about both it's fundamentals (program) and it's implementation by UCI. Which I am pretty sure you knew as it's common knowledge in the clinic after Armstrong.

DrMas you like ever one else is are free to do whatever you want to do, just do so in the knowledge there are consequences to your actions. It's up to you to determine what those might be.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Common sense tells me you don't know when to desist even when everyone is politely asked to do so by moderators in an attempt to move the conversation along when it was in danger of clogging. To the extent you took your polite and informative private discussion into a public forum.

Yet I did desist - but only because of the threats, not because I understand the reasons for it.
I should not have to work out the why on the basis of how polite the request is.

As for clogging up threads, if something goes Off topic (which can happen in error) shove it in to the appropriate thread (or start a new one), if the argument is genuine and was not to clog a thread (a common tactic) it will die.

Nor did I take the private conversation into the public forum. Who did I talk to, what did we say? Exactly.

YOU decided to address me in the public forum that was your choice and shows it is a solo run.

DrMas your question in that thread was answered, maybe not by Benotti but by several others including myself. And to be honest I'm still unsure as to your motives, as you also admitted you also thought the ABP does not work while insisting Ashenden never said suchlike when he clearly has major reservations about both it's fundamentals (program) and it's implementation by UCI. Which I am pretty sure you knew as it's common knowledge in the clinic after Armstrong.

Hold on - what I said was I "broadly agreed" to be specific it is because of UCI interference by not funding it properly.
Nothing to do with the BP itself, and again Ashenden has not dismissed it.

Benotti (or anyone else) is entitled to say the BP (or anything else) does not work, but when they are specific then they should be able to back it up or even withdraw it.

DrMas you like ever one else is are free to do whatever you want to do, just do so in the knowledge there are consequences to your actions. It's up to you to determine what those might be.

Oh, the consequences have been made quite clear - but I am trying really really hard to determine what what those "actions" are.

 

[sittingbison]

... I am trying really really hard to determine what what those "actions" are....

This might help:

Here's a simple rule for you: If a mod tells you to stop, stop.

...rule 303: do what a moderator asks/tells you to do...

You're welcome

 

[Dr. Maserati]

This might help:





You're welcome

Which I have already done.

I took my query of the mods to this the appropriate thread.
Yet you continue to remind me of the 'consequences'.

And while I do know there are 'rules' here somewhere, can you please link to Rule 303, a search on the forum did not work.

 

[Boeing]

Modding isnt relevant in the Mod thread?

that is like saying i'm taking my crayons and going home because I don't like your personality..

 

[BroDeal]

Hmmm. The vortex went right through his own trailer park.

 

[Boeing]

Which of course, is not a rule.

Thats mods deciding what is and is not acceptable or appropriate.
That means the general membership like me have no way of knowing what can be posted.

I think Dr Maserati is on to something. too many Mods reacting to a laundry list of likes and dont likes from their favorite posters and offering nothing more of an explanation other than ' just because'

free the Doc

 

[ElChingon]

I think Dr Maserati is on to something. too many Mods reacting to a laundry list of likes and dont likes from their favorite posters and offering nothing more of an explanation other than ' just because'

free the Doc

Hopefully you're referring freeing him from himself.

Then, don't you like it how 10 vs 1 in your campy rust thread post isn't enough to shut someone up, then a mod comes in and can't decipher what is actually going on but wants peace where even the middle east could not reach for mediation. Then the reach for the mod button and that poster has yet to realie they took it away

 

[patricknd]

Which of course, is not a rule.

Thats mods deciding what is and is not acceptable or appropriate.
That means the general membership like me have no way of knowing what can be posted.

The mods are never wrong, doc. They've told me so on more than one occasion.

Serve out your sentence like the well behaved stepford member they want here, and everything will be much better. It's for THE GREATER GOOD !!!!!!

 

[BroDeal]

Hopefully you're referring freeing him from himself.

Then, don't you like it how 10 vs 1 in your campy rust thread post isn't enough to shut someone up, then a mod comes in and can't decipher what is actually going on but wants peace where even the middle east could not reach for mediation. Then the reach for the mod button and that poster has yet to realie they took it away

That was classic. To summarize:

"I have not been around here for a long time and I have no idea what is going on, but I am upset. In a few days or whatever, maybe a few weeks, when I finally get the time to sort this thing out, I may be handing out bans."

Ridiculous moderator behavior is ridiculous.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

The doc needs to be freed.

 

[King Boonen]

introducing religion into the argument by the OP was the problem, so it and all the responses were deleted.

As to notification, its not part of the vbulletin software system and I suspect the mods have not got the time or inclination to individually notify each poster when they edit/delete a post.

Ok thanks, sees strange that a mod wouldn't take the time to send a quick PM. Is there really that much that gets deleted?

 

[King Boonen]

Would it be worthwhile assigning moderators to particular forums?

For instance, the gear forum has a thread on disc brakes with a fair bit of banter in that Heiro has decided is unacceptable (or at least needs reviewing), but it seems that the users are completely fine with it. A mod who was familiar with the posters would have known this. As The forum is quite varied and you do tend to get many of the same people posting in particular sections (although there is a fair amount of cross-over) it seems sensible to have mods who are regular users of those forums do the moderation.

 

[Eshnar]

Would it be worthwhile assigning moderators to particular forums?

For instance, the gear forum has a thread on disc brakes with a fair bit of banter in that Heiro has decided is unacceptable (or at least needs reviewing), but it seems that the users are completely fine with it. A mod who was familiar with the posters would have known this. As The forum is quite varied and you do tend to get many of the same people posting in particular sections (although there is a fair amount of cross-over) it seems sensible to have mods who are regular users of those forums do the moderation.

Indeed that's what happens normally. Everyone of us tend to moderate the section(s) they're more familiar with. It's not a rule though, as sometimes there aren't many mods online and we still have to cover all the forum.

This thing of "the users are fine with it", though, it's not necessarily evidence that whatever is going on is acceptable.

 

[ChrisE]

The mods are never wrong, doc. They've told me so on more than one occasion.

Serve out your sentence like the well behaved stepford member they want here, and everything will be much better. It's for THE GREATER GOOD !!!!!!

What is funny is he waged a war that has already been waged. Hundreds of pages ago I put up the white flag and stopped trying to convince the mods they were arbitrary in their rulings, and rulings are mostly based upon prejudice. With the new wad of mods (The Mod Wad )that have no business being mods, it only got worse. Though I can't stand vortex, for his own sanity I do hope he decides to step back from this forum.

 

[patricknd]

What is funny is he waged a war that has already been waged. Hundreds of pages ago I put up the white flag and stopped trying to convince the mods they were arbitrary in their rulings, and rulings are mostly based upon prejudice. With the new wad of mods (The Mod Wad )that have no business being mods, it only got worse. Though I can't stand vortex, for his own sanity I do hope he decides to step back from this forum.

i believe in the infallibility of the popes/mods in cycling forum matters. i was told by a couple of your favorites that they don't make mistakes, and their decisions are always fair and completely unbiased.

the new batch remind me of the kid in class who took names of the kids who talked when the teacher left the room to pee, or whatever teachers do when they leave the room. you could tell that even the teachers didn't like them much.

 

[Hugh Januss]

This thing of "the users are fine with it", though, it's not necessarily evidence that whatever is going on is acceptable.

So the forum is really here for the moderators more than the users.

 

[Eshnar]

So the forum is really here for the moderators more than the users.

Nice way to miss the point.

"The users are fine with it"? Which users? Generally the answer is "those who stayed". What about the others?

Just to make an example, otherwise people here tend to take the worst interpretation available, some months ago a user complained here because one of us modded a thread in the Café which, according to the user, is full of people with thick skin and who were absolutely fine with it.

Well isn't there the chance that the Café is populated by such users only because the thin skinned ones had to leave? Is that good for this forum? We don't think so.

 

[ElChingon]

Would it be worthwhile assigning moderators to particular forums?

For instance, the gear forum has a thread on disc brakes with a fair bit of banter in that Heiro has decided is unacceptable (or at least needs reviewing), but it seems that the users are completely fine with it. A mod who was familiar with the posters would have known this. As The forum is quite varied and you do tend to get many of the same people posting in particular sections (although there is a fair amount of cross-over) it seems sensible to have mods who are regular users of those forums do the moderation.

We'd get away with more if there wasn't that one user who keeps clicking the "Report Post" button when things don't go their way.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

We'd get away with more if there wasn't that one user who keeps clicking the "Report Post" button when things don't go their way.

Clicking the "report post" button is nice to give them mods some work

 

[MarkvW]

Nice way to miss the point.

"The users are fine with it"? Which users? Generally the answer is "those who stayed". What about the others?

Just to make an example, otherwise people here tend to take the worst interpretation available, some months ago a user complained here because one of us modded a thread in the Café which, according to the user, is full of people with thick skin and who were absolutely fine with it.

Well isn't there the chance that the Café is populated by such users only because the thin skinned ones had to leave? Is that good for this forum? We don't think so.

And people who left because the moderation is unfair.

 

[hiero2]

Would it be worthwhile assigning moderators to particular forums?

For instance, the gear forum has a thread on disc brakes with a fair bit of banter in that Heiro has decided is unacceptable (or at least needs reviewing), but it seems that the users are completely fine with it. A mod who was familiar with the posters would have known this. As The forum is quite varied and you do tend to get many of the same people posting in particular sections (although there is a fair amount of cross-over) it seems sensible to have mods who are regular users of those forums do the moderation.

Indeed that's what happens normally. Everyone of us tend to moderate the section(s) they're more familiar with. It's not a rule though, as sometimes there aren't many mods online and we still have to cover all the forum.

This thing of "the users are fine with it", though, it's not necessarily evidence that whatever is going on is acceptable.

King - if we get more mods - such an idea might eventually happen. As Eshnar pointed out - it happens now - albeit informally.

But listen up for a second. I have another point, or two. First, if any of the current mods is familiar with posters in gear and health and those less-frequented areas, it is myself.

So, I don't care WHO is throwing around rule-breaking posts - if it is against the rules - it is against the rules. Now, I recognize that there are grey areas - but this was not one, and the posters in question here are ALL quite familiar to me. I don't give a darn if BD is cool with being called names, ditto any of the other participants. If I allow a CLEAR breach of protocol, then I have to permit it of EVERYONE. Wouldn't we love that? I can just see the results now - we would descend into a fest of about a dozen posters slinging insults at each other and saying "Oh, they don't mind, they do it all the time!"

The point is to have conversations. Not fights.

Which already happens, to an extent. But we are working on this.

 

[King Boonen]

King - if we get more mods - such an idea might eventually happen. As Eshnar pointed out - it happens now - albeit informally.

But listen up for a second. I have another point, or two. First, if any of the current mods is familiar with posters in gear and health and those less-frequented areas, it is myself.

So, I don't care WHO is throwing around rule-breaking posts - if it is against the rules - it is against the rules. Now, I recognize that there are grey areas - but this was not one, and the posters in question here are ALL quite familiar to me. I don't give a darn if BD is cool with being called names, ditto any of the other participants. If I allow a CLEAR breach of protocol, then I have to permit it of EVERYONE. Wouldn't we love that? I can just see the results now - we would descend into a fest of about a dozen posters slinging insults at each other and saying "Oh, they don't mind, they do it all the time!"

The point is to have conversations. Not fights.

Which already happens, to an extent. But we are working on this.

All taken on board. Maybe in this case my feeling was, as they are regular members who have stated they are fine with it, an edit of the posts and a reminder to keep language civil, even among friends, would be best? The posters seem to feel it was a conversation rather than a fight. Although if someone reported a post that's a different kettle of fish.

You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

And, of course if this has been done before and it is still persisting my point is invalid.

 

[Eshnar]

And people who left because the moderation is unfair.

And people who left because they don't like the forum
And people who left because they hate blue, don't forget about them.

There are all kinds of people out there, no doubt there are those who left because of us. Moderation is a compromise. You get some people annoyed, but (hopefully) you get also other people satisfied.