Moderators

[ElChingon]

So you can post obvious doping topics in the PRR forum and just leave it for a mod to move? Good to know.

Then the one mod says there's nothing

Its this inaction that then causes the second wave and the mods getting all bent on retaliation and pick one form members who continue along the newly allowed lines of a particular thread as the one in the PRR forum.

Same-o, same-o,

 

[King Boonen]

uh? Where did we state something like that?

You didn't, actions speak louder than words.

 

[Red Rick]

You didn't, actions speak louder than words.

Are you talking about the lol thread?

 

[hiero2]

I guess someone who started a thread like that would get an infraction

uh? Where did we state something like that?

Yeah - what the ----? Yes, no - it all depends. When somebody posts something inappropriate, it usually gets moved, edited, or deleted, depending on the severity, the general other behaviour of the poster, and how much time the mod has to deal with it. But if it is seen, we try to deal with things gently first, and with a stronger hand when posters don't pay attention to 1st warnings.

For instance, a poster who is an old hand, at least for me, I expect better behaviour, because I know they've been around long enough to know a bit about us. Sometimes I am very disappointed.

Then the one mod says there's nothing

Its this inaction that then causes the second wave and the mods getting all bent on retaliation and pick one form members who continue along the newly allowed lines of a particular thread as the one in the PRR forum.

Same-o, same-o,

El - once again, I wish I knew wtf you were talking about. Innuendo and sly references don't help me, man. I can see how what you say COULD make sense - but you aren't giving me enough to go look and see what you are talking about.

You didn't, actions speak louder than words.

Ditto - kinda. Please be more specific.

And again - if a poster makes an error - or is not in the habit of flaunting the rules - we are inclined to be generous and helpful. When they get obstreperous, or uncooperative, or just plain unneighborly, well, we don't tend to be so generous. What you are saying is that we, as mods, are not behaving as I have just described. So, if you believe yourself to be right - and you have evidence - present it. If it would be better presented in private - then send a PM.

 

[Cyivel]

oh aye mate.

 

[pedaling squares]

The problem with it is that your name would be visible not only in the Clinic, but in all the other sections, especially in the PRR where clinic-related references are forbidden.
The rule is just in order to avoid this kind of nonsense where a user cannot post in PRR because his name is a clinic reference.

I'm not sure when vetting usernames became fashionable, but I think that's the real nonsense. If my username was Little White Lunch Bag, I couldn't post in the racing forum because my nick was a reference to the USP doping system? That's ridiculous. Mods and regular forum users have, or at least should have, better things to worry about. Like the content of posts, not who wrote them or what that person calls him/herself online. The Clinic is the only place where you can discuss doping; the PRR is doping discussion free. Usernames are not discussion, and only become topical if people choose to go off topic. Some whiner doesn't like a guy's opinion, so he raises an issue with his username. Some mod can't let an issue arise without acting on it, so he takes up the whiner's cause. Let usernames be - Susan (at least it used to be Susan) already vets the ones that fail the morality test - and focus on ridding the forum of whining and over-moderation.

 

[ElChingon]

El - once again, I wish I knew wtf you were talking about. Innuendo and sly references don't help me, man. I can see how what you say COULD make sense - but you aren't giving me enough to go look and see what you are talking about.

Psst... (see quote below)

So you can post obvious doping topics in the PRR forum and just leave it for a mod to move? Good to know.

In closing, one can give and give but when nothing is returned the giving, well I think you're smart enough to guess what happens.

 

[hiero2]

Then the one mod says there's nothing

Its this inaction that then causes the second wave and the mods getting all bent on retaliation and pick one form members who continue along the newly allowed lines of a particular thread as the one in the PRR forum.

Same-o, same-o,

El - once again - you are leaving it to inference and indirect reference - and giving me NOTHING I can go look up! DUDE! I am a smart man! I can do a lot! I can't read your ephing mind!!!!!!!!

"sigh" - sorry -- had to vent a little. But it is honest. Quit trying to be cute and smart and try to point out the obvious when you ain't pointin' out the obvious. I ain't stoopid. I can google somethin' - if you tell me what to google.

If you sit there and say "well you should know" -- when I obviously don't know -- it only looks like you are trying to make me look stoopid.

I don't think you REALLY want to do that. Give me handles. Be specific. Link threads. Quote quotes. Keep this standard in mind "can the reader google it?" If you don't provide enough data - the reader can't.

 

[hiero2]

I'm not sure when vetting usernames became fashionable, but I think that's the real nonsense. If my username was Little White Lunch Bag, I couldn't post in the racing forum because my nick was a reference to the USP doping system? That's ridiculous. Mods and regular forum users have, or at least should have, better things to worry about. Like the content of posts, not who wrote them or what that person calls him/herself online. The Clinic is the only place where you can discuss doping; the PRR is doping discussion free. Usernames are not discussion, and only become topical if people choose to go off topic. Some whiner doesn't like a guy's opinion, so he raises an issue with his username. Some mod can't let an issue arise without acting on it, so he takes up the whiner's cause. Let usernames be - Susan (at least it used to be Susan) already vets the ones that fail the morality test - and focus on ridding the forum of whining and over-moderation.

My point was that vetting usernames was important a number of years ago. It is not so important today. I know of several usernames that are dping referneces that have not been "edited". A few years ago they would not have been allowed. So - "vetting usernames" turned out to be what you said - problematic - a bit P.I.T.A. But, at the same time - such names used to cause huge consternation.

Things change. Trees grow. The grass gets mowed. Weeds are always waiting in the wings - trying to take over - - - - -

cheers;
h

 

[ElChingon]

El - once again - you are leaving it to inference and indirect reference - and giving me NOTHING I can go look up! DUDE! I am a smart man! I can do a lot! I can't read your ephing mind!!!!!!!!

"sigh" - sorry -- had to vent a little. But it is honest. Quit trying to be cute and smart and try to point out the obvious when you ain't pointin' out the obvious. I ain't stoopid. I can google somethin' - if you tell me what to google.

If you sit there and say "well you should know" -- when I obviously don't know -- it only looks like you are trying to make me look stoopid.

I don't think you REALLY want to do that. Give me handles. Be specific. Link threads. Quote quotes. Keep this standard in mind "can the reader google it?" If you don't provide enough data - the reader can't.

Part of being a member on the forum is a requirement to read, hence how everyone signed on. No where in the rules does it state we need to read for others.

If you can't keep up with the forum then maybe its not for you is all I'm saying. Not every forum is for everyone, members come and members go, its part of the forum. I quoted what I was referring to, as you asked, it may not be what you wanted but its what you asked for, how you interpret that is all up to you, but all the information is there in one post, well now two, lets not make it three as it would probably void one of your rules.

 

[pedaling squares]

My point was that vetting usernames was important a number of years ago. It is not so important today...

I don't recall it being important years ago, but good to hear that you don't consider it necessary today. See #4838 though, maybe a little staff room chat will get everyone on the same page.

 

[Eshnar]

I don't recall it being important years ago, but good to hear that you don't consider it necessary today. See #4838 though, maybe a little staff room chat will get everyone on the same page.

An explicit doping accusation in a nickname is still not allowed though. That's pretty much what I was meaning. More subtle references as pedaling squares's example are allowed.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Bison,

You have (as usual) arrived late to the party. Not your fault obviously and indeed your intervention is broadly welcome.
It is also a contrast to the 2 mods who were on the forum at that time.

However - what is not welcome, are the "warnings".
Again, this is a desperate threat and effectively highlights what is going on here. You have no idea who, or what started what - so out comes the ban hammer. Behave or else - guess what, thats not moderation.

Now if I was actually here to troll, I would sit back and wait. It doesn't take long for a mod to go offline, the threat to pass, or be seen to be meaningless. You aren't on every thread, its easy peasy.

I realize that doesn't make me popular and indeed puts me right in the firing line - but I don't really care about that, this isn't Facebook, I am not here to make faux friends or be liked.

Either deal with the trolls - or don't.
Make your minds up.

 

[pedaling squares]

Hey where's the "Dr. Maserati 10,000 arguments" congratulatory thread?

 

[Cal_Joe]

Hey where's the "Dr. Maserati 10,000 arguments" congratulatory thread?

Two guesses -

1) It got swallowed up by a vortex.

2) Mods deleted it because their crystal ball thought it would cause problems.

 

[sittingbison]

Congrats on 10k posts DrMas. As someone (sniper, sceptic?? haha not being facaetious) said yesterday, most are excellent and insightful. Well done.

On this current matter:

I'm in Perth, most posts occur while I'm asleep thus "late to the game". When things go off like Horner on Angliru, Dawg on Venteux I often have up to a hundred posts to read tbrough, and a dozen reported posts over numerous threads. However as this is after the fact I also get a good feel for the ebb and flow, and do know "who or what started what".

I usually try gentle nudges, without an implied or overt threat, whewwhen spats break out. After editing a string of posts and deleting others, and sometimes using the infraction system, sometimes PM to be very clear to individuals. This is moderating.

However sometimes a heavier hand is needed especially when things have gone completely off track needing 20 or more deletions like Chris Squared. Or no deletions like JV Talks as there are too many and it can be better to leave as an example when read in conjunction with the warning With these heavy threats I am trying to be as clear as possible... stop with whatever and get back on track and topic....that is clearly understood no matter the language or culture barrier or for that matter purposely misunderstood by ne'er do wells. Is that moderation? Of course it is.

Trolls? We deal with them the best we can especially the most obvious, especially as many here resort to trolling and baiting to a lesser extent at some time or other...it is a forum for fans of cyclingafter all, a sport of extremes. It's not perfect indeed we all know it's inadequate, but we try. As such that ability is under discussion and review.

 

[sittingbison]

I will also add that the heavier warnings with threats are usually after several previous attempts to calm things down... which usually work short term.

Believe it or not I can get tired of repeating the same direction... keep it on topic, shoot the message not the messenger, stop the personal insults and attacks, move it along please etc etc

 

[red_flanders]

I think the Bison did a helluva job today actually.

 

[spalco]

Correct, we have our reasons.

And yes it DID really warrant a ban, spalco is experienced and clever enough to know better.

And also yes, there are "quite a lot of clinic posts" that are baiting... they all run the risk of receiving a ban, especially when they cause trouble

It was really just a joke, though not a good one, my intent was not to bait anyone.

Anyway, not a big deal.

 

[sittingbison]

I thought the joke bit was funny. In fact I'll edit the post and put it back up.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1333950&postcount=151

Anyhoo all good, glad to see you're back

 

[spalco]

I was a little annoyed to get banned for that to be honest, but I do have to admit, I've been leaning a bit far out of the window for a while before that occasionally.

 

[EnacheV]

this clearly are post on topic here

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1341726&postcount=7871

good to know you can bump anything with offtopic garbage

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Congrats on 10k posts DrMas. As someone (sniper, sceptic?? haha not being facaetious) said yesterday, most are excellent and insightful. Well done.

On this current matter:

I'm in Perth, most posts occur while I'm asleep thus "late to the game". When things go off like Horner on Angliru, Dawg on Venteux I often have up to a hundred posts to read tbrough, and a dozen reported posts over numerous threads. However as this is after the fact I also get a good feel for the ebb and flow, and do know "who or what started what".

I usually try gentle nudges, without an implied or overt threat, whewwhen spats break out. After editing a string of posts and deleting others, and sometimes using the infraction system, sometimes PM to be very clear to individuals. This is moderating.

This actually highlights the current difficulty.

That you are in a different time-zone and have to clear through the other posts - where were the mods who were on 'duty' and why is it none picked up what you can see?

Also - and with respect, I don't think you get a "good feel" for who and what started things.
If you did, there would be no need for a long general warning - the offending post would be addressed, and the poster would receive the appropriate warning.

However sometimes a heavier hand is needed especially when things have gone completely off track needing 20 or more deletions like Chris Squared. Or no deletions like JV Talks as there are too many and it can be better to leave as an example when read in conjunction with the warning With these heavy threats I am trying to be as clear as possible... stop with whatever and get back on track and topic....that is clearly understood no matter the language or culture barrier or for that matter purposely misunderstood by ne'er do wells. Is that moderation? Of course it is.

No - you are not being clear. And indeed it is most foolhardy to believe what you are doing is clear. Shouting 'stop' at no-one in particular is not clear.
Although, the consequences are pretty clear.

Shouting stop is not moderation - the whole idea is to encourage discussion by letting it flow (within the agreed rules).

Trolls? We deal with them the best we can especially the most obvious, especially as many here resort to trolling and baiting to a lesser extent at some time or other...it is a forum for fans of cyclingafter all, a sport of extremes. It's not perfect indeed we all know it's inadequate, but we try. As such that ability is under discussion and review.

Thats pretty much it - the obvious trolls.
The less obvious trolls get to run wild.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

If you have/know the proper quote, then link/quote it and leave things at that. No need asking for a response and eventually clog up the thread.

I have "A" quote/link.

I am allowing the poster to post their link, in case it is different and shows their point or the opportunity to clarify/amend their remarks.

No need to respond to this post and clog up the thread.

 

[pmcg76]

Absolutely ridiculous that Dr.Mas has been banned again, for what?? Are you guys on some sort of power trip or something. Sure he can be a pain when the vortex gets going but he is usually good at calling out BS.

Trolls run free distorting and lying, continue as normal. Someone actually calls out their BS, take a nice break.

The standard of mods in this place has hit rock bottom. Too bad that Susan has quit.