Moderators

[Hugh Januss]

I want my nickname to be asshat. I have updated my avatar to reflect this.

It wasn't?

 

[Hugh Januss]

This forum will be a happier friendlier place when all the posters stop fighting amongst themselves and unite against the common enemy, the mods.

 

[sittingbison]

...the perception is, whether earned or not, that some of you now became mods simply for the power kick. I certainly felt that way after I got a 1 week ban for what was at worst a very very minor insult (the word in question was "idiot", which in this country hasn't been a swear word since about the 12th century), and at best, friendly banter (the poster had asked "am I an idiot"). 1 week, couldn't help but laugh when I saw it. **** em if they cant take a joke seemed to be the message....

Hold it, you weren't banned for a week merely for calling spalco an idiot. I am going to do a "thehog":

...In the case of you and spalco, yes it could well have been for two or three days instead of a week. However I was already unimpressed with half of spalcos post and pondering what to do, and your own insulting response to it was only 90 minutes and two posts after I politely asked everyone to desist with personal insults:

come on gentle(wo)men,
lets not resort to personal insults and attacks. Remember message not messenger comprende?

cheers
bison

So I thought you were being purposely flagrant, and upped it to a week. And decided to give spalco the same because it was a blatant bait (that you fell for).

The polite request to desist from personal attacks was made because the thread was turning quite sour. IMO this is "moderation", you completely ignored said request.

 

[The Hitch]

Yes I was given a 1 week ban merely for calling spalco an idiot (after he asked "am I an idiot").

I committed no other violation.

I don't see how thats even a 1 day ban. Ive certainly seen a lot worse go without a warning. Ive posted worse myself without a warning.

But one can't help recall that a few days earlier you wrongly claimed that I deserved a ban and I called you out on that, asking you to find a reason for why I should have been banned.

I closed the thread rather than banning Hitch and sceptic et al

You then Wiggins style claimed to have meant something else by what you said. But the above sentence is not vague in the slightest. Its very explicit.You closed the thread rather than banning the hitch. What reason did you have for banning the hitch then?

And your explanation was poor as hell but I thought if i let it slide it would die down.

Clearly not as a few days later, surprise surprise, sittingbison pounces on the first chance he gets and bins me for a week for the equivalent of a parking violation.

Seeing as you, without asking me, decided to interpret my post to spalco as subversion of the forum (even though in 19000 posts I had never done anything of the sort), well I then choose to interpret your banning me for nothing, as revenge for proving you wrong in front of everyone, not so very long before.

 

[hiero2]

In a similar vein, I went to apologise to someone who had posted off topic and I accused him of knowing nothing about what he has posted.

I did a bit of research afterwards, and discovered, he did know something about it (even if technically he was wrong)
I went to apologise, and couldn't find either post: no doubt both deleted.

Would it be too difficult to develop a programme which gives a PM to posters whose post has been deleted?
Saying why??
just a suggestion

Noted. Concur. Idk if possible, maybe, or other status. But I agree - and at least afaic, the concept is being looked into.

 

[hiero2]

I doubt the change of Wiggins to Sir Wiggo makes any real difference, though it did have the one advamtage in that it got BroDeal throthing at the mouth

omfg. Hahahaha. Responses to the rest of this bs going on is forthcoming- but this deserves an individual notice. Funny, del. Funny. I got a good laugh.


Now - maybe my next post will be a mea culpa - but wtf - for now? This was funny.

 

[hiero2]

I explained why I edited the title. To depersonalise it from the person Bradley Wiggins to the post 2012 caricature "Sir Wiggo"...and I used ".." to emphasise that aspect. If BroDeal has a suggestion that would satisfy both he and I, please PM me I am happy to change it.

Because it's not about Bradley Wiggins, Contador, Sky, Froome etc per se. It's about the process of getting the spectacular result (presumeably by nefarious means) then flying under the radar. As such a guy like Froome should never enter the conversation given he is doing the exact opposite and stated he wants another 5 or so TdF wins.

FYI I had to delete something like 30 posts in a row because it had got so off track rabbiting on about Sky etc. If the actual intent is to discuss Bradley Wiggins doping, or Sky team based doping, or Froome doping etc etc I will close the thread and you can use the existing ones. However I think the purported intention of this thread is sound and should remain open if it sticks to said intention.

Still catching up - but this is a good response. SB - well done!

 

[hiero2]

. . .
Since none of you had the balls to respond, the thread died.
. . .

hitch - knock it off. No one had the balls to respond? Please. 85% of your post is right-on. The other 15% is inflammatory, insulting, and otherwise looking for a fight. Have another think before you post - thank you very much.

 

[BroDeal]

Still catching up - but this is a good response. SB - well done!

Way to keep current. CN moderation at its finest.

 

[red_flanders]

no. "some" were not banned, only one. The rest continue with their nonsense.

The entire thread was a troll. It had nothing to do with the wind direction but was the result of several posters odd obsession. Mods only made it worse by ignoring what was going on and, in some cases, contributing to the chaos. I even had a Mod tell me "tell your friends in the sport they're the ones who burned the fans" instead of addressing the obvious chaos

Yes, I said that to you in context and in private. That you have put it out on the forum to score points in an argument shows a complete lack of character and perspective.

Sad that you've come to this.

 

[sittingbison]

Yes I was given a 1 week ban merely for calling spalco an idiot (after he asked "am I an idiot").

I committed no other violation.

I don't see how thats even a 1 day ban. Ive certainly seen a lot worse go without a warning. Ive posted worse myself without a warning.

But one can't help recall that a few days earlier you wrongly claimed that I deserved a ban and I called you out on that, asking you to find a reason for why I should have been banned.

You then Wiggins style claimed to have meant something else by what you said. But the above sentence is not vague in the slightest. Its very explicit.You closed the thread rather than banning the hitch. What reason did you have for banning the hitch then?

And your explanation was poor as hell but I thought if i let it slide it would die down.

Clearly not as a few days later, surprise surprise, sittingbison pounces on the first chance he gets and bins me for a week for the equivalent of a parking violation.

Seeing as you, without asking me, decided to interpret my post to spalco as subversion of the forum (even though in 19000 posts I had never done anything of the sort), well I then choose to interpret your banning me for nothing, as revenge for proving you wrong in front of everyone, not so very long before.

complete and utter rubbish. As explained previously in this thread, that comment was clearly made in response to and using as examples the comments that you and sceptic made about disrupting threads.

Pouncing on you? The simple fact is as described above...in a thread that was turning nasty you deliberately chose to completely ignore a clear and polite request to desist with the personal insults. Sorry the Hitch, you bought it on yourself.

 

[The Hitch]

Way to keep current. CN moderation at its finest.

Rest assured hiero will respond to this.











Within the next 5 months.

 

[hiero2]

oy. I quit catching up on page 503 of pages ?ungodly number?. I will try to find time tomorrow.

But, from what I have seen:
Dr Mas: stfu. You are being obstreperous and obtuse. Netserk is right when he says to provide a link. You seem disingenous to me when you say the other poster should provide the link. You are in an ARGUMENT, dude. It is up to YOU to provide the PROOF for your side. If you are disproving the OTHER side, it is still up to YOU to provide the proof.

If you want to argue with me, go look up the rules for debate.

Sorry I don't have time to catch up more tonight. I see that a lot has happened. I don't have time to follow it all.

Manana. Or, po-russki: paka.

 

[The Hitch]

Pouncing on you? The simple fact is as described above...in a thread that was turning nasty you deliberately chose to completely ignore a clear and polite request to desist with the personal insults. Sorry the Hitch, you bought it on yourself.

Ignoring the inaccuracies here I'll just get to the point of why the instance shows you are a bad moderator.

I have made nearly 20 000 posts in 3 years and have about 6 or 7 warnings, including about 2 for using f****** as an adjective back when the mods wanted to discourage swearing.
I had 1 24 hour ban over 2 years ago, for joking that a spectator who knocked over contador should knock over his opponents if he wants redemption.

My warnings are months apart from eachother and there is no history of me ignoring one. There is no history of me disputing one. There is no history of me arguing with the moderators.


so I make a post in a thread I hadn't participated in that day calling a poster an idiot. A first offense

And you give me a 7 day ban. No, discussion, no questions, no consideration of whether I deserve it, no comment even, just pow, straight in there, 7 day ban.

So, what did this 1 week ban accomplish? Did you stop some mass trolling spree that I was about to embark on? Did you have reason to believe I would ignore a simple- stay off that thread.

Did bro deal and don'tbelate pedro, the 2 posters who had been going at it in that thread suddenly think - oh sittingbison is for real, let's stop posting? If so could this not have been achieved without using me as a scapegoat.

the answer- nothing was accomplished. Other than a power kick for you perhaps and potentially (though I no longer care as much) making me feel bad about being banned from the forum, and risking me now being more uncooperative with the mods since I might feel wounded. Thereby risking further distruption down the line.

I would not have caused any further distruption to the forum and you know that. Had I been given a 24 hour ban I would not have spent the remaining 6 days doing anything against the rules. And you know that too.

but you gave the ban anyway, even though it accomplished nothing.

And when I point this out you search for some legal technicality for why in theory a 7 day ban might be justified rather than considering if it was the right or logical thing to do.

And the incident really brings home the idea that the current mods see posters on here not as fellow posters, but the way wardens and correctional officers see prisoners.

7 day ban to show who's boss. And if you dont swallow it you'll get more.

When a real moderator, would say - listen hitch, since you are very rarely a poster who causes us trouble, I know I don't need to ban you for the rest of the vuelta. But could you please leave that thread for now and not call anyone an idiot.

And that moderator still gets to ban me if I refuse. Maybe that was the fear? That I would cooperate and then you'd miss your chance to ban me?

But that moderator isn't waking up to defend his actions on the moderator thread 3 weeks later. That moderator in fact is probably getting pms of support and recognition on this section. But that would be too easy.

 

[The Hitch]

Dr Mas: stfu.

What on earth possessed you to think writing this was a good idea?

 

[ElChingon]

This forum will be a happier friendlier place when all the posters stop fighting amongst themselves and unite against the common enemy, the mods.

The problem is they're now infiltrating us with a lot of ex-mods now, I suspect their double forum-ite is the cause of the problem(s). I wonder what is going on over in the protected Mod thread. I hear its pretty funny stuff.

 

[sittingbison]

OK The Hitch, lets reduce the situation to its simplest component. Take out of the equation whether I'm on a power trip, have it in for you etc etc. Answer me these two questions:

Why did you decide to call spalco an idiot only two posts and 90 minutes after I asked for the personal insults to stop?

Do you think its a good idea to do the exact opposite when a moderator asks everyone to stop the insults? Especially as you acknowledge the thread had turned somewhat nasty with insults flying between various other posters (not you).

 

[BroDeal]

"Shut it down!"

Seriously, this has become rather pathetic. This place needs a reboot.

 

[pedaling squares]

Way to keep current. CN moderation at its finest.

Not only was one finger on the forum pulse, identifying breaking news and emerging events, both thumbs were held up in support of Squatting Buffalo's wacky theory that changing "Wiggins" to "Sir Wiggo" would make the thread less about er, well, Bradley Wiggins. An idea so far ahead of its time that it had to be abandoned spectacularly the following day.

 

[Hugh Januss]

"Shut it down!"

Seriously, this has become rather pathetic. This place needs a reboot.

http://youtu.be/a1Tpe-dbPQI

 

[sittingbison]

only abandoned out of consideration to the OP.

I suspect though that heiro2 is not talking about the title change per se, rather the accompanying sentiment that we need another Wiggins/Sky/Froome doping thread like a hole in the head, and trying to save that otherwise useful thread from descending down that route was worth the effort.

EDIT:
although I personally couldn't care less, it is not acceptable to be insulting by distorting handles or making up nicknames. Everyone had their fun earlier today, its time to stop that please

 

[pedaling squares]

Not meant as an insult, been doing that off and on with others' handles for 4 yrs but will leave you out of it.

 

[sittingbison]

Not meant as an insult, been doing that off and on with others' handles for 4 yrs but will leave you out of it.

no problemo pedalling squares

I just don't think its a good idea for everyone to think they can or should do it, chaos would truly eventuate.

 

[skidmark]

sooo, after catching up on the last 24 hours, is anyone else thinking what I'm thinking, namely that Dr. Mas should be a moderator? I can't think of someone more detailed, diligent, and oriented towards a strict interpretation of the rules.

This last 150 responses is maybe one of the most surreal, crazy things I've seen on a CN forum, whewf.

 

[LaFlorecita]

sooo, after catching up on the last 24 hours, is anyone else thinking what I'm thinking, namely that Dr. Mas should be a moderator? I can't think of someone more detailed, diligent, and oriented towards a strict interpretation of the rules.

This last 150 responses is maybe one of the most surreal, crazy things I've seen on a CN forum, whewf.

I vote AGAINST.