Moderators

[Netserk]

Here goes a question for Dan (or any mod who can answer it):

What constitutes 'contact' in Future's T&C 5.19?

Dear mods and Daniel, I would still very much like an answer to this question.

 

[python]

....It's really meant for Dan Benson. ......

i dont have a dog in this and would pass over the subject as was my usual except i saw one thing that imo needs a correction (well better say - to register my opinion)...

speaking from experience and common sense, it is unimaginable when a senior corporate employe (benson) asked an important question of his legal mates and being ignored, that is, NOT being responded to. some sort of legal advice must have been made and benson, i am sure, got an idea if not a written opinion.

it is altogether another thing, and his right for that matter, to communicate it (or not) to a narrow circle of mods or a wider audience of the forum.

either way, i can't say the matter was handled wisely by him nor can i say, he contributed to curtailing a huge turnover of solid mods/admins or the content-adding posters.

 

[Granville57]

Incorrect. I know, I posted and linked to the answers a couple of times somewhere in the history of time. Don't want to take my word for it? Go waste your own time in a search. Sorry, I'm not interested.

Actually, it took no time at all. Doing a very quick search on your history, combined with the word "Papp," yielded only nine posts total—all while preparing a very nice omelette for myself this morning.

This one did stand out though.

In this thread everyone can cast their vote(s) on who is/are your favorite user(s) on this forum.

I'll add Joe Papp.

All in good fun, heiro2, all in good fun.

 

[MarkvW]

I've yet to see any credible proof of any supposedly outrageous thing that Joe Papp did on this forum.

In the absence of credible proof, why give CN a hard time?

 

[Granville57]

I've yet to see any credible proof of any supposedly outrageous thing that Joe Papp did on this forum.

In the absence of credible proof, why give CN a hard time?

This issue is no longer with that dude you mentioned, it's with CN/Benson/"legal"

Their handling of it was the outrageous part. Or maybe most of the best mods left for some other reason (even though they explicitly stated the direct connection)?

 

[MarkvW]

This issue is no longer with that dude you mentioned, it's with CN/Benson/"legal"

Their handling of it was the outrageous part. Or maybe most of the best mods left for some other reason (even though they explicitly stated the direct connection)?

As I understand it, by "their handling of it," you just mean their refusal to tell you anything about how they handled it.

Seems like a tempest in a teapot.

 

[Granville57]

Seems like a tempest in a teapot.

Seems like a vortex...

 

[MarkvW]

Seems like a vortex...

I don't think they're going to tell you anything more than they already have.

 

[BroDeal]

I will say this - "legal" never came back with an answer that we heard. So if you are trying to pigeonhole the thing, and misdirect the answer by being overly strict - hey, I surrender - and you can count the coup. There ya go.

The "legal" story was nothing but a way to stonewall instead of dealing with the problem. What was "legal" going to say? Even though you have been banning people left and right for innocuous reasons, you cannot ban Papp? Initially no regular users knew about what was going on. It was only after management failed to act and the mods quit that it leaked out. Papp could have been banned under the rubric of "a private matter" and no one would have been the wiser.

 

[Netserk]

Actually, it took no time at all. Doing a very quick search on your history, combined with the word "Papp," yielded only nine posts total—all while preparing a very nice omelette for myself this morning.

This one did stand out though.






All in good fun, heiro2, all in good fun.

Good thing you didn't search for his opinion regarding LauraLyn

 

[JRTinMA]

You have all conveniently forgot that RR sent him his actual name in an email address. Papp may be all the things you say but its not his fault RR was careless.

 

[hiero2]

Actually, it took no time at all. Doing a very quick search on your history, combined with the word "Papp," yielded only nine posts total—all while preparing a very nice omelette for myself this morning.
This one did stand out though.




All in good fun, heiro2, all in good fun.

indeed! Well, at one time, here was a guy on the inside of everything, the peloton, dopage, willing to openly share his P.O.V. That took guts or something.

That's good thinking on the search terms. If I only quoted another person, and just said "this situation" - it might not come up. But hey, I don't have 10K posts, and you could narrow it down by thread.

I've yet to see any credible proof of any supposedly outrageous thing that Joe Papp did on this forum.

In the absence of credible proof, why give CN a hard time?

Yes, and to be honest, it finally, at least in part, was put down to "two sides to the story" - with no way to validate that the heinous deed attributed actually occurred.

Good thing you didn't search for his opinion regarding LauraLyn

Oh, yeah, LL, now THERE was a real nasty character. From that one we saw, not just deviousness, but malicious intent. Not nice.

You have all conveniently forgot that RR sent him his actual name in an email address. Papp may be all the things you say but its not his fault RR was careless.

Which is true, and I think might have something to do with RR not making a bigger deal out of it. Basically, I think RR just kinda felt like "This really sucks, but I have a life. Movin' on." Of course, that is only my opinion of what his opinion might be.

 

[Netserk]

Then why did you write: "Not sure if this is the right thread - but I was wondering what LL did to get permanently banned. I mean, I thought she was particularly annoying, but she did seem to be intelligent and mostly rational. Not entirely sad to see her go, but surprised to see a perm ban with no warnings and no reason given"*

*Closed thread so can't quote.

 

[ebandit]

?

indeed!

Oh, yeah, LL, now THERE was a real nasty character. From that one we saw, not just deviousness, but malicious intent. Not nice.

Which is true

what sort of moderation is this? do I read the truth or a paranoid gut reaction
to please?

strange as it may seem I liked the member LL................of course they did not fit in with the clinic crowd but I had some good conversations by
PM and later email

Mark L

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I wasn't a mod then either, but I can state fairly certainly that it was never properly addressed.

I even tried to reach Dan Benson by phone regarding the matter.

Here's what transpired:

Granville57: There has been a lot of stuff on the CN forum that you were definitely aware of over the last couple of years. One of the points was that you refused to address the Joe Papp issue. Could you explain that?

Benson: No I don’t know anything about that. I’d have to read up on it or something.

Granville57: I can give you the quote very quickly as I know you’re pressed for time. It’s from Glenn Wilson but it refers to Race Radio, and it says…

Benson: Granville, Granville, I’m getting ready to drive right now. So there’s nothing I’m going to know on that. You’ll have to get hold of me another time because I’m on the phone and they’re going to give me a ticket if I’m driving with it on the phone.

Granville57: Can I just ask one last question?

Benson: I’m driving with the phone and I’m going to get a ticket.

An hour later, Granville57 called Benson for a second time:

Benson: I’m busy right now. We’ll have to try another time. Thanks.

Granville57: Are you free later on this evening?

Benson: No. I’ve just got home from covering the Tour of Spain, Granville. I’m done with interviews. I’ve already done 200 or something like that. How come you didn’t come to Spain? I’ll let you go, I’m going to spend some time at home. Bye, bye.

[Benson hangs up]

It's true.

Guess that was the end of that.

 

[TheGame]

I've yet to see any credible proof of any supposedly outrageous thing that Joe Papp did on this forum.

In the absence of credible proof, why give CN a hard time?

Petition details for their personal details via private communication on the forum behind a banner of "friendship" or wanting to discuss "something privately". Yes, this happened.

Attempted passing on of that information to other partie(s) in return for remuneration also happened.

A lot of the people involved are no longer anonymous not because of the actions of Joe Papp but by personal choice. That does not change the fact that CN appeared to do nothing.

As I understand it, by "their handling of it," you just mean their refusal to tell you anything about how they handled it.

Seems like a tempest in a teapot.

Taking into account, the people involved, and the person(s) that the information was attempted to be passed on to, person(s) with a reputation for intimidation and harrassment, it was not a tempest in a teapot as you put it. Had it been your personal information I am sure you would view it differently.

 

[MarkvW]

Petition details for their personal details via private communication on the forum behind a banner of "friendship" or wanting to discuss "something privately". Yes, this happened.

Attempted passing on of that information to other partie(s) in return for remuneration also happened.

A lot of the people involved are no longer anonymous not because of the actions of Joe Papp but by personal choice. That does not change the fact that CN appeared to do nothing.



Taking into account, the people involved, and the person(s) that the information was attempted to be passed on to, person(s) with a reputation for intimidation and harrassment, it was not a tempest in a teapot as you put it. Had it been your personal information I am sure you would view it differently.

You're just stating conclusions. Why should I believe that Joe Papp disseminated information that he learned by PM here? And if he did, what's wrong with that? Is there something secret about PMs?

 

[BroDeal]

You're just stating conclusions. Why should I believe that Joe Papp disseminated information that he learned by PM here? And if he did, what's wrong with that? Is there something secret about PMs?

You go ahead and put your trust in what Joe Papp says. I am sure he won't let you down.

 

[MarkvW]

You go ahead and put your trust in what Joe Papp says. I am sure he won't let you down.

If you think I should put my trust in what Joe Papp says, then that's your problem.

But what proof exists that Papp did the deed? I doubt anyone has any proof.

 

[TheGame]

You're just stating conclusions. Why should I believe that Joe Papp disseminated information that he learned by PM here? And if he did, what's wrong with that? Is there something secret about PMs?

No I am not just stating conclusions. I am stating from personal experience.

On the "secret about PM's", the very phrase "private message" gives that away. And yes, there is an issue with attempting to sell peoples RL details.

If you think I should put my trust in what Joe Papp says, then that's your problem.

But what proof exists that Papp did the deed? I doubt anyone has any proof.

Thats very much what people were saying about Lance Armstrong and USADA.

But anyway, I know it happened, others know it happened, we do not answer to you (although it must be noted I do not speak for them), nor are (we) required to provide proof to you. Sometimes you just have to take peoples word for things. Besides, providing evidence could just as easily remove the anonymity of the people who were trying to protect their anonymity in the first place.

And none of this has anything to do with the Moderators or the way they moderate.

 

[MarkvW]

No I am not just stating conclusions. I am stating from personal experience.

On the "secret about PM's", the very phrase "private message" gives that away. And yes, there is an issue with attempting to sell peoples RL details.



Thats very much what people were saying about Lance Armstrong and USADA.

But anyway, I know it happened, others know it happened, we do not answer to you (although it must be noted I do not speak for them), nor are (we) required to provide proof to you. Sometimes you just have to take peoples word for things. Besides, providing evidence could just as easily remove the anonymity of the people who were trying to protect their anonymity in the first place.

And none of this has anything to do with the Moderators or the way they moderate.

You're making my point for me. We can't fault the mods on this issue because there was no proof that Papp disclosed identities to anybody. Inconclusive is the word that best sums it up.

 

[Netserk]

We can't fault the mods on this issue because there was no proof that Papp disclosed identities to anybody.

How would you know?

 

[TheGame]

You're making my point for me. We can't fault the mods on this issue because there was no proof that Papp disclosed identities to anybody. Inconclusive is the word that best sums it up.

How do you know this? How do you know the information or "evidence" was not shared privately with the moderation team or Daniel and not publicly.

There is actually a procedure for dealing with things of a serious nature and the procedure is to deal with them privately, report them to the moderation team who escalate it to Dan.

The procedure is not, never has been, and never will be, to provide the evidence publicly to you.

 

[MarkvW]

How do you know this? How do you know the information or "evidence" was not shared privately with the moderation team or Daniel and not publicly.

There is actually a procedure for dealing with things of a serious nature and the procedure is to deal with them privately, report them to the moderation team who escalate it to Dan.

The procedure is not, never has been, and never will be, to provide the evidence publicly to you.

Read hiero2's post. The one that says "two sides to the story" and "no way to validate."

That's where I'm coming from.

Use your noggin. We know Papp asked for people's names, but how in the world could CN have ever learned that Papp gave those names to anybody else in particular unless Papp or the recipient admitted it?

I can have my suspicions, but that's about it. Besides, the dopedealing sleaze doesn't participate here any more, so what's the big deal?

 

[TheGame]

Read hiero2's post. The one that says "two sides to the story" and "no way to validate."

That's where I'm coming from.

Use your noggin. We know Papp asked for people's names, but how in the world could CN have ever learned that Papp gave those names to anybody else in particular unless Papp or the recipient admitted it?

I can have my suspicions, but that's about it. Besides, the dopedealing sleaze doesn't participate here any more, so what's the big deal?

And that is Hiero's opinion. was he a moderator at the time? Did he have access to full unadulterated information on the matter?

Just because you have not seen evidence doesn't mean that others haven't seen it or witnessed it first hand. But like I say, last I read the forum rules they didn't state anywhere that evidence had to be provided publicly to you.

I'm out of this one now before I blow my top and say things I really shouldn't be sharing, nor do I need to share WITH YOU

That's all.