Moderators

[red_flanders]

It is not like RR has not been giving it back with equal or greater disdain for thehog and everyone else who disagrees with him.

A month long ban is ridiculous. That thread was under control. I think the real issue is the Skrybabies are pursuing a campaign to ban thehog by constantly reporting his posts, and the mods don't have the swingers to not act if someone hits the "report" button. The forum has been reduced to reactive moderation done without thought.

I can assure you that's not who's doing the bulk of the complaining.

 

[red_flanders]

That is not the type of "reaction" I am talking about. I was referring to reactive moderation rather than proactive. I have seen it happen on a lot of forums. Instead of reading threads and participating in discussions, so they aware of the give and take of a discussion plus the mood of the group or thread, mods get lazy, even losing interest in participating. They rely on reported posts to decide when to act. They charge in without knowing what is going on and make bad moderating decisions. Maybe a better term would be "squeaky wheel moderating." That is what seems to be going on here.

It is, exactly. Apparently the mods have lives apart from the forum. Not sure that's a bad thing...

 

[red_flanders]

Ah, gotcha - and yes, I would agree that if the mods are merely reacting to the report function then they will get a distorted view of an exchange.

I may be wrong, but I suspect that a lot of reports are from people taking exception to something 'bad' being posted about their favourite rider.

Not a bad guess, but no. Most of the reporting is from people complaining about insults, off-topic posting, thread-clogging, and calling people who don't agree with them "trolls".

Most of the people calling others trolls have exhibited EXACTLY the same behavior as those they're reporting on in the previous few posts or previous few days.

It's a challenging job if you're not here full-time.

 

[darwin553]

That is not the type of "reaction" I am talking about. I was referring to reactive moderation rather than proactive. I have seen it happen on a lot of forums. Instead of reading threads and participating in discussions, so they aware of the give and take of a discussion plus the mood of the group or thread, mods get lazy, even losing interest in participating. They rely on reported posts to decide when to act. They charge in without knowing what is going on and make bad moderating decisions. Maybe a better term would be "squeaky wheel moderating." That is what seems to be going on here.

I agree. This is a problem I see often as well.

 

[Granville57]

After a decent night's sleep, I see that the Sky thread has reduced itself to a new level of stupid, even by the standards that we have come to expect when the conversation revolves around that particularly prickly issue.

I mean...I mean...it's not even worth trolling. And that is unforgivable. If the arguments being offered by some are truly meant to be taken seriously, then 2014 will certainly prove itself worthy of being The Year of The Horse.

I would ask that the mods institute a new standard, to be put in place immediately, that requires all debate to be at least entertaining enough to be trolled for further entertainment if one so desires. Otherwise "stupid" will win the day, and there will no longer be any reason to even glance at The Clinic (and then what would the pro peloton do for late night amusement?).

Please, I implore you.
Ridiculous debate must not be so ridiculous as to be unworthy of ridicule. I can not even bring myself to comment in that thread at the moment.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

That is not the type of "reaction" I am talking about. I was referring to reactive moderation rather than proactive. I have seen it happen on a lot of forums. Instead of reading threads and participating in discussions, so they aware of the give and take of a discussion plus the mood of the group or thread, mods get lazy, even losing interest in participating. They rely on reported posts to decide when to act. They charge in without knowing what is going on and make bad moderating decisions. Maybe a better term would be "squeaky wheel moderating." That is what seems to be going on here.

I would like to see the posts from the after the Armstrong thread lock where thehog was "trolling" RR. RR made some clear distortions of what Hincapie said and got called on it.

And unfortunately, unlike Leroy Jenkins, they rule the day when they do so.

As for the stupidity in the Sky thread referred to by Granville, I hope I've added layers upon layers.

 

[ebandit]

?

After a decent night's sleep, I see that the Sky thread has reduced itself to a new level of stupid, even by the standards that we have come to expect when the conversation revolves around that particularly prickly issue.

I mean...I mean...it's not even worth trolling.

limit members to 6 posts per day ensuring they make them count

plenty of entertainment here members blame skybots/skybabies/RR for lacking
moral fortitude when confronted by hoggy etc

one would think hoggy would be bright enough to fit into forum rules and not repeatedly be banned for similar offences

ha ha their squirming to always appear in the know / always correct makes them as difficult to pin down as a greased piglet

................enjoy!

Mark L

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Not a bad guess, but no. Most of the reporting is from people complaining about insults, off-topic posting, thread-clogging, and calling people who don't agree with them "trolls".

Good.
That is what its there for.

Of note is that you didnt mention the posts that are subtle digs that can fly under the radar, these will of course inevitably end in someone reacting.

Most of the people calling others trolls have exhibited EXACTLY the same behavior as those they're reporting on in the previous few posts or previous few days.

So what?

This appears to confirm something SB wrote earlier about RR, that in essence he is capable of looking after himself.
If that attitude is what the mods think then it is little wonder that there is plenty of conflict.

It's a challenging job if you're not here full-time.

No, when confusing rules are set up that are sporadically enforced with little consistency then the mods have made a straight forward job challenging.

No-one expects the mods to be here full-time, indeed thats why the report button is there.

 

[the sceptic]

After a decent night's sleep, I see that the Sky thread has reduced itself to a new level of stupid, even by the standards that we have come to expect when the conversation revolves around that particularly prickly issue.

I mean...I mean...it's not even worth trolling. And that is unforgivable. If the arguments being offered by some are truly meant to be taken seriously, then 2014 will certainly prove itself worthy of being The Year of The Horse.

I would ask that the mods institute a new standard, to be put in place immediately, that requires all debate to be at least entertaining enough to be trolled for further entertainment if one so desires. Otherwise "stupid" will win the day, and there will no longer be any reason to even glance at The Clinic (and then what would the pro peloton do for late night amusement?).

Please, I implore you.
Ridiculous debate must not be so ridiculous as to be unworthy of ridicule. I can not even bring myself to comment in that thread at the moment.

Thats what happens when trolls like Martinvickers are allowed to keep doing their thing forever.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Thats what happens when trolls like Martinvickers are allowed to keep doing their thing forever.

Ok, this is actually a perfect example of how having a particular opinion on a subject colors what you feel is 'trolling' or 'entertaining' and its why the mods should ignore sentiment, posters and keep it to a few simple guidelines that are enforced.

Unless of course you wish to make a clear distinction in what MV is doing and what TheHog does, that you find entertaining - this is from a few days ago:

It looked to me like he was making an effort to tone it down a bit. Anyway, in my opinion he isnt any worse than the people he is arguing with.

Just seems ridiculous to ban someone for a month for basically nothing.

I know everyone wont agree but I find Hog very entertaining most of the time and the clinic is pretty dull without him.

Doesnt seem like a good idea to ban everyone with a different opinion or that is able to stir up some ****. Eventually well be left with everyone agreeing with each other and Dr Vortex/Benotti posting wars that nobody will read.

 

[the sceptic]

Ok, this is actually a perfect example of how having a particular opinion on a subject colors what you feel is 'trolling' or 'entertaining' and its why the mods should ignore sentiment, posters and keep it to a few simple guidelines that are enforced.

Unless of course you wish to make a clear distinction in what MV is doing and what TheHog does, that you find entertaining - this is from a few days ago:

Vickers doesnt have any opinions or arguments of his own though. His sole purpose is to nitpick other peoples posts and subtly insult people.

I think thats a pretty big difference from what Hog is doing, entertaining or not.

 

[pmcg76]

Vickers doesnt have any opinions or arguments of his own though. His sole purpose is to nitpick other peoples posts and subtly insult people.

I think thats a pretty big difference from what Hog is doing, entertaining or not.

I think if a poster has been banned as many times as Hog has, then clearly there is an issue with the poster regardless of your admiration for him, it must be well into double figures at this stage. His last stay didn't even last a week I think.

What I want to know is where the limit is and how is it some people get perma-banned super quick after say one ban. Surely once a poster has received say five bans, they should be on thin ice. If you go over 10, then it should be Adios.

Of course I got a comment from a mod once that suggested certain people who should be long gone are simply tolerated here becasue their ridiculous posting causes controversey and brings numbers to the forum, a bit like a car crash really.

I think many of the heavy posters fall into that category.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Vickers doesnt have any opinions or arguments of his own though. His sole purpose is to nitpick other peoples posts and subtly insult people.

I think thats a pretty big difference from what Hog is doing, entertaining or not.

This is wonderful.
This is probably the biggest compliment to Hogs trolling techniques that could be given.
And I am not using the term trolling as a negative - when its this well done it has to be almost appreciated as an art.
The Hogs purpose is to troll, nothing more- whatever the flavor of the day is, add in some buzzwords, sit back and watch.
I am actually feeling bad that I said his stuff is getting old after your post.


Like it of not - MV does have a 'purpose', you often refer to them as a Skybot, remember? They do nitpick, because that is what exposes the weak points in some people arguments. And guess what, its a forum - nitpicking and countering other peoples point is exactly what is supposed to happen.

 

[Granville57]

nitpicking and countering other peoples point is exactly what is supposed to happen.

Ehhh...is it "supposed" to happen?

The problem with that is that because this is a forum (and not a real life, face-to-face environment for discussion) it will always be possible to nitpick anything that anyone says. Always.

In anticipation of such, I sometimes spend more time on a post than I care to, knowing full well that if one point is left unaccounted for, (no matter how obvious that point may be) that someone is likely to shout back, "Hey, you didn't include every example from the past 100 years that might slightly contradict that!"

It can be exhausting. A forum does require a certain degree of implied understanding, lest one get caught a series of...well...vortexes.
(Not pointing fingers or trying to be cute here. I just honestly can't think of a more appropriate term.)

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Ehhh...is it "supposed" to happen?

The problem with that is that because this is a forum (and not a real life, face-to-face environment for discussion) it will always be possible to nitpick anything that anyone says. Always.

In anticipation of such, I sometimes spend more time on a post than I care to, knowing full well that if one point is left unaccounted for, (no matter how obvious that point may be) that someone is likely to shout back, "Hey, you didn't include every example from the past 100 years that might slightly contradict that!"

It can be exhausting. A forum does require a certain degree of implied understanding, lest one get caught a series of...well...vortexes.
(Not pointing fingers or trying to be cute here. I just honestly can't think of a more appropriate term.)

Sure - and I accept using the term in that way.

And I believe we agree - but just because someone nitpicks a point, does not mean they are deliberately doing so. Ie - to be merely obtuse.
It can indeed just be that they do not see the nuanced point that the poster who posted believes obvious.

I don't have a problem with the term vortex, in fact it is a bit of a compliment.
However, it has been used as a tool to not answer a point.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Vickers doesnt have any opinions or arguments of his own though. His sole purpose is to nitpick other peoples posts and subtly insult people.

I think thats a pretty big difference from what Hog is doing, entertaining or not.

I can think of a few others that fit this description..
can't be name-calling

 

[del1962]

Vickers doesnt have any opinions or arguments of his own though. His sole purpose is to nitpick other peoples posts and subtly insult people.

I think thats a pretty big difference from what Hog is doing, entertaining or not.

hmm, thus says one of the forum's biggest trolls

 

[the sceptic]

hmm, thus says one of the forum's biggest trolls

any evidence or eyewitness testimonies to back up that claim?

 

[MarkvW]

Well . . . Mr. Vickers is being trolled rather hard right now.

 

[ferryman]

This is the Moderators thread people. Don't come on here to continue the petty fights that are going on in the Clinic. Which, are frankly embarrassing in some cases.

 

[mewmewmew13]

This is the Moderators thread people. Don't come on here to continue the petty fights that are going on in the Clinic. Which, are frankly embarrassing in some cases.

I guess there should be a 'room' for scuffling and free play

 

[Edward of Woodstock]

as of late he has been going at the throat of RR if no one has noticed. What's going on with that?

You need to know the history to understand. Thehog and RR basically had the same act for years. They were two almost identical anti Armstrong trolls whose main hobby in life was to get around the mod teams on cycling forums to spread vague rumors and gossip and pretend to have the inside line on all things Armstrong. They worked together, sharing PMs and coordinating rumors and sock accounts. They had the same style, always teasing without being specific. Nobody can quite remember anything either of them said coming true, apart from obvious big truth that Armstrong was doping, which everyone in the sport knew anyway. But somehow RR managed to get 20k followers on twitter out of this simple act, and thanks to that got to finally meet the very cycling celebs he used to pretend he knew. Thehog, on the other hand, never made it out of forum obscurity. Thehog must ask himself everyday what the hell happened? How could two people so similar have such different fortunes? Their relationship now is like Landis and Lance before Lance got busted. One believes the other is living a lie and doesn't deserve to be where they are today. Thehog believes RR would still be working the rumor mill on the forums about the likes of team sky, just as he is, had RR not met his new friends and got all serious, and lets face it, thehog is probably right about that. There is going to be no easy fix to this relationship.

 

[Cyivel]

You need to know the history to understand. Thehog and RR basically had the same act for years. They were two almost identical anti Armstrong trolls whose main hobby in life was to get around the mod teams on cycling forums to spread vague rumors and gossip and pretend to have the inside line on all things Armstrong. They worked together, sharing PMs and coordinating rumors and sock accounts. They had the same style, always teasing without being specific. Nobody can quite remember anything either of them said coming true, apart from obvious big truth that Armstrong was doping, which everyone in the sport knew anyway. But somehow RR managed to get 20k followers on twitter out of this simple act, and thanks to that got to finally meet the very cycling celebs he used to pretend he knew. Thehog, on the other hand, never made it out of forum obscurity. Thehog must ask himself everyday what the hell happened? How could two people so similar have such different fortunes? Their relationship now is like Landis and Lance before Lance got busted. One believes the other is living a lie and doesn't deserve to be where they are today. Thehog believes RR would still be working the rumor mill on the forums about the likes of team sky, just as he is, had RR not met his new friends and got all serious, and lets face it, thehog is probably right about that. There is going to be no easy fix to this relationship.

Welcome, brother.

 

[the sceptic]

good first post

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You need to know the history to understand. Thehog and RR basically had the same act for years. They were two almost identical anti Armstrong trolls whose main hobby in life was to get around the mod teams on cycling forums to spread vague rumors and gossip and pretend to have the inside line on all things Armstrong. They worked together, sharing PMs and coordinating rumors and sock accounts. They had the same style, always teasing without being specific. Nobody can quite remember anything either of them said coming true, apart from obvious big truth that Armstrong was doping, which everyone in the sport knew anyway. But somehow RR managed to get 20k followers on twitter out of this simple act, and thanks to that got to finally meet the very cycling celebs he used to pretend he knew. Thehog, on the other hand, never made it out of forum obscurity. Thehog must ask himself everyday what the hell happened? How could two people so similar have such different fortunes? Their relationship now is like Landis and Lance before Lance got busted. One believes the other is living a lie and doesn't deserve to be where they are today. Thehog believes RR would still be working the rumor mill on the forums about the likes of team sky, just as he is, had RR not met his new friends and got all serious, and lets face it, thehog is probably right about that. There is going to be no easy fix to this relationship.

I won't even ask you to back this up -as obviously it is entirely true and accurate record of history.

The best trolling they did though was when they set up the other account by The Arbiter/BPC guy, that kind of crazy stuff was some of the best trolling ever. Particularly the way they made it seemed like a crazy stalker. You couldn't make it up.