Moderators

[pmcg76]

So I see the Dan Martin thread was closed, can't really say that is surprising. I think the thread could be deleted entirely from page 42 until the final page. This place is going to go downhill even quicker if people are just interested in trying to outvortex Dr.Mas. Netserk joined in with the sole purpose to nitpick with Dr.Mas. Also is it any surprise the thread was veered off on a tangent when what was being discussed (Vayer)undermined the mantra of certain posters who were involved in seeing it go off course.

 

[RownhamHill]

They have been allowed back though. A few hours after Graham is banned a new profile with the exact same everything, just happens to come in, and continues the same discussions with the same posters. Graham has been allowed to continue under a new name so what's the problem?

Well there are two main problems; first if what you say is true, and is being tacitly permitted by the moderators, then there are two explanations I can think of:

- they know it's a sock-puppet and are tacitly permitting it on the basis of (I'm guessing) a modicum of regret/repentance at their original decision, or
- the new account hasn't tested positive for sock-puppetry yet, and there's no other reason to hand out another ban (of any description)

Now, the problem is that if the new account is continuing the same discussions with the same posters that a couple of days ago were worthy of a perma-ban, then it begs an obvious question of why the new posts haven't been worthy of a perma-ban? (Oh yeah, there's a pretty obvious answer: they aren't now, and they weren't last week). In either case it highlights the obvious problem with the original decision.

But away from the specifics of this case, the bigger problem is the original point I made about juxtaposing one user who gets a perma-ban for politely engaging in on-topic discussion of the thread's subject, against the two week ban for another user who had been explicitly and aggressively trolling another user for weeks in order to demonstrate his own point that the forum sucks. It explicitly looks like different rules for different posters based on the whims of the moderators, and that is problematic for the long-term health of any forum, I would suggest, and is particularly problematic for this specific one at the moment.

So that's why I think it was a problem.

 

[sittingbison]

Or the alledged sockpuppet has learnt to be more careful

RownhamHill you still suggest GrahamS did nothing wrong. I suggest otherwise.

As I said before, we will have to agree to disagree on this particular.

 

[sittingbison]

So I see the Dan Martin thread was closed, can't really say that is surprising. I think the thread could be deleted entirely from page 42 until the final page. This place is going to go downhill even quicker if people are just interested in trying to outvortex Dr.Mas. Netserk joined in with the sole purpose to nitpick with Dr.Mas. Also is it any surprise the thread was veered off on a tangent when what was being discussed (Vayer)undermined the mantra of certain posters who were involved in seeing it go off course.

I agree, unfortunately I ran out of time this morning and couldn't edit it. Perhaps another mod will do so tonight (my time) ...which is now

 

[RownhamHill]

Or the alledged sockpuppet has learnt to be more careful

RownhamHill you still suggest GrahamS did nothing wrong. I suggest otherwise.

As I said before, we will have to agree to disagree on this particular.

Yep, I've already agreed to disagree, I was just answering the Hitch's question as to why I think it's a problem.

I agree, unfortunately I ran out of time this morning and couldn't edit it. Perhaps another mod will do so tonight (my time) ...which is now

I've just read that car-crash of a thread. Off topic, baiting, de-railing, insulting - it's all there. Out of interest, and given the previous topic, why no perma-bans there?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Yep, I've already agreed to disagree, I was just answering the Hitch's question as to why I think it's a problem.



I've just read that car-crash of a thread. Off topic, baiting, de-railing, insulting - it's all there. Out of interest, and given the previous topic, why no perma-bans there?

Ah hello - because Graham did not break any rules.
Silly boy - it might suggest that they were indeed a new user as its a rookie mistake.

I will cop to a OT charge in that thread - no perma ban for me.
So if the poster has returned now they have actually broken a rule so now they do not get perma banned.

But if they want to make sure they could just go to the Dan Martin thread and post a little OT comment - unfortunately, Froome, USPS, JV, Armstrong, USPS, Wiesel are all used - the Frankie slot appears available though.

 

[the sceptic]

looks like you will get your utopian forum in the froome thread, so you can stop whining now.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

looks like you will get your utopian forum in the froome thread, so you can stop whining now.

Sceptic, my sincere apologies.
I did indeed engage some people who believe in Froome in a normal and civil discussion to see what plausible explanations they may have to show their point.

I now accept this has ruined your 'entertainment' in that thread, by way of apology I will collect and post all fotos of Froome doing zig zag stuff and pushing Henderson and you can do the follow up telling the Skybots to f@ck off back to Bike ***.

 

[the sceptic]

Sceptic, my sincere apologies.
I did indeed engage some people who believe in Froome in a normal and civil discussion to see what plausible explanations they may have to show their point.

I now accept this has ruined your 'entertainment' in that thread, by way of apology I will collect and post all fotos of Froome doing zig zag stuff and pushing Henderson and you can do the follow up telling the Skybots to f@ck off back to Bike ***.

to be clear, I have no problem with you questioning people or your posts in general. My problem is that there are some obvious trolls running wild in that thread, which makes it unreadable for those that arent interested in going over the same old arguments again for hundreds of posts.

Im pretty sure I never told anyone to **** off, Im not that rude. But yes, in an ideal world the skybots would be contained to BikeRetard so I wouldnt have to read their posts here. Thus, I must complain when the Froome thread starts to look indistinguishable from it.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

to be clear, I have no problem with you questioning people or your posts in general. My problem is that there are some obvious trolls running wild in that thread, which makes it unreadable for those that arent interested in going over the same old arguments again for hundreds of posts.

Im pretty sure I never told anyone to **** off, Im not that rude. But yes, in an ideal world the skybots would be contained to BikeRetard so I wouldnt have to read their posts here. Thus, I must complain when the Froome thread starts to look indistinguishable from it.

Fu*k off. I am that rude.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

to be clear, I have no problem with you questioning people or your posts in general. My problem is that there are some obvious trolls running wild in that thread, which makes it unreadable for those that arent interested in going over the same old arguments again for hundreds of posts.

Im pretty sure I never told anyone to **** off, Im not that rude. But yes, in an ideal world the skybots would be contained to BikeRetard so I wouldnt have to read their posts here. Thus, I must complain when the Froome thread starts to look indistinguishable from it.

I am that rude, but I'll resist the impulse (okay, I didn't resist, but I quickly deleted it because it seemed overly harsh)

Valuable and enthralling post. <-It means the same thing.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

to be clear, I have no problem with you questioning people or your posts in general. My problem is that there are some obvious trolls running wild in that thread, which makes it unreadable for those that arent interested in going over the same old arguments again for hundreds of posts.

Im pretty sure I never told anyone to **** off, Im not that rude. But yes, in an ideal world the skybots would be contained to BikeRetard so I wouldnt have to read their posts here. Thus, I must complain when the Froome thread starts to look indistinguishable from it.

What new arguments are there?
The thread would have struggled to get to 10 pages if that was the case.
It would be just a list of statements - "I think he doped". "I think he is clean".

So what if the are the same "trolls"? Wont they be greeted by the same trolls (particularly when you troll them)?

Its very interesting that you want the "Skybots" to remain in BR -that goes along way to explaining why you want them banned and run with TheHog.
It also shows that you either have no ability or point to argue and just want a place to control.

 

[the sceptic]

What new arguments are there?
The thread would have struggled to get to 10 pages if that was the case.
It would be just a list of statements - "I think he doped". "I think he is clean".

So what if the are the same "trolls"? Wont they be greeted by the same trolls (particularly when you troll them)?

Its very interesting that you want the "Skybots" to remain in BR -that goes along way to explaining why you want them banned and run with TheHog.
It also shows that you either have no ability or point to argue and just want a place to control.

No. It shows that I have no interest in arguing because I know there is no point. I could easily vortex those skybots for hundreds of pages if I wanted to.

I want to read posts by people who know what they are talking about and who are also entertaining posters. But, when those posts get drowned out in a sea of trolling then it becomes pretty boring.

 

[sittingbison]

...I've just read that car-crash of a thread. Off topic, baiting, de-railing, insulting - it's all there. Out of interest, and given the previous topic, why no perma-bans there?

errrmmmmmm......

...unfortunately I ran out of time this morning and couldn't edit it. Perhaps another mod will do so tonight (my time) ...which is now

sorry I do have a life outside this ayslum

 

[Dr. Maserati]

No. It shows that I have no interest in arguing because I know there is no point. I could easily vortex those skybots for hundreds of pages if I wanted to.

I doubt that - I doubt that very much.
Remember I asked if you had a post that you were proud of or one that offered an interesting insight from your entire posting history? Just one post.
You couldn't come up with one.

I want to read posts by people who know what they are talking about and who are also entertaining posters. But, when those posts get drowned out in a sea of trolling then it becomes pretty boring.

Thats code for - only people who believe Froome/Sky dopes and people who troll the Skybots.

 

[the sceptic]

I doubt that - I doubt that very much.
Remember I asked if you had a post that you were proud of or one that offered an interesting insight from your entire posting history? Just one post.
You couldn't come up with one.



Thats code for - only people who believe Froome/Sky dopes and people who troll the Skybots.

Why would I be proud of vortexing? Thats the easiest skill in the world. I have enough self-awareness to realize it turns threads to crap, thats why I dont do it.

Its code for: Id rather read posts by people like The Hog or Hitch, than EnacheV and Parker.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Why would I be proud of vortexing? Thats the easiest skill in the world. I have enough self-awareness to realize it turns threads to crap, thats why I dont do it.

No-one has been able to explain what vortexing is - but if its replying to a discussion (or turning threads in to crap) , then that is what you are doing right here, right now.
Perhaps you aren't that self aware after all.

Its code for: Id rather read posts by people like The Hog or Hitch, than EnacheV and Parker.

So the Hog posts, Froome dog dopes & attaches a zig zag picture, TheHitch comes in with something like "LOL".
There would be nothing to discuss, thats it. Close thread.

TheHitch is one of my fav posters - the reason is, because they can argue, discuss and they do not set out to troll. They are not trying to run off anyone who disagrees with them.

 

[the sceptic]

No-one has been able to explain what vortexing is - but if its replying to a discussion (or turning threads in to crap) , then that is what you are doing right here, right now.
Perhaps you aren't that self awareness after all.


So the Hog posts, Froome dog dopes & attaches a zig zag picture, TheHitch comes in with something like "LOL".
There would be nothing to discuss, thats it. Close thread.

TheHitch is one of my fav posters - the reason is, because they can argue, discuss and they do not set out to troll. They are not trying to run off anyone who disagrees with them.

yes, in case anyone else is reading this thread its probably best to stop arguing now. If youre really interested then we can take it to the sidebar thread or PM.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

yes, in case anyone else is reading this thread its probably best to stop arguing now. If youre really interested then we can take it to the sidebar thread or PM.

Well, if you were really interested you would have put your initial post in that thread.

What has now happened is actually pretty much on point of this thread, because it shows the mods the underlying intent that has been going on here.
In fact I read a post earlier by PMCG76 about how they rarely post here.

They have been a member since the very start, March 09, and are an excellent poster - even if we didn't always agree on a point, they remained civil and were very effective at posting their opinion or thoughts.

If the mods wanted to know what has happened to the forum - they would be a good poster to PM who could offer an objective assessment of the place.

 

[The Hitch]

Im pretty sure I never told anyone to **** off, Im not that rude. But yes, in an ideal world the skybots would be contained to BikeRetard so I wouldnt have to read their posts here. Thus, I must complain when the Froome thread starts to look indistinguishable from it.

I dont understand why you would want that, nor why you and Brodeal want to keep giving this other place, free advertisement all the time, by constantly mentioning it.

First of all, keeping opposite opinions away is always dangerous. Now a lot of the pro Sky arguments imo are stupid as is being demonstrated tonight, but so are some of the anti ones i have read on here from some. Either way even if they are wrong, opposite opinions are essential in polishing ones own opinions. Arguments become weak when isolated from opposition, since there is no one to point out flaws. Ive personally moderated many of my own views over the years due to counterarguments, eg I used to believe doping was more prevalent in cycling today than I do now.

But from a pragamitic side I don't think it would be good for your position at all if pro sky opinions left for this other place you bring up.

The Clinic has prestige as the centre for cycling doping discussion and possibly doping discussion in general on the internet. A place where all opinions are welcome and all manner of debate takes place. News gets posted, as it wont be anywhere else (new tests, new interviews with experts- they get no attention in the media), people come to ask questions.

Both a cause and a concequence of this prestige is the fact that a number of people well known with connections in the cycling world have come here.

Betsy posted here, and continues to occasionally pop in. Mike Anderson posted here, and continues to post here, even if not in the clinic.
JV came here a number of times. Race Radio posts here, a lot. To a lesser extent Festinagirl and others.
That they have all posted multiple posts over multiple years speaks to the size of the internet forum.

Now the clinic, already happens to lie more on the suspicion side. I would argue that the reason for this is the same reason why Mike Ashenden and **** Pound are suspicious - because we know a little bit about how doping works, here.

Why would you want to change that and politicize the clinic. It already, seems to annoy some of your more extreme opponents to no end that the clinic has this strong doubt against Sky and so much prestige. Which is why parker has adopted the term "asylum" (how Lance's fans used to refer to this place in 09-10) and tried to force it on the clinic as much as Mambo95 used to.
Ive seen on other sites some of the pro sky crowd seem to obsess about the clinic, discuss how dumb and deluded we are amongst themselves, and ive seen strong anti clinic rants on newspaper comments sections.

All because they know The Clinic is big. These people want all suspicion against their favourite riders silenced. And the way things are now, they don't like.

Weve seen plenty of sky defenders on this forum can behave with honour, even if some of what they post annoys me at times.

Leave the fringes to the fringes. Both sides. This is the clinic. Despite some romanticized nostalgia, namely from Bro Deal every few months, about how its all gone down the drain, strong as it ever was. I was here during the Armstrong wars and its more or less the same.

Open to all, and if anyone wants one sided discussions they can go to smaller circle jerk internet boards no one else visits.

 

[the sceptic]

hitch.. you make some good points there and I agree with what you are saying.

I dont think everyone that disagrees with sky doping should get banned. I agree that the forum should be open for everyone. My problem is with those posters who do nothing but troll in every single post.

as you said, its a forum that is known to attract "celebrities" and other knowledgeable people, but would those people come here if the forum descended into non stop trolling wars? (yes, dr mas I realize that there is an irony in me saying this since I have taken part in my fair share of those myself)

anyway, It is time to stop this crusade now.. I realize that. Its really up to the mods to figure out how to get a nice signal/noise ratio without going crazy with the ban button.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

hitch.. you make some good points there and I agree with what you are saying.

I dont think everyone that disagrees with sky doping should get banned. I agree that the forum should be open for everyone. My problem is with those posters who do nothing but troll in every single post.

as you said, its a forum that is known to attract "celebrities" and other knowledgeable people, but would those people come here if the forum descended into non stop trolling wars? (yes, dr mas I realize that there is an irony in me saying this since I have taken part in my fair share of those myself)

anyway, It is time to stop this crusade now.. I realize that. Its really up to the mods to figure out how to get a nice signal/noise ratio without going crazy with the ban button.

Hey, in all fairness anyone who gets to +100 posts (if allowed ) in here will have gotten involved in some sort of trolling behavior. But that's a reflection on the forum and they way it has gone.

The 'trolls' that you talk of in blue - they used to stick out years ago, because even back in 09, there was a lot of posts and differing opinion (regarding LA) but overall it was civil.
As Hitch points out a lot of it was repetition too. And the best 'trolling' done at the time was people slipping in little lies here and there and having to call names - like 'circle jerk' or 'handbag ladies'. At the time I viewed that as complimentary because that meant "we" were being effective in articulating a strong argument.

 

[TexPat]

Well, that was quick action in the Gunderson thread.
Chapeau.

 

[sittingbison]

guys can you take it to the sidebar thread please

cheers
bison

 

[42x16ss]

errrmmmmmm......


sorry I do have a life outside this ayslum

Gotta say, considering the time difference to our part of the world, you do a good job keeping up with as much as you do. I know that when I'm usually on the boards, it's a very quiet time of day.