Moderators

Page 383 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Re:

TheSpud said:
In my view there is a lot of one-sided moderation going on here.

If you mean one sided towards those who actually want to discuss the data and the associated testing, then yes, it's one sided. Those who are looking to stir up and break down a really good thread are dealt by the usual methods. It's all very straight forward.

It's a really good thread that hasn't descended into Froome/Hendo pictures with many good contributions. And good moderation.

I looked at another forum, no discussion on numbers or how the tests were conducted. Just endless discussion on how Swart (whom I gather most didn't know before this testing) owned a non-English speaking Vayer on Twitter. Most of which is in poor taste considering the language barrier.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
TheSpud said:
In my view there is a lot of one-sided moderation going on here.

If you mean one sided towards those who actually want to discuss the data and the associated testing, then yes, it's one sided. Those who are looking to stir up and break down a really good thread are dealt by the usual methods. It's all very straight forward.

It's a really good thread that hasn't descended into Froome/Hendo pictures with many good contributions. And good moderation.

I looked at another forum, no discussion on numbers or how the tests were conducted. Just endless discussion on how Swart (whom I gather most didn't know before this testing) owned a non-English speaking Vayer on Twitter. Most of which is in poor taste considering the language barrier.


The behavior reminds me of episode 3 of the office (UK) where David Brailsford ( I mean Brent) and his Wigginsesque foul mouthed and mannered "friend"- Chris (Chris and David) lose the quiz legitimately but are so bitter about it that they steal Tim's shoes and announce drunkenly that if Finch can throw the shoes over the roof, they (Chris and David) become the real winners of the quiz.

Similarly here, people who haven't attempted to make an argument in years and still have not a shoe to stand on (pun intended, poor Tim), in any arguments about power outputs or aicar or broken promises or ztp or lienders or jullich etc etc, have suddenly decided that if froome manages to convince one unsullied scientist that froome is clean, then they (Chris and David) become the real winners of the- have sky ever doped,.debate
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,320
0
0
I only want to say to Dan:

Thanks Dan, for the Ban, I had a very productive weekend, sans problemes.

Oh my g, I am bad at riming...


To be clear: this was a joke Dan.
 
Unbelievable

Posts deleted tonight are the one questioning me / tailwindhome / ebandit and others about the picture and fat %, to which I replied (saying I wouldn't comment too much). None of this (in my view) was argumentative or trolling yet it seems all relevant posts have been deleted. I'm sorry - I know a lot of you on here don't see eye to eye with me - but this isn't moderation, its censorship (in my view).
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
Re:

TheSpud said:
Unbelievable

Posts deleted tonight are the one questioning me / tailwindhome / ebandit and others about the picture and fat %, to which I replied (saying I wouldn't comment too much). None of this (in my view) was argumentative or trolling yet it seems all relevant posts have been deleted. I'm sorry - I know a lot of you on here don't see eye to eye with me - but this isn't moderation, its censorship (in my view).

That exchange was heading towards derailment of the thread.

That is why it was removed.
 
Re: Re:

mrhender said:
TheSpud said:
Unbelievable

Posts deleted tonight are the one questioning me / tailwindhome / ebandit and others about the picture and fat %, to which I replied (saying I wouldn't comment too much). None of this (in my view) was argumentative or trolling yet it seems all relevant posts have been deleted. I'm sorry - I know a lot of you on here don't see eye to eye with me - but this isn't moderation, its censorship (in my view).

That exchange was heading towards derailment of the thread.

That is why it was removed.

Possibly. But why not just post a warning (as has been done in the past) to get back on track. In my view this is a much better course of action - otherwise I think you run the risk of losing the gist of a thread. Warn and let things stand - it shows users what is/isnt ok in my mind.
 
Re: Re:

TheSpud said:
mrhender said:
TheSpud said:
Unbelievable

Posts deleted tonight are the one questioning me / tailwindhome / ebandit and others about the picture and fat %, to which I replied (saying I wouldn't comment too much). None of this (in my view) was argumentative or trolling yet it seems all relevant posts have been deleted. I'm sorry - I know a lot of you on here don't see eye to eye with me - but this isn't moderation, its censorship (in my view).

That exchange was heading towards derailment of the thread.

That is why it was removed.

Possibly. But why not just post a warning (as has been done in the past) to get back on track. In my view this is a much better course of action - otherwise I think you run the risk of losing the gist of a thread. Warn and let things stand - it shows users what is/isnt ok in my mind.
There are numerous warnings posted throughout that thread. When warnings are no longer effective the comments in question are subject to action/removal.
 
Re: Re:

thehog said:
TheSpud said:
In my view there is a lot of one-sided moderation going on here.

If you mean one sided towards those who actually want to discuss the data and the associated testing, then yes, it's one sided. Those who are looking to stir up and break down a really good thread are dealt by the usual methods. It's all very straight forward.

It's a really good thread that hasn't descended into Froome/Hendo pictures with many good contributions. And good moderation.

I looked at another forum, no discussion on numbers or how the tests were conducted. Just endless discussion on how Swart (whom I gather most didn't know before this testing) owned a non-English speaking Vayer on Twitter. Most of which is in poor taste considering the language barrier.

It's a very good thread, you can tell because it has dragged in people who hardly ever post in the clinic to actually discuss the data. I'm personally very glad the mods allowed it. Made for some very interesting reading.

I've had to drop out of any discussion and the thread as I simply don't have the time to keep up and respond. It feels like I go in, make a point and never answer people back because the discussion has moved on by 5-10 pages by the time I read the responses. I don't like doing that as it can interfere with the current discussion.
 
Oct 10, 2015
479
0
0
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
I've had to drop out of any discussion and the thread as I simply don't have the time to keep up and respond. It feels like I go in, make a point and never answer people back because the discussion has moved on by 5-10 pages by the time I read the responses. I don't like doing that as it can interfere with the current discussion.
Threads of this nature will always tend to do just that though. They'll move fast, they will ebb and flow with multiple discussions overlapping one another, and at times teeter on derailment.

Eventually much of this will tend to sort itself out, and your rational contributions (even if they need to be repeated, so as not to get lost in the fog) will only add to the overall quality of the thread.

So post what you can, when you can. It's all good in the end. :)
 
Re: Re:

King Boonen said:
thehog said:
TheSpud said:
In my view there is a lot of one-sided moderation going on here.

If you mean one sided towards those who actually want to discuss the data and the associated testing, then yes, it's one sided. Those who are looking to stir up and break down a really good thread are dealt by the usual methods. It's all very straight forward.

It's a really good thread that hasn't descended into Froome/Hendo pictures with many good contributions. And good moderation.

I looked at another forum, no discussion on numbers or how the tests were conducted. Just endless discussion on how Swart (whom I gather most didn't know before this testing) owned a non-English speaking Vayer on Twitter. Most of which is in poor taste considering the language barrier.

It's a very good thread, you can tell because it has dragged in people who hardly ever post in the clinic to actually discuss the data. I'm personally very glad the mods allowed it. Made for some very interesting reading.

I've had to drop out of any discussion and the thread as I simply don't have the time to keep up and respond. It feels like I go in, make a point and never answer people back because the discussion has moved on by 5-10 pages by the time I read the responses. I don't like doing that as it can interfere with the current discussion.

I agree. Also I do drop in and out of here - its only when I saw a post specifically asking me that I decided to respond. I had literally flicked through the pages and saw 'Spud'. Otherwise I would not have bothered. Well, when I did bother everything was deleted - so I have decided not to bother at all with that thread.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Re: Re:

TheSpud said:
King Boonen said:
thehog said:
TheSpud said:
In my view there is a lot of one-sided moderation going on here.

If you mean one sided towards those who actually want to discuss the data and the associated testing, then yes, it's one sided. Those who are looking to stir up and break down a really good thread are dealt by the usual methods. It's all very straight forward.

It's a really good thread that hasn't descended into Froome/Hendo pictures with many good contributions. And good moderation.

I looked at another forum, no discussion on numbers or how the tests were conducted. Just endless discussion on how Swart (whom I gather most didn't know before this testing) owned a non-English speaking Vayer on Twitter. Most of which is in poor taste considering the language barrier.

It's a very good thread, you can tell because it has dragged in people who hardly ever post in the clinic to actually discuss the data. I'm personally very glad the mods allowed it. Made for some very interesting reading.

I've had to drop out of any discussion and the thread as I simply don't have the time to keep up and respond. It feels like I go in, make a point and never answer people back because the discussion has moved on by 5-10 pages by the time I read the responses. I don't like doing that as it can interfere with the current discussion.

I agree. Also I do drop in and out of here - its only when I saw a post specifically asking me that I decided to respond. I had literally flicked through the pages and saw 'Spud'. Otherwise I would not have bothered. Well, when I did bother everything was deleted - so I have decided not to bother at all with that thread.
All about you then. What a way to go through life on message boards. When I see my name I snap TO like a snapping turtle!

SPUDS means potatoes where ME from how bout you?
 
Re:

TheSpud said:
Unbelievable

Posts deleted tonight are the one questioning me / tailwindhome / ebandit and others about the picture and fat %, to which I replied (saying I wouldn't comment too much). None of this (in my view) was argumentative or trolling yet it seems all relevant posts have been deleted. I'm sorry - I know a lot of you on here don't see eye to eye with me - but this isn't moderation, its censorship (in my view).
As the person who posted that question I was a bit miffed as well, because I was certain that some of the members I mentioned would have had something to say about it at least. I guess it may have come off combative to some but I think it was heading to an area that needs to be questioned, because Froome happened to be a great deal leaner to the naked eye than his 2007 numbers suggested.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
I hope he doesn't, but considering how FGL got treated by the mods I would understand if he stayed away for good.
To give him this stiff, rigid "accept it and move on, or, complain and get banned" treatment, unnessecary imo.
it creates a bit of a totalitarian, Orwell-esque atmosphere in here.
No reason to do that to a poster who, if you know his history (and the mods should), is always respectful and able to admit if he was too harsh. Even if the post was offensive, it would have been good to see the mods show some willingness to reflect on it.
just my 2 cents.
 
I think the treatment of FGL by the mods was fair. He was given room to make his case and move on, but decided to repeatedly argue his point and that is worthy of a ban IMO. Whether his argument had merit or not, he was given fair warning to cease his actions without any repercussions. It is analogous to being booked for dissent in a futbol match. The foul was minor, the response was punishable. YMMV
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Re:

djpbaltimore said:
I think the treatment of FGL by the mods was fair. He was given room to make his case and move on, but decided to repeatedly argue his point and that is worthy of a ban IMO. Whether his argument had merit or not, he was given fair warning to cease his actions without any repercussions. It is analogous to being booked for dissent in a futbol match. The foul was minor, the response was punishable. YMMV
you're proving my point.
whether his argument had merit or not, it didn't seem to matter.
Well, imo it did have merit and it should obviously matter.
Also, his background/history as a poster should matter.
If you know FGL's background, you know he's not out to offend people.
The mods (at least in this particular instance) seemed incapable of reflecting on their moderation.
If now you say "well get over it, they don't have to explain themselves", there's obviously little I can say to that, but it's disappointing all the same, and I think they could show more class in some instances.
We're contributors, not mere tributary subjects.
 
Re: Re:

sniper said:
djpbaltimore said:
I think the treatment of FGL by the mods was fair. He was given room to make his case and move on, but decided to repeatedly argue his point and that is worthy of a ban IMO. Whether his argument had merit or not, he was given fair warning to cease his actions without any repercussions. It is analogous to being booked for dissent in a futbol match. The foul was minor, the response was punishable. YMMV
you're proving my point.
whether his argument had merit or not, it didn't seem to matter.
Well, imo it did have merit and it should obviously matter.
Also, his background/history as a poster should matter.
If you know FGL's background, you know he's not out to offend people.
The mods (at least in this particular instance) seemed incapable of reflecting on their moderation.
If now you say "well get over it, they don't have to explain themselves", there's obviously little I can say to that, but it's disappointing all the same, and I think they could show more class in some instances.
We're contributors, not mere tributary subjects.

In this instance, I agree. The 'ball not man' rule has been very loosely enforced until now. People have been allowed to dance right up to the edge of a personal attack (and very often well beyond) without sanction. Now, things are changing? Or are they? This is a very valid subject of discussion.

I like the initial moderation of FGL (warning), but the standard used needs to be consistently followed, and that is a tough thing to do. Others may differ. That is why this particular issue is worthy of discussion and the mod that banned him made a stupid mistake.

But, hey, things aren't that bad! At least we aren't getting content-moderated by Berzin!
 
Re: Re:

sniper said:
you're proving my point.
whether his argument had merit or not, it didn't seem to matter.
Well, imo it did have merit and it should obviously matter.
Also, his background/history as a poster should matter.
If you know FGL's background, you know he's not out to offend people.
The mods (at least in this particular instance) seemed incapable of reflecting on their moderation.
If now you say "well get over it, they don't have to explain themselves", there's obviously little I can say to that, but it's disappointing all the same, and I think they could show more class in some instances.
We're contributors, not mere tributary subjects.

I don't see what other avenue the moderator had after FGL dared the mod to be banned and questioned his credibility as a mod. The suspension was due to 'excessive complaining' and I think that was merited given that the poster was given the "it's time to move on" warning immediately beforehand. If we don't give the moderator's that minimal authority, they can't perform effectively as moderators.

FWIW, if the post in question had been directed at me, I would've reported it.
 
Mar 27, 2015
435
0
0
I loved this post by holy FGL: viewtopic.php?p=1845337#p1845337

I'm not sure to where he's telling me to go, but if a litte amount of humour is allowed here, I imagine that the conversation could have went in this way: he's telling me to go back to igloo where we Finns used to live, and then I tell him to go to back to a coffee shop to chill out like Dutch used to do :D
 
Re: Re:

Glenn_Wilson said:
TheSpud said:
King Boonen said:
thehog said:
TheSpud said:
In my view there is a lot of one-sided moderation going on here.

If you mean one sided towards those who actually want to discuss the data and the associated testing, then yes, it's one sided. Those who are looking to stir up and break down a really good thread are dealt by the usual methods. It's all very straight forward.

It's a really good thread that hasn't descended into Froome/Hendo pictures with many good contributions. And good moderation.

I looked at another forum, no discussion on numbers or how the tests were conducted. Just endless discussion on how Swart (whom I gather most didn't know before this testing) owned a non-English speaking Vayer on Twitter. Most of which is in poor taste considering the language barrier.

It's a very good thread, you can tell because it has dragged in people who hardly ever post in the clinic to actually discuss the data. I'm personally very glad the mods allowed it. Made for some very interesting reading.

I've had to drop out of any discussion and the thread as I simply don't have the time to keep up and respond. It feels like I go in, make a point and never answer people back because the discussion has moved on by 5-10 pages by the time I read the responses. I don't like doing that as it can interfere with the current discussion.

I agree. Also I do drop in and out of here - its only when I saw a post specifically asking me that I decided to respond. I had literally flicked through the pages and saw 'Spud'. Otherwise I would not have bothered. Well, when I did bother everything was deleted - so I have decided not to bother at all with that thread.
All about you then. What a way to go through life on message boards. When I see my name I snap TO like a snapping turtle!

SPUDS means potatoes where ME from how bout you?

Who else would it be about? I'm hardly likely to worry about you am I ...
 
Apr 20, 2012
6,320
0
0
Re:

harryh said:
I loved this post by holy FGL: viewtopic.php?p=1845337#p1845337

I'm not sure to where he's telling me to go, but if a litte amount of humour is allowed here, I imagine that the conversation could have went in this way: he's telling me to go back to igloo where we Finns used to live, and then I tell him to go to back to a coffee shop to chill out like Dutch used to do :D
At last someone acknowledges my humour.

But back to the inintial warning 'offence' :

viewtopic.php?p=1844029&sid=8b06aeccd70dfcdc6f162c3ff5c3cd08#p1844029

Everyone can read there that I address member acoggan as 'Andy'. Member acoggan is Andrew Coggan irl, Andy is not a strange thing to say to him one would say.

On this board acoggan and several others - including me - have had numerous discussions about matters. Some heated, some less heated, like acoggan in the latest Froome thread: a more than welcome view on things.

Irondan, who joined this forum in 2014, after those discussions have taken place, sees my post above and judges it as ad hominem or something like that. Really? No sir, that wasnt a personal attack.

That is what I was protesting about last week, normally I always take 'warnings' 'like a man' and they often are just. But not this time, untill I realized Irondan joined after the 'acoggandiscussions' on this board. So, my excuse to Irondan for my judgement on him not being fit for the moderator job; he just didnt know.

Case closed, no hard feelings, if Irondan agrees on this we will all get along just fine.
 
Mods - The Froome data thread which has been really good up till now is drifting into The Vayer Thread. Maybe because there's less to discuss now. Could we keep it onto Froome and data? Otherwise it just gets into a bashing game. Thanks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.