Moderators

[roundabout]

What's the deal with posts in Valverde thread in the Road forum being deleted?

I always took the 'no doping talk' to mean no accusations of doping where guilt has not been proven, but apparently this is not the case. And with Valverde's case being confirmed there is also no room for discussion whether he is a convicted doper so that covers the reference to 'professional road racing' being a doping discussion free forum.

Maybe a clarification is in order then?

 

[Tonton]

Re:

What's the deal with posts in Valverde thread in the Road forum being deleted?

I always took the 'no doping talk' to mean no accusations of doping where guilt has not been proven, but apparently this is not the case. And with Valverde's case being confirmed there is also no room for discussion whether he is a convicted doper so that covers the reference to 'professional road racing' being a doping discussion free forum.

Maybe a clarification is in order then?

[not mod anymore] the PRR forum is dope free. Busted, not busted, half busted doesn't matter. This is not the place. The Clinic is the place.

Yes, it makes it hard to ignore the elephant in the room and still have a coherent discussion.

But these are the rules and in many ways they help not making doping the core of a forum that also caters to newbies, fans who think that doping is marginal, or just have no problem with PEDs, when their daily life is taking Viagra, other things, and they just don't care.

Allowing doping in the PRR forum would turn it into a Clinic forum and a very toxic place.

My $0,02, acknowledging that the elephant is huge and I want clean cycling. And we are asked to believe in miracles...my first signature quoting Lance.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

El Pistolero was permabanned for trolling

*Applause*

Finally. He was so obvious each time. Worse than Ryo

 

[ferryman]

Re:

El Pistolero was permabanned for trolling

*Applause*

Finally. He was so obvious each time. Worse than Ryo

Yes he was, but I would rather have him posting than the English/wannabe English mob who post in defence of everything British/Sky/Froome. They are absolutely the worst on any of the threads in this forum.

 

[roundabout]

Re: Re:

What's the deal with posts in Valverde thread in the Road forum being deleted?

I always took the 'no doping talk' to mean no accusations of doping where guilt has not been proven, but apparently this is not the case. And with Valverde's case being confirmed there is also no room for discussion whether he is a convicted doper so that covers the reference to 'professional road racing' being a doping discussion free forum.

Maybe a clarification is in order then?

[not mod anymore] the PRR forum is dope free. Busted, not busted, half busted doesn't matter. This is not the place. The Clinic is the place.

Yes, it makes it hard to ignore the elephant in the room and still have a coherent discussion.

But these are the rules and in many ways they help not making doping the core of a forum that also caters to newbies, fans who think that doping is marginal, or just have no problem with PEDs, when their daily life is taking Viagra, other things, and they just don't care.

Allowing doping in the PRR forum would turn it into a Clinic forum and a very toxic place.

My $0,02, acknowledging that the elephant is huge and I want clean cycling. And we are asked to believe in miracles...my first signature quoting Lance.

Thank you for actually taking the time to respond.

I don't believe that a mere mention of confirmed doping cases is enough to make doping the core of a forum.

As things stand now, this may well be the only forum where posting the truth can get those posts deleted. What about having a signature saying that Valverde has had his ADRV upheld by CAS and the Swiss Federal Tribunal? Would this be a bannable offense?

And even more troubling is the lack of clear feedback from the mods/admins about this. Or maybe I am asking too much as usual.

 

[Tonton]

Re: Re:

Thank you for actually taking the time to respond.

I don't believe that a mere mention of confirmed doping cases is enough to make doping the core of a forum.

As things stand now, this may well be the only forum where posting the truth can get those posts deleted. What about having a signature saying that Valverde has had his ADRV upheld by CAS and the Swiss Federal Tribunal? Would this be a bannable offense?

And even more troubling is the lack of clear feedback from the mods/admins about this. Or maybe I am asking too much as usual.

To the bolded, the problem is that after one makes a mere mention, others jump in,and before you know it's mayhem. So deleting a post can be a smart preemptive action that is not against a poster but good for the thread and the "doping free discussion" standard.

 

[King Boonen]

Tonton is pretty much spot on, hopefully this explains it well:

The clinic is where doping should be discussed. Mentioning that someone has served a ban in the PRR is ok, but it has to be relevant to the discussion and not trolling. For example, if someone were to question why you left a specific rider of a list and you just said they served a ban so you didn't include them that's fine. Jumping into a discussion about someone winning something and saying "Yeah, but they're a doper so it's rubbish" is not fine.

In reality there are very few reasons to bring up doping in the PRR that will not lead to a discussion that involves speculation. If the mods think that is the likely outcome of a post then it's going to get removed. It's a really hard line for us to walk, we don't want to say doping must never ever be mentioned outside of the clinic, but we also don't want speculation spreading across the forum as a whole. Many people, I think, accept that doping is part of professional sport and put it aside when enjoying the spectacle and discussing it. There are many factors that affect this, one of the main ones is that the only dopers we know about are the ones who are caught, but most people do not believe that all dopers are caught, and this is what is likely to lead to the speculation and discussion we're trying to avoid.

Hopefully this all makes sense.

Cheers,

KB.

 

[roundabout]

Ok, that's fair enough I suppose.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Re: Re:

El Pistolero was permabanned for trolling

*Applause*

Finally. He was so obvious each time. Worse than Ryo

Yes he was, but I would rather have him posting than the English/wannabe English mob who post in defence of everything British/Sky/Froome. They are absolutely the worst on any of the threads in this forum.

I put most of them on the 'foe' list so I don't have to read it :lol:

 

[GuyIncognito]

Re: Re:

El Pistolero was permabanned for trolling

*Applause*

Finally. He was so obvious each time. Worse than Ryo

Yes he was, but I would rather have him posting than the English/wannabe English mob who post in defence of everything British/Sky/Froome. They are absolutely the worst on any of the threads in this forum.

I put most of them on the 'foe' list so I don't have to read it :lol:

Same.

I finally resorted to that. Used to be just the guy with the childish nickname referencing a Chappelle show skit and the "Poland Stronk!" guy, but this week I added the other two.

What's the point reading someone's post when they go out of their way to deny even the most basic fact just to push an agenda? It's just noise clouding any actual discussion you might want to have, and getting people to quit. So auto ignoring their posts is the best of all worlds.

edit: I also had Pistolero in there

 

[TheGreenMonkey]

I am so out of following cycling I do not really care in a lot of ways but a 6 month ban for what I did seems to more than a little extreme. Yes I reacted to a moderators off topic nonsense in a way I should not have done but 6 months is a total joke.

 

[Pricey_sky]

Re:

I am so out of following cycling I do not really care in a lot of ways but a 6 month ban for what I did seems to more than a little extreme. Yes I reacted to a moderators off topic nonsense in a way I should not have done but 6 months is a total joke.

Abuse to moderators (or any poster for that matter) will not be tolerated on any level and will always carry an extreme sanction. We would have been well within our rights to make it a permaban.

 

[TheGreenMonkey]

Re: Re:

I am so out of following cycling I do not really care in a lot of ways but a 6 month ban for what I did seems to more than a little extreme. Yes I reacted to a moderators off topic nonsense in a way I should not have done but 6 months is a total joke.

Abuse to moderators (or any poster for that matter) will not be tolerated on any level and will always carry an extreme sanction. We would have been well within our rights to make it a permaban.

Come off it. The moderator was posting off topic nonsense and was clearly provoking me. What was being posted to me was against the rules and I reacted. I should not have reacted but if the moderator had acted like a moderator should instead of breaking the rules but posting off topic nonsense I would have had nothing to react to.

 

[tobydawq]

Skybot permabanned. Sure, he was annoying, but if he really enjoys watching the Sky train smother each and every bike race, shouldn't he be allowed to express that?

Of course, he might have committed a more serious offense that has eluded me.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

Skybot permabanned. Sure, he was annoying, but if he really enjoys watching the Sky train smother each and every bike race, shouldn't he be allowed to express that?

Of course, he might have committed a more serious offense that has eluded me.

They did.

 

[red_flanders]

Re: Re:

I am so out of following cycling I do not really care in a lot of ways but a 6 month ban for what I did seems to more than a little extreme. Yes I reacted to a moderators off topic nonsense in a way I should not have done but 6 months is a total joke.

Abuse to moderators (or any poster for that matter) will not be tolerated on any level and will always carry an extreme sanction. We would have been well within our rights to make it a permaban.

My experience here tells me the word "abuse" regarding the moderators gets thrown around pretty easily. I've seen simple disagreements labeled as abuse.

Don't know what happened in this case, but claiming abuse for invisible offenses (as they often are deleted after the fact) might strike a lot of forum members as somewhat disingenuous. I'd just say "we feel the ban was warranted" and leave it at that.

Meant as a helpful critique, not criticism.

 

[python]

can't contribute to the opinion re. the 'abuse' word usage in reference to a particular ban.

you sound reasonable red arguing the 'invisible offense' , but unless we had a public record, suspecting a mod in impropriety has as much gravity - at it's most stringent to a mod - as suspecting a real overreaction by a poster (lets call it so to avoid the word 'abuse').

what seems the board *new* fact to me, is that the mods are lately very careful in administering bans. look at the current frequency compared to the recent past - once in several weeks someone is banned.

is it due to a new internal criteria or due to the fact the board activity is a fraction of what it once was - i would not know.

a case in point... just today, i was involved in a longish and patient exchange debunking a poster's false allusions (the details don't belong here). the mods behavior was different compared to my past exchanges with the same poster. just saying... the mods are imo, just like you and me, are not static entities, but humans. they learn, sometimes overreact, sometimes making the mistakes they wont admit. i was quite outspoken HERE when i felt the mistakes. but generally they are well disposed and intended. at least i hope so as a former mod myself. you were too, but seem to still being concerned.

 

[Robert5091]

If it's not bad enough with a spam infested forum that's not "contactable" a lot of the time, there's also heavy handed mods, so it's goodbye from me.

 

[macbindle]

Ach come on. 3 days, after a previous warning? That's not heavy handed. Guy before you got a month in the cooler.

 

[Armchair cyclist]

It would probably make sense to merge this thread with this one, and maybe even with the original.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

How has no moderator banned Geisterhome for his behaviour on the Lombardia topic?

 

[Mayo from Mayo]

How has no moderator banned Geisterhome for his behaviour on the Lombardia topic?

Had it been earlier in the season I'm guessing he'd have got time out.

 

[RedheadDane]

I just want to praise the mods for their takedown of the Chinese passport-spammer. That must have been one hell of a task!

 

[Pricey_sky]

I just want to praise the mods for their takedown of the Chinese passport-spammer. That must have been one hell of a task!

Very annoying when one slips through the filters and we end up with copy and paste threads in pretty much every sub-forum

 

[RedheadDane]

Once again; good work. That was quick!