Moderators

[Barrus]

This is simple, and should not be so tedious so as to have to spell it out. I do not agree with a significant portion of what I see you post. Ergo. We have different opinions on matters. Nothing wrong with that inherently. But you are a moderator, and there are several on that team that I might characterize the same way. That is specifically what others are talking about in this thread, and what I am repeating. This fact is inescapable and naturally colors one's experience and judgment when it comes time to determine what should be done with a post as moderator. How you go about it, and how I would go about will defer at times. Fact.

However you say that our moderation is biased, imbalanced and partial, yet you show nothing which would substantiate your argument. None of you who have proposed your viewpoint have. Again, you say that our opinions make us biased, if you propose this statement, back it up, at least with prima facie evidence. Off course the way different moderators handle things will be different, yet this does not immediately mean they are biased.

As I stated before I am of the opinion that ones opinion does not create some sort of deficiency due to which one could not render an impartial judgement about a post, something which you do not believe and which for me ensure that you could never be a moderator

 

[scribe]

However you say that our moderation is biased, imbalanced and partial, yet you show nothing which would substantiate your argument. None of you who have proposed your viewpoint have. Again, you say that our opinions make us biased, if you propose this statement, back it up, at least with prima facie evidence. Off course the way different moderators handle things will be different, yet this does not immediately mean they are biased.

As I stated before I am of the opinion that ones opinion does not create some sort of deficiency due to which one could not render an impartial judgement about a post, something which you do not believe and which for me ensure that you could never be a moderator

The only reason I will never be a moderator is if you and the others on the team feel I will not float the same direction as you down the stream. While I think that is true, I am just as capable as applying the rules as any of you.

Before you get wound up again on the same refrain, I did not call your moderation bias with relationship to me, you did. I did say there is room for differing opinions on the moderation team, that much is for certain, and what guys are saying.

 

[straydog]

Ok I have been "away" for a while....and honestly I am not going to trawl through the previous 40 odd pages in this thread to see if what I am about to say has been said before....so here goes:

Firstly, Wonderlance is a genius. Pure and simple. If he is ever banned permanently I warn you all that I am going to post something so heinous I join him

Secondly, I don't want to appear whiny...and hopefully the mods will notice I have barely uttered a word concerning my recent TWO MONTH holiday!

But, here's my point. A mod once told me that if someone has a problem with an infraction they can always pm the mods to discuss it. The problem being if you get banned you have no way of contacting the mods. How are you supposed to pm them if you don't have access to your account? And the only mod who does have a published email address completely ignored my email enquiry.

I did something naughty, fair enough. Bad boy. However, the (ahem) explicit rules on what I did weren't published when I committed my infraction....I was told it should have been "common sense". Honestly I thought it was "common sense" that posting a "naughty" link in a conversation concerning lawyers d*ck sizes was obviously meant as a joke. But hey, it was worth a ban to some. So that's the way it goes. What I did have a problem with was being accused of suckering people in with my link and insulting a well known federal investigator. Firstly, I posted a warning with the link, and secondly I said he looked buff!

Lastly, I have seen other links posted to descriptions of pornographic acts, that haven't even been taken down. (sorry for being a grass, but I said when I came back I was going to come back clean and do a full "Landis" on my fellow sinners)

I understand that moderating isn't an exact science and that there will always be good referees and bad. But my one whine is that as a group surely you must attempt some kind of consistency, and refrain from "spinning" somewhat, the reasons for banning someone otherwise people will....well....whine.

Lastly....and I don't mean to mod bash here....but receiving complaints, whines, veiled insults, accusations of facism etc. from members goes with the territory....they volunteered for it and weren't press ganged into it....and as such I don't think they should be complaining about it.

Good to be back....for a bit at least

 

[Barrus]

No, you did not call it biased towards you, but you did call it biased, without showing any evidence or even circumstances that could be seen as biased.

This fact is inescapable and naturally colors one's experience and judgment when it comes time to determine what should be done with a post as moderator.

If you can't figure out who is behind it, it's because you haven't tried hard enough.

in the interest of a more balanced moderation of the forum.

saying we aren't neutral:

That'll make an immediate splash toward a more neutral moderation of the forum

The one thing you pointed to, has been proven to be wrong from your end. So untill you have anything to substantiate your argument, I believe further discussion with you on this point would be futile


@ straydog, sorry but posting porn, is obviously something that isn't done in a public forum. And your post did not include a warning, I know I deleted that post myself

 

[180mmCrank]

 

[straydog]

@ straydog, sorry but posting porn, is obviously something that isn't done in a public forum. And your post did not include a warning, I know I deleted that post myself

Actually Barrus....this is my point....I did post a warning (not to open it at work) which was discussed with Alpe when he emailed me. To say other wise is either to be mistaken or deliberately disingenuous. I can retrieve the original from my history if it would help. Or maybe when Alpe banned me he hadn't actually seen the post and was going on someone else's description of it. An answer to that would be very illuminating.

If you did delete the post you would also have noted the link didn't even work, as it's address was asterisked by the CN language filter.

So to one of the other points that you didn't address....is it ok to post a link to a pornographic description? But not a film? I am not quite sure how.

 

[straydog]

Sorry Barrus and 180mm crank.

You also seem to have missed the point of my post. I am not debating my ban. As I said, that's the way it goes. I genuinely aint whining about that. It was obviously a joke, but never the less, crossed a line for some and I took my two month ban.

Consistency is my whine....what other crimes receive such a sanction? and what crimes receive merely a twenty four hour suspension? I had no previous infractions, no warnings etc and my first ban was pretty "impressive". I consider it almost a badge of honour to have been made a martyr to the parlous lack of humour and self importance that I think sometimes exists here.

Anyway I am a changed man. Almost on a crusade for cleanliness, fair posting and general good behaviour. Where ever I see a "fail" from you guys on that in future, rest assured I will, time permitting, feel it my duty to bring it to your attention

 

[scribe]

No, you did not call it biased towards you, but you did call it biased, without showing any evidence or even circumstances that could be seen as biased.






saying we aren't neutral:


The one thing you pointed to, has been proven to be wrong from your end. So untill you have anything to substantiate your argument, I believe further discussion with you on this point would be futile


@ straydog, sorry but posting porn, is obviously something that isn't done in a public forum. And your post did not include a warning, I know I deleted that post myself

Differing points of view in the spectrum of the moderator team is a more balanced team. You won't admit to this because you are behaving the obstinate in this discussion. Why? Heck if I know. Can I just guess you are happy with the makeup of the team as it stands, even if there is room for additional help? But don't worry, we can break bread as admins. I won't bite.

 

[180mmCrank]

Somewhat describes how it feels on here sometimes...

I should probably give myself an infraction for going off topic - maybe I will ban myself for a couple of days and take the weekend off

 

[scribe]

I once saw a board op try to IP ban an AOL user. The admin disappeared for a couple of days and never admitted what happened, but I knew as I had gotten emails from him before.

He too was an AOL user and had to get support to get back into his own forum.

 

[straydog]

And for posting a deliberately offensive and inflammatory cartoon depicting talking "dogs" in a thread that i have posted to....and they are both nekkid!

Dog porn....sick....you're right that has to be worth at least two days

 

[180mmCrank]

And for posting a deliberately offensive and inflammatory cartoon depicting talking "dogs" in a thread that i have posted to....and they are both nekkid!

Dog porn....sick....you're right that has to be worth at least two days

Does it make any differencethat they were stray dogs?
(I'll take another two days for that!)

 

[straydog]

Does it make any differencethat they were stray dogs?
(I'll take another two days for that!)

Still got a way to go to beat my record!

Now to go completely off thread. You were/ are a british rower?

I think I used to know your team doctor....and please this isn't some kind of pseudo accusation that belongs in the clinic....lol

 

[180mmCrank]

It's funny you should mention that because one of our team doctors famously shopped a guy that came to him to ask if he would monitor the effect of PEDs on his health because he was thinking of stating a program! It's the only authenticated story I have from UK rowing of someone being involved with stuff like that.

(I suppose this should go in the clinic and its off topic - that must wrack up even more days! ) I know i'll get one of my fellow admin on my back shortly.

Quite right too.

 

[straydog]

It's funny you should mention that because one of our team doctors famously shopped a guy that came to him to ask if he would monitor the effect of PEDs on his health because he was thinking of stating a program! It's the only authenticated story I have from UK rowing of someone being involved with stuff like that.

(I suppose this should go in the clinic and its off topic - that must wrack up even more days! ) I know i'll get one of my fellow admin on my back shortly.

Quite right too.

If it was the guy I am thinking off....it would make complete sense. His moral compass was pretty unwavering. Oh god, now I will get myself another ban for continuing this....lol

Ok let me bring this back on thread....you mods.....god....you are rubbish...all of you

There fixed!

 

[Ferminal]

WonderLance is a sockpuppet, but I don't want to ruin the fun.

The only person who wants to see WL gone is acf

 

[krebs303]

WonderLance is a sockpuppet, but I don't want to ruin the fun.

The only person who wants to see WL gone is acf

 

[Barrus]

Differing points of view in the spectrum of the moderator team is a more balanced team. You won't admit to this because you are behaving the obstinate in this discussion. Why? Heck if I know. Can I just guess you are happy with the makeup of the team as it stands, even if there is room for additional help? But don't worry, we can break bread as admins. I won't bite.

But you act as though we don't judge in a fair and balanced manner, and that is something whith which I take issue. And this has been debated back and forth earlier in this thread, yet none of those stating such unfair decisions have come up with any kind of example, something that really irks me.
And no, I am not happy with the current makeup, as we do need help, but this is already discussed by the moderators amongst each other. But I can't see you as a good mod, especially if you look at some of your posts in this thread.

Also @ straydog, stating that something should not be opened at work, in my mind does not constitute a warning for porn. Perhaps my view of this differs with Alpe, but that is my opinion.

 

[auscyclefan94]

WonderLance is a sockpuppet, but I don't want to ruin the fun.

The only person who wants to see WL gone is acf

no, she making fun of me is so she has a better self-esteem about herself! I am letting her do that!

 

[scribe]

But you act as though we don't judge in a fair and balanced manner, and that is something whith which I take issue. And this has been debated back and forth earlier in this thread, yet none of those stating such unfair decisions have come up with any kind of example, something that really irks me.
And no, I am not happy with the current makeup, as we do need help, but this is already discussed by the moderators amongst each other. But I can't see you as a good mod, especially if you look at some of your posts in this thread.

Also @ straydog, stating that something should not be opened at work, in my mind does not constitute a warning for porn. Perhaps my view of this differs with Alpe, but that is my opinion.

Like what posts exactly? That I would put some of the posters to task that haven't been previously....at least outwardly? I demonstrated how I would approach Wonderlance, and you actually agreed with me. After that admission, I actually said it sounded like the team had done due diligence. So what exactly is the problem?

Is it the comments on Race Radio? As you know, he posts from 'in the know'. Yet he is anonymous, not a known professional. And he doesn't substantiate a large portion of his 'facts'. How is he gets a free pass? Seems needless for cyclingnews to make bed with that, which is a protective function of moderation.

 

[python]

Like what posts exactly? That I would put some of the posters to task that haven't been previously....at least outwardly? I demonstrated how I would approach Wonderlance, and you actually agreed with me. After that admission, I actually said it sounded like the team had done due diligence. So what exactly is the problem?

Is it the comments on Race Radio? As you know, he posts from 'in the know'. Yet he is anonymous, not a known professional. And he doesn't substantiate a large portion of his 'facts'. How is he gets a free pass? Seems needless for cyclingnews to make bed with that, which is a protective function of moderation.

what exactly is your problem ?

you stated you are happy with how mods treat you. you stated you are satisfied with barrus's response re wonderlance, which, imo, barrus went out of his way to address and publicly told you things that imo you could inquire about but had no business to know. instead of appreciating barrus, you keep on pressing. why ?

i'm just unclear re what you're unhappy about ? i tend to agree with barrus, you'd make a bad moderator. one big reason would seem - you're confused. a moderator's job is not 'to take people to task' as you put it, but uphold the forum rules. it's not mod's job to judge a poster's opinion or how those posters sourced that opinion (of course, as long as the copyrights are protected).

if rr claims something you find questionable, it's your job to take him to task, not barrus's. if you feel that the information provided by rr is incorrect, disprove it or provide an alternative source or an opinion. if you're still not satisfied with how rr responded, the only reason for the mods to get involved would be if rr broke rules responding to you.

are you barking at the wrong tree ?

 

[Race Radio]

if rr claims something you find questionable, it's your job to take him to task, not barrus's. if you feel that the information provided by rr is incorrect, disprove it or provide an alternative source or an opinion. if you're still not satisfied with how rr responded, the only reason for the mods to get involved would be if rr broke rules responding to you.

He never does this. It is easier to attack me personally then to actually address anything I post.

If somebody thinks I am wrong then show me where I am wrong. It should be easy for someone to show where I have posted something that turned out to later not be the case.

 

[straydog]

Also @ straydog, stating that something should not be opened at work, in my mind does not constitute a warning for porn. Perhaps my view of this differs with Alpe, but that is my opinion.

You are a moderator on an Internet forum and you have never heard of the anacronym NSFW? Seriously?

Nice swerve though on why you initially incorrectly stated that I hadn't posted a warning. A warning which actually didn't "state" anything but actually said it was a "warning" and to please not open the link at work.
Also, you have managed to not answer twice now the relevant point. Is it ok to post a link to a pornographic description?

And Barrus, if you think posting an unworking link, in a discussion concerning how two lawyers had seemingly become more concerned with their respective p*nis sizes, titled "lawyers with big d*cks" needed a warning that it was PORN, then I really do apologise. That must have come as a terrible shock to you.

 

[Anonymous]

But, here's my point. A mod once told me that if someone has a problem with an infraction they can always pm the mods to discuss it. The problem being if you get banned you have no way of contacting the mods. How are you supposed to pm them if you don't have access to your account? And the only mod who does have a published email address completely ignored my email enquiry.

A point i made before that i never recieved a satisfactory answer to. Once you are banned you cant discuss it unless you break the rules and create a second account purely for discussion of the ban which in itself is a banning offence.

As for mods, i cant be bothered to read all of this, but Ive always found Barrus and Martin to be very good mods who seem to have a good grasp on what this place needs. (no offence meant to any other mods but they are the two I notice)

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

No offense taken Dim. I tend to agree with you. When Martin made his post about the system being corrupt about a week ago a lot of us were surprised - though 99% of the people here agreed with him - because he was right.

Also @ straydog, stating that something should not be opened at work, in my mind does not constitute a warning for porn. Perhaps my view of this differs with Alpe, but that is my opinion.

And Barrus, if you think posting an unworking link, in a discussion concerning how two lawyers had seemingly become more concerned with their respective p*nis sizes, titled "lawyers with big d*cks" needed a warning that it was PORN, then I really do apologise. That must have come as a terrible shock to you.

Just what is it that you're trying to accomplish by doing this? Both by pushing the boundaries of what constitutes rule breaking, rudeness or incivility on a cycling message board that anyone, including children, can read? If I presume it's to share adult laughter, or be admired for your humor, is it so important to you that such a thing be in the open here? Why?

Is it the comments on Race Radio? As you know, he posts from 'in the know'. Yet he is anonymous, not a known professional. And he doesn't substantiate a large portion of his 'facts'. How is he gets a free pass? Seems needless for cyclingnews to make bed with that, which is a protective function of moderation.

First, I know enough of who RR is through many posts, PM's and e-mail exchanges that I know where he stands, and he understands what is asked of him by admins and mods. They mostly involve remaining tactful when disagreeing with other members, and backing up any claims with link. As he pointed out, when you don't like what he posts, or links he supplies, you frequently go after him, you don't offer logical counter arguments, or valid links to claims that run counter to his. This isn't the mark of anyone capable of being a mod or admin.