New Clinic Sub-Forum?

[luckyboy]

I'm surprised you guys aren't piling on top of Lim more. The guy is revealed to be a lying, unethical scumbag, just like the rest of us, after he'd been hired-away to Radio Shack for dubious reasons, and aside from mocking him for getting totally faced during the ToC and clamming up like a ...<insert metaphor of choice>...when asked a question that would have revealed how deeply involved in doping he was, and yet he's not raked perpetually over the coals.

This is why The Clinic needs a FLandis Affair/Landisgate sub-forum...so that people can start threads on subtle topics like Lim, rather than wading through 105 freaking pages of a single thread.

Have to agree with what Joe says here. Everything gets lost in the threads, and while they might not be worthy of their own threads in The Clinic, they probably would be in a FLArmstrong Affair Sub-Forum.

Just putting it out there.

 

[Y the H8]

Have to agree with what Joe says here. Everything gets lost in the threads, and while they might not be worthy of their own threads in The Clinic, they probably would be in a FLArmstrong Affair Sub-Forum.

Just putting it out there.

This would help make things easier to navigate, so my vote is yes. Thanks.

 

[craig1985]

Yeah why not.

 

[luckyboy]

You want to set up a sub forum to attack Allen Lim?

I read other people's posts fully too. Great isn't it?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

It's not a bad idea, if only a temporary forum that would eventually be closed when the case ends. But it's not likely to happen right now, maybe in a few weeks. I don't have the power to create one, in case anyone is wondering.

Someone was discussing a "Lance Armstrong" forum, and I can tell you that won't likely happen at all.

There are however three things I can do to help. First is to spend more time closing threads that are just nonsense and counter productive. The next is to merge threads that are similar in topic. And finally I can alter thread titles to reflect their content better.

Joe is right though about Alan Lim, we were ripping the guy a new one, and yet, he's since slithered into hiding and we let him do so.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I read other people's posts fully too. Great isn't it?

I feel your pain. Believe me.

 

[BroDeal]

Personally I think small threads with a narrow scope work better than large threads with a broad scope. I don't see a problem with having lots of threads as long as the threads can stay on topic. It is easier to skip stuff you don't want to read.

It is not like at the moment there are a huge number of other doping scandals that will get crowded out if there is more than one thread about FLandis' revelations.

 

[WonderLance]

Why would you want to make all the roumors and inuendo even less cridible by debating them in a internet forum.

 

[Anonymous]

Smaller threads would be better.

When you look the reply numbers on some of these threads and see 800 or 5,000 ............

You cannot read the thread. You cannot stay current and they end up turning circular, because no-one ca stay on top of them.

Smaller threads are better.

 

[Pedaaldanser]

I'm not even clicking on a thread with 80+ pages :S

Well maybe on the last few pages hoping there's something useful there, but I think a temporary sub forum would be better.

 

[pedaling squares]

Voted yes. Good idea. The 'Flandis reveals' case will be long, complex, with lots of sidebars and we can't keep all that in a few threads. Admins, let's give this a shot.

 

[Race Radio]

Maybe we can have a Public Strategies folder where Armstrong trolls can post their garbage?

 

[Rip:30]

Yes. Hard for me to follow the long threads. Time limited.

Search tool would be good too.

Some other forum sites have sub-thread viewing options (as opposed to linear viewing), where you can see who has responded to what without clicking through hundreds of pages. I find this really helps.

 

[joe_papp]

Yes. Hard for me to follow the long threads. Time limited.

Search tool would be good too.

Some other forum sites have sub-thread viewing options (as opposed to linear viewing), where you can see who has responded to what without clicking through hundreds of pages. I find this really helps.

Great follow-on suggestion.

I hope the admins really take this to heart and act quickly to create the sub-forum.

People just do not have the time to wade through a 100-page thread to try to follow all the lines of inquiry.

Thanks for considering the request.

 

[wattage]

I think we need clinic sub-forum when this 3 weeks is over.

 

[Escarabajo]

personally i think small threads with a narrow scope work better than large threads with a broad scope. I don't see a problem with having lots of threads as long as the threads can stay on topic. It is easier to skip stuff you don't want to read.

It is not like at the moment there are a huge number of other doping scandals that will get crowded out if there is more than one thread about flandis' revelations.

+1
..............................

 

[ElChingon]

Instead of "Sub-Forum" it should be a "Forum" section on its own. Sub won't do it justice and I don't want to click that many times to get to it, I am green and don't want to waste needless energy to get to it, wasteful.