New Forum! Feedback thread

[Netserk]

I can very well imagine the same approach to problematic content result in the clinic getting deleted. Even if 9 out of 10 posts are okay, surely we can expect the tenth to slander a rider? Better delete it all then.

 

[fmk_RoI]

I think that he should have communicated the reason before anyone needed to ask about it.

Again, you seem to be totally missing the point: the first Tweet preceded the deletion. Once the threads were deleted he replied, in context.

 

[BlueRoads]

So, if I understand it right you, @fmk_Rol were the one complaining and the thread got deleted because of that?

 

[BlueRoads]

Anyway, what really bugs me is that usually nobody "from above" ever answers here when you have a complaint, although they say they will answer, but here, when it was about public outlook, they took initiative immediately. Good to know twitter is the way to go.

 

[RedheadDane]

Again, you seem to be totally missing the point: the first Tweet preceded the deletion. Once the threads were deleted he replied, in context.

Here is how it should have happened:

1. DB was made aware of the threads.
2. DB decided to delete them - and doesn't seem to have taken much time to actually read them...
3. DB made a post on the forum about why exactly the threads were deleted.
4. DB replied to the first tweet.

However, "3" never happened. He didn't communicate anything about it, here!
The "anyone" I mentioned was us, here, in this thread. Asking what happened - again, I think it was probably less than an hour from BR's post in... one of the threads (can't remember which one...) about how we should all keep it PG and respectful, to the threads were just completely gone - including a Mod straight up saying that even he didn't know why.

 

[fmk_RoI]

So, if I understand it right you, @fmk_Rol were the one complaining and the thread got deleted because of that?

Jesus but you're fast. I could argue with the use of the word complain. I posted a comment and a screengrab. A complaint wasn't really needed, that alone was enough to bring the thread to CN's attention and you should know the rest by know, Benson's comment that the thread was totally unacceptable and was deleted as soon as it was brought to his attention has been repeated enough at this stage.

 

[BlueRoads]

Jesus but you're fast. I could argue with the use of the word complain. I posted a comment and a screengrab. A complaint wasn't really needed, that alone was enough to bring the thread to CN's attention and you should know the rest by know, Benson's comment that the thread was totally unacceptable and was deleted as soon as it was brought to his attention has been repeated enough at this stage.

Okay. I've just been wondering whether there were any other complaints as well, especially from active pro cyclists or females, since I didn't follow the twitter discussion.

 

[Sciatic]

Don't be so silly. And please stop placing ridiculous words and thoughts in my mouth.

Who were you replying to here?

 

[fmk_RoI]

The "anyone" I mentioned was us, here, in this thread. Asking what happened

You or whoever it was hadn't asked here if the threads had been deleted until after they were deleted so there was no here for Benson to come to to tell you personally that the threads were deleted.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Anyway, what really bugs me is that usually nobody "from above" ever answers here when you have a complaint, although they say they will answer, but here, when it was about public outlook, they took initiative immediately. Good to know twitter is the way to go.

"Here" is a thread about a forum that was new more than two years ago. At this stage the best I expect of it is that the mods note the issues raised and if they think them worth forwarding to Future's geek squad, they do that. The rest is just howling into the void...

 

[BlueRoads]

Who were you replying to here?

Not you.
But actually I don't know why I always get into these discussions. Probably avoiding work, where I will better turn to again.

 

[Sciatic]

Not you.
But actually I don't know why I always get into these discussions. Probably avoiding work, where I will better turn to again.

Ha! The same is so true for me—stalling about getting to work!

 

[RedheadDane]

You hadn't asked here if the threads had been deleted until after they were deleted so there was no here for Benson to come to to tell you personally that the threads were deleted.

Of course I didn't ask if the threads had been deleted before they got deleted. Before they got deleted, they were still there, and being - for the most part - perfectly innocent discussions.
My first question was indeed a "What-question" - I seriously thought my eyes were deceiving me when I suddenly realised I couldn't find the threads, but then it quickly became a "Why-question - and the only reason we have anything resembling an answer is because you took the effort to play messenger, even though it would have taken DB five minutes (tops) to make a quick announcement about it here.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Before they got deleted, they were still there, and being - for the most part - perfectly innocent discussions.

You're really not getting the totally unacceptable bit, are you?

 

[fmk_RoI]

it would have taken DB five minutes (tops) to make a quick announcement about it here.

One more time for you: there was no here when it happened.

 

[RedheadDane]

You're really not getting the totally unacceptable bit, are you?

I'm still not sure what - other than the use of the word "sexiest" in the headlines - was so "totally unacceptable" about them. We're not allowed to, in any way, mention that we think a rider is good looking?

One more time for you: there was no here when it happened.

Huh?

 

[Gigs_98]

I can very well imagine the same approach to problematic content result in the clinic getting deleted. Even if 9 out of 10 posts are okay, surely we can expect the tenth to slander a rider? Better delete it all then.

That's apples and oranges. Objectification of people, women in particular, is a huge societal issue. Claiming someone is doping isn't.

 

[fmk_RoI]

I'm still not sure what - other than the use of the word "sexiest" in the headlines - was so "totally unacceptable" about them. We're not allowed to, in any way, mention that we think a rider is good looking?

Others have tried to explain their interpretation of what was unacceptable, you're wilfully deaf and blind to those explanations. Nothing's going to change your mind cause you know you were in the right.

 

[RedheadDane]

Others have tried to explain their interpretation of what was unacceptable, you're wilfully deaf and blind to those explanations.

And several of us has pointed out that we wanted the threads to remain at an accepable level, a level of "Hey, I think [Rider X] is quite good looking." "I think [Rider Y] is quite good looking." with maybe the occassional (PG) picture to "back it up", and as mentioned; most of the pictures posted were from PCS; not exactly rude or risque in any way. No explicit pictures, no explicit posts. And - just as importantly - no posts criticising the looks of a rider.
Because that was another risk the threads were running - and as mentioned above; I'm totally aware that they had the risk of becoming problematic as a whole (of course any problematic posts within the threads should be deleted, as problematic posts always are), I just don't think they'd reached they'd quite reached that point yet - namely that of the threads devolving into people saying mean things about riders' looks.

 

[fmk_RoI]

I just don't think they'd reached they'd quite reached that point yet

Once more with affection: totally unacceptable. Totally. Stop holding out for a single post being the problem. The thread was the problem.

If you need more, take it up with CN's editor. Seriously, go to the mountain, stop expecting the mountain to come to you.

 

[RedheadDane]

Once more with affection: totally unacceptable. Totally. Stop holding out for a single post being the problem. The thread was the problem.

You know what? The whole discussion about whether or the threads were "totally unaccaptable" is a moot point. The main point is that DB did not - at any point, not even when he was literally right here, on the forum - bother spending five minutes to make a quick announcement, even if it had just been "Those threads were deemed totally unacceptable" with no further explanation. I, of course would have preferred a further explanation, because... well... if those threads were "totally unacceptable", does that mean we're never allowed to - in a respectable manner - mention that we think a rider is good-looking?

Seriously, go to the mountain, stop expecting the mountain to come to you.

This is "the mountain", so to speak. This is the thread were we comment on the running of the (new) forum. If you run a forum - or any kind of communication platform - it's only natural that you'd be expected to communicate on said forum. Not just enter, delete a couple of threads, and leave.

 

[fmk_RoI]

The main point is that DB did not - at any point, not even when he was literally right here, on the forum - bother spending five minutes to make a quick announcement

You know what? I think it's pretty damned arrogant, expecting the editor of CN to come down here and explain himself to you.

 

[RedheadDane]

You know what? I think it's pretty damned arrogant, expecting the editor of CN to come down here and explain himself to you.

I think it's damned arrogant to run a forum, and not communicate with the users.
Doesn't necessarily have to be DB himself, just whoever took on the task of logging onto the forum in order to delete the threads! They were here.

 

[fmk_RoI]

Serious question: if an explanation had been posted, would that have been enough for you, would that have been the end of it? Or would you treat it as the opening move in a discussion and you'd talk about your best intentions in the hope of getting the decision reversed?

What is the end game here?

 

[RedheadDane]

Serious question: if an explanation had been posted, would that have been enough for you, would that have been the end of it? Or would you treat it as the opening move in a discussion and you'd talk about your best intentions in the hope of getting the decision reversed?

What is the end game here?

If an explanation had been posted - including why the threads were deemed "totally uacceptable" - then we'd have a better understanding of what's acceptable.
We aren't allowed to create specific threads discussing riders we find good-looking. What about mentioning it elsewhere?