Poll for a seperate Lance Armstrong section on forum

[pmcg76]

I actually voted 'yes' but having read through the arguments, I think I would change to 'No', The thing that annoys me about Lance being around is how much cycling coverage is dedicated to just him, everything else suffers as a result. I was happy when he retired in 05 because I felt we could get back to talking cycling again so I was incredily ****ed when he announced his comeback because I knew what was gonna happen and that is exactly how it has panned out. Creating a single section for one rider is just another bow to Armstrong.

This is the first forum I have ever been involved in and I mentioned in another post, I enjoy it because I live in a place where cycling is practically non-existent so this where I come to discuss cycling. I have never put anybody on ignore because I feel everybody is entitled to their opinion, especially on a forum because they are not meant to be taken too serious.

As bad as Great White is, I find people like Speedway, Guilder and a few others more annoying because they try to claim some high ground and imply eveyone who dislikes Lance are mentally ill, yet never enter in the debate themselves, which is the point of a forum I think. At least Great White tries to defend Lance even if I think most of what he says is rubbish.

The one thing I have noticed about all the Lance defenders is that they rarely post in any thread not involving Lance whilst those who are regarded as 'haters' usually post everywhere. I think that speaks for itself as to whom have the real problems. Having followed this sport for 20 years in depth, all my opinions are based on what I have witnessed in that time and I form my arguments set in the overall context of the sport. Too many of the Lance defenders just buy the Lance PR spin without examining issues in depth.

I know it is frustrating when most people have the same common view of the reality of doping and an intelligent discussion is disrupted by somebody who is just throwing crap in the wind, whether just trolling or just being naive. Even though I agree with RR, TFF & a few others on almost everything, I think they can be OTT with the abuse sometimes. I know its hard with people like Great White around. I really have had some good debates with people and I admit I enjoy a good argument but try to stay clear of slinging abuse at people.

Dr.Ferrari was known as 'the myth' in the 90s and to me Lance is now 'the myth', it frustates me that he is the representative of our sport and is held up as some 'crusading,all white hero' when in fact he is a major douchebag. Then when so much coverage is devoted to this one person in the name of commercialism, it becomes overbearing. Fact is I want rid of the circus and to have my sport back which is why I try to dispel 'the myth'.

 

[Hugh Januss]

And you can't just state an opinion here. You need to back it up with facts and figures or else your opinion is meaningless to some. This is a forum to share opinions, even if they oppose your own. But some feel the need to force their opinion on you. They may not realize it but that's what's happening and that's what creates conflict.

It is fine to state an opinion but if it's really only something like a "gut feeling" and multiple other users present clear facts as to why your opinion is faulty, then you should either just drop it or go away or present some actual facts that support your side.
Going on and on recycling the same opinion backed with the same lame arguments and driven by circular reasoning becomes tiresome and when it goes on long enough it becomes trolling.
As an example if I began posting on every thread where the name came up that Lance should be stripped of his tour wins because of the '99 EPO results, people would come back with all the legitimate reasons for why that can't happen. The rules that are in place that prevent it. If I then went on a campaign to fill every thread I could with the opinion that the rules should be thrown out and Armstrong should be DQed because after all there was EPO in his samples and I wouldn't stop no matter how rediculous it became, oh yeah, and that after being warned and then banned multiple times, then I too would have earned the title of Troll.

 

[Anonymous]

It is fine to state an opinion but if it's really only something like a "gut feeling" and multiple other users present clear facts as to why your opinion is faulty, then you should either just drop it or go away or present some actual facts that support your side.

Agreed. But sometimes you just want to speak your mind and end it there. Although I do understand that sometimes you need clarity from a statement made. I know for me, I'll try to do that if I'm not clear.

As for "trolls"... there's a difference between what I mean in my post and trolls and I agree with you on that too. That's where moderators need to step in.

As for those that just post in certain threads... those that do that are missing out on other good topics. And they subject themselves to the stereotype as a troll because of it. Easy solution, post on other threads then you won't be seen as a troll.

<sigh> back to work...

 

[poupou]

2 specific Armstrong threads

To avoid disrupting all other threads, it would be better to have 2 differents threads about Lance's doping:

- Lance doped because (only arguments in favor of that thesis are allowed)

- Lance was clean because (only arguments in favor of that thesis are allowed)

Then everyone could refer to those 2 sticky threads.

 

[Hugh Januss]

As for those that just post in certain threads... those that do that are missing out on other good topics. And they subject themselves to the stereotype as a troll because of it. Easy solution, post on other threads then you won't be seen as a troll.

<sigh> back to work...

No, don't even suggest that! I can see Great White posting in the beer thread now. "I think we can all agree that Miller Genuine Draft tastes better than Guinness."

 

[Anonymous]

To avoid disrupting all other threads, it would be better to have 2 differents threads about Lance's doping:

- Lance doped because (only arguments in favor of that thesis are allowed)

- Lance was clean because (only arguments in favor of that thesis are allowed)

Then everyone could refer to those 2 sticky threads.

Then there would be no discussion, right?

If you click on a Lance-clean thread, and disagree with something, you are unable to express it?

If you click on a Lance-doped thread, and disagree with something, you are unable to express it?

It goes against the nature of a forum - people from two sides of an argument put forth their opinion with every right to disagree with other users.

---

Also, another thing about the 'trolls'. Another thing I would suggest is for the well-educated people here to answer the POST and not the POSTER.

Polish mentioned earlier about the troll = disagreement argument, and sometimes it does feel like that. If you genuinely disagree with some piece of circumstantial evidence about LA and you state it, often, and very often, you are labelled as a troll - and it becomes obvious you are labelled this, not becoz of what you said but because of your screen name (i.e. if you have a reputation for this type of disagreement and you state it, sometimes you are labelled a troll - whereas if someone just answered you post it would be settled).

So another suggestion for both sides of an argument is to answer the POST and not consider who wrote the post, i.e. the POSTER.

 

[SpeedWay]

I am sick of the constant negative talk about certain cyclists. It would be nice if there were a "Haters" thread where people can go and rip on whatever rider they wish.

This is entertainment at its best. A group of us used to go to a circus where the highlight was a clown taking off his big shoe and hitting himself in the head, over and over and over again. It got the biggest laugh of the night. If you create a "HATERS" thread I fear it would be just like restricting the clown to hitting himself in the head only once. I vote for the insanity to continue to run amok, led as always, by the "HATERS". Just reading the title of the thread made me spit my coffee all over the screen.

 

[workingclasshero]

(i.e. if you have a reputation for this type of disagreement and you state it, sometimes you are labelled a troll - whereas if someone just answered you post it would be settled).

no no no

in theory you're right.

but we've all seen how great white's different personas just don't follow that road. tell him some facts and back it up with a link to a credible source, and he'll just overlook it and repeat the nonsense he claims is his opinion.

He does not care for discussion or facts. what he does is post what can at best be described as gut feelings over and over again, even when he's facing fact upon fact saying he's wrong.

he'll then be called out for what he is - a troll - and he'll manage to go on and on and on about how people who call him a troll are trolls. and he'll make a new post for every thought that pops into his head.

all of this is a part of his goal - to interrupt the flow of discussion (cause there are some good discussions on here up to the troll throws his weight about)

that's what makes great white such a troll. not his opinions, not his position. but that he does everything he can to fck up the forum for everyone else.

even me, voted by many as an all round good egg and top lad, can let him get to me

then there's the pure braindead lot which also annoy people. i mean, seriously, check out the opening post in the thread about best road graffiti (nicely placed in the clinic for some reason), then try to look me in the eyes and tell me there's a brain behind the fingers who typed out that

and then there's the gem above me, who seems to think that essentially typing 'haters' (how wánk is that term?) is enough to win any discussion, go over his threads and try to find a decent point in them. jesus h christ. some people really do make me dispare

 

[Ripper]

then there's the pure braindead lot which also annoy people. i mean, seriously, check out the opening post in the thread about best road graffiti (nicely placed in the clinic for some reason), then try to look me in the eyes and tell me there's a brain behind the fingers who typed out that

You are bang on there ... bit of a stupid post.

and then there's the gem above me, who seems to think that essentially typing 'haters' (how wánk is that term?) is enough to win any discussion, go over his threads and try to find a decent point in them. jesus h christ. some people really do make me dispare

Yes, gotta drink some hatoraide

 

[Ripper]

On another note, and sorry that this is out of context, but who the fack is IgnoreBPC?

 

[Race Radio]

Free speech is a great thing, otherwise we wouldn't know who the idiots are.

 

[auscyclefan94]

PMs saying shack attack? You're kidding, right?

7 Pm's to be exact. After everyone of my posts in the forums he did as well. Susan was very helpful!!!!! We had a 3 page forum arguement as he was trying to prove that Lance is a better person than cadel (obviously he's not). it was in the wiggins forum. Make sense of that?

Because he is disturbed

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...ong-fan-faked-cancer-to-marry-girlfriend.html

That is just sad

 

[auscyclefan94]

esfínter hombre olor de, this is his new username but it has just been banned. what will it be next?

 

[Ripper]

7 Pm's to be exact. After everyone of my posts in the forums he did as well. Susan was very helpful!!!!! We had a 3 page forum arguement as he was trying to prove that Lance is a better person than cadel (obviously he's not). it was in the wiggins forum. Make sense of that?

LMAO!!!!

LMAO again!

Sorry, not trying to be an ass, just it blows me away. 7 PMs is kinda nutters man. Nutters!

 

[Ripper]

esfínter hombre olor de, this is his new username but it has just been banned. what will it be next?

I don't know, I first saw the IgnoreBPC well before any of these "Hombres". I guess it could just be a puppet.

 

[bianchigirl]

Definitely no separate forum - for a start just about every thread would eventually end up there as the Public Strategies brigade do their job and because Armstrong is neither bigger than the sport or by any means the most important thing in it. He may tick all the commercial and sponsorship boxes and act as a lightning rod for doping allegations - if commercializing the sport along US lines and painting cycling as the 'dopers sport' is what you enjoy then he's great for the sport and, indeed, the biggest thing in it. If, however, you care for its rich history and traditions, the smaller races that are getting squeezed out so that a handful of riders can earn big bucks for racing a handful of times, the fact that most young men are turning to football and basketball to make their fortunes and the fact that there are a myriad of great races outside le Tour then you know he's a very small cog whatever he claims to be. So let's not give him further delusions of his own grandeur by creating a forum just for him and let's ignore the Public Strategies Inc paid monkeys and their lack of real engagement with a great sport

 

[red_flanders]

Agreed. But sometimes you just want to speak your mind and end it there.

Yeah, I've never seen a forum where that happens to tell you the truth, cycling or otherwise.

Blogging. There you go. Be sure to disable comments!

 

[red_explosions]

esfínter hombre olor de, this is his new username but it has just been banned. what will it be next?

Hombre Cortés de Monroy y Pizarro?

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

It goes against the nature of a forum - people from two sides of an argument put forth their opinion with every right to disagree with other users..

I think that's his point - that it's all a bunch of pointless nonsense.

all of this is a part of his goal - to interrupt the flow of discussion.

Excellent post. You really nailed it. I'm a pretty tolerant guy, and I've completely had it with him.