Poll for a seperate Lance Armstrong section on forum

[RDV4ROUBAIX]

Eddy said "speak to the hand because the face ain't listening"

Exactly, those two are the best. Pretty sure that photo is from 1976 no?

It was the 1975 start of Milano-San Remo. He told me that he was going to make his move at the base of the Cipressa. Of course, he won that day. I had my payback in Roubaix that year.

 

[Anonymous]

Absolutely not.

Sure there are some people who are blatantly trolling, but the ignore list/button is there for a reason. Its the attention that they get that drives them. If people do not wish to discuss Lance Armstrong then they have every right not to click on a Lance-based thread in the Clinic.

Now, I for one, have been vocal in Lance threads, and if people view this as trolling I disagree as I can assure you i'm not doing it for fun - its to clarify certain things that I don't yet agree with. Hopefully i'm not under the banner of "Lance troller" as I'm genuinely interested in discussing the respective topic.

Whoever 'the trollers' are, it doesn't matter. They all have a right to post here, and if someone views this as trolling then just ignore them, it's easy. But if one of these guys does log on and asks a genuine question about Lance and doping then I think the well-educated people here should give them enough respect and actually answer the question, rather than insult them.

I've seen Great White ask some simple questions, and rather than giving him/her an honest answer he/she gets blatantly abused, which is adding fuel to the fire.

Two options - ignore or answer the question, abuse is unnecessary, from both sides..

 

[Mellow Velo]

No point, as there would be no change. People chose to enter the Clinic. It's not obligatory. People then chose to enter the war of words that is all things Lance.
Rather than clean up the Clinic, it would more likely send it into periods of hybernation.
To coin a Lance acronym: SSDN.

Besides, I see Sphincter Man has already returned.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

No. And won't happen if I have anything to say about it.

At most I could see a sticky in The Clinic with his name on it. But even then...

Meanwhile, he made the media today via AP. Long article about his perhaps being athlete of the decade, but dogged by doping allegations. Article falls a bit short if you ask me. Link here.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

Can't stand the idea of a separate LA section in the forum - it just reeks of any publicity is good publicity. So much attention for one rider is just too weird.

A sticky in the clinic might help. Split any thread that turns into an off topic debate or flame war about LA and add the LA stuff to the sticky thread. That way anyone continuing to post OT about lance, in a thread that has been split, is unquestionably trolling and can be immediately dealt with.

I really enjoyed this forum before the whole troll thing got totally ridiculous. Hopefully a better way to manage it will be found soon.

 

[sars1981]

lol is this dude still around? It's clear he just wants attention. You have to question the motivation of anyone who comes into "The Clinic" without any real arguments. If he thinks everybody here is an idiot, why does he come here? He makes no real effort to dispute the facts. The only answer is seeing his name quoted all the time must give him a sense of importance he cannot otherwise get. Sadly, many humans are like this.

 

[flyor64]

IMHO it would make no difference...he would still come up from one side or the other....

 

[Great White]

I've changed my mind. Maybe there should be a separate section for people who all think the same.

It's clear there is a large group in the clinic who only want this place to be a club for people who agree with each other. They can't stand any disagreement. If you stand up to them and point out that the evidence points to Armstrong having not doped at the Giro, for instance, showing he is a good tour rider, or point out that there is no evidence to support the claim Wiggins is on a "program", then that is beyond the pale. You're termed a troll, abused, and their moderator friends are called to ban you. Ask them if they can cite a specific piece of trolling and they never respond - no one has ever been able to do that. Go on, ask BikeCentric if he can cite some "trolling" - I guarantee you he will not give you an answer. They now openly use the term 'troll' for 'disagreement'.

So, if they want their own little club and can't handle reasonable debate then maybe a new forum should be set up for them - where no debate is allowed. And the rest of us can be free to discuss these matters here.

 

[sars1981]

I've changed my mind. Maybe there should be a separate section for people who all think the same.

It's clear there is a large group in the clinic who only want this place to be a club for people who agree with each other. They can't stand any disagreement. If you stand up to them and point out that the evidence points to Armstrong having not doped at the Giro, for instance, showing he is a good tour rider, or point out that there is no evidence to support the claim Wiggins is on a "program", then that is beyond the pale. You're termed a troll, abused, and their moderator friends are called to ban you. Ask them if they can cite a specific piece of trolling and they never respond - no one has ever been able to do that. Go on, ask BikeCentric if he can cite some "trolling" - I guarantee you he will not give you an answer. They now openly use the term 'troll' for 'disagreement'.

So, if they want their own little club and can't handle reasonable debate then maybe a new forum should be set up for them - where no debate is allowed. And the rest of us can be free to discuss these matters here.

Now you're the one sounding like a "conspiracy theorist". If its so tough for you here, why do you keep coming back?

 

[Race Radio]

I've changed my mind. Maybe there should be a separate section for people who all think the same.

It's clear there is a large group in the clinic who only want this place to be a club for people who agree with each other. They can't stand any disagreement. If you stand up to them and point out that the evidence points to Armstrong having not doped at the Giro, for instance, showing he is a good tour rider, or point out that there is no evidence to support the claim Wiggins is on a "program", then that is beyond the pale. You're termed a troll, abused, and their moderator friends are called to ban you. Ask them if they can cite a specific piece of trolling and they never respond - no one has ever been able to do that. Go on, ask BikeCentric if he can cite some "trolling" - I guarantee you he will not give you an answer. They now openly use the term 'troll' for 'disagreement'.

So, if they want their own little club and can't handle reasonable debate then maybe a new forum should be set up for them - where no debate is allowed. And the rest of us can be free to discuss these matters here.

Great White loves to pretend he is persecuted when he knows the reality of the situation.

He is banned again. Arbiter/BanProCycling/BritishProCycling/Earth Tribe/ Max Power/Great white. While I am not a moderator as a user it is clear he is not banned for his views but his actions. To pretend that he is anything but a dedicated troll who is bent on disrupting the forum is dishonest.

If anyone thinks that he has made a legitimate point that was not answered then please raise it here, but do not recycle his garbage about how Betsy should have committed perjury, Cortisone was never used in Pro Cycling, Ferrari is a great coach who has nothing to do with doping, etc.

 

[Anonymous]

No, I don't want to see a LA section of the CN forum. But I know why you are frustrated and understand your point completely. As others have written, it's up to all of us to ignore trolling and manipulation of threads.

What we really need is a Bradley Wiggins section. A few days ago the front page of the Pro Racing forum had such diverse threads as: Wiggins Drama Ending?, Wiggins to Sky, Wiggo at the 2010 Tour, Wiggins to win le Tour?, Wiggins wears an ascot, Wiggins is a mod, and Wiggins ate Weetabix this morning. Does the guy think he's Lance Armstrong?!

i think that just needs to mods to be a little more active and merge duplicate threads...

maybe more mods are needed. one man cant do it alone..

 

[**Uru**]

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.

 

[Race Radio]

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.

So true, the haters that are always going after Lemond for speaking the truth are getting a little tiresome.

 

[Troll]

You see, I told you. RaceRadio can't produce anything of substance to support his claim that I troll and disrupt the forum. All he has are some out of context remarks from six months ago.

Where is all this constant "disrupting" of the forum? Show us where it is? There should be tonnes of it, surely? Is it because disruption is his word for 'counter argument'? Yes I do often make counter arguments. Why is that wrong? Why is it trolling to point at that Armstrong's blood values show he did not dope at the Giro? Why is it wrong to highlight the complete lack of evidence that Wiggins is on a program? Tell us?

But lets deal with his little smears...

do not recycle his garbage about how Betsy should have committed perjury,

This is from months ago and my position was more subtle than that - I merely pointed out that there was a balance of morals at play. It was not a simple decision. Given that Betsy recently confessed that Frankie pretended not to remember certain things that he could remember, I think the moral high ground has gone on that one.

But if you were deeply offended by my position then I apologise. I did not mean to hurt your feelings - it's just the way I saw the situation. You don't have to hate and demand they are banned because they don't see the world as you do.

Cortisone was never used in Pro Cycling,

Again from months ago - a mistake which I quickly corrected. Very poor.

Ferrari is a great coach who has nothing to do with doping, etc.

That's just a lie - I never said he had nothing to do with doping. I merely pointed out he is also a great coach and number cruncher - something people in the sport don't deny. It's not even a controversial statement.

Is this the best you have? Three little comments from about six months ago? Where is all the trolling and disruption, RaceRadio?

I actually don't care what people call me - it just bounces off me. I think that actually upsets people - they know I couldn't give a toss about being called names, so the usual bully tactics don't work for them. The problem I have is when I get banned because people like RaceRadio are so easily offended by counter arguments and throw their toys out of the pram. Why do you do that? This is why there should be two clinic forums - one where debate is allowed, and another one for RaceRadio and co to peddle their propaganda without fear of counterargument.

 

[Troll]

Now you're the one sounding like a "conspiracy theorist".

Why?

If its so tough for you here, why do you keep coming back?

I actually find it pretty easy. It seems to be very tough for other people though. I come back because I have something to say and its obviously unfair for a group of trolls to hound out people they disagree with.

 

[Race Radio]

You see, I told you. RaceRadio can't produce anything of substance to support his claim that I troll and disrupt the forum. All he has are some out of context remarks from six months ago.

Where is all this constant "disrupting" of the forum? Show us where it is? There should be tonnes of it, surely? Is it because disruption is his word for 'counter argument'? Yes I do often make counter arguments. Why is that wrong? Why is it trolling to point at that Armstrong's blood values show he did not dope at the Giro? Why is it wrong to highlight the complete lack of evidence that Wiggins is on a program? Tell us?

But lets deal with his little smears...



This is from months ago and my position was more subtle than that - I merely pointed out that there was a balance of morals at play. It was not a simple decision. Given that Betsy recently confessed that Frankie pretended not to remember certain things that he could remember, I think the moral high ground has gone on that one.

But if you were deeply offended by my position then I apologise. I did not mean to hurt your feelings - it's just the way I saw the situation. You don't have to hate and demand they are banned because they don't see the world as you do.



Again from months ago - a mistake which I quickly corrected. Very poor.



That's just a lie - I never said he had nothing to do with doping. I merely pointed out he is also a great coach and number cruncher - something people in the sport don't deny. It's not even a controversial statement.

Is this the best you have? Three little comments from about six months ago? Where is all the trolling and disruption, RaceRadio?

I actually don't care what people call me - it just bounces off me. I think that actually upsets people - they know I couldn't give a toss about being called names, so the usual bully tactics don't work for them. The problem I have is when I get banned because people like RaceRadio are so easily offended by counter arguments and throw their toys out of the pram. Why do you do that? This is why there should be two clinic forums - one where debate is allowed, and another one for RaceRadio and co to peddle their propaganda without fear of counterargument.

Thank you for proving my point. Nothing but a troll.

All of these points have been covered over and over. That you pretend that they haven't only confirms that your goal is to disrupt, not contribute, to the forum.

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

I don't think it's necessary. Besides it would only perpetuate the idea that he is bigger than cycling. I get sick of the constant criticism directed toward him, but I just stay out of it, unless somebody is articulating a well-thought out argument. In that case, I may join in. Ultimately, discussing somebody I've been watching for years really is counterproductive to my ambition of learning more about cycling.

 

[Troll]

Thank you for proving my point. Nothing but a troll.

All of these points have been covered over and over. That you pretend that they haven't only confirms that your goal is to disrupt, not contribute, to the forum.

Now what he's saying doesn't even make sense. How does that relate to my post? Where is the trolling? Where are the points that have been covered over and over? I didn't make any new points about issues - I explained the context of the points that you brought up, then repeated my view that you should have your own forum where all debate is banned so you can't be offended by counter views. Let the rest of us debate matters here.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Where is all this constant "disrupting" of the forum? Show us where it is? .......

Is this the best you have? Three little comments from about six months ago? Where is all the trolling and disruption, RaceRadio?

Ok then -try this from just a few days ago when I asked you....

Quick question then....

Are you denying that you are/ were, any of the following?

TheArbiter, Sproket01, BanProCycling, UnBanProCycling, BritishProCycling, Earth Tribe..

If so which one.

This was your reply...

Yes I can categorically confirm I am none of these people. What relevance is this to the discussion?

There seems like there is a strategy here that when someone makes a counter point to the perceived wisdom, people must disrupt the thread by talking about the poster rather than the subject.

I don't like seeing anyone getting banned - but all you do is lie, flame, disrupt and bait others. I have only seen you bring up one counterargument that had merit in all the time that you have been here under your different user-names.

 

[Troll]

Ok then -try this from just a few days ago when I asked you....

This was your reply...

I don't like seeing anyone getting banned - but all you do is lie, flame, disrupt and bait others. I have only seen you bring up one counterargument that had merit in all the time that you have been here under your different user-names.

Come on, you know I denied being me because I've learnt that I quickly get banned if I admit who I am. Remember when I kept coming back with the same type of name? Or how I showed everybody Earth tribe was an anagram and I was gone, so you will perfectly understand why I have to deny that issue. I would like to be completely open, alas I am forced not to.

Now, in a forum people are not going to be robots - they are always going to have some character coming through in the things they say. A little joke now and again, like 'you're the police officer who lied about having cancer'. (That was directed at me). But as you know, my style is not as bad as TFF and RR who constantly bait and insult people. Lets be honest.

It seems you can disagree a tiny little bit, but if you have a strong character and actually challenge details and offer counter points, that's over the limit!

 

[Race Radio]

Now what he's saying doesn't even make sense. How does that relate to my post? Where is the trolling? Where are the points that have been covered over and over? I didn't make any new points about issues - I explained the context of the points that you brought up, then repeated my view that you should have your own forum where all debate is banned so you can't be offended by counter views. Let the rest of us debate matters here.

You need to go get your meds.

To pretend that you have not tried to disrupt this forum is just more of your games. You know that much of your more aggressive trolling has been deleted. Your only goal now is to get people to respond to your nonsense by posting more bait.

 

[Race Radio]

Come on, you know I denied being me because I've learnt that I quickly get banned if I admit who I am. Remember when I kept coming back with the same type of name? Or how I showed everybody Earth tribe was an anagram and I was gone, so you will perfectly understand why I have to deny that issue. I would like to be completely open, alas I am forced not to.

Now, in a forum people are not going to be robots - they are always going to have some character coming through in the things they say. A little joke now and again, like 'you're the police officer who lied about having cancer'. (That was directed at me). But as you know, my style is not as bad as TFF and RR who constantly bait and insult people. Lets be honest.

I am glad that you have admitted bing a lier. Now admit you are a troll.

Please provide a link to a post where I have insulted someone that is not one of your multiple banned usernames.

Thanks for confirming that you were that Police Officer. Given your strange behavior and inability to tell the truth it seemed obvious.

 

[Polish]

If anyone thinks that he has made a legitimate point that was not answered then please raise it here.

How about the point he made that "They now openly use the term 'troll' for 'disagreement'."

I think that point is legitimate. Can you name any of the so-called trollish posts that you were in agreement on?

 

[Race Radio]

How about the point he made that "They now openly use the term 'troll' for 'disagreement'."

I think that point is legitimate. Can you name any of the so-called trollish posts that you were in agreement on?

Given his habit of posting absurd topics in order to bait others into responding I don't think there were many that agreed with his posts. Did you think there was a point that had not be answered? If so then by all means start a thread and ask the question.

 

[Anonymous]

Honestly, I've gained a lot of info from both sides. But that good info soon deflates to bickering by some forum members and soon thereafter goes the thread to the trash bin.

So it goes both ways. Both sides have contributed to the demise of good debates on many Lance related threads (and even non-Lance threads but they feel the need to bring him into the discussion). I'm guilty of it like everyone else. And the problem is that both sides won't relent.

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 seems like some want to change the world views on LA and if someone feels a certain way just know that you aren't going to change everyone's minds no matter what the "facts" may or may not be or how much you argue.

But, back to the OP's idea, a seperate LA forum won't really change anything, imo. It'll just end up being another outlet for more bickering and the same bickering will continue in the clinic or any cycling related forum here and everywhere else.

So the solution, unfortunately, is until everyone puts their bravado away there will be none. I think we've heard every single LA pro and con there is so what's the point of arguing about it over and over again? It'll be up to the moderators really. They'll need to be objective and keep a closer eye on debates and shut them down when it becomes a senseless argument. Then maybe people will learn to be more civilized and not feel like they are being bullied. So moderators be prepared. But when you close a thread please leave an explanation as to why it was closed so both sides know how the thread went south. That'd be helpful.

Good luck!

Edit: I agree with Dimspace that maybe more moderators are needed since one guy can't watch every thread, just as long as they can be objective.