This Forum Blows

[Maxiton]

He was banned a month for reopening a thread and Joe was not banned for (allegedly) using the forum to phish for personal information, does that strike you as crazy? The excuse that Race Radio asked you not to take action is even more ridiculous, why would his opinion on this even matter?!? The answer should have been, thanks race but Joe's gone.

If Race tells you to remove the ban on Barrus will you do it? Or can I simply request it? Please remove Barrus' ban, thanks.

Bingo!~ Exactly what I was thinking. And it's a privately owned forum. You can ban anyone for any reason, or for no reason! You don't need a reason. So I guess I really can't understand what legitimate excuse you could come up with for not banning this . . . person, despite having an excess of reason to.

 

[Amsterhammer]

No, I am blaming Susan for terrible decision making, bone-headed stupid moderation and an inability to accept that she has handled the situation with Barrus appallingly.

The Barrus sockpuppet would not have arisen if she had not over-reacted to Barrus posting topics. This whole situation is entirely her responsibility.



Of course. Which reflects on the lack of integrity and decency of the 'folks upstairs'.

You have no idea if this is "entirely her responsibility". You're assuming, because Susan is the 'face', because she reported the decision. Who knows what influences/suggestions/orders were brought to bear from other quarters? I'm sure this decision (which I totally disagree with btw) was not taken lightly or frivolously. How about you cut Susan some slack and don't shoot the messenger?

 

[Froome19]

Lol the wagon is about to collapse and the band about to fall off...

Give CN a break, they made have made a mistake possibly more than that, they are not terrible people and though the moderation and management of the forum is not at times satisfactory it is not by all means awful. Remember, they are currently facing a very difficult situation and they are probably as frustrated with the current circumstances as many members here are, yet they have their hands tied and are incapable of fixing the situation.

And even if they have made a mistake and are in the wrong as is very likely.. even so there is no need for the torrent of abuse and criticism to be hurled at them. They do get the idea and I am sure they got it a long time back, so I do not believe that your (each individual members) criticism and individual insight into the matter is going to contribute all that much. So why post it?

 

[Maxiton]

You have no idea if this is "entirely her responsibility". You're assuming, because Susan is the 'face', because she reported the decision. Who knows what influences/suggestions/orders were brought to bear from other quarters? I'm sure this decision (which I totally disagree with btw) was not taken lightly or frivolously. How about you cut Susan some slack and don't shoot the messenger?

I agree with this wholeheartedly.

 

[pedaling squares]

The ban was made permanent because he used a second account after being banned.

Susan

How many times have we seen this same offence receive lesser punishment, and from members who have a record of far greater offences than Barrus? Barrus was banned because he asked tough questions, and continued to ask them when they went unanswered. CN should be hiring him as a journalist, not banning him from the forum.

Once again the uber-rigid approach to moderation has been a total failure, and has added fuel to a fire. Campfire becomes inferno. This forum blows.

You have no idea if this is "entirely her responsibility". You're assuming, because Susan is the 'face', because she reported the decision. Who knows what influences/suggestions/orders were brought to bear from other quarters? I'm sure this decision (which I totally disagree with btw) was not taken lightly or frivolously. How about you cut Susan some slack and don't shoot the messenger?

Which other quarters? I doubt that Benson has insufficient time to address Barrus' questions but has time to order Susan to ban him. He cannot be so small of a man that he would direct Susan to ban someone who became a thorn in his side. No, I think this came from our admin team.

 

[red_flanders]

I will confirm that the reason given for Barrus' ban is, in fact, the reason for the ban. Categorically stating otherwise is completely incorrect. We ban every sockpuppet we can confirm. Additionally, there was a whole lot more than just doing the sockpuppet routine.

Everyone has had a good vent now. I suggest if you truly think "this forum blows", you should do something productive to fix it. Continuing to vent and conjure up the worst possible reasons for every action on this forum is categorically not productive. It's making it worse. You guys make this place, not us, we are here to assist and we do it because we want this place to be better. Please give that a good hard thought, and consider your part in this and how you can be productive. You can't think we haven't heard the issues at this point.

Thank you.

 

[thirteen]

i'm not defending anyone, but Barrus knew he was going to get banned... and he also knew which buttons to press.

then he set up a sockpuppet -- knowing that would ban him permanently* which it did.

at this point, he was so disgusted with the place, he didn't care -- he wants no part.

however, i do hope that the powers-to-be rethink this and revoke the permanent ban... if things clean up here -- including the whole Papp mess -- he may decide to return at a later date (i like him and hope he does). and i truly hope he is allowed.

* i included this asterisk because it really bothers me that a mod was so pathetic at creating a sockpuppet. i mean, you'd think they'd know how to escape under the radar if they are supposedly investigating cases here? no wonder so many are allowed to run rampant (and for so long)!

 

[zapata]

Lol the wagon is about to collapse and the band about to fall off...

Give CN a break, they made have made a mistake possibly more than that, they are not terrible people and though the moderation and management of the forum is not at times satisfactory it is not by all means awful. Remember, they are currently facing a very difficult situation and they are probably as frustrated with the current circumstances as many members here are, yet they have their hands tied and are incapable of fixing the situation.

And even if they have made a mistake and are in the wrong as is very likely.. even so there is no need for the torrent of abuse and criticism to be hurled at them. They do get the idea and I am sure they got it a long time back, so I do not believe that your (each individual members) criticism and individual insight into the matter is going to contribute all that much. So why post it?

Christ, you do use a lot of words to say nothing.

 

[BroDeal]

No idea where to put this but surprise surprise. Over at RBR I found this about Papp.


But he does have an account here: joe.p01.
http://forums.roadbikereview.com/member.php?u=351648

He posted exactly once, and he has PM'ed me asking to talk by personal email. I declined. I'm sure I wasn't the only one he PM'ed.

 

[GreasyMonkey]

I am out of here.

I ask that you delete my account (GreasyMonkey) and all of my posts, PM's and any other records of my presence on this forum.

I am disgusted at the treatment afforded to some members of this community who appear to be a "protected species", and for what is percieved by myself (and others apparently) as the unbalanced and "head-in-the-sand" manner of handling the whole issue of a member using the CN forum as a contact (and commencement) of actions contrary to the Forum Rules.

They are actions that should be condemned at all levels of the editorial staff and management, whether that be the wish of one of the aggrieved parties or not.
Both the editorial staff and management have remained mute on the issue, which is an indictment on the company behind this, Future Publications.

The knee-jerk reactions which have followed is indicative of an editorial staff & management who do not care for the members who constitute the forum, but will happily use the Forum as a source of material, commentary and opinion for the CyclingNews site.

Very unprofessional in my opinion, and as a result I wish to have no further participation in the Forum.

Goodbye.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

If you wish to delete your postings, you may do so yourself.

If you do not wish to further participat in the forum, you can simply log out and never again log in.

Susan

 

[Martin318is]

Susan,
You are probably not aware but when regular members view their post list they don't get the checkboxes. They cannot wholesale delete posts like mods can. I'd think it a reasonable request from someone with over 200 posts that a mod takes a minute to do it for them?

 

[issoisso]

After reading François's post, along with what I've witnessed here for years since this forum came online I conclude it's not the forum itself that blows, it's the whole attitude by CN staff and to a smaller degree moderators.

Pathetic behaviour, really.
But hey, it's simple: I won't be coming back here again. See ya. Or hopefully not.

 

[pedaling squares]

I will confirm that the reason given for Barrus' ban is, in fact, the reason for the ban. Categorically stating otherwise is completely incorrect.

This was the reason given by Susan:

Barrus has been banned for one month for repeatedly opening duplicative threads after being warned not to do so.

This was my take on it:

Barrus was banned because he asked tough questions, and continued to ask them when they went unanswered.

I would not call that categorically stating otherwise, it's simply my interpretation of the reason behind the ban.

I suggest if you truly think "this forum blows", you should do something productive to fix it. Continuing to vent and conjure up the worst possible reasons for every action on this forum is categorically not productive. It's making it worse. You guys make this place, not us, we are here to assist and we do it because we want this place to be better. Please give that a good hard thought, and consider your part in this and how you can be productive. You can't think we haven't heard the issues at this point.

It's not that simple, Red. You and I have both at times been frustrated with the workings of this forum, and it's no easier to fix as a regular member that it is as a moderator. The current issue concerns members' privacy, potentially even extending to their safety, and the inaction of CN management. Nothing that a regular user can do about that, except either ignore it (the Benson route ) or demand answers (the Barrus route ). When certain fundamental issues are not adequately addressed, it is difficult for the worker bees to remain quiet and be productive.

You and the other mods are in a tough spot, one not of your making. Just like the ad issue of some months back, and it sucks that you have to deal with the aftermath.

First they ignored a breach of privacy, and I did not speak out - because my privacy was not breached.

 

[pedaling squares]

No idea where to put this but surprise surprise. Over at RBR I found this about Papp.


But he does have an account here: joe.p01.
http://forums.roadbikereview.com/member.php?u=351648

He posted exactly once, and he has PM'ed me asking to talk by personal email. I declined. I'm sure I wasn't the only one he PM'ed.

At velorooms, JP's signature block includes a request to email him along with a link to his email account. Caveat emptor.

 

[mewmewmew13]

At velorooms, JP's signature block includes a request to email him along with a link to his email account. Caveat emptor.

as for his sig on here I have never seen so many avenues of contact listed..
bit o' ego anyone?

 

[Tinman]

I suggest if you truly think "this forum blows", you should do something productive to fix it.

You guys make this place, not us, we are here to assist and we do it because we want this place to be better.

Please give that a good hard thought, and consider your part in this and how you can be productive.

Thank you.

Endorsed & thanks for a pointing out the obvious, it's needed.

Some of the most posted members here are some of the biggest offenders.

I would propose that mods be given the right to give points based on quality of posting. That would bring some status to what is otherwise a thankless job. And we then look at this measure rather than post quantity as a level of "seniority"...

 

[aphronesis]

This was the reason given by Susan:


This was my take on it:


I would not call that categorically stating otherwise, it's simply my interpretation of the reason behind the ban.


It's not that simple, Red. You and I have both at times been frustrated with the workings of this forum, and it's no easier to fix as a regular member that it is as a moderator. The current issue concerns members' privacy, potentially even extending to their safety, and the inaction of CN management. Nothing that a regular user can do about that, except either ignore it (the Benson route ) or demand answers (the Barrus route ). When certain fundamental issues are not adequately addressed, it is difficult for the worker bees to remain quiet and be productive.

You and the other mods are in a tough spot, one not of your making. Just like the ad issue of some months back, and it sucks that you have to deal with the aftermath.

First they ignored a breach of privacy, and I did not speak out - because my privacy was not breached.

The fact remains, Papp didn't hack (or breach) anyone's account, at least as is known from the discussion to date. Moreover, anyone reading or listening to what he has to say in the terms that he says it would know (as poster rhubroma mentioned some ways back) that Papp is and was obviously posturing. His prose and speech are overwrought and out of all proportion to any content that he's actually bringing to the table when questioned in an expert or professional capacity. There is an extent to which--as several admitted in the now vanished thread--that any potential breach of their privacy occurred through their own means, for sympathetic reasons. Does that make him less pathetic, no, but it might mean that others might be more vigilant--in an ethical, rather than a paranoid sense.

Posters clamoring about morals in what is ultimately both a commercial and thereby juridically overseen venue is touching but not likely to go far.

 

[trompe le monde]

as for his sig on here I have never seen so many avenues of contact listed..
bit o' ego anyone?

To quote from the Art Bergmann song "Bound for Vegas" regarding Papp, 'He's a never was, trying to be a has been'

 

[mewmewmew13]

To quote from the Art Bergmann song "Bound for Vegas" regarding Papp, 'He's a never was, trying to be a has been'

Lol! Good one!

 

[Ozzie2]

can't believe Papp was given any credibility to start with,

you mean because he's possibly the only person posting here who was a professional (albeit 2nd level) cyclist?
and did drugs
and could talk about them
while we speculate on page 16,972 on the Sky thread
like it or not, has been or never was, if we go to the clinic he has cred
versus people like me who are fat smelly and cant stay upright for long on a 3 wheeler, or others who confuse libel with constructive argument?

or is it because he was the ONLY one here going by his actual name (that I am aware of admittedly)

that kind of can't believe?

now all this over some sort of threat of twisted legal fantasy.

At what point though did people not think their posts went past having a rant and entered what he would possibly consider defamation territory? I mean Barrus just be smarter about it next time

I also agree legal is a 2 way lose street, and this is a small community of mostly irrelevant people with already formed opinions. Just move on , don't go broke trying to sue for defamation. This place gave us all so much freedom and flexibility in the clinic, and took a big risk. is it it's fault when emotions get away with some people?

lots of collateral damage. his head must be huge, Troll mission accomplished. sad day, back to lurking

well, its a web forum. aren't we all that way including? pot kettle for all of us?

 

[Ozzie2]

Wow this place stinks worse than the UCI. CN seem to be refusing to accept any responsibility for this whole Papp affair

does CN ban me if i run a red light,
Or if I post a moth eaten book to a member who paid good money for it?
how does it prove it was a misuse of its resources?
how is this CNs fault?
if RR says dont chase, it, how is it the "Papp" affair?
Isnt this the Barrus affair?



and to permenantly ban Barrus for alerting others of CN apathy towards users confidentiality is bang out of order.To permenantly ban Barrus whilst JP remains at large beggars belief.

was it that or the language used to present that story?


CN have made a grave error of judgement on this and Barrus' opening another thread and creating another ID to try and get that message out there is a demonstration of integrity if ever I saw it, and I commend him/her for doing so. Take note CN!

or a banging drum who broke terms of use rules.
what rules did Papp break that we want him banned by CN for again?
dont rules have to be blind justice?




CN or Joe Papp have offered nothing in the way of answers, JP has selectively not offered any evidence that he is innocent of the accusations and just came out with some bombastic Lance style threats, to simply deny it without any explanation is a joke, especially given his previous form. Any hope JP has of establishing any kind of past, present or future credibility seems to me to be zero.


i agree id personally like to hear the other side of the story
that comment about cred i spoke to in the above post.
wasnt joe already a "known quantity"?





I don't simply want to step away from the keyboard and not log in. I'm so disgusted I want nothing to do with this place, even leaving a account here that I don't use, as CN have demonstrated a flagrant disregard for users personal details.

okay. lets say i post my name here now
and one of you then use that to tweet to my boss, or whatever, that so and so makes stupid posts during the work day, and must be a bludger
i get into trouble from my boss
how is that CNs fault?


Even if RR did eventually give away his details outside the forum, for CN to deny that these very boards played an integral part in that phishing process is simply unbelievable.

how many posts a day here? how many people post here?
why should CN be responsible for what individuals do, and who they trust
does hotmail take the blame if i lose money to a nigerian scam?
i mean they surely know these emails and the senders. why dont they stop them
CN probably are sitting there reading this shaking their heads at how we are overblowing this


In the big scheme of things I'm new and no one will miss me, the lawyers may be pleased with CN's stance but to users old, new and those considering joining, CN's handling of this is will be seen as nothing but a big fat fail. I'd expect this sort of thing from Mcquaid but you should know better.

mate in 15 minutes we're all quickly forgotten, and our posts go to page 17 of 1601. sad but true

you and others are right that such valuable commodities are lost here
but now that we can read David Millers book, and now Tylers, and LA has been exposed for what he really was, well, isnt it all out there now?



Can a moderator please delete my account as I want no trace of me left here and I want no part on a forum that is run like this. Goodbye.

That' sad , i hope we dont lose you, and i hope Barrus gets back in here

 

[Ozzie2]

Susan,
You are probably not aware but when regular members view their post list they don't get the checkboxes. They cannot wholesale delete posts like mods can. I'd think it a reasonable request from someone with over 200 posts that a mod takes a minute to do it for them?

but why?
are these grown ups?
i mean blow me down
permanent delete? why?
why not just go away?
this is such a take my bat and ball and have a dummy spit
how does that send a message to CN?
all we get is emptied threads, lost context
those who remain suffer,
like the guy who joined in july and has all of 12 posts, well, that wont be missed
but 200+? why be like that?

 

[Ozzie2]

At velorooms, JP's signature block includes a request to email him along with a link to his email account. Caveat emptor.

and then what?
someone earlier posted how someone possibly compromised RRs safety by posting RRs name

what am i mean to do with this?
email him?
pretend to e a 13yr old girl and try to set up a sting
am i missing something here
what are you trying to achieve wit this Ped?

we all already KNOW his email address

HE is the one here who actually discloses his identity and stands by what he posts.

vs termites like me who hide behind false names

i mean his ego, or brashness, or honesty, whatever his motivation

we could probably find his phone number too if we wanted

are we looking for alice and the rabbitt here?

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

My troll-dar seems to be going into over-drive at the moment.