I've been trying to figure out a way to say that about Bro ever since I saw him labeled, by another poster of similar seniority, as #1 on the top ten of CN's trolls. It forced me to go back to usenet days, and do quite a bit of research, up until today, on what a troll is. It should suffice to say, imo, that Bro knows the envelope as well as anyone. Nor is he alone, not by any stretch of the imagination. So, why does singling Bro out not get me in detention (at least, not yet)? Perhaps because I am "condemning with faint praise"? Or "praising with faint condemnation"?Boeing said:It's a smart tactic after all H so props for that. singling out one posers name gets you in detention. Starting a reply "you people" doesn't. but same intention...genius really. wish I thought of it.
as for the OP OT. there is nothing like a little George Hincape LA love to fuel this forum again.
I like the new bandit icon - cute - and just so history will know - since I'm sure you'll change it again sometime this year for some bet. Froome standing with two aliens - aha - Froomy as Alien! Cute graphics.ebandit said:bro killed it................posting so much
The CN login problem is, I think, related to the version of vBulletin being used. It seems to be an issue with properly detecting a login/logout on the news pages vs the forum pages. I suspect they are using different database files to store login info. And somehow those files are getting slightly hosed.python said:perhaps this forum is not so much dying of natural causes , as it may have... suicidal tendencies ?
i mean, why would scores and scores of regular not suspended posters, not due to their own computer issues, have persistent problems to log in ?
in the last year or so, i personally had at least 4 incidents when i could not log in. many, who did not walk away entirely, posted the same concern...
at different times i have been a member of about 10 different forums and as many private sites requiring to log in...never i had a as many problems as i had logging on to the cn forums.. when a site was due to go 'off air' due to maintenance or any other issues, it would normally be posted in advance or a redirect message would make everything clear.
not the case with the cn. you just get cut off with some meaningless error message.
sometimes you get lucky to read a post by a good-doer about a work around. but almost never a considered response from the cn it. here i have to give credit to some cn staff for being responsive to emails and messages about the problem.
i am stunned by the cn attitude to this normally small problem
a suicidal negligence, to say the least.
There is only so long people can talk how amazing JV isDigger said:
well jv is apparently top three in the list of those who brought down lance -thehog said:There is only so long people can talk how amazing JV isDigger said:
Walsh, Tygart and JV took down Lance.Digger said:well jv is apparently top three in the list of those who brought down lance -thehog said:There is only so long people can talk how amazing JV isDigger said:
I wonder, does this sage observation remain true?hiero2 said:Meh. Fools.
Listen - and learn. The forums will not die. Why not? Because there is sufficient NEW influx to replace OLD die-off. So, usage stats will remain appox the same, year to year.
So, how does this fit with YOUR observation that some influential, insider, big-name, whatever posters have left? Well, if you are correct, it means the forums COULD be much bigger than they are.
DO NOT confuse the circumstances thus far described with what has happened historically. Because of the historical sequence of events - with so much stuff covered-up or attempted to be covered-up - the revelations of this forum had an unusual impact on RL events. But, the situation has shifted. Today, the speculations of The Clinic are exactly that: speculations. Not revelations, which is what they were. Revelations masquerading as speculation.
The logical and rational conclusion is not that the forum has decreased in influence, but that the information imparted has decreased in power. The information imparted can not be validated or verified - it is speculative. When, and IF, the data gains validation, the forum information will again become an influential source. But, failing said validation - well - fail.
On the other hand, have posters abandoned this forum? No question, yes. Does that reduce the activity? Eh, no. I think this is due to the connection of the forum to a major cycling news source. So, it is the neighborhood. You won't see any LESS traffic - just because the forum is in a traffic crossroads/intersection. What could happen is that the intersection COULD see much MORE traffic if it were managed appropriately.
The decision to use subject based threads rather than current event based ones was absolutely asinine. Didn't anyone take a peek at other forums to see how things are done elsewhere? What is really amazing is that the owners are so incompetent that none has ever checked out the forum and had the thought, "WTF! This idiotic policy about threads is costing us money."Ferminal said:
Not so much the thread itself as to what it reinforces (to be fair the war was lost long ago).BigMac said:
I'd argue that you're looking at it from the wrong end.LaFlorecita said:I really don't see the issue with subject based threads. It keeps all the news regarding 1 rider or team together and prevents cluttering. I really wouldn't want to see a new thread for everything a rider says or does.
I agree with this. I like when there were interesting offbeat thread titles discussing a specific and new aspect about a rider, a team or similar. A little like the Froome test data thread. It wasn't about his racing but about the testing data and some really good discussion came from it to then have the thread locked and everything revert into the general froome thread (and get lost between the "there's no proof").DamianoMachiavelli said:The decision to use subject based threads rather than current event based ones was absolutely asinine. Didn't anyone take a peek at other forums to see how things are done elsewhere? What is really amazing is that the owners are so incompetent that none has ever checked out the forum and had the thought, "WTF! This idiotic policy about threads is costing us money."Ferminal said: