What about if there is a race is on or it is the grio or tour. 20 posts will not do.that small amount of posts discourages posting.
-
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
SpartacusRox said:
I don't mind a few insults now and then, especially if they are entertaining. Tossing the word "Hater" at anyone who disagrees with you is OK by me.
It becomes an issue when all a poster does is insult a group of posters or floods the board with posts in order to derail the discussion. There is one unstable individual that is responsible for 90% of the troll and is the target of 90% of the accusations of trolling. Occasionally someone is erroneously called out but most posters recognize his game now and would just like the Mods to get on him faster.
SpartacusRox said:
Some people would have relatively high post counts if you count their banned accounts
Francois the Postman said:
"post worthy" or sponge worthy? Elaine Benis, where are you when we need you?
Barrus
BANNED
A question: isn't it better not to ban BPC from now on, it has no use and that way we won't need to ignore new users each and every time
That would be true Barrus if we all knew it was him, and he had no other user names or sock puppets. He once registered as "Troll", and if I could trust him, I'd let him come back under only that user name and stay on the forums.
But he won't play that game.
But he won't play that game.
The real answer here is to keep to the higher ground. So ignore the drivel and keep posting about things worthy of discussion in a sensible and appropriate manner. As mods we will continueto do our best to surpress the noise... and I know we don't always get this right ... but most of us are volunteers and we do the best we can.
I actually think we'll be fine in July because we'll have somethig really exciting to talk about
I actually think we'll be fine in July because we'll have somethig really exciting to talk about
buckwheat
BANNED
180mmCrank said:The real answer here is to keep to the higher ground. So ignore the drivel and keep posting about things worthy of discussion in a sensible and appropriate manner. As mods we will continueto do our best to surpress the noise... and I know we don't always get this right ... but most of us are volunteers and we do the best we can.
I actually think we'll be fine in July because we'll have somethig really exciting to talk about
Don't know if you've noticed but the people spouting the drivel are taking over.
The pea pod people are ubiquitous.
(Please note i have entered this thread dressed head to toe in armour....and with a crash helmet on)
Ok...as firstly a "newbie", and secondly, as someone who has been accused of "trolling" for posting a new thread on a "contentious" subject, may i offer my opinion?
Firstly....we should all be encouraging as many members as possible to sign up. Surely? The more people on here, the longer the sponsors are going to pay for it to exist ....and also the more open, varied and potentially interesting the discussions can be....and if they are on subjects we are bored of....we can ignore them if we choose.
Secondly....the "trolling"....what I hope (and I really am still not sure) is meant by that term is the constant de-railing of a thread purposefully....well, I have certainly noticed that behaviour on here, and it is tedious beyond belief, but I know how to use the ignore function now....but if "trolling" means having a belief or an opinion that runs against the perceived tide....or provoking debate....and being passionate about defending one's opinion....well....I guess by that definition I better go and try and find my bridge.
So please, I hope we encourage newbies....and don't call them names....after all, who could you all patronise without them?
Warning: A joke that some might find offensive was used in the making of this post
Ok...as firstly a "newbie", and secondly, as someone who has been accused of "trolling" for posting a new thread on a "contentious" subject, may i offer my opinion?
Firstly....we should all be encouraging as many members as possible to sign up. Surely? The more people on here, the longer the sponsors are going to pay for it to exist ....and also the more open, varied and potentially interesting the discussions can be....and if they are on subjects we are bored of....we can ignore them if we choose.
Secondly....the "trolling"....what I hope (and I really am still not sure) is meant by that term is the constant de-railing of a thread purposefully....well, I have certainly noticed that behaviour on here, and it is tedious beyond belief, but I know how to use the ignore function now....but if "trolling" means having a belief or an opinion that runs against the perceived tide....or provoking debate....and being passionate about defending one's opinion....well....I guess by that definition I better go and try and find my bridge.
So please, I hope we encourage newbies....and don't call them names....after all, who could you all patronise without them?
Warning: A joke that some might find offensive was used in the making of this post
Barrus
BANNED
A problem with many of these "new" posters is that they start new threads or post in other threads about subjects which are beaten to death, these posters make 1 or 2 posts about such a topic and are never to be seen again. Or these "new" posters start by attacking members with abusive speech. None of them want to really contribute to a debate, only derail a topic at hand or ensure that the forum is unreadable
Barrus said:
If their posts are are on subjects that "are beaten" to death....ignore them....read one of the many other posts that are available to you....surely?
Or these "new" posters start by attacking members with abusive speech.....but it is acceptable for "old" members to attack "new" members with abusive speech....or people they disagree with....or indeed people in the public domain?
Actually, I think the term "abusive" can become a bit perjorative....sarcasm...provocation....irony....humour....I honestly think they all have their place in freedom of speech and debate. Listen, If I wanted to be bored and only hear things i agreed with...I wouldn't be here at all. (I'd be on Twitter and listening to my Ryan adams CD)
None of them want to really contribute to a debate, only derail a topic at hand or ensure that the forum is unreadable
The topics are either at hand or beaten to death....I don't think they can be both....and "ensuring the forum is unreadable"?....I may find banging my head repeatedly on my desk less frustrating than reading some of the things I have read on here....but unreadable?....Never.
Just like my public profile isn't unreadable....to some.
Barrus
BANNED
To be quite honest the forum at the moment is quite free of trolls, at least compared to a few weeks back. And your post sounds like your being wilfully obtuse
for example:
Also:
Also new is within quotation marks due to the fact that many of them are not new, but either posters previously banned, or seem to come with some form of pre rendered message
for example:
You understand or should understand that this means that they come in topics that are at hand and come in with something that is beaten to death
Also:
You should understand damn well, that I did not mean humour, the problem is that not many of these "new" posters have any sense of humour.
Also new is within quotation marks due to the fact that many of them are not new, but either posters previously banned, or seem to come with some form of pre rendered message
Barrus said:
This is obviously a problem, but let me give my experiences.
My first post here was a question regarding a certain American rider, not worded quite as well as it may have been, but I would contest not inflammatory.
Cue 101 posts telling me I'm a troll.
Fair enough, for a first post, wrong subject.
I then contributed to a post regarding leMond, politely and respectfully, albeit on another of those touchy subjects. My opinion did not match up with some members of this forum and it wasn't long before I was met with insults.
At this point it would take the patience of a saint to not respond in kind.
Having a high post count on a forum is one of the poorest indicators of knowledge on a subject. A good indicator of supporting the forum yes, but an indicator of expertise, no.
Being accused of being naive or clueless by some members of the forum because my opinion does not match up with theirs is frankly laughable.
If someone wants to question my experience within cycling and pro racing, then please do. Until then don't confuse "new" with inexperience.
I know where my beliefs come from, and it's not from reading articles, 3rd hand opinion or other Internet forums.
I do however think that I can learn something new by posting and contributing to these forums, as long as I'm afforded respect for having a different view on things and not derailed by ridiculous and incorrect personal remarks.
Who knows, someone mght learn something new from me?
Barrus said:
they start new threads or post in other threads about subjects which are beaten to death....
actually means....
You understand or should understand that this means that they come in topics that are at hand and come in with something that is beaten to death
Thanks for clearing that up for yourself....
and incidentally are people suggesting newbies "come in topics"?....If so, I am definitely having a word with the mods....that isn't going to help
....apologies i couldn't help that oneYou should understand damn well....now you see, I wouldn't call that "abusive" but i did notice it wasn't accompanied by a hug emoticon.
and thanks for the clearing up the quotation marks....I really, really hadn't got that inference....despite many people accusing me of being a "new" poster for declaring my admiration for a certain english speaking cyclist with one testicle on a cycling forum.
andy1234 said:
Andy....you aren't me are you?
Frankly....I don't think there is a "wrong" first post. Even if it is "inflammatory"....what I find risible, is the people who don't somehow see how reductive and self condemning simply labelling you a "troll" is. Shouting someone down isn't debating or "proving" anything....it is just shouting....throwing one's toys out of the pram so no one else can play with them
And also....am I polite and respectful of those who show neither of those two qualities to free debate or thought?....Honestly...Why should i be? Should I ignore them instead? Undoubedtly. But if I read their "respectful" and "polite" opinions because they have come to a public forum to air them....then i feel perfectly entitled to reply on the terms they have set.
To those who are polite and respectful....of course, they deserve the same politeness and respect in return.
And finally Andy....there will be people learning something new from you and that is why i think you should be very welcome here.
Barrus
BANNED
@ straydog
Again you appear to be wilfully obtuse
@ Andy, that is a regretful start of your stay here. However we had that topic quite a lot of times already in quite a short amount of time, most always started by trolls, not interested in genuine debate, the same was the case with Lemond. Perhaps a lot of it also had to do with the fact that first you solely posted in the clinic, which already makes a lot of posters wary.
But from what I have seen with your posting and the reactions to it, is that they have grown more civil at least and a genuine debate sometimes springs. Also your welcoming in the road race part of the forum was a lot better I believe than the one you received in the clinic.
But really in the clinic people are very wary of new posters, especially those who start a thread with their first post. Something which I would not advise anyone to do, it is often better to first familiarize yourselve with a forum by posting in already existing threads and not start your posting out with a thread, especially not one about quite a sensitive subject.
But the wariness comes mainly from problems we have with known trolls and people who post standard threads on their first posts. Something we have not yet found a solution for, but we are working on it
Again you appear to be wilfully obtuse
That second part was directed at a comment of yourselve that they cannot go into another topic, which is at hand and start beating on a dead horse
@ Andy, that is a regretful start of your stay here. However we had that topic quite a lot of times already in quite a short amount of time, most always started by trolls, not interested in genuine debate, the same was the case with Lemond. Perhaps a lot of it also had to do with the fact that first you solely posted in the clinic, which already makes a lot of posters wary.
But from what I have seen with your posting and the reactions to it, is that they have grown more civil at least and a genuine debate sometimes springs. Also your welcoming in the road race part of the forum was a lot better I believe than the one you received in the clinic.
But really in the clinic people are very wary of new posters, especially those who start a thread with their first post. Something which I would not advise anyone to do, it is often better to first familiarize yourselve with a forum by posting in already existing threads and not start your posting out with a thread, especially not one about quite a sensitive subject.
But the wariness comes mainly from problems we have with known trolls and people who post standard threads on their first posts. Something we have not yet found a solution for, but we are working on it
Dr. Maserati
BANNED
andy1234 said:
'Andy' - sorry, but this is not quite correct.
In your opening post - as you acknowledge you worded it badly - and it was those words that inflamed the thread. This does not excuse people reactions, but does make it understandable.
If it was your first introduction to the forum then you would have a point at the reception received - however in another post you acknowledge that you have been 'lurking for "years", quite simply you should have known what was going to happen.
Although I do believe it was not your intention to inflame, it was the obvious outcome to -as you admit - a badly worded (and previously discussed) question - which (IMO) is the opposite of what 'straydog' is doing.
Again - on the LeMond thread, while your initial question was made "politely and respectfully" so to were the answers you received- but you then requested different criteria on a point made solely by you, then many did call in to question your motives.
I do agree with you that it is not correct or nice to be called 'clueless' or 'naive' -but your views on the "tradeshow" were inaccurate.
Post count has nothing to do with one's contribution - in fact some of the best posters here are low count people who post a link or a correction and are never heard from again.
I read all your posts, and I am happy to "learn something new" from you or anybody -even BPC got me to change my opinion on an issue - I look forward to your posts.
Dr. Maserati said:
Dr M.
I did NOT change my question with regards to the LeMond thread, so please don't accuse me of that yet again.
From the start I used a powerful word - "crusade" as a description of what LeMond was now doing in terms of doping.
I then changed my description to "aggressive" because people did no appear to get my point.
I felt the need to re-empahasise myelf because I was asking for some evidence of the aggressive approach that LeMond uses today, being exercised pre Armstrong.
This did NOT happen. The presented links etc did NOT show this.
One poster even conceded that I was asking for something that people would be unable to provide. He then went further to say that I knew this.
The Truth is, I did half know this, but I asked the question to stimulate some activity on the subject.
As soon as my someone pointed out some of the points on the tradeshow, I reassessd my opinion of the event. No arguments, no change of question.
(even though many sources claim LeMond asked to be there and team accommodated him, not the other way around)
I also learned how to spell LeMond correctly
For the record, I admire Greg, his record speaks for itself and the few times I have met him, he comes across as a nice guy.
But....
Like nearly all great champions though, he lives primarily for the good of himself. Any changes he made within the peleton as a rider, were made as a bi-product of serving Greg, and I believe any changes being made to the peleton as an ex rider are being made primarlily to serve Greg.
Digressing slightly...The end of Gregs career is not the frustrating tale of clean against dirty that it is often portrayed.
Gregs career was finished within the BIG drugs era, but it wasnt finished BY it.
There were still riders winning clean at that point, indeed there were even riders within his own team winning clean at that point.
(Not overall GTs conceded)
If you want me to back this last point up and discuss it further, Im happy to do it offline with you.
Now we can argue my original point until the cow comes home, after all most of what both of us has to say is just opinion, so if theres no breakthrough on the fact front, let's just leave it there.
Nice discussing this with you
Andy
Dr. Maserati
BANNED
Firstly Andy - I am not talking about what your view is or is not on LeMond (I learned to correctly spell it to).andy1234 said:Dr M.
I did NOT change my question with regards to the LeMond thread, so please don't accuse me of that yet again.
From the start I used a powerful word - "crusade" as a description of what LeMond was now doing in terms of doping.
I then changed my description to "aggressive" because people did no appear to get my point.
I felt the need to re-empahasise myelf because I was asking for some evidence of the aggressive approach that LeMond uses today, being exercised pre Armstrong.
This did NOT happen. The presented links etc did NOT show this.
One poster even conceded that I was asking for something that people would be unable to provide. He then went further to say that I knew this.
The Truth is, I did half know this, but I asked the question to stimulate some activity on the subject.
As soon as my someone pointed out some of the points on the tradeshow, I reassessd my opinion of the event. No arguments, no change of question.
(even though many sources claim LeMond asked to be there and team accommodated him, not the other way around)
I also learned how to spell LeMond correctly
<snipped for brevity>
Nice discussing this with you
Andy
It has to do with what you said in this thread - and how you were treated in this forum.
Here is what you said:
.... we have agreed on your very first post - where you admit you worded it wrong which is what inflammed the situation.andy1234 said:
However in regards to the LeMond thread - you did change your questions....
Here are the full posts with my highlighting of the relevant remarks:
andy1234 said:
Then you added in the word 'crusade' to your point -
.................. LeMond was not on a 'crusade' then, and is not on one now - so it is difficult to give you evidence of something that does not exist.andy1234 said:
He has been outspoken on the subject - and it has been shown that he was outspoken on it before 1999, as you originally requested.
andy1234 said:
In your latest post you have admitted that what you requested "was never going to be found" - so I cannot see how you can make a statement like "My opinion did not match up with some members of this forum and it wasn't long before I was met with insults."...........
I don't see why you can try and act as some sort of 'victim' when you got exactly what you sought.
Dr. Maserati said:
If LeMond isn't on a crusade now, I wouldn't like to see your definition of someone who is.
Anyway, I stopped caring about this about 10 posts ago, but it's weird how this forum sucks you in.....
When I started posting on this forum, it was because I thought I would be discussing topics with like minded individuals, with some expertise on the subject.
That isn't really the case, instead I find myself being met with people who clearly have no experience of racing at a high level, any first hand experience of the individuals they are discussing or any direct experience of European professional racing ( other than what they have picked up on the Internet)
Now I'm not saying this kind of experience is a pre-requisite for having a discussion, but with the sort of certainty some posters have in their convictions, I would expect something close.
The clinic is more about the frustrations of the posters than the actual points being discussed, which I have discovered is neither a productive or informative place to be.
It's now no mystery why the people with genuine experience and expertise rarely venture into the clinic, it just isn't worth the trouble.
It's been fun....ish.
Dr. Maserati
BANNED
andy1234 said:
On LeMond, outspoken sure - "crusade" no.
Other than that - your post has gone all 'ad hominem" and makes no attempt to answer anything that was raised.
Its quite easy to spot those who are or who are not involved in cycling - and to what level, there are numerous posters who are very involved in cycling- at all levels, from Pros to administrators - I can understand why you may not spot them.
I actually don't care about peoples experience or not to cycling - I judge people on their post and the opinion they offer.
This is why I responded to your post when you talked about "my experience" - and when you said "My opinion did not match up with some members of this forum and it wasn't long before I was met with insults".
As I have shown, this was simply not correct - the only question that remained was, was it an innocent mistake or a desired effect -and after reading your above post - I suspect the latter.
Funny how Lemond writes a long article with two sentences on Wonderboy and it is a "crusade". Even during the trial Trek could only come up with three tepid quotes over a 8 year period.
Race Radio said:
Silly me, I must be thinking of someone else recording phone conversations in order to gain mitigating evidence.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 29K
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 11K
-
Teams & Riders Alberto Contador Discussion Thread- Started by LaFlorecita
- Replies: 51K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Teams & Riders Everybody needs a little bit of Roglstomp in their lives- Started by johnymax
- Replies: 19K
-
Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.- Started by Miburo
- Replies: 21K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram