Why I quit

[Barrus]

Allright, apparently th eproblem might have been a lot more prevalent than I thought. Lets just hope nothing has been done with any of the information from all the members that did contact him.

this was ages ago if i remember right

Yes, it was ages ago, does not make it right, especially if RR asked for consequences to Papp's actions later.

Yeah, it puts the forum in a very poor light.

Papp. This was the guy who was selling drugs to racers even as he was testifying against other racers for drug use. Even Armstrong would blanch at that. I'd heard this about Papp and consequently didn't have much use for him. But some yahoos on this forum thought he'd reformed and I was finally convinced, mostly. Just goes to show, never doubt your own instincts. It's almost always a mistake when you do.

And as for this place. How can you say that it "happened outside the forum"? Of course something of it, some component, happened outside the forum, unless you've instituted wire transfer capability: the money changed hands outside the forum. But the offense happened inside the forum, when the forum was used to gain a member's trust, and when its private message (PM) capability was used to communicate with the victim.

Has it ever occurred to you that you might have some legal exposure here? If something happens that leads RR to sue Armstrong and/or Papp in civil court, you could be liable, too, especially in light of having taken no action once you learned of this. And if something of a criminal nature were to happen to RR - which, given who we're dealing with, is not outside the realm of possibility - the company that owns and runs this forum, and the employees making the decisions, could maybe have some kind of criminal liability - who knows?

The whole thing stinks to high heaven. I can't believe you people!

If I am correctly they did run the thing by their legal department at the time, which ensured that they could not be held liable

Also your argument about what happened inside the forum, was exactly the argument that I put forward at the time

Super duper uncool that cyclingnews.com might have allowed that to happen again without warning us it happened the first time(I'd heard an ugly rumor, but never heard anything else, so I figured it was blown out of proportion or something. I mean, I have defended Joe MANY times here. I even wrote a letter to the judge in his case a couple of years ago before he was sentenced telling the judge he as a nice guy...I figured I would be able to trust him), or banning him before it could happen again...really uncool...

It shows a complete lack of respect for the security and privacy of its members, a lack of respect that the official CN staff has shown quite a few times. Although I can understand that such a warning should have been given without the names of those involved (as per RR request) or at least just banning Papp

I'm not certain how, when, or why this came to light, but I'm glad that Papp's dirty little secret has finally been exposed. Whether or not RR wanted anything to be done at the time, it was and is wrong that Papp was not banned once his other issues were resolved. His actions started within the forum and were directed against a member of the forum; he has no place here. The admins do a lot of things well, but they dropped the ball on a critical issue.

To be honest it was not really the volunteer staff their fault, but those of the real CN staff. They said to do nothing, in accordance with the wishes of RR and they did not communicate with the volunteer staff at all, just leaving them out to dry

How is velorooms going people, would they like a clinic? What about cyclismas, could they start a forum, or NY velocity or inrng? I'm really not happy with CN at the moment. Benson has done such great reporting of the whole Armstrong fiasco in the last couple of years, but I think this decision was a massive mistake. Hope he comes to explain himself.

we have a clinic but it does not get that much use

I don't think any explanations from CN staff, at this point, will amount to much, or mean much.

I doubt you'll get any explanation, when it was going on, not even the moderators could get any explanation from them.

 

[Daniel Benson]

Morning,

I think it's important that I post in here personally. To clear a few things up. A bit of background: I talked to Race Race extensively before, throughout and after this period. We talked about a number of issues, forum posters, investigations, various cycling stories, and even tried to meet up in London this spring but due to the Classics, it wasn't possible.

With specific regards to allegations made here, it was initially at RR's request that no action at all be taken at the time. There was a long debate off forum between the mods and myself over what to do but along with respecting RR's wishes, I also spoke to legal here, who advised also not to take action on two major issues involving a forum user's alleged involvement due to breach of TC and direct contact.

At the time that info was passed to the mods. It wasn't a popular decision with some and it was in part why some of the mods stepped away from the forums. We did take the matter seriously though, I believe it was Postman's idea that we talk to legal. He, Barrus and a few other good mods pressed me and I followed up on that. It was a sensitive matter, no doubt about it, but after hearing from legal and at RR's initial request, no action was taken. I thought the matter was closed.

I was personally disappointed by many factors. Not in a 'oh my god, now we need more mods' way, but because this whole incident had led to good upstanding mods leaving the forums, which was sad to see because they obviously cared a lot.

Back to RR, we carried on talking quite a lot after , I cant remember the exact details of every chat or about whether we talked specifically over this one issue - he says we did, that I was firm on the situation, which could be true but either way, it would have brought us back to the legal standpoint yet again. We may have posted something in the rules saying 'hey guys remember you're on a forum don't give out details' but again, I'm not 100 per cent sure.

One thing I will say, Susan and the remaining mods do a great job on this site and the volunteer mods are here out of the kindness of their hearts (they do it all for free). They try their ****ing best to police, monitor and nurture the forums. No one is perfect and nothing is ever black and white but the abuse - especially off forum - has been way over the top. they are not responsible for this situation and have merely acted in accordance with what's been put in front of them. If they all walk away from the forums, they'll be closed, it's that simple. I and the editorial team CAN'T run this place without them.

If I've acted badly in some people's eyes, I apologise. I'm not here 24/7 or as much as I'd like to be, so some of the responses are short and lack detail (this post perhaps is a good example) but at every step I've tried to honest, up front and tried to manage a delicate situation as best as I could.

Again, I'll seek advice on this but I would remind you again, not to give out personal details on the forum.

Thanks

Dan

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

'...'If I am correctly they did run the thing by their legal department at the time, which ensured that they could not be held liable

Couldn't be held liable by RR cause he said to leave it, or couldn't be held liable by anyone else affected after they failed to act?

It shows a complete lack of respect for the security and privacy of its members, a lack of respect that the official CN staff has shown quite a few times.

For example...?

Thanks for warning us about this Barrus.

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

'...'Again, I'll seek advice on this but I would remind you again, not to give out personal details on the forum.

Thanks

Dan

I will reply in a more measured way later, but let me just take this opportunity to tell you to **** off.

 

[sittingbison]

No action was taken at the time until "something" was "resolved". for whatever reasons, including RR asking.

Times have apparently moved on though, and it is now a case of several people openly questioning the motives and morals of Joe Papp, who appears to have made a career out of throwing people under the bus. And it also appears the issue is not posters giving out their personal details on the forum, but Joe Papp inveigling his way into confidence through the forum but getting said info after the fact, often through a mistake.

Daniel, perhaps it is time to make an executive decision about Joe Papps continued presence on the CN forums?

 

[L'arriviste]

I had email contact with Joe Papp quite a bit some months ago and again quite recently. I doubt he was particularly interested in who or what I knew (which was and is nothing ) but reading this thread did force me to look back through that correspondence.

I think it's very disappointing that he was not banned as soon as the facts became clear to those who were aware of them. He could not have prepared an approach to those individuals without using this forum.

Not acting on that might have been the lawyerly thing to do, but it was not the right thing to do where members are concerned. Loyalty is a two-way street, after all.

 

[Maxiton]

Morning,

I think it's important that I post in here personally. To clear a few things up. A bit of background: I talked to Race Race extensively before, throughout and after this period. We talked about a number of issues, forum posters, investigations, various cycling stories, and even tried to meet up in London this spring but due to the Classics, it wasn't possible.

With specific regards to allegations made here, it was initially at RR's request that no action at all be taken at the time. There was a long debate off forum between the mods and myself over what to do but along with respecting RR's wishes, I also spoke to legal here, who advised also not to take action on two major issues involving a forum user's alleged involvement due to breach of TC and direct contact.

At the time that info was passed to the mods. It wasn't a popular decision with some and it was in part why some of the mods stepped away from the forums. We did take the matter seriously though, I believe it was Postman's idea that we talk to legal. He, Barrus and a few other good mods pressed me and I followed up on that. It was a sensitive matter, no doubt about it, but after hearing from legal and at RR's initial request, no action was taken. I thought the matter was closed.

I was personally disappointed by many factors. Not in a 'oh my god, now we need more mods' way, but because this whole incident had led to good upstanding mods leaving the forums, which was sad to see because they obviously cared a lot.

Back to RR, we carried on talking quite a lot after , I cant remember the exact details of every chat or about whether we talked specifically over this one issue - he says we did, that I was firm on the situation, which could be true but either way, it would have brought us back to the legal standpoint yet again. We may have posted something in the rules saying 'hey guys remember you're on a forum don't give out details' but again, I'm not 100 per cent sure.

One thing I will say, Susan and the remaining mods do a great job on this site and the volunteer mods are here out of the kindness of their hearts (they do it all for free). They try their ****ing best to police, monitor and nurture the forums. No one is perfect and nothing is ever black and white but the abuse - especially off forum - has been way over the top. they are not responsible for this situation and have merely acted in accordance with what's been put in front of them. If they all walk away from the forums, they'll be closed, it's that simple. I and the editorial team CAN'T run this place without them.

If I've acted badly in some people's eyes, I apologise. I'm not here 24/7 or as much as I'd like to be, so some of the responses are short and lack detail (this post perhaps is a good example) but at every step I've tried to honest, up front and tried to manage a delicate situation as best as I could.

Again, I'll seek advice on this but I would remind you again, not to give out personal details on the forum.

Thanks

Dan

Dan,

For the life of me I can't think of a reason for a website manager allowing someone like that to continue in his public forum, not if the manager knows what you knew.

I mean, we have on the one hand the most powerful and pervasive clique of people in cycling - the people who control it, who bring money into it and suck even more out, who control doping, and probably distribution, too, and who enforce omerta: Armstrong, Bruyneel, UCI, corporate interests, and probably a little bit of organized crime thrown in for good measure; and on the other hand we have Armstrong's fiercest critic, a certain Race Radio, and his band of merry men and winsome women. On this latter hand we also have USADA and the other official critics and investigators. And altogether this cast of characters is involved in nothing less than a titanic struggle for the soul of the sport, and its future.

The party on the defensive sends an unscrupulous person - who also happens to be a convicted criminal - to find the real identity of its fiercest critic. The criminal accomplishes this using your forum, where his target - the critic - labors under the presumed cloak of anonymity. The criminal has public exchanges with the critic, and gains a certain level of trust; then he moves on to private exchanges, using your forum's private messaging feature. Eventually he slimes his way into getting an email address, and other personal info, which he passes along to his masters in exchange for payment. The critic gets wind of it and informs you, asking, for his own reasons, that you hold off on taking any action. Later, when he is ready for action to be taken, you do nothing.

Now, what's been going on in the meantime? The criminal has been posting threads seeking information on his boss's critics in the pro ranks, while also soliciting private, personal details from other forum members, those active in the contest, which presumably he is also passing along. And you know about it the whole time. And do nothing. Nada.

What's wrong with this picture? I know "moral compass" might be a bit much to ask, but how about just some common sense?

 

[L'arriviste]

Dan,
... Because for the life of me I can't think of any other reason a website manager would allow someone like that to continue in his public forum, not if that manager knows what you knew...

I suspect the lawyers may have told him that if you were to stick a pushpin on the point where the wrongdoing occurred then it happened "offline", and to call out and then ban Papp would have meant CN becoming a party to the events rather than a mere blameless conduit for the wrongdoing.

However, as you rightly say, the moral question including the responsibility to other members who give this forum their loyalty is quite different.

 

[Maxiton]

I suspect the lawyers may have told him that if you were to stick a pushpin on the point where the wrongdoing occurred then it happened "offline", and to call out and then ban Papp would have meant CN becoming a party to the events rather than a mere blameless conduit for the wrongdoing.

However, as you rightly say, the moral question including the responsibility to other members who give this forum their loyalty is quite different.

I suspect you are right - on all counts.

 

[L'arriviste]

I suspect you are right (on all counts), and now that I've calmed down I withdraw the suggestion.

Don't see why you should. It makes sense legally but it's still wrong.

 

[Maxiton]

Don't see why you should. It makes sense legally but it's still wrong.

I meant the suggestion I've since deleted. I agree with you (and myself ) that it's wrong. I also think allowing it to go on under the pretense of being a witless conduit is a bit tenuous from a legal standpoint, but obviously no one asked. Good thing Papp's (presumably) not a thief or a rapist . . . or a terrorist.

 

[Barrus]

Morning,

I think it's important that I post in here personally. To clear a few things up. A bit of background: I talked to Race Race extensively before, throughout and after this period. We talked about a number of issues, forum posters, investigations, various cycling stories, and even tried to meet up in London this spring but due to the Classics, it wasn't possible.

With specific regards to allegations made here, it was initially at RR's request that no action at all be taken at the time. There was a long debate off forum between the mods and myself over what to do but along with respecting RR's wishes, I also spoke to legal here, who advised also not to take action on two major issues involving a forum user's alleged involvement due to breach of TC and direct contact.

At the time that info was passed to the mods It wasn't a popular decision with some and it was in part why some of the mods stepped away from the forums.. We did take the matter seriously though, I believe it was Postman's idea that we talk to legal. He, Barrus and a few other good mods pressed me and I followed up on that. It was a sensitive matter, no doubt about it, but after hearing from legal and at RR's initial request, no action was taken. I thought the matter was closed.

I was personally disappointed by many factors. Not in a 'oh my god, now we need more mods' way, but because this whole incident had led to good upstanding mods leaving the forums, which was sad to see because they obviously cared a lot.

At the time? We, the mod team, had to wait (if I am not mistaken) about 2 weeks before we heard anything official from anyone, either from you or anyone else. You still don't realise that a major point of the problem you got with the mod team at the time was the lack of communication and support that you (meaning all the staff) give to the forum. My resignation also came during this period of non communication on your part, due to the fact that this was not an issue that the volunteer mods should deal with, it required action from your part.

And I know quite certain that certain of the mods pleaded for something to be posted, some sort of announcement that people needed to ensure that they did not give out their private information, espeially considering this situation and the situation with the fake Floyd Landis situation, but if I am correct we were shot down due to the fact that this needed to remain closed and not be made public.

For example...?

Quite recent example the ads in the forum, which was sprung on the moderators as well, no communication at all from the staff towards its members

 

[Benotti69]

I still dont understand why Papp was not banned?

Was he gonna sue CN?

Some people get banned for using certain words in the english dictionary FFS!

I dont know why there was not a sticky made, which would have alerted posters. I also dont know why those posters who posted daily in the clinic were not told by pm.

CN treating forum members the way cycling treats riders.

 

[The Hitch]

Read the wiki closely. Doesn't it look like the scumbag wrote lots of it himself?

I recall he once complained in the vino thread that long pieces he wrote on vinokourov's wikipedia page had been removed for not.being objective and asked other vino fans to help have his pieces reinstated.

 

[Sylvester]

I recall he once complained in the vino thread that long pieces he wrote on vinokourov's wikipedia page had been rejected for not.being objective and asked other vino fans to help have his pieces reinstated.

Indeed, I remember the same incident. However, if he changed his own Wikipedia page, he did not use his official account: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Joep01

 

[Cyivel]

Sickening stuff from Joe Papp.

 

[sublimit]

The guys Wiki page.. ouch.

I doubt if he will be back here but whats to stop some unsuspecting person falling pray to this guy again in the future if he's not thrown out?

 

[Daniel Benson]

there was a period of five days between this being talked about by the mods on the forum and from when I posted a response from legal. That included talking to a couple of mods on the phone, RR, legal, and me being away...

I'm not saying the communication was perfect but it wasn't two weeks.

Daniel

 

[auscyclefan94]

Sounds quite bad about what Joe did but I am still confused about some details. Probably shows how out of touch I am with the politics on this forum.

Again, I'll seek advice on this but I would remind you again, not to give out personal details on the forum.

Thanks

Dan

Including photos of one's self? There is a thread for that.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Morning,

I think it's important that I post in here personally. To clear a few things up. A bit of background: I talked to Race Race extensively before, throughout and after this period. We talked about a number of issues, forum posters, investigations, various cycling stories, and even tried to meet up in London this spring but due to the Classics, it wasn't possible.

With specific regards to allegations made here, it was initially at RR's request that no action at all be taken at the time. There was a long debate off forum between the mods and myself over what to do but along with respecting RR's wishes, I also spoke to legal here, who advised also not to take action on two major issues involving a forum user's alleged involvement due to breach of TC and direct contact.

At the time that info was passed to the mods. It wasn't a popular decision with some and it was in part why some of the mods stepped away from the forums. We did take the matter seriously though, I believe it was Postman's idea that we talk to legal. He, Barrus and a few other good mods pressed me and I followed up on that. It was a sensitive matter, no doubt about it, but after hearing from legal and at RR's initial request, no action was taken. I thought the matter was closed.

I was personally disappointed by many factors. Not in a 'oh my god, now we need more mods' way, but because this whole incident had led to good upstanding mods leaving the forums, which was sad to see because they obviously cared a lot.

Back to RR, we carried on talking quite a lot after , I cant remember the exact details of every chat or about whether we talked specifically over this one issue - he says we did, that I was firm on the situation, which could be true but either way, it would have brought us back to the legal standpoint yet again. We may have posted something in the rules saying 'hey guys remember you're on a forum don't give out details' but again, I'm not 100 per cent sure.

One thing I will say, Susan and the remaining mods do a great job on this site and the volunteer mods are here out of the kindness of their hearts (they do it all for free). They try their ****ing best to police, monitor and nurture the forums. No one is perfect and nothing is ever black and white but the abuse - especially off forum - has been way over the top. they are not responsible for this situation and have merely acted in accordance with what's been put in front of them. If they all walk away from the forums, they'll be closed, it's that simple. I and the editorial team CAN'T run this place without them.

If I've acted badly in some people's eyes, I apologise. I'm not here 24/7 or as much as I'd like to be, so some of the responses are short and lack detail (this post perhaps is a good example) but at every step I've tried to honest, up front and tried to manage a delicate situation as best as I could.

Again, I'll seek advice on this but I would remind you again, not to give out personal details on the forum.

Thanks

Dan

This isn't about the mods here being bad mods. Susan does a great job.

This is about the fact that a specific incident occurred where one member solicited HERE correspondence in another medium, and then used that correspondence to mine information that was sold to Lance's attorney. Lance subsequently made public on Twitter that very information. I heard a rumor, but Papp had always seemed like a genuinely nice guy, so I chalked it up to rumor. My mistake I guess.

The problem is that YOU knew it wasn't a rumor. You KNEW it had happened, and never bothered to make public to any of the other members that such a thing took place. Your only suggestion was that we not post personal information here. Well, that isn't the issue, now is it?

Then, on the day I get into an altercation with Lance on twitter, this same member contacts me in a friendly manner asking me to correspond in another medium. Certainly, I can be called gullible. That would not be the first time. Contrary to what I may portray sometimes, my belief is that there is a core of good in people. That has bitten me in the *** before, so I'll chalk this up to another life lesson. However, that is irrelevant to the main point which is that Mr. Papp's suspiciously timed PM to me HERE led to correspondence that revealed many details that I had not, nor ever wanted to reveal to a larger audience. I guess I don't have that choice now as Mr. Papp knows my legal name, not just my nickname, which is all I have ever made public (again, for a reason). He has my personal email address, and certainly it would be pretty easy from that information to find out much more of my personal information.

Had I known what Mr. Papp had done, I would never have revealed my personal information to him. One way I would have known is if you had done what should have logically and rightfully been done, and made known the incident, and banned Mr. Papp. You didn't. Evidently, that was a decision that angered many of your mods. Enough so that they quit. Poor decision. I certainly hope that there are no real ramifications for me having revealed my info to Mr. Papp. I would think you should hope that is true also.

 

[DominicDecoco]

I'm not saying the communication was perfect but it wasn't two weeks.

Daniel

Just like the time where your forum members and your mods where screaming for a response as to why you didn't remove the softcore porn pictures in your ads. Not until you watched the effect of lower user activity caused by a strike action from a great amount of the forum memebers did CN take any action. Or the qeue of 300 threads that are left unanswered in the feedback forum requesting just simple things.

Without this forum there wouldn't be a CN. CN needs the forum - not the other way around. I'm seriously baffled by the lack of links from top to bottom here sometimes.

 

[Race Radio]

I don't have time to contribute much on this now but this clearly is a complex issue with many elements to it. I share everyone's frustration on this but I think eventually a solution will be found.

In the mean time I do not see any value in demonizing Susan or Dan. They are stuck between many different elements here. It is not always easy to make everyone happy, including the lawyers

 

[hrotha]

Well, if you don't want to ban Joe because of some Byzantine reason that escapes me, rest assured he'll be ostracized by all of us (certainly by me) from now on.

edit: of course, just because he's a **** and a weasel that doesn't mean his every move had a hidden purpose, but even if it did, the Reactions to LA thread is still a valuable one for the community.

 

[kielbasa]

Yeah, I think it's CN's job to make sure people don't run with scissors in hand . I can't believe that you guys are even confessing to such stupidity, much less trying to blame it on the host. As if Papp couldn't have fished for info anonymously (like the rest of you). I'm not defending him, but this is the internets, and you should have taken your mom's advice. Now deal with the consequences.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I don't have time to contribute much on this now but this clearly is a complex issue with many elements to it. I share everyone's frustration on this but I think eventually a solution will be found.

In the mean time I do not see any value in demonizing Susan or Dan. They are stuck between many different elements here. It is not always easy to make everyone happy, including the lawyers

Fair enough. My stupidity for believing Papp was an honest dude. Oh well, my experience is that for every Papp, there are 100 decent people, so I'm gonna get burned sometimes. Part of life. Anyone who wants to screw with some schmuck like me should have better things to do anyway...like making more commercials using images of suffering cancer patients as a way to provide cover for the fact that they are a doping freak. The world needs people like that I guess...

I should have believed the story when I first heard it...in the words of George W. Bush, "There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again."