Why?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
martinvickers said:
This is pathetic.

Argue, disagree, whatever. but this ad hominem is just childish. Actually particularly childish of it's type.

And it's never 'deserved' - ridiculous statement. the whole point of ad hominem is it's irrlevance to the argument. And irrelevent attacks are never deserved. they are simply, irrelevent.

Agreed Martin. Cut it with the personal stuff everyone.
 
Benotti69 said:
I think you will find those accusations came from Monkeymouth's fanboys and now regurgitated by Sky's fanboys.

Regurgitated is a perfect turn of phrase.
Some of the anti pro cycling bulls**t spouted by yourself and other extremists, thinly veiled as anti doping, is enough to make anyone regurgitate.

When there is no doping story, any criticism will do.
 
spalco said:
Compared to mainstream opinion, the Clinic clearly is "extremist" or I would rather say "radical" to be more precise, which doesn't necessarily mean unreasonable, though, especially since actual historical facts have proven much of the mainstream wrong in the past on issues of doping.

I have read some forums (In Spain) where there is not clinic, and you can post about doping in any place, although there is a thread for that, and all the forum is like the clinic or even worst, so, mainstream is it depend of what you consider.

I think clinic and that kind of forums are as you say, radical, but sometimes reasonable, but just sometimes or some people.

it is a normal consecuence of what we have had in cycling the last 20 years, people felt betrayed, and now is worry to be again.
 
May 26, 2009
4,114
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
It was a moniker given by some disgruntled fanboy (probably BPC) in an effort to discredit those of us who didn't buy the Armstrong myth. I don't know the exact number of people who fit that description at the time, but it was several. I found it to be a good joke as what it really described were those people who subscribed to this thing called "reality."

As to who is a member, andy1234 is incorrect, if you weren't here pointing out just how idiotic all of Armstrong's defenders were years ago, you can't claim the title. I don't know the exact number of people who can claim the title, but I know who can't.

Aww the days of BPC and his various other names, those were fun times.

BroDeal said:
Here is Wisdom, Let him that hath understanding count the number of The Clinic.

:eek: :D
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
Chewie, my recollection is the Clinic 12, is an interpretation on JV's dozen active posters on the clinic.

then we co-opted it as the Clinic 12. I think that Dear Wiggo may have been integral in its meme development.

just like Captaintbag of More Glorious Than Hookers And Blow tumblr with his NOT NORMAL.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
blackcat said:
Chewie, my recollection is the Clinic 12, is an interpretation on JV's dozen active posters on the clinic.

then we co-opted it as the Clinic 12. I think that Dear Wiggo may have been integral in its meme development.

just like Captaintbag of More Glorious Than Hookers And Blow tumblr with his NOT NORMAL.

I couldn't remember.

And BPC's original moniker was Arbiter, but he made enough names that had BPC as the acronym that it stuck.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,853
2
0
ChewbaccaD said:
I couldn't remember.

And BPC's original moniker was Arbiter, but he made enough names that had BPC as the acronym that it stuck.
yeah you re right, fricken truckload of handles.

post-Arbiter, he usually went, 3 syllables. yeah, ban pro 2 more syllables = 4 syllables.

but if you gave me new members' handles, it was pretty easy to spot a BPC handle
 
Taxus4a said:
I have read some forums (In Spain) where there is not clinic, and you can post about doping in any place, although there is a thread for that, and all the forum is like the clinic or even worst, so, mainstream is it depend of what you consider.

I think clinic and that kind of forums are as you say, radical, but sometimes reasonable, but just sometimes or some people.

it is a normal consecuence of what we have had in cycling the last 20 years, people felt betrayed, and now is worry to be again.

Mainstream is daily newspapers, tv and radio, not internet forums.
 
May 26, 2009
4,114
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
I wish I still had my blocked list from when I was TFF. I had every name saved.

If I recall correctly, didn;t he threaten murder and r*** or maybe I've just watched too many gangster/revenge movies of late.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
BYOP88 said:
If I recall correctly, didn;t he threaten murder and r*** or maybe I've just watched too many gangster/revenge movies of late.

No, that was Jackhammer/Carboncrank. He said he was going to come kill me and rape my wife.
 
Aug 1, 2012
180
0
0
Zam_Olyas said:
Why do some posters/readers think that The Clinic regular posters are all the same and do not have reasonable views? And that we are all extremist.

I would say, in my short time, this is not the case at all. I have learned a lot from some of the regulars, a number of regulars are just here killing time or listening to themselves talk, some are very patient, some just want to argue with their forum nemesis.

One theme that does seem to be consistent, acknowledging that I have a short history here, is that very little gets resolved and very little gets accomplished.

Take the Moncoutie thread; 390 posts and 2 years to determine what? Maybe (most hope) he was clean, but maybe not. Someone call the guy up...

How about the Sky thread? Anything resolved?

Chris Froome? 2700 posts in less than a year to get to a point where he might be using Aicor or he might be a Pilates phenomenon.

This one is important. In the era of the internet and Google, Froome is glowing like a night light, he's turning 100+ years of this sport on it's head, what little is known is suspect, yet not much real sleuthing.

This is a bit of a shame, because this forum could really play a role in navigating the future of this wonderful sport.

I have learned tons; I thank everyone who has gone out of their way to help me out. It is sort of amazing that Cycling News has allowed this place to exist; it would be great if it were a little more constructive.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
andy1234 said:
Regurgitated is a perfect turn of phrase.
Some of the anti pro cycling bulls**t spouted by yourself and other extremists, thinly veiled as anti doping, is enough to make anyone regurgitate.

When there is no doping story, any criticism will do.

If anti doping = anti pro cycling then you are correct. I am anti doping.

I am pro transparency.

I have not seen a shred of transparency from pro cycling.

Where is all the transparency promised by Brailsford ans Sky?

All we got from pro cycling was abuse for daring to question the new era, with less testing, big jump and unexplained GT winners popping up from nowhere.

Where is Garmin's transparency. Has JV explained how Hesjedal won the Giro on pane e acqua? All we got from JV wa sa lame excuse about Hesjedal's jump in HCt in the 3rd week saying it was a lab error.

Pro pro cycling might be misinterpreted as pro doping.
 
Benotti69 said:
If anti doping = anti pro cycling then you are correct. I am anti doping.

I am pro transparency.

I have not seen a shred of transparency from pro cycling.

Where is all the transparency promised by Brailsford ans Sky?

All we got from pro cycling was abuse for daring to question the new era, with less testing, big jump and unexplained GT winners popping up from nowhere.

Where is Garmin's transparency. Has JV explained how Hesjedal won the Giro on pane e acqua? All we got from JV wa sa lame excuse about Hesjedal's jump in HCt in the 3rd week saying it was a lab error.

Pro pro cycling might be misinterpreted as pro doping.

You don't fool me....
When the doping conversation dries up, it turns to the riders lifestyle, or taxes paid, or wife, or girlfriend, or descending skills....
Its just unconstructive hate, and criticising pro cycling is like shooting fish in a barrel.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
andy1234 said:
You don't fool me....

Its just unconstructive hate, and criticising pro cycling is like shooting fish in a barrel.

If "criticising pro cycling is like shooting fish in a barrel", dont blame me, blame UCI and those who run the sport.
 
May 26, 2009
4,114
0
0
Benotti69 said:
If anti doping = anti pro cycling then you are correct. I am anti doping.

I am pro transparency.

I have not seen a shred of transparency from pro cycling.

Where is all the transparency promised by Brailsford ans Sky?

All we got from pro cycling was abuse for daring to question the new era, with less testing, big jump and unexplained GT winners popping up from nowhere.

Where is Garmin's transparency. Has JV explained how Hesjedal won the Giro on pane e acqua? All we got from JV wa sa lame excuse about Hesjedal's jump in HCt in the 3rd week saying it was a lab error.

Pro pro cycling might be misinterpreted as pro doping.

Brailsford gave all the answers at the event in Manchester last year that he promised after last years tour...........Oh wait that never happened just more PR crap from Sky.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
andy1234 said:
I'm not blaming you, you simply can't help it.
I'm just holding up a mirror.

My mirror reflects without all the PR BS that the teams, federations and arselicking hacks would have fans believe. Keep stroking your little unicorn.