Do we need our own version of Godwin's Law?

dulldave

Many of you will be familiar with Godwin's Law. It states that the longer a forum thread lasts, the more likely it is that someone will mention the Nazis. So if you mention the Nazis in a thread that wasn't about the Nazis, someone calls Godwin's Law and the argument is over.

How about our own version? If someone posts up a thread that is neither about doping or Lance Armstrong then nobody is allowed to mention or discuss the question of him being clean or not.

Sound fair? (that includes this thread by the way).

takethehighroad

Sounds good to me. I had the idea that a thread should be created called "Lance Armstrong - Discuss" and whenever a topic drifts onto the subject of Lance when the subject is nothing to do with him, it is referred to the LA Discuss thread.

Kléber

Imagine a forum dedicated to 1930s Germany, you'd struggle not to talk about the Nazis.

Similarly, I don't see how you can disassociate some talk of pro cycling from doping. Not everything has to relate to this of course but as examples, no biography of Contador would be complete without a reference to Operation Puerto and it is hard to talk about Armstrong whilst ignoring his links to Michele Ferrari. You can't view Garmin in isolation of their commitment to cleaning up the sport and you can't discuss FDJ without a brief mention of their impeccable anti-doping stance.

dulldave

Kléber wrote:

Imagine a forum dedicated to 1930s Germany, you'd struggle not to talk about the Nazis.

Similarly, I don't see how you can disassociate some talk of pro cycling from doping. Not everything has to relate to this of course but as examples, no biography of Contador would be complete without a reference to Operation Puerto and it is hard to talk about Armstrong whilst ignoring his links to Michele Ferrari. You can't view Garmin in isolation of their commitment to cleaning up the sport and you can't discuss FDJ without a brief mention of their impeccable anti-doping stance.

That's not what I'm saying. If Lance or doping is the subject of the thread then fair enough. But if I start a thread on another topic, it shouldn't descend into the usual boring did-he didn't-he discussion we've seen a million times.

Similarly Godwin's law would not apply to a thread about Nazi Germany. Does this make it any clearer?

Odelay!

dulldave wrote:

Kléber wrote:

Imagine a forum dedicated to 1930s Germany, you'd struggle not to talk about the Nazis.

Similarly, I don't see how you can disassociate some talk of pro cycling from doping. Not everything has to relate to this of course but as examples, no biography of Contador would be complete without a reference to Operation Puerto and it is hard to talk about Armstrong whilst ignoring his links to Michele Ferrari. You can't view Garmin in isolation of their commitment to cleaning up the sport and you can't discuss FDJ without a brief mention of their impeccable anti-doping stance.

That's not what I'm saying. If Lance or doping is the subject of the thread then fair enough. But if I start a thread on another topic, it shouldn't descend into the usual boring did-he didn't-he discussion we've seen a million times.

Similarly Godwin's law would not apply to a thread about Nazi Germany. Does this make it any clearer?

I think that's not what Kléber is saying. Rather, the subject of doping is so intrinstic to much of pro cycling (the subject of the forum) that it will have a relevance even in threads not explictly doping-related, say if there was a thread on best team or stage win of this year's Tour. Similarly, in the 1930's Germany forum (which sounds like a great forum) even in topics like shopping, Nazism would have an impact.

finchy

I did start an "Ultimate Lance doping thread", because there was a time when discussing the weather conditions would lead back to did Lance dope.

It was quite successful, went on for about 14 pages, but eventually died a death.

afx237vi

johnfinch wrote:

I did start an "Ultimate Lance doping thread", because there was a time when discussing the weather conditions would lead back to did Lance dope.

It was quite successful, went on for about 14 pages, but eventually died a death.

That's a funny definition of success.

I agree with Kléber, FWIW. Trying to separate the forum into "doping discussions" and "cycling discussions" is an exercise in futility. The two are one and the same.

finchy

afx237vi wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

I did start an "Ultimate Lance doping thread", because there was a time when discussing the weather conditions would lead back to did Lance dope.

It was quite successful, went on for about 14 pages, but eventually died a death.

That's a funny definition of success.

I agree with Kléber, FWIW. Trying to separate the forum into "doping discussions" and "cycling discussions" is an exercise in futility. The two are one and the same.

What I mean is that people did use it, and other threads did, for a short time, stop turning into Lance dope threads, which was my intention.

I agree with Kleber too. Unless doping is completely stamped out, there won't be any separation.

Kléber

For what it's worth, the cyclingnews.com forum has tried to seperate all talk of doping into a seperate thread. But this strikes me as the online version of an ostrich sticking its head in the sand, you can't discuss Astarloza's stage win without now mentioning doping. Besides, which category do you talk about Menchov, in the "Race" or the "Doping" section?

Fans shouldn't seek to duck the issue, I know it can appear negative but there are also a lot of positives here too. More and more of the cheats are getting caught.

RichN95.

Kléber wrote:

For what it's worth, the cyclingnews.com forum has tried to seperate all talk of doping into a seperate thread. But this strikes me as the online version of an ostrich sticking its head in the sand, you can't discuss Astarloza's stage win without now mentioning doping. Besides, which category do you talk about Menchov, in the "Race" or the "Doping" section?

Fans shouldn't seek to duck the issue, I know it can appear negative but there are also a lot of positives here too. More and more of the cheats are getting caught.

On the cyclingnews forum it was more a necessity, rather than head in the sand. There are a few posters on there who are certain that everyone dopes and they brought their agenda to almost every thread going.

ermintrude

forget the split between doping/racing I think there should be a split between the sane and the insane, or the 'normal' people who enjoy a bit of banter and the complete neurotic obsessives. I would be very afraid to meet some of the people who post on this forum.

Kléber

RichN95 wrote:

On the cyclingnews forum it was more a necessity, rather than head in the sand. There are a few posters on there who are certain that everyone dopes and they brought their agenda to almost every thread going.

Fair enough. I visited the forum but it was as PEOPLE WERE SHOUTING all the time. Things are more considered here and many members have a sense of humour.