Girls in... threads and the lack of reasonable moderation

cornerblock

dpaulett wrote:

I have never demanded that the threads in question be removed, nor that I find them sexist or even offensive

I think you should contact the mods, as there appears to be somebody using your name who is threatening to leave the whole forum if they decide to keep them.


(quote="dpaulett")
Because if the majority of members want to keep them and the site owner allows it, then I will bow out of the discussion. And possibly the whole site. (I know, save the jokes, I won't be missed and all that).

rhialto

@ conerblock, you've already made it clear that you think I should leave so your not really adding anything to the discussion. And way to sidestep the issue of sensitivity and cast doubt on it by attacking me. You are astute in employing a tactic that often works. Well played.

nevman

there is also a widely- recognized codicil that any intentional triggering of Godwin's Law in order to invoke its thread-ending effects will be unsuccessful.
"As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." Just saying like.

cornerblock

dpaulett wrote:

@ conerblock, you've already made it clear that you think I should leave so your not really adding anything to the discussion. And way to sidestep the issue of sensitivity and cast doubt on it by attacking me. You are astute in employing a tactic that often works. Well played.

dpaulett I do not care if you stay or go, you are the one who made the threat to walk. I am not attacking you, I may agree with some of what you say. However you cannot expect to make two such contradictory statements and not be pulled up on it. I have no tactic, if I have I would like you to elaborate and tell me what it is. I speak as I see and find.

On the issue of sensitivity, I think I have accepted that certain images and lewd comments are not on, and admitted that one of the images I posted was wrong and so removed it.

So do you feel like explaining how two of your posts can be so at odds with each other.

DonDaddyD

Let's try and set aside the personal pissing battle, eh?

Why was a decision taken to ban all animations?

Seems a bit too close to zero tolerance that. The goal should be to prevent/ban/remove all inappropriate material (images and text) that could cause outright offense.

cornerblock

What are you on about? Pissing battles? It's two other members having a discussion or a difference of opinion. Are you trying to control the interaction between other forum members now? Jeez, you'll start to sound like a control freak soon if you are not careful. It's all still on topic.

As for the animations, I agree getting rid of them is a complete over reaction. A touch of throwing baby out with the bath water. Unfortunately this is normally the case when bans come into place.

Pseudonym

DonDaddyD wrote:

Let's try and set aside the personal pissing battle, eh?

Why was a decision taken to ban all animations?

Seems a bit too close to zero tolerance that. The goal should be to prevent/ban/remove all inappropriate material (images and text) that could cause outright offense.

it's another example of what I was talking about originally - the fact that each individual post needs to be looked at and reviewed according to whatever guidelines are in place. The only way to do that is to have active/interested moderators.

I agree that a blanket ban on animations seems a bit clumsy, at best. The ban should be on the potential content - not in the way it is presented.

rhialto

Cornerblock wrote:

So do you feel like explaining how two of your posts can be so at odds with each other.

<Sigh> Why is my credibility even relevant to the discussion? I haven't asked you to believe anything I said - I have just been asking questions to prompt some thought, which boil down to this:

in light of the fact that these threads make some of the women uncomfortable, are these threads so important that members who enjoy them wouldn't consider the possibility of not having them?

To date, I have seen very few reasonable responses to this question, and many more questioning my motivation/credibility. Go figure.

I do appreciate the issue of censorsip as raised by cleat eastwood, who took the time to try and answer the question.

Perhaps we should get back to looking for a resolution to this contentious issue. Supersonic expressed his opinion a while back and I think his approach is a good one.

rozzer32

Maybe a mod can set up a poll with the different options here and leave it for a week or so and see which option gets the most votes.

Pseudonym

rozzer32 wrote:

Maybe a mod can set up a poll with the different options here and leave it for a week or so and see which option gets the most votes.

As usual fella - you're not quite getting it. It's not about 'popularity' and it's not about a 'vote' - it's about whatever BR finds and decides is acceptable content on their (cycling) forums. Their policy - if they actually had one - would be the only issue.

rozzer32

Pseudonym wrote:

rozzer32 wrote:

Maybe a mod can set up a poll with the different options here and leave it for a week or so and see which option gets the most votes.

As usual fella - you're not quite getting it. It's not about 'popularity' and it's not about a 'vote' - it's about whatever BR finds and decides is acceptable content on their (cycling) forums. Their policy - if they actually had one - would be the only issue.

And as usual fella you're not seeing what I'm saying. BR should listen to it's members. Obviously we like the forums here and I'm sure the BR staff would like to work with us in finding a solution.

A number of different solutions have been put across and as always there are people for and against them.

A poll would see what solution people would like to see implemented. It's just an idea, you know I am trying to help find a solution to this (although the "If you're offended don't look at the thread" will get my vote). But if you just want to sit there being a keyboard warrior telling people to shut up and telling people that they are wrong because they don't agree with you then you stick at it buddy. You should try get a job in politics. You've already got the right personality for it.

Eric Cartman

This is one of the largest / busiest cycling forums in the world with, despite the criticism levelled at them on this thread, pretty decent moderation. Problem posters get dealt with before they become an issue, there are virtually none of massive flame wars that plague other large forums, yet the mods stay in the background and dont interfere too much either.

It is a difficult balance to strike and I commend their work. If i didnt like it i'd go join some other forum instead.

Greg66 wrote:

It's striking that those who are desperate to hold onto the Internet equivalent of the Kays underwear catalogue to aid their masturbation habit routinely trot out the argument "there's something wrong with you if you don't like what I like".

The only people who have trotted out those sort of argument are those that are wanting to be the forums moral guardians and have a new set of rules enforced because they see people enjoying posting something that they dont enjoy themself. If the content being posted was illegal or if the forums didnt have an over 16s rule then the criticism would have a point. But as it stands it doesn't and is just the views of an illiberal group seeking to force their morality onto others and attempt to undermine the sort of moderating that makes the site popular, even for those who do not view, post or contribute in the image threads.

rhialto

Eric Cartman wrote:

But as it stands it doesn't and is just the views of an illiberal group seeking to force their morality onto others and attempt to undermine the sort of moderating that makes the site popular, even for those who do not view, post or contribute in the image threads.

I have read virtually all the posts going back to the original thread in Commuting Chat and that is not the impression I got.

What I took away from the various posts was that there were some female members who said that they found the overall tone of Cakestop unwelcoming to them, due to various reasons but partly due to the Girls In threads that appear to be quite prominent there. So they said (and I'm paraphrasing), "Hey guys, what about toning it down a bit? Or maybe you could even take your games somewhere else? Don't you want us to feel welcome?"

I acknowledge that you may not have garnered the same impression. There is a lot of material there.

jedster

In keeping with fizz's suggestions, what about:

- no images that are nsfw. The test is not whether they get through your work firewall, but whether you'd be comfortable having them on your screen while someone from HR is standing behind you.
- no images that are not safe for company. The test is whether you'd be comfortable having them on the screen while your teenage daughter and her friends are standing behind you.

Greg posted this a few pages back.
I think it's a great suggestion, particularly if it is made as a guideline when posting rather than setting up some huge moderation effort. The point would not be to demonise particular types of material just to say is this really the right place for that kind of stuff given that we'd like the place to be welcoming for women.

Monkeypump

dpaulett wrote:

What I took away from the various posts was that there were some female members who said that they found the overall tone of Cakestop unwelcoming to them, due to various reasons but partly due to the Girls In threads that appear to be quite prominent there. So they said (and I'm paraphrasing), "Hey guys, what about toning it down a bit? Or maybe you could even take your games somewhere else? Don't you want us to feel welcome?"

This is the problem - why should we 'take our games somewhere else'? (If the words you're putting in people's mouths are correct).

To continue the analogy, we're happy to play alongside you, you're welcome to join in. We'll even put a big sign up so you know exactly what game we're playing. If you don't like this game, we also play others - how about joining in those games? But for this particular game, why should you get to stay and we have to go?

Despite what a couple of people think, long-lived threads with hundreds of pages and millions of views does mean there is a relevant interest.

My vote (for dpaulett and anyone else who is counting) is to keep all the threads, remove anything you wouldn't see in mainstream media and stick a warning on it. In the main, the content is fine.

rhialto

Monkeypump wrote:

...why should we 'take our games somewhere else'?

To make others feel welcome.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Monkeypump wrote:

Despite what a couple of people think, long-lived threads with hundreds of pages and millions of views does mean there is a relevant interest.

The threads may be popular, but that doesn't mean they are appropriate. Those are two very different questions.

DonDaddyD

Question, why do some feel that they need a thread containing sexually suggestive pictures of women on this forum?

msmancunia

Greg66 wrote:

Monkeypump wrote:

Despite what a couple of people think, long-lived threads with hundreds of pages and millions of views does mean there is a relevant interest.

The threads may be popular, but that doesn't mean they are appropriate. Those are two very different questions.

Just because there's hundreds of pages and millions of views doesn't mean that there's millions of people viewing. It could just be a small selection of men having millions of wanks. Over a BIKE site. Like Aggieboy. If you're going to do it, at least go and do it on a PORN site. It's not like they're hard to find - there's a fair few about, and some of them are even free!

Cleat Eastwood

DonDaddyD wrote:

Question, why do some feel that they need a thread containing sexually suggestive pictures of women on this forum?

Probably for the same reason people post this utter sexist shite

"Has anyone asked the OP if he felt the other guys ball bag smack against his own as they double teamed her from either side?

As a hetro male I don't think I could ride a tandem with another male..."


"And then one day some posh Wife/Mum bint who looks and speaks (LiT) like Liz Hurley knocks you off you bike. So later that day you knock one off in her..."

greg66_tri_v2.0

New avatar required for Mr. Eastwood:

Monkeypump

Greg66 wrote:

Monkeypump wrote:

Despite what a couple of people think, long-lived threads with hundreds of pages and millions of views does mean there is a relevant interest.

The threads may be popular, but that doesn't mean they are appropriate. Those are two very different questions.

But it does mean that there is demand, and therefore plenty of people who don't want/need them changed or deleted.

Monkeypump

msmancunia wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Monkeypump wrote:

Despite what a couple of people think, long-lived threads with hundreds of pages and millions of views does mean there is a relevant interest.

The threads may be popular, but that doesn't mean they are appropriate. Those are two very different questions.

Just because there's hundreds of pages and millions of views doesn't mean that there's millions of people viewing. It could just be a small selection of men having millions of wanks. Over a BIKE site. Like Aggieboy. If you're going to do it, at least go and do it on a PORN site. It's not like they're hard to find - there's a fair few about, and some of them are even free!

Are you:

a - baiting?
b - really that naive?
c - lacking any insight into the male psyche?

Having a look at some scantily clad girls in lycra/short skirts/rainwear/etc. doesn't turn us all into horny 11-year-olds getting a hard-on for the first time and wondering what to do with it.

They're entertaining images, to varying degrees, but none of them (for me, at least) are anywhere near explicit enough to induce the need to crack one off.

As you say, porn sites are plentiful and easy to find, but not even revelant to this 'discussion'.

Monkeypump

Monkeypump wrote:

They're entertaining images, to varying degrees, but none of them (for me, at least) are anywhere near explicit enough to induce the need to crack one off.

Maybe that should be the criteria by which images are deemed suitable for inclusion.

Would I file this image in the w*nk bank?

Yes - Can't post on BR
No - Fine for posting

Of course this is a joke (although I shouldn't need to point that out), but it underlines the point that there is a difference between "unrelenting filth" (as mentioned earlier) and a cheeky/titilating pic.

notsoblue

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Question, why do some feel that they need a thread containing sexually suggestive pictures of women on this forum?

Probably for the same reason people post this utter sexist shite

"Has anyone asked the OP if he felt the other guys ball bag smack against his own as they double teamed her from either side?

As a hetro male I don't think I could ride a tandem with another male..."


"And then one day some posh Wife/Mum bint who looks and speaks (LiT) like Liz Hurley knocks you off you bike. So later that day you knock one off in her..."

Sorry DDD, but thats priceless...

DonDaddyD

I don't get how or why that is priceless.

Is it being alleged that word for word I wrote those sentences?

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

I don't get how or why that is priceless.

Is it being alleged that word for word I wrote those sentences?

Are you saying you didn't?

dirtymonkey1985

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

I don't get how or why that is priceless.

Is it being alleged that word for word I wrote those sentences?

Are you saying you didn't?

+1

jonny_trousers

Just wanted to quickly congratulate the Cycling Plus team on the Tri-Uk advert on page 131 of this month's magazine! The naked young lady only just covering her breasts in the very centre of the page... Phwoaaaar!

I now find myself agreeing with those who say, if it aint in Cycling Plus then it shouldn't be here. Ladies and Gentlemen of Cake Stop! As you were...

PS. Top magazine this edition, breasts aside.

DonDaddyD

dirtymonkey1985 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

I don't get how or why that is priceless.

Is it being alleged that word for word I wrote those sentences?

Are you saying you didn't?

+1

I certainly cannot recall word for word writing those things, no. If I did I will resoundingly apologise. If I didn't word for word write them and they have been altered in any way then I think I will be owed an apology.

Furthermore the thing about being a hetro male not being able to share a tandem with another male is not sexist, it could be perceived as homophobic.

---

It's also deflecting the issue and not answering the question.

Why do some feel the need to post images of topless, nearly naked and sexually suggestive women on this forum?