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

velocestrapture

Monkeypump wrote:

I'm not fully sure about how ad revenue works, but would the owner(s) be happy with the massive hit ad revenue will take if the threads are removed, as some people want?

Would a drop in revenue necessarily be inevitable, especially if you could then promote the site as being positively female friendly, and perhaps include an article or two in the magazines about the decisions that have been taken?

rozzer32

I agree that if new rules are to be enforced, i.e no pictures unless bike related and no half naked ladies then I would expect the same in everything that Future touch, website ads, mags etc.

Pseudonym

rozzer32 wrote:

I agree that if new rules are to be enforced, i.e no pictures unless bike related and no half naked ladies then I would expect the same in everything that Future touch, website ads, mags etc.

do you remember when I said to you that you should probably stop talking...?

dirtymonkey1985

rozzer32 wrote:

I agree that if new rules are to be enforced, i.e no pictures unless bike related and no half naked ladies then I would expect the same in everything that Future touch, website ads, mags etc.

So t3 would be stuffed then??!!

greg66_tri_v2.0

rozzer32 wrote:

I agree that if new rules are to be enforced, i.e no pictures unless bike related and no half naked ladies then I would expect the same in everything that Future touch, website ads, mags etc.

Very principled. But it's their ball, so their rules. If they apply different rules here and in their print media, your choices are (a) suck it up; (b) vote with your feet.

But you knew that already.

rozzer32

Pseudonym wrote:

rozzer32 wrote:

I agree that if new rules are to be enforced, i.e no pictures unless bike related and no half naked ladies then I would expect the same in everything that Future touch, website ads, mags etc.

do you remember when I said to you that you should probably stop talking...?

Do you remember when I didn't listen to you and told you to stop being a keyboard warrior. I don't give a s**t what you think of me. Go tell your mum, she might care.

But they can't create one rule for us and another for them. If they want to make new rules then they should be fair for everyone.

Monkeypump

Greg66 wrote:

But it's their ball, so their rules...your choices are (a) suck it up; (b) vote with your feet.

But you knew that already.

Perhaps those who are proposing change should be told exactly this?

Even if they rules are implied, they've been working for quite some time now (certainly well enough that nobody has upset the status quo until a few days ago).

Pseudonym

rozzer32 wrote:

Pseudonym wrote:

rozzer32 wrote:

I agree that if new rules are to be enforced, i.e no pictures unless bike related and no half naked ladies then I would expect the same in everything that Future touch, website ads, mags etc.

do you remember when I said to you that you should probably stop talking...?

Do you remember when I didn't listen to you and told you to stop being a keyboard warrior. I don't give a s**t what you think of me. Go tell your mum, she might care.

But they can't create one rule for us and another for them. If they want to make new rules then they should be fair for everyone.

I'm sorry, I really am - but you do talk such utter rubbish. Luckily, my mum is protected from your nonsense as she doesn't have the internet.

supersonic

Let's get back on topic and stop the personal jibes.

Monkeypump

velocestrapture wrote:

Would a drop in revenue necessarily be inevitable, especially if you could then promote the site as being positively female friendly...

I think any marketeer would say yes, on a site predominantly targetting males with a common sporting interest. But hey, it was just a hunch that anyone looking for ad revenue would relish the idea of 3 million+ hits.

velocestrapture wrote:

... and perhaps include an article or two in the magazines about the decisions that have been taken?

Just as I thought the suggested changes were the very definition of 'over-reaction', we plumb new depths...

tailwindhome

supersonic wrote:

Let's get back on topic and stop the personal jibes.

I can't believe we're still discussing this when I've already told you what to do!

Cleat Eastwood

back on topic indeed - the thing is rozzer actively posts on cake stop, pseudonym posts to say how much he dislikes other posting what he doesnt agree with in a sub forum he hardly visits.

Now from this - supersonic do you remember the old c+ forum when for example racing was one sub forum so people could would have to wade through amateur results before they got to pro racing; or mtb'ers would post on roadie topics because the sub forums didnt really come into play until it became bikeradar.

Well why not simply re-organise. Like the mods did, brilliantly in my opinion in crudcatcher with the hub - that is setting a section aside with clear rules and good conduct and leaving crudcatcher to its unique string and lime tastes.

I remember when there was a thread in the hub and it may have been sheeps who posted a jokey response, was pulled up about it when someone said something like 'come on were trying to this hub work' and sure enough he apoologised and the hubs carried on working and crudcatcher is still as irreverent as ever. It really would be a shame if cake stop became an over officiated pit of humourlessness like the communting section.

Each section has its own flavour. Why homogenise, why try to have one all encompassing set of rules, why not let each subforum say what they expect from each section and build on that.

rozzer32

I'm just saying that if they want to change the rules then they should abide by them too.

I wonder how many hits in total all the "Girls in..." threads have had. A very large number I suspect. Take them away and like has been said I'm not sure the companies paying for advertisement would be best pleased, specially now with the ads in the middle of threads. Just a thought.

Supersonic,

Has the person you asked read the original thread and this thread from start to finish? Genuinely interested as to the answer.

Stone Glider

And you think....... they will get tired of the endless re-statement of the rigid postures adopted all those words ago.... but they don't.

Leave it to the mods. or just leave it. I am.

Pseudonym

As above.

So far, you have a bunch of people who don't think they are doing anything wrong, up against a bunch of other people who think they are doing something wrong. In the middle you have some others (like me) commenting on the validity (or otherwise) of people's arguments and an even smaller number trying to make sense of it all.

What I will say is that we are now at 19 pages and if it hasn't been resolved by now, it probably never will be. The fact is, all the answers are already on here. I'm so bored now that I've resorted to insulting people, so it must be bad.

Cleat Eastwood

rozzer32 wrote:

I'm just saying that if they want to change the rules then they should abide by them too.

+1

supersonic

supersonic do you remember the old c+ forum

Unfortunately not, I came from the old WMB site, and was made an Admin on BikeRadar a couple of years ago. C+ is not a website I was familiar with. But for reorganisation, I was responsible for the CrudCatcher/Hub split - at first met with much derision in the CC lol, but now has seemed to work very well. Having unique rules to both areas has had its benefits. The CC was first in this case.

However, as mentioned by some earlier in this thread, some just don't want such an area: they ask why? I do believe there is some validity in saying 'don't enter if you are liable to be offended', but the counter has always been that regardless, the content will still paint cyclists, the forum, websites, and magazine with a bad image towards women and put them off.

Has the person you asked read the original thread and this thread from start to finish? Genuinely interested as to the answer.

I believe so, they stated they will keep themselves updated. I am hoping for more input from some of the mods/admin.

This discussion has taken on quite a few branches, and is quite long. There will be a resolution soon: but as before, it will not please all. I really can't go ahead without more input from other admin. So naturally this thread will keep getting longer and longer, and inevitably boring some!

ddraver

Pseudonym wrote:

As above.

So far, you have a bunch of people who don't think they are doing anything wrong, up against a bunch of other people who think they are doing something wrong. In the middle you have some others (like me) commenting on the validity (or otherwise) of people's arguments and an even smaller number trying to make sense of it all.

What I will say is that we are now at 19 pages and if it hasn't been resolved by now, it probably never will be. The fact is, all the answers are already on here. I'm so bored now that I've resorted to insulting people, so it must be bad.

Sorry, who are you?

Please! :roll:

@Sonic - I do not think that the majority of women accessing the forum will care - That 2 do is not a reason to censor/alter the forum. So the Cake Stop makes you feel uncomfortable velocestrapture - I ve not seen you in the other 15 areas on the road forum either. Are you honestly saying that 3 or 4 threads keep you out of the whole road section?

Pseudonym

ddraver wrote:

Sorry, who are you?

Please! :roll:

I believe your name is 'ddraver' and my name is 'pseudonym' - and we are both posting anonymously on an internet forum.

Unless of course, you really were christened 'ddraver'...??

greg66_tri_v2.0

Monkeypump wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

But it's their ball, so their rules...your choices are (a) suck it up; (b) vote with your feet.

But you knew that already.

Perhaps those who are proposing change should be told exactly this?

It may come to that. But it will be the site owners who decide who has to make the choice.

fizz

supersonic wrote:

Is it worth doing an anymonous vote to try an gauge general opinion, and if so, what questions would you include?

Yes because it makes people feel like they are involved in what's going on. However it can cause more problems than it solves and you may end up with difficult situation that the views of the forum users dont fit with what the site owner actually wants.

Then you are stuck with the situation of saying "this is what is going to happen, put up or shut up" ( but obviously worded in a more appropriate way )

Your other option is that now the issue of the content of those threads has been brought into light and discussed, pull every thread delete it and create a suitable set of new ones, or one new one and then let them run.

Your mod team can keep an eye on it and any dodgy images can be removed, or forum users can hit the report button. If you are going to remove images, you should be sure to be clear the reason why.

That way it maybe that the threads will naturally go the way that is required and there is no laying down the law / creating rules / guidelines.

Just suggestion...

t.m.h.n.e.t

Ladies and Gentlemen. Observe

http://youtu.be/JvKIWjnEPNY

jonny_trousers

velocestrapture wrote:

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Where we are now is a bit "wild west"

I just don't believe there are female cyclists out there who refuse to take part anywhere on the forum because they object to what goes on in Cake Stop.

So yours is a vote for 4) then? Or a combination of 3) and 4)? To make it easier I will permit votes in more than one category.

My opinion doesn't really matter and the silly thing is I don't really care what happens either. I can and do enjoy looking at pictures of particularly attractive women, but I also know there is an internet full of such pictures if I want them. I don't need to go into Cake Stop to get my fix and if they do end up being banned there then I will not really worry about it beyond thinking a bunch of lads who were just being lads have been tarred with a brush they didn't deserve. There are only really two reasons why I've been so verbal on this subject: 1. the sheer hypocrisy of DDD got right up my nose and 2. I found much of your particular argument to be offensive to ordinary, decent men. If you'd directed your criticism towards the "Women in realistic situations" thread I probably wouldn't have bothered to come out in support of you, but I certainly wouldn't have argued against you. To my mind, beyond a few childish accompanying comments, the rest of the "Girls in..." threads were born of harmless camaraderie between a bunch of male bike fans killing time together, and are not an indicator that they are misogynist degenerates just waiting until they can go and abuse some poor girl going about her business (nor do I think viewing such images breeds sexism). Now, none of that is to say I do not believe there are far too many men out there who think it is acceptable to be abusive towards women, verbally or physically, but I feel it is a much deeper issue than the ease of access to softly erotic pictures that causes them to behave in that way (we can discuss it in another thread if you would like).

Like I say, your argument, though I don't agree with it, I can respect because you truly feel passionate about it. It's those who have whined that they don't really like such pictures, yet have never contacted the mods about them, have never spend any meaningful time in Cake Stop (nor really wanted to), and have never tried to engage those who have posted such threads, that I feel are just being busybodies and spoilsports.

msmancunia

ddraver wrote:

@Sonic - I do not think that the majority of women accessing the forum will care - That 2 do is not a reason to censor/alter the forum. So the Cake Stop makes you feel uncomfortable velocestrapture - I ve not seen you in the other 15 areas on the road forum either. Are you honestly saying that 3 or 4 threads keep you out of the whole road section?

The thing is (and I don't know the proportion of male/female posters on BR), a lot of women may not be even aware that this has even kicked off in the first place. It's just a few of us who have seen the original thread, thought about it, looked at the Girl's in.. threads again, and thought "no, I think some of these posts are wrong", and complained. If you don't go in Commuting Chat, or this forum, or Cake Stop, how would they even know?

There will be some who don't actually care, or who don't mind the tone of the Girl's in... threads. There will be some who don't like them but don't really want to complain because they don't want to be shouted down. And then there will be some who will have the same objections as me - some of the pictures and comments have crossed the line. The question is, what do the majority of women think? And additionally, depending on the spread of M/F posters, (which I'm guessing will be a lot more male than female), will their opinion actually count for anything?

ddraver

I suppose that accepting that the majority disagree with you and leaving it at that, and then just ignoring the threads, given that they re in an area you don't visit anyway, is not an option?

dirtymonkey1985

ddraver wrote:

I suppose that accepting that the majority disagree with you and leaving it at that, and then just ignoring the threads, given that they re in an area you don't visit anyway, is not an option?

I fear it's a bit late for such a simple solution :roll:

msmancunia

ddraver wrote:

I suppose that accepting that the majority disagree with you and leaving it at that, and then just ignoring the threads, given that they re in an area you don't visit anyway, is not an option?

Thanks for that pearl of wisdom. I was just trying to point out the mathematical side of things. I'm sure thousands of women will sleep easy tonight knowing that you know their opinion better than they do.

MattC59

Nice to see that things have progressed today

At this precise moment in time, I don't overly care though, as I've just eated Hare loin with Foie Gras, followed by Venison with Ox tongue and then a Tonka Bean Panacotta with poached rhubarb and rhubarb sorbet, in a two star Michelin restaurant.

Tomorrow I shall read todays posts and think about joining the discussion again

msmancunia

MattC59 wrote:

Nice to see that things have progressed today

At this precise moment in time, I don't overly care though, as I've just eated Hare loin with Foie Gras, followed by Venison with Ox tongue and then a Tonka Bean Panacotta with poached rhubarb and rhubarb sorbet, in a two star Michelin resteraunt.

Tomorrow I shall read todays posts and think about joining the discussion again

You've obviously also had a skinful of vino, judging by that extremely far-out spelling of "resteraunt"

ddraver

msmancunia wrote:

ddraver wrote:

I suppose that accepting that the majority disagree with you and leaving it at that, and then just ignoring the threads, given that they re in an area you don't visit anyway, is not an option?

Thanks for that pearl of wisdom. I was just trying to point out the mathematical side of things. I'm sure thousands of women will sleep easy tonight knowing that you know their opinion better than they do.

Sorry - what opinion do I "know" in that post? I was asking why you feel the need to delete posts from somewhere you don't visit?