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

jedster

I kind of agree with what Kieran says (and what a few other people have suggested) - we don't want officious moderation here. It would be much better if the regulars in this pub policed themselves.

Every now and again I'm on a train when a few blokes have drunk to much and are behaving a bit obnoxiously. Sometimes asks them to keep the language down. Generally they repsond by being embarassed and apologetic and quieten down. They've not ment to be upsetting anyone it's just they forgot to think about how other people around them might be feeling...

I've been a bit surprised by the responses of some of the "Girls in..." supporters. I mean no one really likes to be criticised but I've not seen much sign that there's been any appreciation of "hmmm, I do understand why women might not like the atmosphere those threads create. Are we being a little obnoxious here?"

msmancunia

MattC59 wrote:

You're right, but a Bukkake picture (what ever that is :roll: :shock: ) is in a totally different league to a girl in slightly revealing knitted top.

To you maybe, but you're a bloke. They both make me feel uncomfortable, to be honest. I just fail to see why they should be on this site.

MattC59

supersonic wrote:

What are thoughts on more private areas with strict warnings? (this does not mean no rules though!)

Unfortunately, the content will still be on the forum, and unless I've miss understood it, that is what's being objected to.

That said, taking Greg66's pub analogy, it would segregate it further and mean that CakeStop is not as 'intimidating' to some as has been suggested.

nicklouse

MattC59 wrote:

supersonic wrote:

What are thoughts on more private areas with strict warnings? (this does not mean no rules though!)

Unfortunately, the content will still be on the forum, and unless I've miss understood it, that is what's being objected to.

That said, taking Greg66's pub analogy, it would segregate it further and mean that CakeStop is not as 'intimidating' to some as has been suggested.

which will do very little.

see comuting chat and general.

MattC59

msmancunia wrote:

MattC59 wrote:

You're right, but a Bukkake picture (what ever that is :roll: :shock: ) is in a totally different league to a girl in slightly revealing knitted top.

To you maybe, but you're a bloke. They both make me feel uncomfortable, to be honest. I just fail to see why they should be on this site.

That's fair, but why don' t you come and join in in Cakestop, you'll realise it's far from the picture that's been painted in these recent threads.

MattC59

nicklouse wrote:

MattC59 wrote:

supersonic wrote:

What are thoughts on more private areas with strict warnings? (this does not mean no rules though!)

Unfortunately, the content will still be on the forum, and unless I've miss understood it, that is what's being objected to.

That said, taking Greg66's pub analogy, it would segregate it further and mean that CakeStop is not as 'intimidating' to some as has been suggested.

which will do very little.

see comuting chat and general.

Was just a though, but you're right, they're one and the same.

Paul E

In response to the last but one post on the original thread by Supersonic, I will indeed start reporting anything I find which I think is not appropriate even if that include forum topics.

MattC59

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

The Girls in lycra thread started years ago 2005/2006 when it was the c+ site. The main objector to the thread joined in 2007, if he didnt like it then why join, if he doesnt like it now - feck off.

If you want to know if cakestoppers objectify women ask the female contributors to the road section. Beacon ruth always gives out great advice and is always encouraging others to try out he r clubs rides, one br member came second in a recent TT throughthe mersey tunnel, check out the support for the womens GB team.

Its pointless getting the mods involved because they generally manage the site well, they let crudcatchers do crudcatcher things and set limits when it goes overboard, same with the mods in road section - and I for one think its great that they get where most of the posters are coming from and are treating them with respect.

There been many posts on here with extreme views, all if not most end up being shot down, why the images of women cause such an outcry, because one man, recently became a father a and has a bout of conscience. Well for me i'd rather be on site where most of the posters feel welcome to the point in offering other members genuine condolences when they've suffered loss, than be on a site where posters have to double check their content to see if meets some unwritten rules of a middle class fathers angst.

This site treats all like adults in an adult world with all its complexities, misunderstandings and confusions- if people cant hack being treated like an adult - go somewhere else.

+1

(eeerm.......... non't mince your words Cleat !)

supersonic

Paul E wrote:

In response to the last but one post on the original thread by Supersonic, I will indeed start reporting anything I find which I think is not appropriate even if that include forum topics.

We encourage people to do so: as mentioned, as much as the site is pro actively moderated, bits do get missed. When flagged, the topic will be brought to the attention of the full team to moderate.

rhialto

Kieran_Burns wrote:

I can't help but think people are majorly missing the point of a forum here. Think of a forum like a pub - in this case: it's a pub where the regulars all have cycling as a common interest. The pub has rules of conduct or else you get barred and everyone in there has their own conversation going...

I don't disagree - I think it's the rules of conduct that we are trying to get straight.

Kieran_Burns wrote:

Full and frank discussion should be encouraged - as long as the insults don't happen and nothing illegal is discussed or said.

It would seem that some members do indeed find some topics insulting and degrading.

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

The Girls in lycra thread started years ago 2005/2006 when it was the c+ site. The main objector to the thread joined in 2007, if he didnt like it then why join, if he doesnt like it now - feck off...

There been many posts on here with extreme views, all if not most end up being shot down, why the images of women cause such an outcry, because one man...

You seem angry, which surprises me. I don't think that the views presented have been extreme at all. If some members find the Girls In threads unwelcoming and some comments offensive, then don't you think that deserves some consideration? Are you that insensitive to their feelings that you couldn't do without those threads? Particularly when you can get the same content elsewhere. Honestly, I don't find that the Girls In threads add to the site, just detract from it.

msmancunia

MattC59 wrote:

That's fair, but why don' t you come and join in in Cakestop, you'll realise it's far from the picture that's been painted in these recent threads.

Because I'm a girl and there's not enough about cake, obviously...

Seriously though, I have been in several times, just to see if there was anything interesting going on, although I don't think I've ever posted. The volume of Girls in... posts made my skin crawl, and by association I think "well, do I really want to have a conversation with these blokes if this is what they think about women?" because I don't think it's even done in an appreciative way most of the time - in those threads women really are just objectified.

And it's all very well saying that the site regulates itself, but it obviously doesn't. I haven't reported it in the past because I thought it would all go in a vast internet black hole. But I will do so in the future.

I just don't think those threads show men off in the light that they would like to be seen. Most women think that men are generally decent guys, with a funny (if occasionally immature sense of humour), and a strong moral code. You wouldn't think that to read those threads I'm afraid. They just come across as the types of people who would rub up against you on the tube.

supersonic

So far, general solutions seem to be:

- ban all threads showing pictures of men and women in a suggestive manner

- create or update off topic areas that have warnings about content

- keep things as they are

- keep things as they are, but allow one such thread in each off topic area, that is described as what it is with a warning: basically, don't enter if you are going to be offended.

Please feel free to add any solutions. Of course to many the solution is the first.

DonDaddyD

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

The Girls in lycra thread started years ago 2005/2006 when it was the c+ site. The main objector to the thread joined in 2007, if he didnt like it then why join, if he doesnt like it now - feck off.

If you want to know if cakestoppers objectify women ask the female contributors to the road section. Beacon ruth always gives out great advice and is always encouraging others to try out he r clubs rides, one br member came second in a recent TT throughthe mersey tunnel, check out the support for the womens GB team.

Its pointless getting the mods involved because they generally manage the site well, they let crudcatchers do crudcatcher things and set limits when it goes overboard, same with the mods in road section - and I for one think its great that they get where most of the posters are coming from and are treating them with respect.

There been many posts on here with extreme views, all if not most end up being shot down, why the images of women cause such an outcry, because one man, recently became a father a and has a bout of conscience. Well for me i'd rather be on site where most of the posters feel welcome to the point in offering other members genuine condolences when they've suffered loss, than be on a site where posters have to double check their content to see if meets some unwritten rules of a middle class fathers angst.

This site treats all like adults in an adult world with all its complexities, misunderstandings and confusions- if people cant hack being treated like an adult - go somewhere else.

What pathetic self righteous drivel. What has class got to do with it? Just because a thread or a person has been on here longer than me doesn't mean I somehow have less say about it or them.

To begin:

I posted a question relating to swearing and obscene images. Several female (and some male) members objected to said images and related comments. Clearly there are others who are and were more vocal than I discussing this. For my part I agreed with their points and I started a thread where the discussion has slightly deviated from the orignal OP.

It's pretty poor that your major defence rests on poorly structured personal attacks and attempts to single me out.

But hey.

MattC59

msmancunia wrote:

MattC59 wrote:

That's fair, but why don' t you come and join in in Cakestop, you'll realise it's far from the picture that's been painted in these recent threads.

Because I'm a girl and there's not enough about cake, obviously...

Seriously though, I have been in several times, just to see if there was anything interesting going on, although I don't think I've ever posted. The volume of Girls in... posts made my skin crawl, and by association I think "well, do I really want to have a conversation with these blokes if this is what they think about women?" because I don't think it's even done in an appreciative way most of the time - in those threads women really are just objectified.

And it's all very well saying that the site regulates itself, but it obviously doesn't. I haven't reported it in the past because I thought it would all go in a vast internet black hole. But I will do so in the future.

I just don't think those threads show men off in the light that they would like to be seen. Most women think that men are generally decent guys, with a funny (if occasionally immature sense of humour), and a strong moral code. You wouldn't think that to read those threads I'm afraid. They just come across as the types of people who would rub up against you on the tube.

Personally, I prefer pastries, I'll kill for a fresh cream apple turn over, but I live in hope....

So by association you're making assumptions. There are far more people and threads in cake stop than there are threads and posters of the 'Girls in' type. They're generally the minority and often not even on page one.

Ok, so I admit to having posted in some of those threads, but it's not in a 'fnar fnar snigger' way, more a 'Wow, she's amazing' way. (I'm sure someone is now going to find a post to embarrass me, probably 43nigel87 !). Whilst you hit the nail on the head with the comment about the immaturity of men, I think you're way off target regarding the type of men. (Appart from Cleat perhaps, but he's he gets wierd about most things, he doesn't save it just for women !)

supersonic

Let's refrain from getting personal. I would rather individuals not be 'singled out'.

MonkeyMonster

supersonic wrote:

So far, general solutions seem to be:
- ban all threads showing pictures of men and women in a suggestive manner

---

as you say this is likely most obvious selection for non cakestop viewers and pushes the content to other sites
- create or update off topic areas that have warnings about content

---

misses the point
- keep things as they are

---

likely outcome
- keep things as they are, but allow one such thread in each off topic area, that is described as what it is with a warning: basically, don't enter if you are going to be offended.

---

misses the point again

Please feel free to add any solutions. Of course to many the solution is the first.

I don't want to come across as aggressively dismissive using "misses the point" - but they do. But I can see why they've been suggested as a business choice and why moderators are staying out of stating viewpoints. Good luck with deciding what to do.

Cleat Eastwood

dpaulett wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

I can't help but think people are majorly missing the point of a forum here. Think of a forum like a pub - in this case: it's a pub where the regulars all have cycling as a common interest. The pub has rules of conduct or else you get barred and everyone in there has their own conversation going...

I don't disagree - I think it's the rules of conduct that we are trying to get straight.

Kieran_Burns wrote:

Full and frank discussion should be encouraged - as long as the insults don't happen and nothing illegal is discussed or said.

It would seem that some members do indeed find some topics insulting and degrading.

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

The Girls in lycra thread started years ago 2005/2006 when it was the c+ site. The main objector to the thread joined in 2007, if he didnt like it then why join, if he doesnt like it now - feck off...

There been many posts on here with extreme views, all if not most end up being shot down, why the images of women cause such an outcry, because one man...

You seem angry, which surprises me. I don't think that the views presented have been extreme at all. If some members find the Girls In threads unwelcoming and some comments offensive, then don't you think that deserves some consideration? Are you that insensitive to their feelings that you couldn't do without those threads? Particularly when you can get the same content elsewhere. Honestly, I don't find that the Girls In threads add to the site, just detract from it.

Haha no not angry just pointing out a fact. Its all very though considering someones perspective, or even an entire genders perspective - but where do you draw the line. More offensive I find is the militaristic machismo posturing, the re-enforcing of closed minds - the explicit assumption that the middle class view is all that matters. But my dislike ia anothers reality, and I think neither I nor any forum member should be saying whos reality should take precedence.

If i'm not mistaken DDD's self acknowledged hypocrisy over the thread came about due to his recent fatherhood. Fine, but should he not consider that contributors to the road section are fathers and grandfathers, mothers/grandmothers many times over. Perhaps he's young and feels he needs to assert his moral position but should he not also consider that others have more experience than he and know full well how and when a particular event needs 'policing'.

My soultion would be a keep it as it is - but if a section were needed, why not one where peeps first explain why they are upset over a thread. Let it be discussed like adults and if no understanding can reached let the mods lock it - but by and large most threads die a death after a few days anyway and offensive posts threads are just a sign that there is something hapening in the posters life which they cant face. As a valve, cake stop plays great role.

supersonic

MonkeyMonster wrote:

supersonic wrote:

So far, general solutions seem to be:
- ban all threads showing pictures of men and women in a suggestive manner

---

as you say this is likely most obvious selection for non cakestop viewers and pushes the content to other sites
- create or update off topic areas that have warnings about content

---

misses the point
- keep things as they are

---

likely outcome
- keep things as they are, but allow one such thread in each off topic area, that is described as what it is with a warning: basically, don't enter if you are going to be offended.

---

misses the point again

Please feel free to add any solutions. Of course to many the solution is the first.

I don't want to come across as aggressively dismissive using "misses the point" - but they do. But I can see why they've been suggested as a business choice and why moderators are staying out of stating viewpoints. Good luck with deciding what to do.

As you say, they needed to be mentioned. I understand the points raised, and any dedcision will be met with opposition! If we ban them, the 'harsh, over zealous moderation' band will certainly get their trombones out!

Cleat Eastwood

DonDaddyD wrote:

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

The Girls in lycra thread started years ago 2005/2006 when it was the c+ site. The main objector to the thread joined in 2007, if he didnt like it then why join, if he doesnt like it now - feck off.

If you want to know if cakestoppers objectify women ask the female contributors to the road section. Beacon ruth always gives out great advice and is always encouraging others to try out he r clubs rides, one br member came second in a recent TT throughthe mersey tunnel, check out the support for the womens GB team.

Its pointless getting the mods involved because they generally manage the site well, they let crudcatchers do crudcatcher things and set limits when it goes overboard, same with the mods in road section - and I for one think its great that they get where most of the posters are coming from and are treating them with respect.

There been many posts on here with extreme views, all if not most end up being shot down, why the images of women cause such an outcry, because one man, recently became a father a and has a bout of conscience. Well for me i'd rather be on site where most of the posters feel welcome to the point in offering other members genuine condolences when they've suffered loss, than be on a site where posters have to double check their content to see if meets some unwritten rules of a middle class fathers angst.

This site treats all like adults in an adult world with all its complexities, misunderstandings and confusions- if people cant hack being treated like an adult - go somewhere else.

What pathetic self righteous drivel. Firstly I posted a question relating to swearing and obscene images.

It's pretty poor that your major defence rests on attempts to single me out.

But hey.

ok yes, fair point - you cant be held responsible for how a thread goes, i'm not singling you out per se - but that attitude that 'because I've seen the light - why can't others'. I've a friend whos recently become a mum and is upset at the 'pink is for girls' world view - little taking into account that women have had to face far great concerns. So apols DDD - nothing personal.

bompington

Cleat Eastwood wrote:

but if a section were needed, why not one where peeps first explain why they are upset over a thread. Let it be discussed like adults and anyone who disagrees with me can be told to feck off

FTFY

rideslikeagirl

Must admit, while i find the cake stop 'girls in blah' threads and the comments a bit 'wahey' laddish, am i offended by them? Nah, not really. I find the whole 'roadie' macho 'its all about the PAAAIIN!!!' mentality a bit silly, and the people commenting in there are not people i'd want to hang out with, but that's fine. I share a transport preference with them, that's it, i don't expect to have anything else in common.

I find the occasional 'yr ghey' type of comment much more offensive though. And the 'ladyboy' pic in the joke 'boyz in...' thread. Not cool, not funny. If you must mock her at least do it in one of the 'girls in...' threads. Although i dread to think of the comments...

It's hypocritical to allow 'that sort of thing' and ban swearing though...

velocestrapture

Wow. I have been off doing RL, and just caught up with the old thread from about where JT threw his toys out of the pram. I don't propose to drag any of that over here, but thanks to those posters who posted in support of my side.

I don't see why it should be hard to say that images posted with the intent of being sexually provocative are not acceptable, and why the prohibition on violence shouldn't be expanded to include sexual violence. I also don't think that in reality it would be hard to identify such material. It would be nice if positive steps could be taken to make the site more female-friendly, and for the mods to err on the side of caution when considering if the posts may be considered offensive.

Failing that, if the mods think that there are a significant number of men who would not be able to enjoy using a cycling forum without being in close proximity to sexualised images, then I agree with the suggestion that there be a separate section just for more sexual/adult material to be posted. This would put out a clear message as to the types of posts that are tolerated by the mods, and would mean that people who don't enjoy that sort of material could avoid the section altogether, rather than having to navigate around and attempt to ignore the stuff they don't like in order to fully participate in other chat topics that are in the same section.

msmancunia

MattC59 wrote:

Personally, I prefer pastries, I'll kill for a fresh cream apple turn over, but I live in hope....

So by association you're making assumptions. There are far more people and threads in cake stop than there are threads and posters of the 'Girls in' type. They're generally the minority and often not even on page one.

Ok, so I admit to having posted in some of those threads, but it's not in a 'fnar fnar snigger' way, more a 'Wow, she's amazing' way. (I'm sure someone is now going to find a post to embarrass me, probably 43nigel87 !). Whilst you hit the nail on the head with the comment about the immaturity of men, I think you're way off target regarding the type of men. (Appart from Cleat perhaps, but he's he gets wierd about most things, he doesn't save it just for women !)

I wouldn't go in there until Easter anyway because it's Lent, and I'm doing the whole Catholic hair-shirt of no cakes/sweets/chocolates/biscuits/crisps until then. Maybe that's why I'm getting so uppity....

I don't have a problem per se with Cake Stop - I have a problem with the Girls in... threads, and yes, by association (and assumption) I don't really want to talk to people with those kinds of views. In my idea world yes, I'd get rid of them all completely, for the simple reason that this is a cycling forum and any man and his dog (or child) can access it. As has been said before, if you don't want to see it, then don't click on it. That's fair enough, but for those with impressionable children, Bike Radar is not the sort of thing you'd automatically think to put child-friendly controls on. I don't have kids, but if I had a 12 year old daughter would I want her to stumble on a photo of a woman being done from behind? No, I wouldn't.

I don't have a problem with porn as long as all parties are willing participants (and are being paid and having a good time!) - I have a problem with explicit photos being published on a non-explicit website, the corresponding comments that go with them, and the people who make them. And I have to correct you - the Girls in... threads are ALWAYS on page one.

Kendal Black Drop

msmancunia wrote:

I wouldn't go in there until Easter anyway because it's Lent, and I'm doing the whole Catholic hair-shirt of no cakes/sweets/chocolates/biscuits/crisps until then. Maybe that's why I'm getting so uppity....

Can we also have a separate section for people to comment on religion too because I don't think that it has any place on a cycling forum, and people who aren't Christian might be put off from frequenting the forums?

vitesse169

Kieran_Burns wrote:

I can't help but think people are majorly missing the point of a forum here.

Think of a forum like a pub - in this case: it's a pub where the regulars all have cycling as a common interest. The pub has rules of conduct or else you get barred and everyone in there has their own conversation going.

You can't legislate on every conversation that takes place in the pub, and on occasion some will get heated or touch on subjects that shouldn't be discussed in public - that's when the Landlord (Admin) or barstaff (Mods) step in.

No one will accept overtly racist or hate-speech of any kind (against whoever) but banter happens and conversations within groups of people who happen to all like the same thing will not ever stay on that one subject. Unless you're a train-spotter and no one talks to them apart from other train-spotter and they're scary.

Removing threads that some find offensive is ridiculous and will kill a site / forum stone dead. People getting upset on behalf of other people is just plain embarrassing - a pub is a place for adults and adult themes will be discussed - as long as the discussions are illegal, you can simply ignore the ones you don't like.

We've had this same discussion over on Scoobynet and because that has a paid membership policy, we moved the full on no-holds barred discussions into private forums that you pay to access (Full Membership required). What goes on in there is completely juvenile but we don't stop it.

On BR - the site is free, so there must be limits - as far as I am concerned: anything you can see in a daily paper is fine; and I've not seen anything in the Cake Stop picture threads that aren't AS revealing as some images in certain Red Tops.

Full and frank discussion should be encouraged - as long as the insults don't happen and nothing illegal is discussed or said.

KB +1. I agree with you here.... it's like the TV, if you don't like whats on, change channel or use the off button...

msmancunia

Kendal Black Drop wrote:

msmancunia wrote:

I wouldn't go in there until Easter anyway because it's Lent, and I'm doing the whole Catholic hair-shirt of no cakes/sweets/chocolates/biscuits/crisps until then. Maybe that's why I'm getting so uppity....

Can we also have a separate section for people to comment on religion too because I don't think that it has any place on a cycling forum, and people who aren't Christian might be put off from frequenting the forums?

Fair point - I'll get my coat. I'll be in Cake Stop self-flagellating using the thread Girls With Rosary Beads with an appreciative audience...

verylonglegs

msmancunia wrote:

I just don't think those threads show men off in the light that they would like to be seen. Most women think that men are generally decent guys, with a funny (if occasionally immature sense of humour), and a strong moral code. You wouldn't think that to read those threads I'm afraid. They just come across as the types of people who would rub up against you on the tube.

I have to tell you most of those decent guys will also be party to the 'phwooar...I would' and trading filthy details conversations when you ladies are aren't around. In fact in my experience it's the 'family' guys in long term relationships who are the worst!

Paul E

I don't go into those threads, but I do mind when people post NSFW photos in threads and don't warn anyone.

Sod lent I eat what I want when I want, sorry not even remotely religious, quite the opposite in fact.

velocestrapture

Does anyone else find it odd that if there had been a series of threads that had been even mildly derogatory about black people, and in a thread commenting on it a few black people had said that it made them feel uncomfortable and unwelcome, then (I hope) the answer as to what, if anything, should be done would be much clearer to everyone? Do you think there would still be a debate raging as to whether or not the threads should be banned? Why is sexism seen as less of a problem than racism?

t.m.h.n.e.t

I'm willing to assume that most of the posters in this thread have never actually ran an active forum. A job which is often thankless and rewarded with abuse. You're always damned if you do and equally damned if you don't.

As it happens,I do and I can pretty much confirm for all of you that forums which allow no deviation from one common topic (cycling for example) quite often don't survive well if long. The reason being,users expect to log in each time and see something new,something different,something to discuss and contribute to. Nobody expects to login and be greeted with nothing but

What cleats?
What bike for less than a bag of haribo?
What pedals?
What ...
What....

The list isn't exhaustive but is the general feel of Road Beginners and MTB Beginners(two very busy areas). At this point where is the point? With the same discussion all the time the usefulness of the forum is greatly compromised. There may as well be a single sticky with answers to common questions,this would also save any of us from even visiting. Which will be great right? In fact take the forum down because google has all the answers. Discussion stagnates very easily when you are strict on what is acceptable.

I do understand that some people take offence to certain things,but really at the end of the day you need to take a step back from your keyboard and rethink. Nobody is forced to read these threads,nobody is forced to participate in them either,likewise nobody is forced to visit the purposely placed OT areas. How do you cope with scant dresscode in real life? There is no report button iirc.

I'm not a believer in the reasoning behind the initial discussion on this and if anything the manor in which it was conducted was never going to be fruitful (oh dear was that a homosexual slur?). It doesn't take brain surgeon IQ to figure out that a thread in Commuter about a thread in Road/Cake Stop was never EVER going to come to anything but a lock. I really don't think the issue is girls vs swearing at all,I think someone had posts removed/edited for naughty words and figured he would take it out on everyone else. It's amazing how so many people crawled out from under their rocks to say something against Cake Stop-esque threads yet nobody brought up in a constructive manor before.

---

I for one can appreciate the position of the site owners and admins/mods. It is a tough one to be in of course but a decision needs to me made somewhere and it lies with you guys. I will warn you from experience,failure to find a happy medium will end in tears,but not for BR users. This forum greatly effects sales and thus income.