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

msmancunia

supersonic wrote:

http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=30005&t=12544013&start=6320#p17479014

Lol.

I'm almost too scared to click on that now....

Fizz's guidelines sound good to me though.

supersonic

I guess we just have to wait for comment from some of the others who contributed earlier. I am reluctant to pull the trigger without a little more input (it would be a bit rude to go ahead without them commenting!)

MattC59

As my Mrs has just said, and I quote, "what it needs is more people to realise it's a fr*ggin website. If you don't like something, either don't read it or make a complaint abouot the offending post so that it can be dealt with. It needs self moderation. Otherwise go and read something else".

tailwindhome

MattC59 wrote:

As my Mrs has just said, and I quote, "what it needs is more people to realise it's a fr*ggin website. If you don't like something, either don't read it or make a complaint abouot the offending post so that it can be dealt with. It needs self moderation. Otherwise go and read something else".

Or alternatively those wanting to post and view these images should go somewhere else.

Works both ways...

MattC59

TailWindHome wrote:

MattC59 wrote:

As my Mrs has just said, and I quote, "what it needs is more people to realise it's a fr*ggin website. If you don't like something, either don't read it or make a complaint abouot the offending post so that it can be dealt with. It needs self moderation. Otherwise go and read something else".

Or alternatively those wanting to post and view these images should go somewhere else.

Works both ways...

I think what she means is get a life, there are far more important things to worry about than a few blokes who want to post some slightly risque pictures.

t.m.h.n.e.t

Girls in lycra shorts - Created Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:20 pm

Take from that what you will. But quite a few of the people actually complaining registered long after the thread was created.

tailwindhome

MattC59 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

MattC59 wrote:

As my Mrs has just said, and I quote, "what it needs is more people to realise it's a fr*ggin website. If you don't like something, either don't read it or make a complaint abouot the offending post so that it can be dealt with. It needs self moderation. Otherwise go and read something else".

Or alternatively those wanting to post and view these images should go somewhere else.

Works both ways...

I think what she means is get a life, there are far more important things to worry about than a few blokes who want to post some slightly risque pictures.

LOL. That works both ways too.

I'm not that bothered/worried if the threads stay or go. I rarely venture into CakeStop anymore for pretty much the same reasons as I don't buy the Sport or FHM/Loaded. Not sure if this is what the forum owners would want though.

rideslikeagirl

supersonic wrote:

(snipped)

My personal view - strict guidelines: pictures MUST be bike related, and very pro active moderation. Only one such thread should exist per OT area, with a disclaimer.

Totally this!

Pseudonym

Clank wrote:

I'm calling 'troll'

I'm guessing you're out of your depth, fella. You obviously haven't read what I've written - or more likely, misunderstood it. Either way, there's nothing wrong with having a view different to yours....

supersonic

I have put a post in our office section about the number of (active) mods that we have.

Personally I would like to see a regular member of the commuting section as a moderator: however, being a regular poster and a mod can be a hard task to pull off ie the responsibilty and being a 'normal' member. Nevertheless, if pulled off would hopefully increase our levels of pro active moderation and simultaneously improve the picture of our team.

The same can be said of the Road and MTB sections.

Cleat Eastwood

MattC59 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

MattC59 wrote:

As my Mrs has just said, and I quote, "what it needs is more people to realise it's a fr*ggin website. If you don't like something, either don't read it or make a complaint abouot the offending post so that it can be dealt with. It needs self moderation. Otherwise go and read something else".

Or alternatively those wanting to post and view these images should go somewhere else.

Works both ways...

I think what she means is get a life, there are far more important things to worry about than a few blokes who want to post some slightly risque pictures.

You'd have thought that was obvious to everyone wouldn't you matt, problem is to some this website IS their life. All it needs is a little perspective - by the way any pics of as a one legged black lesbian - I feel a thread coming on. hehe

t.m.h.n.e.t

supersonic wrote:

I have put a post in our office section about the number of (active) mods that we have.

Personally I would like to see a regular member of the commuting section as a moderator: however, being a regular poster and a mod can be a hard task to pull off ie the responsibilty and being a 'normal' member. Nevertheless, if pulled off would hopefully increase our levels of pro active moderation and simultaneously improve the picture of our team.

The same can be said of the Road and MTB sections.

Being a regular moderator is a hard task to pull off it would seem. Very few of the listed staff actually give the impression that they care or turn up,I have to admit,I see you around a lot. At least two of us have offered our help on multiple occasions,but nicklouse was unable or more likely unwlling, to provide further comment on the subject at the time.

On a forum I'm a supermoderator of: Currently Active Users: 1374 - Threads: 663,778, Posts: 5,262,466, Members: 229,698

jonny_trousers

supersonic wrote:

Personally I would like to see a regular member of the commuting section as a moderator.

I nominate DDD.

MattC59

Yer all Nazis !!!

There, I call Godwins. I believe that means that the discussion is over ?!?

supersonic

T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:

supersonic wrote:

I have put a post in our office section about the number of (active) mods that we have.

Personally I would like to see a regular member of the commuting section as a moderator: however, being a regular poster and a mod can be a hard task to pull off ie the responsibilty and being a 'normal' member. Nevertheless, if pulled off would hopefully increase our levels of pro active moderation and simultaneously improve the picture of our team.

The same can be said of the Road and MTB sections.

Being a regular moderator is a hard task to pull off it would seem. Very few of the listed staff actually give the impression that they care or turn up,I have to admit,I see you around a lot. At least two of us have offered our help on multiple occasions,but nicklouse was unable or more likely unwlling, to provide further comment on the subject at the time.

On a forum I'm a supermoderator of: Currently Active Users: 1374 - Threads: 663,778, Posts: 5,262,466, Members: 229,698

We could, of course, add more 'silent' mods, but then the populous tends to view these as dark overlords who have nothing better to do than over zealously cull posts. I think a mixture of both works, as a friendly faced mod adds a sense of person to what is happening. But it can be a hard task indeed, especially if some of the regulars start to dislike you, or you have to step in and reveal yourself. Your persona might be viewed as to have changed, then you start to lose the sense of being a regular member, enjoying the forum for what it is.

I actually gained my column for What Mountain Bike from my forum posts, and one of my roles is to try and link the forum to the mag ie sort of an average rider who can sympathise more with other average riders. For the above reasons, some magazine staff and testers are often viewed as impersonable types who are all expert riders: like robots!

Pseudonym

supersonic wrote:

We could, of course, add more 'silent' mods, but then the populous tends to view these as dark overlords who have nothing better to do than over zealously cull posts. I think a mixture of both works, as a friendly faced mod adds a sense of person to what is happening. But it can be a hard task indeed, especially if some of the regulars start to dislike you, or you have to step in and reveal yourself. Your persona might be viewed as to have changed, then you start to lose the sense of being a regular member, enjoying the forum for what it is.

I actually gained my column for What Mountain Bike from my forum posts, and one of my roles is to try and link the forum to the mag ie sort of an average rider who can sympathise more with other average riders. For the above reasons, some magazine staff and testers are often viewed as impersonable types who are all expert riders: like robots!

I think the first thing to realise is that whatever you do, you are never going to gain universal approval. But (and I think you know this already) you really do need some content guidelines - together with a moderating team that is happy and willing to enforce them, regardless of however upset this may make some of the userbase.

supersonic

I think the first thing to realise is that whatever you do, you are never going to gain universal approval.

Definitely aware of this ;-). I am fortunate that I an spend a lot of time at the computer from the comfort of my house, more than say some of the other Admin (again, a reason why we could do with more mods). Well I say fortunate, am still recovering from a rather evil illness lol, but nevertheless, this place keeps me ticking over!

tailwindhome

supersonic wrote:

Personally I would like to see a regular member of the commuting section as a moderator.

How does that work? Do the exist Mods pick someone to approach or do we nominate someone

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

I nominate DDD.

Careful what you wish for.....

supersonic

TailWindHome wrote:

supersonic wrote:

Personally I would like to see a regular member of the commuting section as a moderator.

How does that work? Do the exist Mods pick someone to approach or do we nominate someone

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

I nominate DDD.

Careful what you wish for.....

We are just discussing the way forward right now!

greg66_tri_v2.0

supersonic wrote:

I have put a post in our office section about the number of (active) mods that we have.

Personally I would like to see a regular member of the commuting section as a moderator: however, being a regular poster and a mod can be a hard task to pull off ie the responsibilty and being a 'normal' member. Nevertheless, if pulled off would hopefully increase our levels of pro active moderation and simultaneously improve the picture of our team.

The same can be said of the Road and MTB sections.

Whilst I think that would be a good thing, I am not sure it is a complete answer. A quick look in Crudcatcher (followed by some eyebleach) told me that two of the ogle threads were started by moderators.

Clear guidelines are more important IMO. And FWIW, they should be conservative rather than liberal. There are plenty of places on the Internet to find soft porn, if that's your interest.

And to whoever said that the ogle threads have been around a long time, so what. Times change. What used to be acceptable can become unacceptable. Get used to it.

rhialto

supersonic wrote:

My personal view - strict guidelines: pictures MUST be bike related, and very pro active moderation. Only one such thread should exist per OT area, with a disclaimer.

I agree with you on this. Or this:

TailWindHome wrote:

If a photo is unsuitable for publication in Cycling Plus or MBUK then it shouldn't be considered suitable for the forum. In principle I have no objection to a Girls In Lycra thread

keeping with the original spirit

. Some people might, I'm afraid thats for you and the 'pub' owner to resolve

I originally joined the forum because I was looking for a helpful and welcoming community of like-minded bikers. If certain threads (e.g. Girls in...) are unwelcoming to some members, then I think those threads should be considered for removal. I admit, there is a bit of uncertainty in my mind due to the possibility that other members might find some sense of community from those threads.

I still find it baffling that some members are so vehement in their defense of these threads and aren't willing to consider their removal to create a more welcoming forum for others. Are they that important? Or are they objections based on some principle that I am missing?

supersonic

I am not sure it is a complete answer.

I don't think there is one, as some groups will always object: but what we can do is try and move things to a better ground. This may not happen all in one go, have to keep things in discussion and development. More mods to to push forward pro active moderating is needed, as there are clearly times when nobody is about. Clearer guidelines for sure.

Are they that important? Or are they objections based on some principle that I am missing?

From what I have gathered from responses, there is a section of people who do not see such threads as objectable, think that any changes amount to over moderating and that people shouldn't venture into such places if they are liable to be offended. Arguments for have ranged from the free availability of content (including bike magazines!) to 'this is what most men do, it is harmless'.

Jez mon

T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:

Girls in lycra shorts - Created Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:20 pm

Take from that what you will. But quite a few of the people actually complaining registered long after the thread was created.

I don't think this really works as a defence does it? It feels to me like when posters on pro race claim superiority by number of posts.

Anyway my tuppence on this, (bearing in mind I'm sky high on cold/flu medicine)

This has all come to a head following DDD's reasonable point that the moderators generally come down hard on swearing but have allowed the more risqué picture posts in cake stop to stand. Various other posters then came out of the woodwork, and started slating the various girls in... threads.

The thing is, why did none of them complain earlier, evidently they felt offended, just not enough to bother complaining either to fellow forum users, or to the mods. ( with the exception of that Peter guy).

Overall, any actions that the mods take need to be carefully thought out. There's nothing like over zealous moderation to kill a forum and the fact that the girls in lycra shorts thread has been going so long, suggests that a reasonable number of posters want it kept alive. I would post a sticky at the top of cake stop, with some ground rules about Girls in... threads. Those PG ones look ok as a starting point. Warning that multiple offenders face bans, and encouraging the reporting of suspect posts.

t.m.h.n.e.t

Jez mon wrote:

T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:

Girls in lycra shorts - Created Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:20 pm

Take from that what you will. But quite a few of the people actually complaining registered long after the thread was created.

I don't think this really works as a defence does it?

It's something else that should be taken into consideration.

Sidenote: half of the listed moderators haven't logged in this year

rozzer32

Right here is my 2p worth.

I do post in cake stop and look at the "Girls in...." threads. It is a bit of fun, we all know what content they contain. If you don't like the content then don't look at the thread. It's as simple as that really. I'm not a fan of gay porn, but if I went and looked at a gay porn site then complained about it then it would be my fault as I knew what the site contained. Some people really need to think about what they are saying. Most of the posts are done in a joking manner and not to be taken seriously, obviously some people need to lighten up a bit and try and see the funny side.

There has been nothing to stop "Men in...." threads. And you're not telling me that women don't like to have a good look at a semi naked man now and again. I'm sure in your workplace there are a few girls who go woooaahhh look at his abs etc. If women want some men to look at then I nominate myself and Cleat to do this.

Also the women complaining about the "Girls in..." threads, I take it you don't buy and womens magazines then??? Because normally they have some pictures of a celeb in a bikini on a beach or something. So it's fine for it to be in a magazine you buy but not in a forum?

But seriously if things have to be changed then why not just make a rule where the title of the thread must contain "May cause offence" or something along those lines. That would give people enough of a heads up.

Maybe we should set up a face to face meeting where we can discuss things properly. I don't mind sorting this out, the only problem I can see is finding a big enough bowl to store all the car keys in for the lucky dip part of the evening.

Pseudonym

ah - the old "if you don't like it, don't look at it" argument....I was wondering when someone would trot that one out....

dirtymonkey1985

Pseudonym wrote:

ah - the old "if you don't like it, don't look at it" argument....I was wondering when someone would trot that one out....

It's a good point though. If I'm in a restaurant and I don't like beef I won't order it then complain that I didn't like it.

These threads will clearly be what they're called. Therefore if scantily clad ladies offend don't open the thread.

Pseudonym

dirtymonkey1985 wrote:

These threads will clearly be what they're called. Therefore if scantily clad ladies offend don't open the thread.

yes but......surely the issue is not with what the thread is called - it is with the extent to which some of the pics may have ventured so far 'off topic' as to make them either offensive or distasteful to some of those viewing the thread. That's my take on it, anyway...

rozzer32

Pseudonym wrote:

dirtymonkey1985 wrote:

These threads will clearly be what they're called. Therefore if scantily clad ladies offend don't open the thread.

yes but......surely the issue is not with what the thread is called - it is with the extent to which some of the pics may have ventured so far 'off topic' as to make them either offensive or distasteful to some of those viewing the thread. That's my take on it, anyway...

I don't think any of the pics go off topic. If the girl is in knitwear then it doesn't matter how much or how little, she's is still in knitwear.

dirtymonkey1985

rozzer32 wrote:

Pseudonym wrote:

dirtymonkey1985 wrote:

These threads will clearly be what they're called. Therefore if scantily clad ladies offend don't open the thread.

yes but......surely the issue is not with what the thread is called - it is with the extent to which some of the pics may have ventured so far 'off topic' as to make them either offensive or distasteful to some of those viewing the thread. That's my take on it, anyway...

I don't think any of the pics go off topic. If the girl is in knitwear then it doesn't matter how much or how little, she's is still in knitwear.

Exactly. I agree some are, shall I say 'dodgy', but that's for the mods to decide.
Anything untoward should be flagged and I'm certain they'd deal with it swiftly. I think half the problem is that they hadn't been made aware of any pics that cause offence.
Talks of shutting them all down is extreme. They just need more of a close eye kept on them