The intolerance of the pedants
DonDaddyD
Posts: 12,689
I have sent a PM to Supersonic but I want to raise this here as well.
Subject: Puncture every time I go on a ride
Personally, I think that the conduct of some members in the link above served only to humiliate the OP and demonstrated a blind intolerance. It's becoming a bit of an accepted culture in Commuting Chat (that I've never cared for).
The OP may have a learning difficulty, dyslexia or despite his age he might be learning/relearning how to read and/or write. English may or may not be his first language. How can anyone be sure he doesn’t and if he does, was it right to ridicule his posts in such a way?
Even if none of the above applies to the OP, the forum ought to be robust and accepting enough to tolerate a person who may struggle to write to a particular standard. No one has the right to marginalise someone simply because they cannot meet a perceived standard of English on a forum.
And yes, while the OP did not help himself by typing insults, correcting his English like that was provocative and would be somewhat humiliating to someone who struggles with such things.
It isn't necessary to be perfectly grammatically correct on a forum. If what has been written is understood then the post has done its job and should be responded to in a constructive manner. Equally, there are far more polite, constructive and productive ways to inform someone that 'txt speak' isn't appreciated here.
What I'm saying and now asking is whether it is right that Modertors enforce an intolerance towards posts that demonstrate a lack of good written English. When equally, the posts ridiculing said poor English could have been deleted and the thread could have continued?
Who is the victim here, the person who hasn't or can't write to a good standard of English or the posts ridiculing that lack of ability?
Subject: Puncture every time I go on a ride
Personally, I think that the conduct of some members in the link above served only to humiliate the OP and demonstrated a blind intolerance. It's becoming a bit of an accepted culture in Commuting Chat (that I've never cared for).
The OP may have a learning difficulty, dyslexia or despite his age he might be learning/relearning how to read and/or write. English may or may not be his first language. How can anyone be sure he doesn’t and if he does, was it right to ridicule his posts in such a way?
Even if none of the above applies to the OP, the forum ought to be robust and accepting enough to tolerate a person who may struggle to write to a particular standard. No one has the right to marginalise someone simply because they cannot meet a perceived standard of English on a forum.
And yes, while the OP did not help himself by typing insults, correcting his English like that was provocative and would be somewhat humiliating to someone who struggles with such things.
It isn't necessary to be perfectly grammatically correct on a forum. If what has been written is understood then the post has done its job and should be responded to in a constructive manner. Equally, there are far more polite, constructive and productive ways to inform someone that 'txt speak' isn't appreciated here.
What I'm saying and now asking is whether it is right that Modertors enforce an intolerance towards posts that demonstrate a lack of good written English. When equally, the posts ridiculing said poor English could have been deleted and the thread could have continued?
Who is the victim here, the person who hasn't or can't write to a good standard of English or the posts ridiculing that lack of ability?
Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game
0
Comments
-
IMO: On a native English speaking forum there is nothing wrong with expecting users to actually post in legible English. Txt spk is just that,shorthand to allow more words into a single text and thus saving the sender 10p(network depending) This forum is not a text message,there is no character limit to posts. Common courtesy would suggest that posters should at least attempt to post in a manner that is well formatted and understandable.
I do agree though,there was no call for the corrections made given nobody knows the posters true background. Ultimately the forum userbase is the collective victim.
It is worth comparing the quality of posts in the thread.
Nothing major here,the odd capslock fail.Everytime I go out on a ride about 15 miles around 55 minutes
, I get up the next day and tyre is flat this has happened every day for the last month now :evil: , I have gone through 6 brand new inertubes. My bike is a Boardman Comp, with brand new Ritchey disk OCR 700 Rear wheel and continental touring plus winter tyre 700x28c, new inertube same spec as tyre, just come back in again and tyre is slowly going down, never had this problem when using my victoria summer tyres. I Check tyreS everytime for thorns , glass inside and out and NOTHING thier, tyre is always inflated to the correct PSI and checked everytime I go out!! The holes are very minute like a pinch,do not use tyre levers to put on tyre but do to get off, Please HELP doing my head in 1 frustrated cyclist..
Slippery slope approachingthanks people and yes its just the back the tyre, it has puncture resistance that wot so annoying , only had 12 weeks so fairly new so is back wheel , new bike from sept 2011 but had at least 20 very slow punctures 6 innertubes ,had no punctures in front wheel or with me vittorias in 6mths, but changed 2 contis for grip in the wet and icy road conditions and no little gremlins at nyt ! goin 2 check Tyre first thing , mark were puncture is on Tyre let u know thanks again
Well on slippery slopejust checked puncture in rear wheel again :evil: , hole ryt on top of tube looks like a thorn hole :idea: , checked tyre nothing in it, marked tyre and rim before takin tube out hole in different place than other repaired patches, must just b me, bad luck am 16st and trye is pumped at max 100psi, tryes r 700X28c Continental touring plus puncture resistant think they missed this 1 out with the puncture resistant,ave put front tyre on the rear wheel, goin out later 2day let u no how i get on, c if i can get a punture free ride, fingers crossed :roll:
Feet are getting wet nowbeen back out to night normal 15 miles full pelt, 7pm in the rain and wind soaked ryt through, all i needed was a puncture, never happened somethink gone ryt and i enjoyed it felt good , no one else out every one must b avin fish 4 tea,no puncture as yet and lowered tire psi to 90,so far so good , just watchin tiger woods make a tit of himself at the masters
SPLASHsorry sirs 4 the spelling mistakes GET A LIFE YE SADOS !!
No sign of rescueu sad sad sad pricks didnt know ye had to be a smart ars* to write on shitty gay cycling forum !!! fark U EKE get a lifewho asked u for ye comment !
put ye handbag away dick ed !IF I WANTED A ENGLISH LESSON YE PRICK AD ASK FOR ONE YE SAD **** !!!!! NOW fark OF AND PLAY WID YE GAY FORUM
But
I can't seem to find a thread containing forum rules.????Topic locked. 'Txt talk' is not allowed. If it carries on in other threads, warnings will be issued then a ban.0 -
As pointed out in PM, I was going to warn a few users about conduct: but I thought I'd take a more passive stance, lock the thread and remind users about usage of text talk (which is why all this happened anyway) and hope that the matter will not repeat itself. Maybe we could add a bit on how people are treated when corrected them ie sarcasm, but let's see how it goes.
In my judgement, it was blatantly text talk.0 -
supersonic wrote:In my judgement, it was blatantly text talk.
It was. But where are the forum rules? (This is a genuine question)0 -
Good point, just added them to a better position. (sticky, top)0
-
Oh come on. Linking back to MTB buying? Put a sticky in each section....supersonic wrote:Good point, just added them to a better position. (sticky, top)0 -
All the relevant info is there.0
-
Hold onsupersonic wrote:All the relevant info is there.
STICKY - LINK BACK - ONE SUBSECTION - LARGE FORUM - NO RULES ANYWHERE ELSE
I can't make it easier to understand0 -
Is all the relevant info there or not in the stickies at the top of the two commuting sections? I will add it to the Workshop too. If it makes you happier I will cut and paste to save your mouse the one click lol.0
-
Put a sticky at the top of each subsection across the forum. Not just Commuting but MTB,Road and everywhere else.
Trying to mod to rules when they don't exist in the section or you have to hunt for them(in an entirely different area) is well,silly.There are a number of questions that get asked rather frequently in here. Re asking an already asked question tends to attract apathetic and disinterested answers. Reading the answers to an already answered question and commenting on them tends to attract much admiration and people willing to put inordinate amounts of effort in to helping you.
There is a search function on the forum (see where it says 'SEARCH' in big letters up and right) so please use it!
Forum FAQs:
http://www.bikeradar.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=40043
Forum rules:
1) Before posting on the forums, read these rules: http://www.futurenet.com/futureonline/t ... itions.asp
2) Don't quote the entire message that you're responding to, only the pertinent passage.
3) Use proper English, do not use 'txt tlk'. Do NOT post messages all in caps.
4) The forum is not an "online chat room" for inane banter or stupid postings. Please use software specifically designed for this purpose, i.e. MSN Messenger, ICQ etc...
5) No cross posting. Post your message to the appropriate forum and nowhere else or it will be locked or deleted without warning.
6)Do not post for sale messages apart from in the Classifieds section: index.php?c=5
7) Don't post just to increase your post count. If you have nothing to say on a certain matter then don't post.
8 ) Members are not permitted to harass or "flame" other members. Please note that this also includes the posting of taunts on a forum solely for the purpose of deriding that forum's topic and/or members.
9) Do not "bump" your topics back to the top of the forum boards. This is not fair on other users, any topics found to be bumped will be removed.
10) The forum has a search facility, please use it, the chances are your topic has been posted before, don't double post! search.php
11) Make your topic title descriptive. Do not use titles like "HEEELLLPPP PPPLEEASE!!!!" as these topics are often overlooked, and may well be deleted.
12) Please be considerate when posting long links. If it is going to create a horizontal scroll bar, shorten the link. Mods who find oversized links that create horizontal scrollbars will delete your post. Use http://www.tinyurl.com to shorten your link if you find that easier than forum code.
13) The size of signatures should be kept to a minimum (two or three lines), the advertising of items for sale is NOT allowed in the signature, this includes Ebay. Make sure your signature won't be mistaken for being part of your post.
14) Do not create multiple accounts.
15) Do not post "How much is it worth?" topics. If you want to know, look on other sites for a benchmark.
16) Do not post other people's personal information on here, without their express permission (posted by them on the forum). This includes, but is not limited to, e-mail addresses, phone numbers and postal addresses.
Summary: Behave nicely. If doing it in 'the real world' would be frowned upon, don't do it here.0 -
Put a sticky at the top of each subsection across the forum.
Yes, I have done. it needs adding to the road granted, please give me time to update (and the rest)0 -
These forums have no rules in announcements or stickies
MTB Buying
Health Fitness Training
Women
Routes
Events + subsections
Your mountain bikes
Your pics and vids
Road Beginners
Road Buying
Amateur Race
Pro Race has have a ruleset
Track
Workshop
Special Interests
Training
Sportives/Tours/Audax
Cake Stop
Campaign
Your Road Bikes
:P Save yourself time and post a forum wide announcement. That will cover all areas easier than copy-pasting like a bosssupersonic wrote:Put a sticky at the top of each subsection across the forum.
Yes, I have done. it needs adding to the road granted, please give me time to update (and the rest)0 -
Then I have to delete all the rest to tidy it up lol, but probably the lesser of two evils.0
-
Yep
I appear to have taken DDD's thread hostage
0 -
I love my days off hehe0
-
Productive!supersonic wrote:I love my days off hehe0 -
Why not just make DDD a mod?
Then he can run the forum as he sees fit.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
It's not always that clear cut DDD.
If it was, it'd have been dealt with and no-one would have cared or noticed.0 -
I'm sorry but now you're trying to fob me off with some 'head in the sand' rubbish. You don't really have a point do you, but you feel you need to type something to defend your position? Mayhap it be better you write nothing.
For what it is worth given the way the OP conducted himself after said provocation I think Supersonic was right for locking the thread. We both agreed this privately. However, the provocation itself relates to an uncalled for intolerance by some members and may need, I feel, addressing or further consideration in the future.
Had the OP not responded or resorted to insults after this post:Rolf wrote:boardmancomp555 wrote:Continental touring plus puncture resistant think they missed this 1 out with the puncture resistant
You don't need puncture protection in a tyre not to have punctures. I've ridden many hundreds of miles on unprotected tyres without punctures as did everyone before puncture guards were invented.
Anyway, some helpful suggestions:
right
see
taking
you
know
be
having
watching
night
The forum isn't a mobile phone......
Who would have been the victim?
Yes, the OP's thread needed locking. His rant followed this somewhat patronising post above and flaming by other members and sometimes, just sometimes the catalyst for the retaliation needs action from the moderators as well. It is not good enough to always side with the general concensus. Yes, txt spk is frowned upon here but what if, as I pointed out earlier, there was a justifiable underlying reason for its use? Is it still right to flame, flog and moderate against those posts without consideration for all sides?Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
There was no justified reason for it's use. As above the initial posts were mostly free of txt spk and soon degenerated into those realms. There is no sign at all of the OP portraying any personal mental/physical reason or otherwise that would hamper ability to type in legible English.0
-
Yes, I get that. And I said that the thread deserved to be locked. We esablished that.
What I am saying is that this intolerance around written English is a dangerous precedent because it does not account for those incapable or those hampered from being able to write in the correct manner.
Moreover, if we look at Rolf's post as a singular entity it is uncalled for and patronising. Had the OP not followed with abuse then I would argue that it would need moderation. Sometimes people need to consider the catalyst and not reaction when taking action.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
Does it not become the responsibility of a user to make at least,someone aware that they have trouble with spelling? (for whatever reason)
Locking the thread was the right thing,but it should have happened earlier <inb4 mods excuses and "report things for us">0 -
T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:Does it not become the responsibility of a user to make at least,someone aware that they have trouble with spelling? (for whatever reason)
No, why should it? And why should a person have to endure such ridicule from other users if they have difficulties with such, especially when it is the responsibility of a user not to insult, attack or flame.
Point is this, at the point of Rolf's post the OP had done little wrong and sometimes the catalyst as oppose to the raction needs to be looked at.
I think it borders too close to unreasonable the stance some on this website hold on the standard of written english they expect others to have.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
If you knew,that you were dyslexic and had trouble with spelling. Would you (upon having read the forum rules) not take it upon yourself to let someone know,in order to save trouble later on? Or would you continue posting until your posts became a problem/point of mocking then use it as a defence? (sadly in my experience the latter is usually only revealed when the user has taken a bit of abuse over it.)DonDaddyD wrote:T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:Does it not become the responsibility of a user to make at least,someone aware that they have trouble with spelling? (for whatever reason)
No, why should it? And why should a person have to endure such ridicule from other users if they have difficulties with such, especially when it is the responsibility of a user not to insult, attack or flame.
No point is. As of Rolf's post the OP had slowly been degenerating his posts into txt spk from perfectly legible English. There was no call for the corrections or mocking and I agree that Rolf's post set the ball rolling(As you say, the "catalyst"). Txt spk at this point is clearly against the rules of the forum which isn't unreasonable at all.Point is this, at the point of Rolf's post the OP had done little wrong and sometimes the catalyst as oppose to the raction needs to be looked at.
The English language far outdates getting as many words as possible into a text message,which this forum is not.
A lot of forums have some basic expectation of literacy levels. On the same note it is expected often on English speaking forums that English be used in posts over German,Gaelic or whatever language. It's not unreasonable and gives users a fair chance of understanding posts made.I think it borders too close to unreasonable the stance some on this website hold on the standard of written english they expect others to have.
People genuinely unable to construct a post in a reasonably understandable manner is a different thing entirely and not the case here.0 -
What I am saying is that this intolerance around written English is a dangerous precedent because it does not account for those incapable or those hampered from being able to write in the correct manner.
It calls for fine judgement. The occasional spelling mistake, grammatical error etc etc does happen (myself included!) and will be passed as normal.
However using all caps and text speak (as was, in my opinion, blatant here) will be acted on. Setting this precedent does not mean all instances of errors will be locked/deleted/whatever, the two simply do not equate.0 -
T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:
If you knew,that you were dyslexic and had trouble with spelling. Would you (upon having read the forum rules) not take it upon yourself to let someone know,in order to save trouble later on? Or would you continue posting until your posts became a problem/point of mocking then use it as a defence? (sadly in my experience the latter is usually only revealed when the user has taken a bit of abuse over it.)DonDaddyD wrote:T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:Does it not become the responsibility of a user to make at least,someone aware that they have trouble with spelling? (for whatever reason)
No, why should it? And why should a person have to endure such ridicule from other users if they have difficulties with such, especially when it is the responsibility of a user not to insult, attack or flame.
Asking the question again doesn't make it any more valid. And honestly, the question itself is just blinkered and silly.
There is no requirement for anyone to reveal any personal information about themselves and this includes a disability. There is however a requirement for members not to mock and riducle others. There is an expection that a person can particpate on this website free of said mocking and ridicule.
I beleive that initially Rolf's post to be in breach of this. And if it was not for the outbursts of the OP then I believe Rolfs post should have been met with moderation.TM wrote:
No point is. As of Rolf's post the OP had slowly been degenerating his posts into txt spk from perfectly legible English. There was no call for the corrections or mocking and I agree that Rolf's post set the ball rolling(As you say, the "catalyst"). Txt spk at this point is clearly against the rules of the forum which isn't unreasonable at all.Point is this, at the point of Rolf's post the OP had done little wrong and sometimes the catalyst as oppose to the raction needs to be looked at.
If there was no call for the corrections or mocking and that was what precipitate the txt spk then I believe my point stands. After all there was no need to correct the persons spelling in the manner it was done.
The English language far outdates getting as many words as possible into a text message,which this forum is not.
[/quote]
A lot of forums have some basic expectation of literacy levels. On the same note it is expected often on English speaking forums that English be used in posts over German,Gaelic or whatever language. It's not unreasonable and gives users a fair chance of understanding posts made.I think it borders too close to unreasonable the stance some on this website hold on the standard of written english they expect others to have.
People genuinely unable to construct a post in a reasonably understandable manner is a different thing entirely and not the case here.
As I said there has to be capacity to allow for exceptions within the rule or you run the risk of marginalising the most vulnerable.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
Fine and I'm happy with that.supersonic wrote:What I am saying is that this intolerance around written English is a dangerous precedent because it does not account for those incapable or those hampered from being able to write in the correct manner.
It calls for fine judgement. The occasional spelling mistake, grammatical error etc etc does happen (myself included!) and will be passed as normal.
However using all caps and text speak (as was, in my opinion, blatant here) will be acted on. Setting this precedent does not mean all instances of errors will be locked/deleted/whatever, the two simply do not equate.
I will be laying the hamer down whereever i see the pedant's geting a bit to uppity
Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
No there isn't of course. You're trying to defend the OP who clearly showed no appreciable signs of disability or inability to form coherent sentence,rather than seeing the OP's posts were degenerating to txt spk even before Rolf posted. I could type the rest of my reply in text speak,pig latin or other and it would be blatant,I think with 700+ posts I have demonstrated an understanding of the language I'm using,the same demonstration the OP gave.DonDaddyD wrote:There is no requirement for anyone to reveal any personal information about themselves and this includes a disability. There is however a requirement for members not to mock and riducle others. There is an expection that a person can particpate on this website free of said mocking and ridicule.
Typing in text speak and genuinely having difficulty typing in English are two very different things. The latter is irrelevant here as the user demonstrated very good levels of literacy.
All of it should be been met with moderation,long before second page. It was blatant text speak.I beleive that initially Rolf's post to be in breach of this. And if it was not for the outbursts of the OP then I believe Rolfs post should have been met with moderation.
There was no call for corrections at all,nor was there need for postings in text speak,which ultimately started it.If there was no call for the corrections or mocking and that was what precipitate the txt spk then I believe my point stands. After all there was no need to correct the persons spelling in the manner it was done.
The English language far outdates getting as many words as possible into a text message,which this forum is not.
[/quote]
A lot of forums have some basic expectation of literacy levels. On the same note it is expected often on English speaking forums that English be used in posts over German,Gaelic or whatever language. It's not unreasonable and gives users a fair chance of understanding posts made.I think it borders too close to unreasonable the stance some on this website hold on the standard of written english they expect others to have.
People genuinely unable to construct a post in a reasonably understandable manner is a different thing entirely and not the case here.
As I said there has to be capacity to allow for exceptions within the rule or you run the risk of marginalising the most vulnerable.[/quote]
I don't think anyone would take issue with posts from a user who's first language isn't English. I haven't seen text speak too often here so in the event of badly written posts (in broken English or otherwise) would it be so hard to contact the user and perhaps,actually moderate proactively?0 -
T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:
No there isn't of course. You're trying to defend the OP...DonDaddyD wrote:There is no requirement for anyone to reveal any personal information about themselves and this includes a disability. There is however a requirement for members not to mock and riducle others. There is an expection that a person can particpate on this website free of said mocking and ridicule.
Really, they why in my first post of this thread did I write this:I wrote:Even if none of the above applies to the OP, the forum ought to be robust and accepting enough to tolerate a person who may struggle to write to a particular standard. No one has the right to marginalise someone simply because they cannot meet a perceived standard of English on a forum.
Clearly I'm speaking from the context that while I think the OP was wrong, the stance in and of itself doesn't allow for exceptions.
As for the rest it's just arguing semantics. Rolf's post was uncalled for and systemic of an intolerance towards that lack a presupposed level of English needed to particpate on this forum.
Prior to Rolf's post the OP did not use txt spk. His grammar and spelling was poor, which he was ridiculed for. That was wrong. At that point the OP was the victim. His retaliation changed that. Acknowledgement of that does not detract from all the points raised.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
He posted this before Rolf stepped in:been back out to night normal 15 miles full pelt, 7pm in the rain and wind soaked ryt through, all i needed was a puncture, never happened somethink gone ryt and i enjoyed it felt good , no one else out every one must b avin fish 4 tea,no puncture as yet and lowered tire psi to 90,so far so good , just watchin tiger woods make a tit of himself at the masters
Yes, it is poor, but a few examples of text speak which were then perpetuated throughout the thread.0 -
I don't think Rolf's post in the manner it was posted was necessary.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0
