Sky doping chat wrecking Spoliers

13

Comments

  • mfin
    mfin Posts: 6,729
    frenchfighter wrote:
    I haven`t said anything personal. I was clearly referring to what you have written in the past. A comment on your level of abuse you used a fair few times when I read your pots. There is a big difference.

    Well you have really IMO, and my level of abuse isn't really there, I don't level abuse at individuals I'm afraid. I don't find it surprising that I get a bit myself though if I say the odd controversial thing though.

    You do come across like Judge Judy and Executioner on what you think is right and wrong that people say though, and level little character assassinations at people with the same apparent level of righteousness.

    Anyway, like I said, I started the thread with a small hope the Spoilers would not be so polluted with Sky Doping things, which I think most people agree is what's degrading them the most.

    Maybe you could help out?

    I don't wanna argue with you though, there's not much point, and it doesn't help the purpose of this thread really.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Racing's been a bit pants which doesn't help.

    Fwiw - spoiler threads are best when they act like enthusiastic tickers with a bit of real time competiting analysis and general sports fan fun.

    That's why I asked for it to be seperats.


    Deep down I knew this would happen post Armstrong confession. We're no longer united against one guy who doesn't even ride anymore.

    Contador threads did get tedious but at least a) he did get busted and b) you all seemed to relish the opportunity to make horribly tedious steak puns which kept everyone amused bar me. Even my gf got in on that.

    I haven't been around all that much since Oct 2012 so I can't comment on much of the above.

    And my favourite discussions on here are always the tactical ones. Often less relevant in the Tour (sadly) but not always.

    Maybe it's a symptom of die hard fans coming to terms with their sport going semi mainstream, who knows. Maybe their doping cynicism set them apart from the n00bs who only like the guy holding a lance with a strong arm.


    Anyway. I want to be able to read spoiler threads and get a good idea on wtf is going on. Step up to the plate people.
    _
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    Read a ticker then Rick, there's loads of them about.

    I'll never complain about anbody posting anything. We all post some absolute murder-chat.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 19,434
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Racing's been a bit pants which doesn't help..

    Weather's been hot. People go mental.
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • mike6
    mike6 Posts: 1,199
    dish_dash wrote:
    Relative newbie poster and long-time lurker... Coriander you hit the nail on the head. Agreed.

    FF - love the pics. IMO they add as much value as geology, wine and cheese chat.

    Thats it!!!! FF to post pics only, no text, end of arguments. Sorted.
  • dsoutar
    dsoutar Posts: 1,746
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    Read a ticker then Rick, there's loads of them about.

    I'll never complain about anbody posting anything. We all post some absolute murder-chat.

    I can see Rick's pov as a) BR spoiler threads have more info and are more frequently updated when any events of note happen and b) will provide a diversity of views of said events (assuming that they are not coloured by the usual arguments)

    However I too have become a bit weary of some of the nonsense posted and as a result I post much less. Not sure if there's is an answer to all this; I guess that what all internet forums (fora ?) are like and I don't believe that's all down to newbies coming on here due to Sky. Many of the more vociferous posters from all / any camps have been on here for years.

    I would like to see more posts that are likely to be controversial being of the "This is my opinion and I don't have any evidence" style but I guess that's unlikely as usually the people posting said content (whatever it is) believe it so much they don't think any evidence is needed
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    As a mod I feel obliged to say it's more about where you post it rather than what....
    _
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    As a mod I feel obliged to say it's more about where you post it rather than what....

    See, that's something else I've never understood. Why does it matter? If i'm having a cnversation face to face with a group of people, it wanders all over the place. However, nobody ever stops and says "oh hang on, we started off talking about cycling and now you're talking about cheese! You need to shut up or start a seperate conversation about cheese!"

    As long as people aren't abusive, who cares?
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • Cleat Eastwood
    Cleat Eastwood Posts: 7,508
    If, as has happened a spoiler thread is started 24 hours before a stage its bound to get filled with seemingly nonsense chit chat - I've got no problem with what people post - but to avoid waffle there could be a ban on spoliers before the stage starts - but you'd cut out a lot of the fun I reckon - sport is nothing without opinion anyway.
    The dissenter is every human being at those moments of his life when he resigns
    momentarily from the herd and thinks for himself.
  • jonomc4
    jonomc4 Posts: 891
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    As a mod I feel obliged to say it's more about where you post it rather than what....

    So from that I take you are say what the OP said - keep the drugs comments out of the spoiler threads - I for one would prefer that ,as I want something I can take a quick glance at to see what's happening in a race - I am old enough to know that you cannot really make a sensible quote on whether someone is doping or not based on watching one race on the TV
  • joelsim
    joelsim Posts: 7,552
    I watched a video last night of the 2009 rivalry b/w Bertie and LA.

    It's a totally different rider (in fact riders) than now. The Schlecks too.

    AC didn't even look tired (Froome has so far) when he broke away and won his stages.

    But you know, there were a lot of riders about in those days who are still competing, your Cancellaras, Voecklers etc. In those days they were beating everyone who was EPO'd up. There's only one logical explanation for that.

    Anyway, there's obviously less of it about these days, the racing seems to be much tighter with far less 'extraterrestrial' performances. But you know when the rules/testing makes it harder it affects everyone. In days gone by you had to do it to be competitive, now less so.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    It's not really a conversation. It's a forum - a bit like you get at conferences. You need some structure so it makes sense to everyone. People go here to discuss prof racing so that's what they'll be hoping for. Thaf happens again for each thread title.

    Else you may as well just have one massive pro race thread.

    Just gives structure to the place and means people are more likely to find the kind of discussion they're looking for.

    E.g. if I wanted to discuss sky doping or not I'd go to that specific thread.

    It aslo serves as a way to police people deliberately moving discussions to their own unrelated agenda which an put people off.

    It's a broad church here but it's not 4chan.

    All about structure. Swhat sets us apart from the pseudo anarchists.
    _
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    I've had it up to here with your "rules" maaaaaaaan.

    As it happens the only other thing I post on is just one massive thread. And wanders aimlessly with nothing but awful abuse and character assassination.

    And it's great.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • above_the_cows
    above_the_cows Posts: 11,406
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    All about structure. Swhat sets us apart from the pseudo anarchists.

    *Off topic political theory post* Anarchism isn't about a lack of structure its about a lack of hierarchy, subtle difference, which I can understand as the big cheese you might not be what you want to hear :wink:
    Correlation is not causation.
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,695
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    I've had it up to here with your "rules" maaaaaaaan.

    As it happens the only other thing I post on is just one massive thread. And wanders aimlessly with nothing but awful abuse and character assassination.

    And it's great.

    The Big Girls Thread? :P
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    Above The Cows wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    All about structure. Swhat sets us apart from the pseudo anarchists.

    *Off topic political theory post* Anarchism isn't about a lack of structure its about a lack of hierarchy, subtle difference, which I can understand as the big cheese you might not be what you want to hear :wink:


    Always about the cheese with you isn't it?
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • mfin
    mfin Posts: 6,729
    jonomc4 wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    As a mod I feel obliged to say it's more about where you post it rather than what....

    So from that I take you are say what the OP said - keep the drugs comments out of the spoiler threads - I for one would prefer that ,as I want something I can take a quick glance at to see what's happening in a race - I am old enough to know that you cannot really make a sensible quote on whether someone is doping or not based on watching one race on the TV

    I don't think it matters if there's doping comments, it's when they're unfounded in the sense they're not backed up by any positive tests, dodgy connections or whatever. I think it's fair enough if there's evidence or history. The problem seems to be that at the moment there's so much talk of Sky and especially Froome doping when there's no evidence at all of it. If there was, I wouldn't care less if it was mentioned, in fact, I'd expect it and probably mention it myself in a heartbeat.
  • Paulie W
    Paulie W Posts: 1,492
    Above The Cows wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    All about structure. Swhat sets us apart from the pseudo anarchists.

    *Off topic political theory post* Anarchism isn't about a lack of structure its about a lack of hierarchy, subtle difference, which I can understand as the big cheese you might not be what you want to hear :wink:

    Well Rick did call them pseudo-anarchists!
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Above The Cows wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    All about structure. Swhat sets us apart from the pseudo anarchists.

    *Off topic political theory post* Anarchism isn't about a lack of structure its about a lack of hierarchy, subtle difference, which I can understand as the big cheese you might not be what you want to hear :wink:

    Ends up being the same 'cos there's no hierarchy to enforce ;-). Ergo 4chan
    _
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,253
    Politics chat is wrecking the cheese chat in the sky doping chat wrecking spoilers chat
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • milton50
    milton50 Posts: 3,856
    I don't know when this forum got so petty and belligerent. For the first 18 months or so of reading the pro forum it was great. Everyone just talked about the cycling, the tactics and the intrigue of racing. There was banter but it always seemed good natured and tongue in cheek. There were disagreements but there didn't seem to be vendettas which went on for months.

    Inevitably that recollection is partly rose-tinted, but it's genuinely how I remember it for the most part.

    Just let things go. It's only a cycling forum. Enjoy the cycling.
  • iainf72
    iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    ddraver wrote:
    Plus if someone wants to post some bile about Sky (and it usually is Sky) then they should make sure that it is true (to the best of their knowledge) and has some basis in reality. I'm afraid i won't apologise for asking people to provide evidence for their wild claims, after all, people ask me that every day in my job!

    The problem is the sensitivity about Sky IMO. I read in another thread someone moaning that no one accused Nibali of doping in the Giro. Well, I certainly remember peopled doing it. With Sky there seems to be some kind of victim thing going on where everything is taken as a slight

    I've had disagreements with FF - And called him a loon with a cartoon view of cycling. But it's just his character on the forum, doesn't bother me. And I think my baiting doesn't bother him.

    In case anyone is wondering, yes, I'm a tosser in real life too
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,725
    This thread is more than a bit poo.
    This place is fast becoming the polar opposite
    of the Cycling News nut house.
    The common theme being the word "troll".

    No fence for those of us who only follow the sport to sit on.
    It's been torn down by all the haters and worshippers.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • No_Ta_Doctor
    No_Ta_Doctor Posts: 14,651
    Rick Chasey wrote:

    All about structure. Swhat sets us apart from the pseudo anarchists.

    Hey, that's not very inclusive for us pseudo-anarchists.

    Personally I like a bit of a meander in a thread. Often it's where some of the more interesting posts turn up. I also quite like a bit of meaningless banter every now and again

    What I'm not keen on is when a thread goes seriously off-topic to an area that is both controversial and polarised and has been covered in depth elsewhere. Or even everywhere.

    On a personal note, I do think some of the anti FF stuff goes a bit too close to the bone, but at the same time it doesn't exactly help when anyone professing the opposite opinion is some labelled sort of newcomer ignorant fanboy. I've got close to 30 years watching cycling, man and boy, behind me. That's a huge amount of distilled wisdom from Phil and Paul... errr.. Hmmm. I block FF for the pure and simple reason that I don't want to rise to the bait. I regard that as doing my bit for thread purity and tone of posting on BR.

    Steak puns are fairly rare now, though I don't mind them. :wink:
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format
  • Coriander
    Coriander Posts: 1,326
    iainf72 wrote:
    In case anyone is wondering, yes, I'm a tosser in real life too

    This. :wink:

    Just joking, no, really I am. He's lovely and very, very balanced. In fact, the whole group of them were lovely, TheBigBean, Moomaloid as well.
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    Can't people just not read the stuff they don't like?

    Anyway, as nobody has singled me out for praise or abuse, I'm assuming I'm just wallpaper and can carry on doing as I see fit. Win.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • Macaloon
    Macaloon Posts: 5,545
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    Can't people just not read the stuff they don't like?

    Anyway, as nobody has singled me out for praise or abuse, I'm assuming I'm just wallpaper and can carry on doing as I see fit. Win.

    Haughty tw@t.
    ...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.
  • No_Ta_Doctor
    No_Ta_Doctor Posts: 14,651
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    Can't people just not read the stuff they don't like?

    Anyway, as nobody has singled me out for praise or abuse, I'm assuming I'm just wallpaper and can carry on doing as I see fit. Win.

    How do I know if I'm going to like it until I've read it? I can't unread it.

    I've tried with some of your posts, but it doesn't work.*











    *Just to keep you on your toes and not too blase in your wallpaperness.
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    No tA Doctor wrote:
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    Can't people just not read the stuff they don't like?

    Anyway, as nobody has singled me out for praise or abuse, I'm assuming I'm just wallpaper and can carry on doing as I see fit. Win.

    How do I know if I'm going to like it until I've read it? I can't unread it.

    I've tried with some of your posts, but it doesn't work.*











    *Just to keep you on your toes and not too blase in your wallpaperness.


    You see? That was great. I enjoyed that.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent
  • disgruntledgoat
    disgruntledgoat Posts: 8,957
    Macaloon wrote:
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    Can't people just not read the stuff they don't like?

    Anyway, as nobody has singled me out for praise or abuse, I'm assuming I'm just wallpaper and can carry on doing as I see fit. Win.

    Haughty tw@t.

    Yeah? Well I love you too, man.
    "In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"

    @gietvangent

Categories