Do mods get paid...

nathancom

Or do it just for fun?

capt_slog

No.

buckles

nathancom wrote:

Or do it just for fun?

You think moderating a forum is 'fun'?

arran77

Buckles wrote:

nathancom wrote:

Or do it just for fun?

You think moderating a forum is 'fun'?

Yes, all that power must be hilarious

sloppyschleckonds

Like shooting fish in a barrel. Or someit.

ugo.santalucia

I am sorry you see moderators as those who limit your freedom of expression... but the clue is in the name... we need to moderate your creativity and channel it through the guidelines and rules of the forum.
Whilst a bit of goliardy and free flow discussions have been tolerated in this section of the forum, it doesn't mean that everything is allowed. Let's be honest, this section serves no purpose and the publisher does not benefit from it. As long as it doesn't harm, it can be allowed to exist, but once it harms the host, then it is history. So, whilst you are encouraged to have your muddy discussions here, you still have to draw a line between what is acceptable in a modern society and what is not... obviously sexism, antisemitism, racism and all these -ism words which have seen such abundance of expression here have to be self-moderated. Otherwise the all section will simply disappear

tlw1

I've got a picture of them in my head like this......................



though - are pictures of pussy's allowed?

arran77

matthew h wrote:

I've got a picture of them in my head like this......................



though - are pictures of pussy's allowed?

I'd say you can see less than half of that pussy so I reckon you're ok there, any more though mister....you've been warned

Just out of interest Ugo do the publishers hold the same view on Crudcatcher?

GiantMike

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Let's be honest, this section serves no purpose and the publisher does not benefit from it.

Is that really honest though? I'm getting adverts for audible.co.uk which I can click on and buy Alex Fergusson's autobiography (and I bet it's a hilarious read with some useful insight into the mind of a footballing genius). Maybe the publisher of this forum could charge audible.co.uk (which I am reliably informed is an Amazon company) a fee for advertising here. I think it's common practice elsewhere and then the publisher would see the benefit of allowing the naughty children a place to play away from the less robust children who need protecting from normal life (according to the BB rules).

ugo.santalucia

GiantMike wrote:

Is that really honest though? I'm getting adverts for audible.co.uk which I can click on and buy Alex Fergusson's autobiography (and I bet it's a hilarious read with some useful insight into the mind of a footballing genius). Maybe the publisher of this forum could charge audible.co.uk (which I am reliably informed is an Amazon company) a fee for advertising here. I think it's common practice elsewhere and then the publisher would see the benefit of allowing the naughty children a place to play away from the less robust children who need protecting from normal life (according to the BB rules).

Yes, but the BB is a small fraternity of old timers, which does not attract new visitors. Virtually all the topics have a handful of contributors... new visitors generally join a cycling forum to talk about cycling, not ladyboys or celebrities.
It serves the only function of keeping the rest of the forum clean and reducing the moderating load. If instead it turns out to increase the moderating load, then it serves no purpose at all and it becomes redundant.

arran77

ugo.santalucia wrote:

It serves the only function of keeping the rest of the forum clean and reducing the moderating load.

So it does serve a purpose then

Bottom Bracket is no different from CrudCatcher is it really then so why is it always BB that takes the flack?

Several of us post in both sections and all agree that the level of tolerance is far greater in CrudCatcher :?

bdave262000

ugo.santalucia wrote:

GiantMike wrote:

Is that really honest though? I'm getting adverts for audible.co.uk which I can click on and buy Alex Fergusson's autobiography (and I bet it's a hilarious read with some useful insight into the mind of a footballing genius). Maybe the publisher of this forum could charge audible.co.uk (which I am reliably informed is an Amazon company) a fee for advertising here. I think it's common practice elsewhere and then the publisher would see the benefit of allowing the naughty children a place to play away from the less robust children who need protecting from normal life (according to the BB rules).

Yes, but the BB is a small fraternity of old timers, which does not attract new visitors. Virtually all the topics have a handful of contributors... new visitors generally join a cycling forum to talk about cycling, not ladyboys or celebrities.
It serves the only function of keeping the rest of the forum clean and reducing the moderating load. If instead it turns out to increase the moderating load, then it serves no purpose at all and it becomes redundant.

I do a bit of lurking but no contributing as yet on BB. Enjoy talking about cycling but also a bit of ladyboy / celebrity chat. I espcially enjoy Mikeys TV recommendations.

GiantMike

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Yes, but the BB is a small fraternity of old timers, which does not attract new visitors. Virtually all the topics have a handful of contributors... new visitors generally join a cycling forum to talk about cycling, not ladyboys or celebrities.

That's because the new kids have no personalities or a sense of humour. The only reason I post on here is because I can't sit in the pub all day spouting boll0x and I have a terrible job I hate. You're providing a valuable service that stops me being inappropriate at work. The irony is that Future PLC could inadvertantly publish a pic of a topless ladyboy next to a bike but I couldn't provide a hotlink to it as that would break Future PLC's rules.

arran77

GiantMike wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Yes, but the BB is a small fraternity of old timers, which does not attract new visitors. Virtually all the topics have a handful of contributors... new visitors generally join a cycling forum to talk about cycling, not ladyboys or celebrities.

That's because the new kids have no personalities or a sense of humour. The only reason I post on here is because I can't sit in the pub all day spouting boll0x and I have a terrible job I hate. You're providing a valuable service that stops me being inappropriate at work. The irony is that Future PLC could inadvertantly publish a pic of a topless ladyboy next to a bike but I couldn't provide a hotlink to it as that would break Future PLC's rules.

I think to be fair it can take a while for new comers to get used to the 'personalities' in Bottom Bracket and CrudCatcher, and for them to feel comfortable to post.

It took me a while before I sunk to the murky depths of BB

GiantMike

arran77 wrote:

GiantMike wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Yes, but the BB is a small fraternity of old timers, which does not attract new visitors. Virtually all the topics have a handful of contributors... new visitors generally join a cycling forum to talk about cycling, not ladyboys or celebrities.

That's because the new kids have no personalities or a sense of humour. The only reason I post on here is because I can't sit in the pub all day spouting boll0x and I have a terrible job I hate. You're providing a valuable service that stops me being inappropriate at work. The irony is that Future PLC could inadvertantly publish a pic of a topless ladyboy next to a bike but I couldn't provide a hotlink to it as that would break Future PLC's rules.

I think to be fair it can take a while for new comers to get used to the 'personalities' in Bottom Bracket and CrudCatcher, and for them to feel comfortable to post.

It took me a while before I sunk to the murky depths of BB

Yes but you still have no personality or a sense of humour.

rick_chasey

The smell of internet blood during a mass banning session is the currency I get paid in.




...oops... Shouldn't have let that slip.

seanoconn

Mods get paid in love surely?

arran77

Rick Chasey wrote:

The smell of internet blood during a mass banning session is the currency I get paid in.




...oops... Shouldn't have let that slip.

We knew that anyway :P

brianonyx

ugo.santalucia wrote:

GiantMike wrote:

Is that really honest though? I'm getting adverts for audible.co.uk which I can click on and buy Alex Fergusson's autobiography (and I bet it's a hilarious read with some useful insight into the mind of a footballing genius). Maybe the publisher of this forum could charge audible.co.uk (which I am reliably informed is an Amazon company) a fee for advertising here. I think it's common practice elsewhere and then the publisher would see the benefit of allowing the naughty children a place to play away from the less robust children who need protecting from normal life (according to the BB rules).

Yes, but the BB is a small fraternity of old timers, which does not attract new visitors. Virtually all the topics have a handful of contributors... new visitors generally join a cycling forum to talk about cycling, not ladyboys or celebrities.
It serves the only function of keeping the rest of the forum clean and reducing the moderating load. If instead it turns out to increase the moderating load, then it serves no purpose at all and it becomes redundant.

So when your business development folk pitch to the bigger advertisers they exclude the traffic and hits that come from BB and crud catcher? hmmm......

nathancom

I don't get why threads are being shut for being off-topic and "sexist" for discussing pulling the ladies of Middlesborough, an amusing and harmless thread to read. Surely this is the section of the forum where people can be off-topic and potentially at times mildly sexist. For sure it is a thankless task being a mod as your best outcome is upsetting all of the people only some of the time but heavy handed and arbitrary decisions abound on Bottom Bracket.

I do honestly wonder why people choose to cross over from being every day users of a forum to having to moderate the thing without any compensation. If it is all about how much advertising dollar Future Publishing can extract from their user base, what is in it for you?

ugo.santalucia

nathancom wrote:

I don't get why threads are being shut for being off-topic and "sexist" for discussing pulling the ladies of Middlesborough, an amusing and harmless thread to read. Surely this is the section of the forum where people can be off-topic and potentially at times mildly sexist.

It wasn't mild. A particular comment was reported by the boss as being "grotesque" and I agree it was.

She also added: "Please be more vigilant with these types of topics as it jeopardizes these areas of the forum..."

Hence my previous warning

arran77

ugo.santalucia wrote:

nathancom wrote:

I don't get why threads are being shut for being off-topic and "sexist" for discussing pulling the ladies of Middlesborough, an amusing and harmless thread to read. Surely this is the section of the forum where people can be off-topic and potentially at times mildly sexist.

It wasn't mild. A particular comment was reported by the boss as being "grotesque" and I agree it was.

She also added: "Please be more vigilant with these types of topics as it jeopardizes these areas of the forum..."

Hence my previous warning

It still smacks at complete hypocrisy when the same organisation has publications, both printed and electronic, that show far more graphic images than the one I got warned for yesterday :roll:

ugo.santalucia

arran77 wrote:

It still smacks at complete hypocrisy when the same organisation has publications, both printed and electronic, that show far more graphic images than the one I got warned for yesterday :roll:

That was my initiative and it was not a warning. I simply deleted your comment to avoid you getting into trouble. If you wish, you can re-post it, I won't delete it and if someone reports you, I will then give you a ban... is that better?

nathancom

ugo.santalucia wrote:

nathancom wrote:

I don't get why threads are being shut for being off-topic and "sexist" for discussing pulling the ladies of Middlesborough, an amusing and harmless thread to read. Surely this is the section of the forum where people can be off-topic and potentially at times mildly sexist.

It wasn't mild. A particular comment was reported by the boss as being "grotesque" and I agree it was.

She also added: "Please be more vigilant with these types of topics as it jeopardizes these areas of the forum..."

Hence my previous warning

Your boss obviously failed to read the tagline to the forum section:
Adults only! Warning - you may be offended!

It even says in the forum rules:
Do not enter such areas if you are liable to be offended.

It sounds like hit and run moderation on her behalf based simply on what offends her not on what helps develop a community, one that has effectively been destroyed on this forum section over the last 18 months.

I know you are doing this because you like and care about the community that has grown up around the forum but there does appear to be a change in how the forum as a whole is being moderated, an attempt to expunge anything that isn't advertising-nice, white teeth and healthy cyclists.

This is reflected in how they have ramped up the advertising on the forums so that on the ipad the page resizes every 30 seconds to accommodate the next huge advertising border for some car manufacturer, energy supplier or toothpaste company.

southdownswolf

ugo.santalucia wrote:

It serves the only function of keeping the rest of the forum clean and reducing the moderating load. If instead it turns out to increase the moderating load, then it serves no purpose at all and it becomes redundant.

I'm guessing that it is the "big" girls thread that helps to reduce the moderators loads? :twisted:

ugo.santalucia

nathancom wrote:

It sounds like hit and run moderation on her behalf based simply on what offends her not on what helps develop a community, one that has effectively been destroyed on this forum section over the last 18 months.

I know you are doing this because you like and care about the community that has grown up around the forum but there does appear to be a change in how the forum as a whole is being moderated, an attempt to expunge anything that isn't advertising-nice, white teeth and healthy cyclists.

This is reflected in how they have ramped up the advertising on the forums so that on the ipad the page resizes every 30 seconds to accommodate the next huge advertising border for some car manufacturer, energy supplier or toothpaste company.

I do care, or I would not be moderating. However, out of nearly 9000 comments and 6 years on the forum I have not caused any problem, with the exception of a couple of idiots reporting me for apparently moderating with the aim to boost my million pounds wheel building.
I do struggle to understand what expelicit and rude references to anal sex and a cycling forum have in common other than if someone on here takes particular pleasure from riding pointy saddles.
The community is still strong, but the strength of the forum is not in these idiotic threads. I don't mind the odd laugh and the off topic threads, but you have to put things in perspective. Nobody has any interest in seeing their name associated with those threads, if you do, then drop your nickname and use your real name :?

GiantMike

ugo.santalucia wrote:

arran77 wrote:

It still smacks at complete hypocrisy when the same organisation has publications, both printed and electronic, that show far more graphic images than the one I got warned for yesterday :roll:

That was my initiative and it was not a warning. I simply deleted your comment to avoid you getting into trouble. If you wish, you can re-post it, I won't delete it and if someone reports you, I will then give you a ban... is that better?

Go on then Arran. Ugo says you can re-post it if you want :twisted:

I promise I won't report you and I'm sure nobody else will.

seanoconn

GiantMike wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

arran77 wrote:

It still smacks at complete hypocrisy when the same organisation has publications, both printed and electronic, that show far more graphic images than the one I got warned for yesterday :roll:

That was my initiative and it was not a warning. I simply deleted your comment to avoid you getting into trouble. If you wish, you can re-post it, I won't delete it and if someone reports you, I will then give you a ban... is that better?

Go on then Arran. Ugo says you can re-post it if you want :twisted:

I promise I won't report you and I'm sure nobody else will.

Good thinking. I promise I won't report him either

arran77

seanoconn wrote:

GiantMike wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

arran77 wrote:

It still smacks at complete hypocrisy when the same organisation has publications, both printed and electronic, that show far more graphic images than the one I got warned for yesterday :roll:

That was my initiative and it was not a warning. I simply deleted your comment to avoid you getting into trouble. If you wish, you can re-post it, I won't delete it and if someone reports you, I will then give you a ban... is that better?

Go on then Arran. Ugo says you can re-post it if you want :twisted:

I promise I won't report you and I'm sure nobody else will.

Good thinking. I promise I won't report him either

B0llocks!

If Ugo didn't report me then one of you two wouldn't take long to do it

If anyone is so interested to see what all the fuss over nothing was then just look on the Daily Mail website and find the article about the Asian trans-gender Miss World entrant, I posted the most risque of all those pictures

GiantMike

arran77 wrote:

No way. I'm far too scared

When I get my Dolphin suit I'll order you one of these to wear while you're on the internet. Would you like the one with small balls or no balls?

arran77

GiantMike wrote:

arran77 wrote:

No way. I'm far too scared

When I get my Dolphin suit I'll order you one of these to wear while you're on the internet. Would you like the one with small balls or no balls?

I don't know, which one do you wear?