* Mail has paid trolls in asylum?

EnacheV

So 2017 started very interesting ...

The old spanish mummy winning after 70km solo break - by 2mins
Porte (BMC) gaining 30 secs in 1 km uphill
Another BMC dude suddenly beating Aru and Bardet uphill
Roglic suddenly, again , being master TT-er and climber again (the guy with glowing hub from italian moto documentary)
Local portuguese dopers winning .HC races
and a lot more...

you would have tought that the asylum would some things to talk about, but surprise, there is total silence there.

Which got me thinking. Is the asylum something kept alive by a couple of paid trolls (you can't be a normal person and do 10,000 posts of noting in 2-3 Sky threads) by some Sky corporate competitor?

Watch the place come alive at the first Sky uphill win

EnacheV

i fail at editing

carbonclem

The logic is that they only hate on Sky because Sky are the only team that claim to be clean.

You know how the rest all say how they dope, right?

imatfaal

And Trolls troll only for reaction - and there is little to no reaction with some topics; but, on these fora, there are a lot of people who will attack/defend/talk about Team Sky. ie Don't feed the trolls and they go away - but as soon as you engage with them they ruin the thread

ddraver

Sky live rent free in an awful lot of peoples head.... underneath the L. Armstrong penthouse suite mind.

Rodrego Hernandez

The Clinic used to have quite a few well connected people giving some useful and interesting hints about what's going on. Thanks to a bit of over-zealous moderation it's now just half a dozen maniacs all shouting various made up facts at each other. Sad really as at one time it was a good source of information on how the grand tours were being won, I think the Sky cortisone connection was made a couple of years before it became main stream news. It's now gone a bit crazy.

EnacheV

i'm beginning to think that whole cyclingnews is run by daily mail trolls

the latest article about complains in the peleton regarding moto drafting at Volta ao Algarve is illustrated with a Sky motopacing training session

EnacheV

some obscure ex Sky rider babbling something about tramadol (same things he said few years ago) and the asylum has reborn , the usual crusaders have a small bone to chew

kingstongraham

EnacheV wrote:

some obscure ex Sky rider babbling something about tramadol (same things he said few years ago) and the asylum has reborn , the usual crusaders have a small bone to chew

My dog was on Tramadol. The riders should try Corvental (Theophylline)- that was the real wonder drug for him.

r0bh

EnacheV wrote:

some obscure ex Sky rider babbling something about tramadol (same things he said few years ago) and the asylum has reborn , the usual crusaders have a small bone to chew

Michael Barry questions the ethics of using Tramadol in bike races; I question the ethics of Michael Barry who lied about his own past doping to get the gig at Sky in the first place :roll:

Richmond Racer 2

Must admit that I have zero fooks of time for Barry

RichN95.

I'm guessing Barry didn't get the media career he expected on retirement, so he's pitching his clickbait generating credentials.

I'm getting annoyed by this constant reference to grey areas and the like. There are no grey areas - there's just the WADA code - it's black and white. You may very well think tramadol should be banned (I do), but it's not so anyone is free to use it as much as they like.

It's the same as life in general. We have the law, and anyone is free to find their own moral code whilst keeping within the law. Saying that something is 'legal, but not moral' is just imposing your moral code on others in order to adversely judge them. And so it is with cycling. Grey areas are invented just to create a doping scandal where there is no evidence of doping.

joelsim

r0bh wrote:

EnacheV wrote:

some obscure ex Sky rider babbling something about tramadol (same things he said few years ago) and the asylum has reborn , the usual crusaders have a small bone to chew

Michael Barry questions the ethics of using Tramadol in bike races; I question the ethics of Michael Barry who lied about his own past doping to get the gig at Sky in the first place :roll:

Clearly there's nothing harder that he can spill the beans on.

blazing_saddles

The BC report comes out tomorrow.
Tramadol to be trumped by sensationalised sexism for the Mail and it's minions.
Happy days, no doubt.

RichN95.

Blazing Saddles wrote:

The BC report comes out tomorrow.
Tramadol to be trumped by sensationalised sexism for the Mail and it's minions.
Happy days, no doubt.

Do you know what's in it?
And was anyone you know interviewed for it - or was it just those complaining?

blazing_saddles

RichN95 wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

The BC report comes out tomorrow.
Tramadol to be trumped by sensationalised sexism for the Mail and it's minions.
Happy days, no doubt.

Do you know what's in it?
And was anyone you know interviewed for it - or was it just those complaining?

No Rich, on both counts.
Hardly surprising, given these things tend to have a desired outcome.
No doubt that the word "more" will heavily feature.

RichN95.

Blazing Saddles wrote:

No Rich, on both counts.
Hardly surprising, given these things tend to have a desired outcome.
No doubt that the word "more" will heavily feature.

So the report has been Cooked and Varnished

twotoebenny

RichN95 wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

No Rich, on both counts.
Hardly surprising, given these things tend to have a desired outcome.
No doubt that the word "more" will heavily feature.

So the report has been Cooked and Varnished

I see what you did there

Richmond Racer 2

RichN95 wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

No Rich, on both counts.
Hardly surprising, given these things tend to have a desired outcome.
No doubt that the word "more" will heavily feature.

So the report has been Cooked and Varnished

*applause*

weekendcyclingfan

I think you could be right. The Daily Mail has decided that owning both the UK and US online and paper markets with a continued growth that they need to find new areas which to expand. One area they zeroed in on was the sport of cycling. They saw the newspaper could expand in untold ways especially if they were able to capture two online forums in English, CyclingNews and BikeRadar. The strategy was agreed at a board level meeting, signed off by Jonathan Harold Esmond Vere Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere and implemented by paying two guys in India $2.34 per day to write anti-Sky posts.

Have to say guys, as far as conspiracy tinfoilism, this thread tops the top. This forum is becoming every bit like the asylum you claim other forums to be, IMHO.

Truth be told, the Clinic looks fairly dead, apart from the Armstrong and Moto threads.

bompington

... which makes me realise - why on earth would anyone pay someone to troll when there are clearly people willing to do it for free?

BTW, wcf, there is a possibility that the OP was cracking a joke. I presume somewhere in your extensive education it was defined for you what one of those is.

weekendcyclingfan

bompington wrote:

... which makes me realise - why on earth would anyone pay someone to troll when there are clearly people willing to do it for free?

BTW, wcf, there is a possibility that the OP was cracking a joke. I presume somewhere in your extensive education it was defined for you what one of those is.

Likewise, did you not sense the irony in my tone?

blazing_saddles

weekendcyclingfan wrote:

Truth be told, the Clinic looks fairly dead, apart from the Armstrong and Moto threads.

Have to agree.
Credit, where credit is due, hog.

spam02

weekendcyclingfan wrote:

I think you could be right. The Daily Mail has decided that owning both the UK and US online and paper markets with a continued growth that they need to find new areas which to expand. One area they zeroed in on was the sport of cycling. They saw the newspaper could expand in untold ways especially if they were able to capture two online forums in English, CyclingNews and BikeRadar. The strategy was agreed at a board level meeting, signed off by Jonathan Harold Esmond Vere Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere and implemented by paying two guys in India $2.34 per day to write anti-Sky posts.

Have to say guys, as far as conspiracy tinfoilism, this thread tops the top. This forum is becoming every bit like the asylum you claim other forums to be, IMHO.

Truth be told, the Clinic looks fairly dead, apart from the Armstrong and Moto threads.

I think you'll find it is not anti-Sky, but anti-cycling posts they are being paid to write

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... louts.html

This is fairly typical of the Daily Mail's view of cycling in general - feel free to look through the site for further examples. It's full of every anti-cycling cliché under the sun and is so bad I originally thought it was a spoof.
You wonder why people on here can't take anything they write seriously. Feel free to read the comments below to get an idea of the type of people that read the Mail. You identify with them?

weekendcyclingfan

SPaM02 wrote:

weekendcyclingfan wrote:

I think you could be right. The Daily Mail has decided that owning both the UK and US online and paper markets with a continued growth that they need to find new areas which to expand. One area they zeroed in on was the sport of cycling. They saw the newspaper could expand in untold ways especially if they were able to capture two online forums in English, CyclingNews and BikeRadar. The strategy was agreed at a board level meeting, signed off by Jonathan Harold Esmond Vere Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere and implemented by paying two guys in India $2.34 per day to write anti-Sky posts.

Have to say guys, as far as conspiracy tinfoilism, this thread tops the top. This forum is becoming every bit like the asylum you claim other forums to be, IMHO.

Truth be told, the Clinic looks fairly dead, apart from the Armstrong and Moto threads.

I think you'll find it is not anti-Sky, but anti-cycling posts they are being paid to write

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... louts.html

This is fairly typical of the Daily Mail's view of cycling in general - feel free to look through the site for further examples. It's full of every anti-cycling cliché under the sun and is so bad I originally thought it was a spoof.
You wonder why people on here can't take anything they write seriously. Feel free to read the comments below to get an idea of the type of people that read the Mail. You identify with them?

Sure, just like the Telegraph; "War declared on the Lycra louts on wheels" - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/active/r ... heels.html

or the Guardian; "Why are London cyclists so white, male and middle-class?" - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/dav ... ddle-class

Then you have a pro article in the Mail about the spate of deaths upon cyclists;

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... te-26.html

Its what's known as "balance" in news media reporting, providing alternate views for the readership rather than pandering to a single, binary thought process. Its a rather important part of our democracy and free speech in the media.

Probably why The Daily Mail has the highest female readership in the UK, over 50%;

The Daily Mail was the first to provide features especially for women and in the second half of 2013 had a 54.77% female readership, the only British newspaper whose female readers constitute more than 50% of its demographic.

My sense is this forum tends to over emphasis on articles which agree with their one sided point of views and ignores all others.

Key word, "balance", which from my point of view the Daily Mail is providing.

Ber Nard

weekendcyclingfan wrote:

Probably why The Daily Mail has the highest female readership in the UK, over 50%

No. Whilst you're googling, Google 'femail' and 'side bar of shame'.

weekendcyclingfan

Ber Nard wrote:

weekendcyclingfan wrote:

Probably why The Daily Mail has the highest female readership in the UK, over 50%

No. Whilst you're googling, Google 'femail' and 'side bar of shame'.

Well, yes. I just proved it and linked it unlike yourself.

I don't read Femail myself but the articles are presented to a female audience, this one from today I thought very insightful:

'I was in complete denial': Casualty star Sunetra Sarker reveals she was ashamed of her Indian roots and spent her childhood striving to be British - and secretly drinking Bovril!

Actress Sunetra Sarker, 43, traces her family history to Calcutta, India, in show Who Do You Think You Are?
Best known for playing Dr Zoe Hanna in Casualty for almost 10 years

Admits she used to rebel against her heritage and now regrets ignoring it

Discovers her great-grandfather's sister was a political activist and forged a friendship with Mahatma Gandhi, leader of the Indian Independence Movement

Breaks down in tears on BBC's Who Do You Think You Are?

You are a funny bunch here.

spam02

weekendcyclingfan wrote:

SPaM02 wrote:

weekendcyclingfan wrote:

I think you could be right. The Daily Mail has decided that owning both the UK and US online and paper markets with a continued growth that they need to find new areas which to expand. One area they zeroed in on was the sport of cycling. They saw the newspaper could expand in untold ways especially if they were able to capture two online forums in English, CyclingNews and BikeRadar. The strategy was agreed at a board level meeting, signed off by Jonathan Harold Esmond Vere Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere and implemented by paying two guys in India $2.34 per day to write anti-Sky posts.

Have to say guys, as far as conspiracy tinfoilism, this thread tops the top. This forum is becoming every bit like the asylum you claim other forums to be, IMHO.

Truth be told, the Clinic looks fairly dead, apart from the Armstrong and Moto threads.

I think you'll find it is not anti-Sky, but anti-cycling posts they are being paid to write

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... louts.html

This is fairly typical of the Daily Mail's view of cycling in general - feel free to look through the site for further examples. It's full of every anti-cycling cliché under the sun and is so bad I originally thought it was a spoof.
You wonder why people on here can't take anything they write seriously. Feel free to read the comments below to get an idea of the type of people that read the Mail. You identify with them?

Sure, just like the Telegraph; "War declared on the Lycra louts on wheels" - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/active/r ... heels.html

or the Guardian; "Why are London cyclists so white, male and middle-class?" - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/dav ... ddle-class

Then you have a pro article in the Mail about the spate of deaths upon cyclists;

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... te-26.html

Its what's known as "balance" in news media reporting, providing alternate views for the readership rather than pandering to a single, binary thought process. Its a rather important part of our democracy and free speech in the media.

Probably why The Daily Mail has the highest female readership in the UK, over 50%;

The Daily Mail was the first to provide features especially for women and in the second half of 2013 had a 54.77% female readership, the only British newspaper whose female readers constitute more than 50% of its demographic.

My sense is this forum tends to over emphasis on articles which agree with their one sided point of views and ignores all others.

Key word, "balance", which from my point of view the Daily Mail is providing.

l

When you say 'Pro' cycling article, do you mean the factual news article? Where is the balanced 'opinion' piece? Is it the one saying that wire should be stung across roads to decapitate cyclists? I don't see any of the other media sources you quote condoning murdering cyclists. Still, if you think they are balanced........

weekendcyclingfan

SPaM02 wrote:

weekendcyclingfan wrote:

SPaM02 wrote:

weekendcyclingfan wrote:

I think you could be right. The Daily Mail has decided that owning both the UK and US online and paper markets with a continued growth that they need to find new areas which to expand. One area they zeroed in on was the sport of cycling. They saw the newspaper could expand in untold ways especially if they were able to capture two online forums in English, CyclingNews and BikeRadar. The strategy was agreed at a board level meeting, signed off by Jonathan Harold Esmond Vere Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere and implemented by paying two guys in India $2.34 per day to write anti-Sky posts.

Have to say guys, as far as conspiracy tinfoilism, this thread tops the top. This forum is becoming every bit like the asylum you claim other forums to be, IMHO.

Truth be told, the Clinic looks fairly dead, apart from the Armstrong and Moto threads.

I think you'll find it is not anti-Sky, but anti-cycling posts they are being paid to write

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... louts.html

This is fairly typical of the Daily Mail's view of cycling in general - feel free to look through the site for further examples. It's full of every anti-cycling cliché under the sun and is so bad I originally thought it was a spoof.
You wonder why people on here can't take anything they write seriously. Feel free to read the comments below to get an idea of the type of people that read the Mail. You identify with them?

Sure, just like the Telegraph; "War declared on the Lycra louts on wheels" - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/active/r ... heels.html

or the Guardian; "Why are London cyclists so white, male and middle-class?" - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/dav ... ddle-class

Then you have a pro article in the Mail about the spate of deaths upon cyclists;

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... te-26.html

Its what's known as "balance" in news media reporting, providing alternate views for the readership rather than pandering to a single, binary thought process. Its a rather important part of our democracy and free speech in the media.

Probably why The Daily Mail has the highest female readership in the UK, over 50%;

The Daily Mail was the first to provide features especially for women and in the second half of 2013 had a 54.77% female readership, the only British newspaper whose female readers constitute more than 50% of its demographic.

My sense is this forum tends to over emphasis on articles which agree with their one sided point of views and ignores all others.

Key word, "balance", which from my point of view the Daily Mail is providing.

l

When you say 'Pro' cycling article, do you mean the factual news article? Where is the balanced 'opinion' piece? Is it the one saying that wire should be stung across roads to decapitate cyclists? I don't see any of the other media sources you quote condoning murdering cyclists. Still, if you think they are balanced........

Interesting view point you have, you've basically had to make up a lie to present your point. No where in the original Mail article did it suggest that wire should be stung across the road to decapitate a cyclist. What we did see though was a cyclist punching the crap out of a bus driver.

I don't support the article as a cyclist myself but the media has to present both sides of the argument, that's balanced reporting.

Ber Nard

weekendcyclingfan wrote:

this one from today I thought very insightful:

'I was in complete denial': Casualty star Sunetra Sarker reveals she was ashamed of her Indian roots and spent her childhood striving to be British - and secretly drinking Bovril!

Actress Sunetra Sarker, 43, traces her family history to Calcutta, India, in show Who Do You Think You Are?
Best known for playing Dr Zoe Hanna in Casualty for almost 10 years

Admits she used to rebel against her heritage and now regrets ignoring it

Discovers her great-grandfather's sister was a political activist and forged a friendship with Mahatma Gandhi, leader of the Indian Independence Movement

Breaks down in tears on BBC's Who Do You Think You Are?

So not a DM story, then.

weekendcyclingfan

Ber Nard wrote:

weekendcyclingfan wrote:

this one from today I thought very insightful:

'I was in complete denial': Casualty star Sunetra Sarker reveals she was ashamed of her Indian roots and spent her childhood striving to be British - and secretly drinking Bovril!

Actress Sunetra Sarker, 43, traces her family history to Calcutta, India, in show Who Do You Think You Are?
Best known for playing Dr Zoe Hanna in Casualty for almost 10 years

Admits she used to rebel against her heritage and now regrets ignoring it

Discovers her great-grandfather's sister was a political activist and forged a friendship with Mahatma Gandhi, leader of the Indian Independence Movement

Breaks down in tears on BBC's Who Do You Think You Are?

So not a DM story, then.

Well, yes it is. They are expanding on the upcoming BBC show - you know writing their own story about a story. Straight from the sidebar.

If you want to provide any proof to the contrary, please do but thus far you've just been rambling. I think most here agree with me when I say, you're not doing a very good job at making your point truth be told.