Disappeared threads

shirley_basso

But the kicking off thread was there for the mods benefit, don't you know?

Stevo_666

joshjevans wrote:

Pinno and Stevo666 thanks for your messages and I understand your disappointment but the decision has been made that this is no longer the site to host those sort of images going forward. I have amended the BB rules so they reflect the rest of the forum.

Yes, this may harm traffic but that isn't the reason we deleted the threads.

There are a number of reasons many forums are declining and the most prominent reason has been the rise of social media platforms. This forum remains, in a large part down to you core users, a vast catalogue of cycling related knowledge that continues to (generally) have cycling tech/training etc questions answered by some of the most knowledgable amateurs and professionals in the industry.

What it doesn't need is images that a large section of our audience and our entire staff find offensive. It also doesn't need a thread pointing people to arguments (kicking off), which often ends in further baiting or trolling of new, and potentially long-term core users, being put off for a few minutes of entertainment by other users.

Again, I understand your disappointment but the decision(s) has/have been made. In the coming year or so (hopefully less) we'll be able to offer some updates to the forum and I plan on reaching out to the regulars to work together in shaping the forum going forward for those that would like to be involved (no, you can't have the big girls thread back!).

Have a good week and speak soon.

Thanks Josh, we'll be ready to give you some suggestions on improving the forum whenever you're ready

Interesting that the entire staff team (both male and female) found the threads offensive. That means that every member of fhe Immediate Media team must have viewed the 'girls' threads. Out of interest, roughly how much time did people in the office take looking at these threads before coming to their conclusion?

ugo.santalucia

Stevo 666 wrote:

Thanks Josh, we'll be ready to give you some suggestions on improving the forum whenever you're ready

Interesting that the entire staff team (both male and female) found the threads offensive. That means that every member of fhe Immediate Media team must have viewed the 'girls' threads. Out of interest, roughly how much time did people in the office take looking at these threads before coming to their conclusion?

You are getting distasteful, even for your own low standards.... give it a cut and move on

darkhairedlord

Another thread has just dissappeared. The one about the post office refusing to accept a stem for posting, in the MTB section.

Stevo_666

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Thanks Josh, we'll be ready to give you some suggestions on improving the forum whenever you're ready

Interesting that the entire staff team (both male and female) found the threads offensive. That means that every member of fhe Immediate Media team must have viewed the 'girls' threads. Out of interest, roughly how much time did people in the office take looking at these threads before coming to their conclusion?

You are getting distasteful, even for your own low standards.... give it a cut and move on

I've accepted the decision as I said clearly above - and am happy to make sensible suggestions on improving the forum going forward.

The second paragraph was just a bit of light hearted humour, which I guess isn't really your style.

ugo.santalucia

Stevo 666 wrote:

The second paragraph was just a bit of light hearted humour, which I guess isn't really your style.

If we were in 1978, that would indeed be lighthearted humour (boys in the office looking at big girls, what a laugh!), but we are in 2018 and things have moved on quite a bit... now it's only childish, if not sexist...

tangled_metal

There's been loads on disappeared threads today. All the passport threads have gone. Bl00dy disgrace!

Stevo_666

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

The second paragraph was just a bit of light hearted humour, which I guess isn't really your style.

If we were in 1978, that would indeed be lighthearted humour (boys in the office looking at big girls, what a laugh!), but we are in 2018 and things have moved on quite a bit... now it's only childish, if not sexist...

You're getting a bit uppity considering I only asked a rhetorical question. I rest my case.

Stevo_666

Tangled Metal wrote:

There's been loads on disappeared threads today. All the passport threads have gone. Bl00dy disgrace!

IMO spam postings have been one of the biggest problems on this forum recently so good to see those being dealt with promptly.

pblakeney

Meh, the bants the only reason for looking.
So long, and thanks for the fish, even Fish Fish.

ballysmate

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Thanks Josh, we'll be ready to give you some suggestions on improving the forum whenever you're ready

Interesting that the entire staff team (both male and female) found the threads offensive. That means that every member of fhe Immediate Media team must have viewed the 'girls' threads. Out of interest, roughly how much time did people in the office take looking at these threads before coming to their conclusion?

You are getting distasteful, even for your own low standards.... give it a cut and move on

A dirty, difficult job, no doubt, for a mod to check all the big girls in the BGT to see how they measured up, but hey, someone had to do it eh, Ugo?
Did the Administrators refuse your pleadings to be given the job, is that why you went from Ugo the Green to Ugo the Grey?
Did becoming a mod involve undergoing a sense of humour bypass, as some on here believe, and it is taking longer than expected for your sense of humour to regenerate?

Your response was unwarranted, especially in these new family friendly, everyone playing nicely, times.

darkhairedlord

there was a thread about posting of stems. Gone.... Nothing distasteful going on, just a discussion of whether the post office can refuse to accept parcels that look like pipe bombs without asking what's in the parcel. Why did that one go?

apreading

darkhairedlord wrote:

there was a thread about posting of stems. Gone.... Nothing distasteful going on, just a discussion of whether the post office can refuse to accept parcels that look like pipe bombs without asking what's in the parcel. Why did that one go?

Did it go? Comedy gold that one but would have grown tired and frustrating if he carried it on much longer.

pinno

Bungle73:
A rant about the Post Office
A rant about a return of money when he had made the mistake
A pair of wheels that seized up in 4 months
A freehub that wouldn't budge...

And in all those events he was offered some very good advice but he is often rude and ungrateful.
Some posters were less than polite but all in all, there's no legislating for ignorance.
If he had been civil and taken on board some of what was said, then I would have sympathy for him.

Stevo_666

Ballysmate wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Thanks Josh, we'll be ready to give you some suggestions on improving the forum whenever you're ready

Interesting that the entire staff team (both male and female) found the threads offensive. That means that every member of fhe Immediate Media team must have viewed the 'girls' threads. Out of interest, roughly how much time did people in the office take looking at these threads before coming to their conclusion?

You are getting distasteful, even for your own low standards.... give it a cut and move on

A dirty, difficult job, no doubt, for a mod to check all the big girls in the BGT to see how they measured up, but hey, someone had to do it eh, Ugo?
Did the Administrators refuse your pleadings to be given the job, is that why you went from Ugo the Green to Ugo the Grey?
Did becoming a mod involve undergoing a sense of humour bypass, as some on here believe, and it is taking longer than expected for your sense of humour to regenerate?

Your response was unwarranted, especially in these new family friendly, everyone playing nicely, times.

cougie

There's a mudguard thread that will probably be purged in the morning. Someone's getting irate yet again over his Fourth set of guards is it ?

Why he's not just bought the set that the makers say will fit is beyond me.

ugo.santalucia

Ballysmate wrote:

Did the Administrators refuse your pleadings to be given the job, is that why you went from Ugo the Green to Ugo the Grey?

If you really want to know...
Things took a turn... one morning I received a phone call in my office with some threats from someone who didn't want to identify himself. At that point, I decided that things had gone too far on the web.
So I quit.
It's just as well, as the role of moderator became redundant soon after, when all the moderating tools were removed from those in green.

Matthewfalle

its not the amount of moderators, its the type of moderator.

in the past the moderators who were appointed - with the exception of Veronese - did not have the skills or personalities to fulfill their role in keeping the forum going.

they did not understand that people come to the forum for different reasons with different interests in cycling, different experiences (which some do not want to go on about) and different ways of doing their cycling - after all, for example, whilst some people want to be in a club some would rather not.

the old mods (apart from the excepted above) didn't understand that people have different life experiences which in turn means they come across differently.

they also jumped on the calls of "troll" issued by people when an opion was given that didn't match theirs. That is not trolling but people were banned.

Tongue in cheek posts were also classed as trolling and bans issued - people who were fun and knowledgeable and experienced just left.

that was the problem.

ugo.santalucia

Matthewfalle wrote:

Tongue in cheek posts were also classed as trolling and bans issued - people who were fun and knowledgeable and experienced just left.

that was the problem.

I am not sure that was the problem. You are the living example that those who were banned found their way back and there was more traffic then than there is now, so nobody was put off by heavy handed moderation (I wish some did).

Was the heavy handed moderation necessary? It depends which side of the rules you want to support. Rules were ignored and bypassed by default, even after several warnings... in other words people were taking the piss... you can ignore or ban. We chose to ban

With Future there was more enphasis to make sure the content was acceptable (ie not liable for it) with Immediate the focus switched, liability for the content was no longer an issue. Deleting those threads seems half a step back, which I do welcome, others don't, but as you say we are different and come from different backgrounds.

I am glad you enjoyed Veronese's moderation, I suggested his name when I left, becasue I know him as a moderate person. In fairness, I don't think he ever got the moderating tools that "my generation" had.

Were we good moderators? No, but I have seen worse... I have seen people verbally abused and humiliated on other forums and even after several reports, no action was ever taken, which I think is worse moderation... but again, different backgrounds and maybe you prefer that. Maybe you value the bully over the bullied

Finally, bear in mind 90% of the job, the one that you don't value or fail to recognise, was simply keeping the thing functioning, like cleaning all the threads that want to sell fake passports every morning. At the time it was us moderators doing it... and for those above who think that "it has got worse" maybe it's only because they see it more, at the time it was a daily routine... coffee, log in, delete spam

Vino'sGhost

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

Tongue in cheek posts were also classed as trolling and bans issued - people who were fun and knowledgeable and experienced just left.

that was the problem.

I am not sure that was the problem. You are the living example that those who were banned found their way back and there was more traffic then than there is now, so nobody was put off by heavy handed moderation (I wish some did).

Was the heavy handed moderation necessary? It depends which side of the rules you want to support. Rules were ignored and bypassed by default, even after several warnings... in other words people were taking the wee-wee... you can ignore or ban. We chose to ban

With Future there was more enphasis to make sure the content was acceptable (ie not liable for it) with Immediate the focus switched, liability for the content was no longer an issue. Deleting those threads seems half a step back, which I do welcome, others don't, but as you say we are different and come from different backgrounds.

I am glad you enjoyed Veronese's moderation, I suggested his name when I left, becasue I know him as a moderate person. In fairness, I don't think he ever got the moderating tools that "my generation" had.

Were we good moderators? No, but I have seen worse... I have seen people verbally abused and humiliated on other forums and even after several reports, no action was ever taken, which I think is worse moderation... but again, different backgrounds and maybe you prefer that. Maybe you value the bully over the bullied

Finally, bear in mind 90% of the job, the one that you don't value or fail to recognise, was simply keeping the thing functioning, like cleaning all the threads that want to sell fake passports every morning. At the time it was us moderators doing it... and for those above who think that "it has got worse" maybe it's only because they see it more, at the time it was a daily routine... coffee, log in, delete spam

I remember jeff jones callling me white trash scum. I had to ask if future publishing thought that was an appropriate way for them to speak to members of the public in an open forum. However, I prefer that narrow self aggrandising approach over the current one of steadily chipping away in case someone is offended after going into a thread they're likely to take offence at over and over again.

Were constantly encouraged to be diverse and tolerant but it appears the actual message here and elsewhere is that diversity of opinion and experience is to be discouraged. Probably why there's such a thriving womens presence. The women that do come here are quickly patronised by those taking offence on their behalf at things like the Big Girls thread.

ugo.santalucia

not sure why you qouted my post... there seem to be no correlation in your answer?

shirley_basso

"The women that do come here are quickly patronised by those taking offence on their behalf at things like the Big Girls thread."

While I am all for lax moderation and the thread didn't offend me and I popped in once in a while, it had absolutely no place on a cycling forum, which is intending to be more family friendly. You don't have to be personally offended on someone else's behalf to see that.

The big shame of late has been the deleting of the epic Bungle threads rather than just locking them. They need to live on in memory.

bungle73

darkhairedlord wrote:

there was a thread about posting of stems. Gone.... Nothing distasteful going on, just a discussion of whether the post office can refuse to accept parcels that look like pipe bombs without asking what's in the parcel. Why did that one go?

In what alternative reality does a jiffy bag look like a "pipe bomb"?

bungle73

Pinno wrote:

Bungle73:
A rant about the Post Office
A rant about a return of money when he had made the mistake
A pair of wheels that seized up in 4 months
A freehub that wouldn't budge...

And in all those events he was offered some very good advice but he is often rude and ungrateful.
Some posters were less than polite but all in all, there's no legislating for ignorance.
If he had been civil and taken on board some of what was said, then I would have sympathy for him.

Yeah, I'm sure in your fantasy land that's what happened. But in reality the fact is that it seems a lot of people here cannot wait to start picking holes or being abusive and/or condescending. I have done absolutely nothing wrong.

That is all I have to say on the matter.

tangled_metal

@bungle
Did you find any of my posts on the RM thread offensive or abusive to your position? I believe I gave you my reasonable opinion based on research of the RM terms and conditions pages and my n interpretation of that. I believe that others said similar things to me in a manner that ranged from a similar inoffensive manner through to a highly frustrated manner. I suspect that if you felt people became offensive it was probably borne out of the frustration most contributors felt when almost universally we felt you were taking an unreasonable position and becoming offensive yourself when everyone else was posting opinions that were opposite to yours.

If you found my comments offensive bear in mind you seem to have an online personality that winds people up. It takes a lot for me to become offensive.

bungle73

Tangled Metal wrote:

@bungle
Did you find any of my posts on the RM thread offensive or abusive to your position? I believe I gave you my reasonable opinion based on research of the RM terms and conditions pages and my n interpretation of that. I believe that others said similar things to me in a manner that ranged from a similar inoffensive manner through to a highly frustrated manner. I suspect that if you felt people became offensive it was probably borne out of the frustration most contributors felt when almost universally we felt you were taking an unreasonable position and becoming offensive yourself when everyone else was posting opinions that were opposite to yours.

If you found my comments offensive bear in mind you seem to have an online personality that winds people up. It takes a lot for me to become offensive.

TBH I can't remember who wrote what in that thread.

tangled_metal

Me neither but trust me I gave my opinion which wasn't the same as yours but I wasn't abusive it offensive. I did find you frustrating though. You post for opinions (I assume) then didn't like what you heard. I don't recall anyone taking your side. I think we've all taken PO staff asking what's in a package as normal and acceptable.

PS if you didn't like Royal mail approach then if DHL and FedEx are running the same procedures as when I used to deal with them in my old job you'll positively hate using them. They used to insist on boxes being left open for the driver to check over. If it was sealed he would make us own it up in front of him.

darkhairedlord

did you refund the buyer or take it to the post office?

tangled_metal

Careful! The disappeared thread might disappear if you're not careful.

Vino'sGhost

WHERES MY STEM!