Is there life in A&S after the antagonists are gone?

[zeytoun]

I'm not insulted by anything you morons write about me
We have zero tolerance for taking an argument about a any topic to a personal level. For instance, the use of terms such as "idiot, moron, stupid" and other derogatory terms constitutes harassment.
If anyone, including Forester, violates the guidelines I will call them on it, and if it doesn't stop I will report the post. I invite others to join me, and hold me to the same standards.
Calling a forum member a name like idiot, insane, or stupid is against the forum guidelines and is not justified no matter how true one may feel it to be. That's the whole point.
you being the village idiot on this forum
Is it slander for me to say that HH behavior was frequently hypocritical?

[I-Like-To-Bike]

In his absence, there has been a dramatic reduction in drama coming from A&S.
Pet peeve: No one on here is slandering anyone. As Ralph would say, "Unpossible".


It seems another poster from the great state of Texas has stepped in to play that dramatic role, eh?

[Brian]

Is it slander for me to say that HH behavior was frequently hypocritical?

Depends. Who did you say it to, and who heard it? :rolleyes:

[genec]

Let's just not pretend that, when we have refined, recrafted, and reformed our original idea, we've actually never changed anything, and that Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.


I thought Eurasia was at war with Oceania... ;)

[Bikepacker67]

OK... from my insider information, HH wore out the welcome mat when he deluged the Admins with complaints about other posters "slings and arrows"

When I found out about his whiny tattle-taling, I naturally lost sympathy.

I mean shyt... if you dish it, you better be able to swallow it.

[John E]

... if you dish it, you better be able to swallow it.

I concur. The price of our valued freedom of speech is the maturity to ignore name-calling.

[chipcom]

I mean shyt... if you dish it, you better be able to swallow it.

Yeah, we don't tolerate no spitters in A&S!

[ChipSeal]

Is it slander for me to say that HH behavior was frequently hypocritical?

It's disingenuous for you to post these comments out of chronological order and without context. Without that it is impossible to give fair evaluation. I am to trust your judgment to be fair?

HH has admitted violating the guidelines when provoked from time to time, especially years ago. Do you have any examples of him insulting others like this in, say, the last 6 months? He himself began a campaign and call for civility, and held himself to that standard in face even more ugliness hurled his way. As was plain to see by any fair-minded observer.

[AlmostTrick]

Personal insults and name calling were pretty rare from HH. Certainly it was not the reason he was banned.

[ChipSeal]

I was not privy to your conversation with him, so I cannot comment on that. But since you're making his comments public, I'm going to fill you in on the part he didn't mention. He is the only member that I know of that was asked by at least two moderators to just voluntarily take some time away from the forums, to go ride his bike, maybe spend time with his family, but get off the computer. He was getting way too wrapped up in the forums. There is no specific infraction that could be applied to his situation, but we certainly made attempts to work with him. In his absence, there has been a dramatic reduction in drama coming from A&S.

Thank you for informing us that no infraction could be applied in his situation, but that he was banned, permanently, anyway....

...but get off the computer. He was getting way too wrapped up in the forums.

Oh, I see, they banned him for his own good! That's rich! The moderators know best how HH ought to spend his time, eh? That sounds a lot like a rationalization for being arbitrary and capricious!

[Brian]

Thank you for informing us that no infraction could be applied in his situation, but that he was banned, permanently, anyway....



Oh, I see, they banned him for his own good! That's rich! The moderators know best how HH ought to spend his time, eh? That sounds a lot like a rationalization for being arbitrary and capricious!

You have nearly achieved the status of troll. Keep it up.

[chipcom]

Only 7 pages...I think the Free Botto threads got to 10 on just the first day.

[rando]

The opposition to HH would disingenuously misquote him (or, as in this case, not quote him at all) and twist the plain meaning of his words, motivating HH to laboriously explain things in greater detail. This is also true for JF. This illustrates that their opponents were not willing to act in an decent manner.

HH has been treated shabbily and shamefully. And now that he is gone you continue to slander him. Does your mother know you do this?

To answer the OP's question, there is no life in A&S since one side of the debate is kicked off the forum for stating and defending their position. Why would one expect a different outcome?



wtf? are you on the same planet as the rest of us? Hardly anything HH wrote was "plain' Shamefully? Shabbily? bull****. The guy treated this forum like his personal sandbox, the Mods were more than generous with him.

It has been quiet, and it should be. With a few notable exceptions, This forum has had limited value to anyone except those who liked to bait each other, muddy the waters, and spout divisive, esoteric crap. maybe now something positive can develop.

[zeytoun]

It's disingenuous for you to post these comments out of chronological order and without context.
No it isn't. You accuse me of slander for not "attributing" my accusations, and then whine when I do.

Do you have any examples of him insulting others like this in, say, the last 6 months?
No. I took an extended break from bikeforums. I can't judge more recent things, because I didn't read them. Those quotes are from the period just before I took my break.

He himself began a campaign and call for civility, and held himself to that standard in face even more ugliness hurled his way. As was plain to see by any fair-minded observer.
First of all, Helmet Head was disrespectful to people who never engaged in personal attacks against him, but rather just disagreed with them. He'd insultingly question their thinking abilities, reading comprehension, sincerity etc. (I'm not talking about me - after a few sincere debates that got ridiculous, I frequently trolled him, as a parody of him, which could be defined as disrespectful).

Then he started a "campaign" after seeing the fruits of what he started, and used it to call out other people, meanwhile he continued to "slip" frequently.

I am to trust your judgment to be fair?
Let me guess, we should just rely on your fair judgment instead?

Let me fill you in.

You and I can have disagreements of opinion. You can say you think HH one way, I can say he was another way. We can debate it. That's the internet for you.

But you come here acting righteously indignant, and accuse me repeatedly of slander, disingenuous behavior, and condescendingly ask me about my mother (??) over and over again, etc.

You've got 2 seconds to play nice or get iggied.

[Brian]

Ok, enough pissing on each other's shoes. Has A&S improved in the last month or so?

[Fear&Trembling]

Holden: Describe in single words only the good things that come into your mind about... your mother.
Leon: My mother?
Holden: Yeah.
Leon: Let me tell you about my mother.
(shoots him)

[zeytoun]

Ok, I'm done peeing. :)

[Brian]

Ok, I'm done peeing. :)

Wash your hands.

[WaltPoutine]

Ok, enough pissing on each other's shoes. Has A&S improved in the last month or so?

No. There's still a high level of personal attack, windbaggery and (if it's not deliberate misrepresentation) a very low level of reading comprehension. More importantly two participants of a maligned and unpopular viewpoint have had their ability to participate removed. It seems fairly clear that this suits many people who dislike the actual views being expressed by JF and HH. See the calls from various participants to remove or redefine, according to their own prejudices and beliefs, the discussion of Vehicular Cycling, e.g.

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=402973


This is coupled with personal attacks and discussion of both HH and JF who are unable to defend themselves, e.g.
http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=6547099&postcount=16

All this is coupled with can only be described and as a coy reluctance on the part of moderators to straightforwardly state what happened. That's not transparent and goes a long way towards suggesting that the moderators are biased.

[Brian Sorrell]

Ok, enough pissing on each other's shoes. Has A&S improved in the last month or so?

{looks around cautiously} Good so far. {peeks behind monitor} Yep, improving.

Seriously: This is the first thread that I've read in A&S in a long long long time (like over a year). Maybe we can start talking about Advocacy without mentioning {gasp} bike lanes! And maybe keep some posts under 1000 words?

[closetbiker]

Ok, enough pissing on each other's shoes. Has A&S improved in the last month or so?

I'm not sure. I think we need more posts on helmets.

[WaltPoutine]

{looks around cautiously} Good so far. {peeks behind monitor} Yep, improving.

Seriously: This is the first thread that I've read in A&S in a long long long time (like over a year). Maybe we can start talking about Advocacy without mentioning {gasp} bike lanes! And maybe keep some posts under 1000 words?

And yet you had to go and *gasp* mention bike lanes! Thanks for reinforcing my suspicion that the real agenda here is not the decorum or behavior of participants, but rather pushing a one-sided perspective of what Advocacy is ;)

[Brian]

Walt, I see your point. It is entirely the fault of the moderation team that members can't get along. Even though we're all volunteers, we should dedicate more time to babysitting a bunch of grown men arguing about bike lanes. But since we don't have enough people to read every post, I'll go ahead and close A&S completely.

The blind men and the elephant - which one are you?

[closetbiker]

maybe we would be all better off if we watched this (http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/04/alt-text-vide-1.html?haha) clip?

[I-Like-To-Bike]

I'm not sure. I think we need more posts on helmets.

Speaking of that, and for a change of pace I will put in a good word for HH - at least he didn't drone on about the magical powers of Styrofoam and if I recall he has a good looking family.

[zeytoun]

No. There's still a high level of personal attack, windbaggery and (if it's not deliberate misrepresentation) a very low level of reading comprehension. More importantly two participants of maligned and unpopular viewpoint have had their ability to participate fairly removed. It seems fairly clear that this suits many people who dislike the actual views being expressed by JF and HH. See the calls from various participants to remove or redefine, accoriding to their own prejudices and beliefs, the discussion of Vehicular Cycling, e.g.

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=402973


This is coupled with personal attacks and discussion of both HH and JF who are unable to defend themselves, e.g.
http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.p...9&postcount=16

I'm sorry, but I didn't see any personal attacks in those two links, could you point them out to me? Maybe I missed them (I saw one borderline disrespectful post, but it wasn't technically a personal attack.)

In fact, your post here has more inflammatory language than those threads, I think :)

[The Human Car]

maybe we would be all better off if we watched this (http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/04/alt-text-vide-1.html?haha) clip?

That really begs the question, doesn't it? ;)

(Great link thanks!)

[WaltPoutine]

Walt, I see your point. It is entirely the fault of the moderation team that members can't get along.

See, that's an example of what drags down A&S. Instead of addressing the point that ONLY those from a particular side of the argument have been banned you construct a sarcastic strawman. To borrow from your own quiver: well done Brian! That really helps to raise the tone. And thank you for admitting that you like to drive your Humvee over cyclists.

Even though we're all volunteers, we should dedicate more time to babysitting a bunch of grown men arguing about bike lanes. But since we don't have enough people to read every post, I'll go ahead and close A&S completely.

Excellent, threats wrapped up in the moral coating of "volunteerism". Seeing as you ask and you appear not to have been able to figure it out from my earlier post. You could either:
1. Spend the necessary time to apply bans even handedly and fairly
2. Actually state the reasons for the ban (and not the "Violation of rule #6: you shall not do something bad" or the snide allusions which are all that's been supplied so far).

If that's too much for your volunteer time then it's probably more open and honest to leave the forum un-moderated.

The blind men and the elephant - which one are you?

Profound. That really makes me think. Pity you didn't answer any of the original points though.

[Brian]

Walt, Serge is banned. Trying to have a public discussion regarding that is an exercise in futility. Any time the moderation team attempts to explain their actions, it backfires. If that is too hard for you to accept, you need to spend less time on the internet.

Why do you insist on perpetuating this discussion?

[WaltPoutine]

Walt, Serge is banned. Trying to have a public discussion regarding that is an exercise in futility. Any time the moderation team attempts to explain their actions, it backfires. If that is too hard for you to accept, you need to spend less time on the internet.

Why do you insist on perpetuating this discussion?

Brian,

This whole thread, which you've been contributing to with questions such as "has A&S improved over the last month?" IS the discussion. YOU are perpetuating it. I had actually deleted some of my earlier posts on the topic when I was alerted by other members and other moderators that the policy of this BB/forum was not to discuss such matters except in the subthread about banning.

Lo and behold a week later, you a moderator, and other participants are flouting that rule. I'm happy enough not to talk about it, but if you're opening up the topic yourself then it's a bit whack for you to start complaining about it being discussed.

W.r.t. discussing moderation decisions I can see your point of view. So why is there a whole freaking thread entitled "Is there life in a&s after the antagonists are gone"?

Either discuss it or don't but stop being such an ineffective hypocrite.

[Speedo]

... you need to spend less time on the internet.


Uh, oh. You're in trouble now Walt.

Speedo

[zeytoun]

Uh, oh. You're in trouble now Walt.

Speedo
He has all the markings.... scrappy, a touch of "kettle? this pot...", and is, judging by his avatar, a programmer....

such a waste for a french canadian.... :p

[rando]

Speaking of that, and for a change of pace I will put in a good word for HH - at least he didn't drone on about the magical powers of Styrofoam and if I recall he has a good looking family.


and has nice taste in hawaiian shirts.

[genec]

and has nice taste in hawaiian shirts.

Standard fare for So Cal... it's all we wear in the offices around here... at least after memorial day. ;)

[The Human Car]

Ok, enough pissing on each other's shoes. Has A&S improved in the last month or so?

I really wish I had time to write all my thoughts down on this put here a few:

Improved, by that do you mean boring? Ya sure it's pretty dull with one POV silenced.

As far as pissing on each others' shoes, this is a long standing tradition here and the mods have gone through several failed attempts to correct the problem. May I suggest the problem actually may be with the mods and how they have dealt with this problem (at least in the past.)

So before I get banned for being a pest to the mods all I am suggesting is try and standardize some procedures that make sense with the resources that you have and that gets results. You can't make a call for civility and then go on to ignore every single uncivil post after your call for civility. While this probably isn't what happened from the MOD's POV but it is what happened all too often from my POV. While I do not expect them to read every post I do expect a response to posts I report and way too often I hear nothing back and the offending post stays on the board, what am I supposed to think? If you show public tolerance for something then it is assumed that it is tolerated by everyone who reads the board and before you know it that same junk is coming from multiple individuals and it is no longer worth bothering to report (because nothing is perceived as being done) and the forums goes down the tubes because ether the mods are not doing a dam thing or what they are doing is not visible to the public.

What Brain recently did and publicly singled out an individual I think needs to be done more often here. And I think posts that violate forum rules should be corrected or noted in some way, you can't leave that stuff up and expect people to subliminally get the message "This post in particular is in volition of forum rules and something so terrible happened as a result that we cannot talk about it in public."

Anyway, do I like the forums better now? No.
Do I want them to go back the way they were? No.
Is there a way to keep all of us happy? No.

I respect that a hard decision had to made, but I am bothered by the mods part in this by saying report violations then banning someone (in part) for over reporting violations. I'll agree with the mods that there is something there that HH did not get that exasperated the situation but I will also assert that there is something there that the mods didn't get that exasperated the situation as well, and this bothers me as now that HH is baned you seem to have a better understanding of something that contributed to HH driving you nuts.

Anyway this seems like a weird situation and I think calls for a more creative solution then a permanent ban of HH, that's my 2 cents anyway.

[closetbiker]

... you need to spend less time on the internet...

Yeah, I think discussion on the internet is a waste of time (it is fun though)

[rando]

I'll say this: as tranquil as it has been, there seem to be a few who are bent on carrying on HH's failed legacy.

[Brian]

Brian,

This whole thread, which you've been contributing to with questions such as "has A&S improved over the last month?" IS the discussion. YOU are perpetuating it. I had actually deleted some of my earlier posts on the topic when I was alerted by other members and other moderators that the policy of this BB/forum was not to discuss such matters except in the subthread about banning.

Lo and behold a week later, you a moderator, and other participants are flouting that rule. I'm happy enough not to talk about it, but if you're opening up the topic yourself then it's a bit whack for you to start complaining about it being discussed.

W.r.t. discussing moderation decisions I can see your point of view. So why is there a whole freaking thread entitled "Is there life in a&s after the antagonists are gone"?

Either discuss it or don't but stop being such an ineffective hypocrite.

This thread is not titled "Why was Serge banned?", nor is it titled "Let's all pick on Serge". But I guess you missed that. We have repeatedly asked that threads not be started about why members were banned, but it still comes up anyway. Are you suggesting that an administrator not respond at all? I didn't bring up why he was banned, but it's been asked plenty of times. And if I don't answer, then it's even more of an issue for some people. It doesn't help that he's sent who knows how many emails out to a bunch of members looking for support.

Go back and read the first two pages of this thread. Based on member comments, I will stand by the moderator's decision.

[WaltPoutine]

I really wish I had time to write all my thoughts down on this.

And for the record although I think that I disagree with TheHumanCar on a huge number of points I think he's generally an example of how to conduct civil disagreement and discussion. Ditto with "genec". Their behavior is in sharp contradistinction to most. And no, I don't know them and don't agree with them. I also don't necessarily agree with all of the content or most of the tone of HH or JF.

[WaltPoutine]

This thread is not titled "Why was Serge banned?", nor is it titled "Let's all pick on Serge". But I guess you missed that.

It doesn't need to be entitled that for it in fact to be a "let's pick on serge (whom I presume is Helmet Head?)" thread. But that's what it is. The example I posted of Bek taking swings at JF _after_ JF was temporarily banned are another.

In fact much of the controversy and disagreement around JF and HH stems from people that are not them but also display gross incivility and combatitiveness. Whatever, these are the internets and that's what you get on them. The problem is that the "enforcement" has been applied with apparent discrimination and prejudice.

We have repeatedly asked that threads not be started about why members were banned, but it still comes up anyway.

So either delete them and ban the abusers or else answer it fully instead of dancing around and allowing others to suggest that Serge/HH posted a link which caused someone's machine to explode. Responding as much as you have and allowing the discussion as much as you have without letting all of us have all the facts is sly.

Given your own appalling wish that some forum members might be killed by cars this selective behavior doesn't exactly surprise me though.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

I'll say this: as tranquil as it has been, there seem to be a few who are bent on carrying on HH's failed legacy.

Yep, at least two here seem to be vying (with their over the top wailing and moaning) for the right to wear the crown of the banished Drama King.

[Allister]

See, that's an example of what drags down A&S. Instead of addressing the point that ONLY those from a particular side of the argument have been banned you construct a sarcastic strawman.

Speaking of strawmen. :rolleyes:

Only HH has been banned. If you believe that he alone constituted one 'side of the argument', or that he was banned for taking that side, you just sound like a conspiracy theorist.

JF's ban has been lifted for quite a while now, and he's welcome to return any time he likes. That's he's thus far chosen not to is entirely irrelevant.

[chipcom]

Speaking of strawmen. :rolleyes:

Only HH has been banned. If you believe that he alone constituted one 'side of the argument', or that he was banned for taking that side, you just sound like a conspiracy theorist.

JF's ban has been lifted for quite a while now, and he's welcome to return any time he likes. That's he's thus far chosen not to is entirely irrelevant.

You nailed it. Plenty of us are pro-vehicular cycling...our main points of contention with HH were his wacky theories and stubborn refusal to admit that facilities can have value to non-alpha dawg cyclists - but I am sure that JF will continue to carry that banner.

This notion that one side of the debate has been silenced is pure horsepucky - kinda like saying that the abolitionist movement was silenced by the execution of John Brown.

[rando]

look, this is not a sexy topic/forum. It's not even that interesting to most cyclists. The only people who really care about this forum are the crazed VC crowd and the people who try to counter their arguments and present a less rigid view of cycling for any who may be watching. All we've been doing for the past several years is pissing on each other's shoes and masturbating. There has been some good info and debate, but it's been overshadowed by the crap. Sometimes I don't mind crap, but it's seldom useful.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

You nailed it. Plenty of us are pro-vehicular cycling...our main points of contention with HH were his wacky theories and stubborn refusal to admit that facilities can have value to non-alpha dawg cyclists - but I am sure that JF will continue to carry that banner.

Actually I think the main points of contention were the demands that the wacky theories be respected at face value, and the stubborn refusal to acknowledge that the concerns of non-alpha dawg cyclists are even worthy of consideration.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

In fact much of the controversy and disagreement around JF and HH stems from people that are not them but also display gross incivility and combatitiveness. Whatever, these are the internets and that's what you get on them. The problem is that the "enforcement" has been applied with apparent discrimination and prejudice.
Appears to me you are manifesting the symptoms of an advanced case of Bike Forums Inferiority Complex. I suggest you try the cure by going cold turkey for awhile, or at least lay off the Waa-Waa pedal when typing.

[LittleBigMan]

Still got my popcorn. :)

Hm...JF and HH banned...

I guess this happened when I was away on vacation in Colorado. Not sure if it was snowing that day, or sunny and clear. Anyway, I was oblivious to Bikeforums, not having a computer. Besides, the scenery in RMNP was much better than Windows could provide, anyway. ;)

Funny how time away in a place like that can remind you what else there is in the world to admire apart from the internet.

[WaltPoutine]

look, this is not a sexy topic/forum [...]All we've been doing for the past several years is pissing on each other's shoes and masturbating. Sometimes I don't mind crap [...]

Nice of you to share, not sure if I needed all that information though.

[WaltPoutine]

Speaking of strawmen. :rolleyes:

Only HH has been banned. If you believe that he alone constituted one 'side of the argument', or that he was banned for taking that side, you just sound like a conspiracy theorist.

Well, that makes you sound like a nitpicker. JF was temporarily banned too. Try stretching a little to assume that other posters aren't conspiracy theorists. The fact remains that the only two people banned are those that argue against most facilities -- although JF has multiple times posted that some facilities are acceptable if they meet particular standards.

JF's ban has been lifted for quite a while now..

Huh? Cognitive dissonance much dude? "Only HH has been banned ... JF's ban has been lifted". Or when you said "Speaking of strawmen" were you introducing your post?

[closetbiker]

Still got my popcorn. :)

Hm...JF and HH banned...

I guess this happened when I was away on vacation in Colorado. Not sure if it was snowing that day, or sunny and clear. Anyway, I was oblivious to Bikeforums, not having a computer. Besides, the scenery in RMNP was much better than Windows could provide, anyway. ;)

Funny how time away in a place like that can remind you what else there is in the world to admire apart from the internet.

it's good to step back, take part in life, and re-think about things with refreshed and a new (or renewed) perspective (that can only be achieved with time)