# The "Cyclechat Helmet Debate Thread" a question/request



## Mugshot (25 Oct 2017)

The helmet debate thread has been on moderation for over a year now is there any chance it can/will be taken back off again? 
The thread was mercilessly trolled by a couple of individuals who, having achieved their aim of effectively getting the thread locked, have barely posted in there since. 
I would have thought the time the mods have to spend checking and authorising each post would be considerable, perhaps thread bans would be more effective?


----------



## classic33 (25 Oct 2017)

Maybe the moderation has stopped the posts appearing.

It's all helmet threads that get moderated, not just one.


----------



## Mugshot (25 Oct 2017)

classic33 said:


> Maybe the moderation has stopped the posts appearing.


Yes, That's a possibility. However I think it discourages participation.



classic33 said:


> It's all helmet threads that get moderated, not just one.


I didn't actually realise that. I originally posted in the Helmet Discussions sub forum and was suprised when it came up for moderation, it was subsequently moved by the mods.


----------



## classic33 (25 Oct 2017)

Mugshot said:


> Yes, That's a possibility. However I think it discourages participation.
> 
> 
> I didn't actually realise that. I originally posted in the Helmet Discussions sub forum and was suprised when it came up for moderation, it was subsequently moved by the mods.


It's for the reasons you gave, as far as I'm aware.


----------



## Mugshot (25 Oct 2017)

What is?


----------



## srw (25 Oct 2017)

Mugshot said:


> The helmet debate thread has been on moderation for over a year now is there any chance it can/will be taken back off again?
> The thread was mercilessly trolled by a couple of individuals who, having achieved their aim of effectively getting the thread locked, have barely posted in there since.
> I would have thought the time the mods have to spend checking and authorising each post would be considerable, perhaps thread bans would be more effective?


I was actually thinking of asking for _more _moderation, after today's offering. Although there's possibly an educative effect when people reply, I'm not sure it adds a great deal to the sum of human understanding for yet another relative newcomer to post "I think everyone should wear a helmet because I think they're great".


----------



## swansonj (25 Oct 2017)

srw said:


> I was actually thinking of asking for _more _moderation, after today's offering. Although there's possibly an educative effect when people reply, I'm not sure it adds a great deal to the sum of human understanding for yet another relative newcomer to post "I think everyone should wear a helmet because I think they're great".


I'd go the other way. The purpose of a forum is to have debate, not for everyone to doff their cap to a previously adopted orthodoxy (even when the orthodoxy is correct). Newcomers should be encouraged to join in, not squashed by those of us who've seen it all before. Yet no-one can seriously be expected to read the whole thread. So every year or so I'd delete the whole thread and start again.


----------



## classic33 (25 Oct 2017)

Mugshot said:


> What is?


Why there's fewer posting there, and others have stopped.


----------



## classic33 (25 Oct 2017)

swansonj said:


> I'd go the other way. The purpose of a forum is to have debate, not for everyone to doff their cap to a previously adopted orthodoxy (even when the orthodoxy is correct). Newcomers should be encouraged to join in, not squashed by those of us who've seen it all before. Yet no-one can seriously be expected to read the whole thread. So every year or so I'd delete the whole thread and start again.


You want to read, start at the beginning, don't cut parts out. That's like skipping a couple of chapters in a book.


----------



## MontyVeda (25 Oct 2017)

i think it's better being moderated in the way it currently is. Otherwise it'd revert to the slanging match it was.


----------



## Mugshot (25 Oct 2017)

swansonj said:


> I'd go the other way. The purpose of a forum is to have debate, not for everyone to doff their cap to a previously adopted orthodoxy (even when the orthodoxy is correct). Newcomers should be encouraged to join in, not squashed by those of us who've seen it all before. Yet no-one can seriously be expected to read the whole thread. So every year or so I'd delete the whole thread and start again.


The lets go round again meme which is frequently thrown at the helmet debate can be applied right across the forum. All sorts of questions and opinions are repeated time and time again, but they have to be, without it the forum dies. I think you're right the thread is just too bloated now for someone to sit down and read it all through, so you're going to get posts like todays, but that's fine, it's what a forum needs. However, I would have thought that the fact that helmet discussions are moderated stifles posting and the creation of new threads.


----------



## Profpointy (25 Oct 2017)

Mugshot said:


> The lets go round again meme which is frequently thrown at the helmet debate can be applied right across the forum. All sorts of questions and opinions are repeated time and time again, but they have to be, without it the forum dies. I think you're right the thread is just too bloated now for someone to sit down and read it all through, so you're going to get posts like todays, but that's fine, it's what a forum needs. However, I would have thought that the fact that helmet discussions are moderated stifles posting and the creation of new threads.



For what it's worth I approve of quite strong moderation, for.this, and indeed all threads. People should be and and usually are free to disagree,robustly argue and even be downright wrong, but when it gets boring or downright obnoxious, the real debate is actually stiffled rather than it being freedom of speech. Helmet threads are significantly better than the free market version. Ar the risk of conflacting two questions I do see the vastly more serious threads on sexual assault regularly degenerate to the point the women seem to give up / be driven out presumably in disgust.


----------



## Mugshot (25 Oct 2017)

Profpointy said:


> For what it's worth I approve of quite strong moderation, for.this, and indeed all threads. People should be and and usually are free to disagree,robustly argue and even be downright wrong, but when it gets boring or downright obnoxious, the real debate is actually stiffled rather than it being freedom of speech. Helmet threads are significantly better than the free market version. Ar the risk of conflacting two questions I do see the vastly more serious threads on sexual assault regularly degenerate to the point the women seem to give up / be driven out presumably in disgust.


It's an interesting juxapostion (would that be the right word?) when you take the robust moderation of the helmet debate and compare it to that of threads such as the one you mentioned. However, the question in my OP really was just that, it was in no way meant to be taken as a criticism or an invitation to debate the quality of the moderation on the forum.


----------



## Fab Foodie (25 Oct 2017)

[QUOTE 5013898, member: 9609"]Having not been in the thread for a very long time, may I ask if a conclusion been arrived at yet, Should we be wearing them ? is it a Yay or is it a Nay ?[/QUOTE]
It’s a definate maybe for sure.....


----------



## classic33 (25 Oct 2017)

Fab Foodie said:


> It’s a definate maybe for sure.....


Certain?


----------



## Dan B (25 Oct 2017)

classic33 said:


> You want to read, start at the beginning, don't cut parts out. That's like skipping a couple of chapters in a book.


Skipping a couple of chapters is sometimes the only way to get to the end of the book. That famous trilogy featuring Tom bloody Bombadil comes immediately to mind


----------



## winjim (25 Oct 2017)

Dan B said:


> Skipping a couple of chapters is sometimes the only way to get to the end of the book. That famous trilogy featuring Tom bloody Bombadil comes immediately to mind


That's a hexalogy...


----------



## Shaun (25 Oct 2017)

To answer the OP - it is simply less time consuming to pre-moderate the debate than deal with the fallout of it being unmoderated (which cost us untold hours and several forum members). It also means that we don't have to exclude anyone, making it _more_ inclusive than permanently removing people from the discussion whose only "crime" is to be extremely passionate for _their_ side of the debate.

A positive side effect of the pre-moderation has been improved quality of debate and increased substance for many of the posts.

*It is as open for new posts and threads as it always has been*, you just might have to wait a little while for a moderator to approve your post(s); but as it's not a time-critical issue that shouldn't be a problem. 

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## Mugshot (26 Oct 2017)

Dan B said:


> Skipping a couple of chapters is sometimes the only way to get to the end of the book. That famous trilogy featuring Tom bloody Bombadil comes immediately to mind


*Tut*, if it hadn't been for Bombadil and the Barrow-downs then Merry wouldn't have had the sword from Westernesse to stab the Witch King with, could have had a very different ending to the book then.


----------



## Lonestar (29 Oct 2017)

classic33 said:


> Why there's fewer posting there, and others have stopped.



I've stopped posting.I want to wear my helmet and that's end of story.Not people telling me I shouldn't wear it because they don't like it.
Same with Hi-Viz as well.


----------



## Crackle (29 Oct 2017)

Before this turns into a de-facto helmet debate thread, I'm closing it as the question has been answered. Helmet debate, thataway>>>>>>


----------

