Is CC becoming a victim of its own success ? ?

[SavageHoutkop]

I mean no critism Touche just that I think some folk have a different understanding of what flaming entails

which is why examples would be useful, otherwise some of us are off talking about apples while others are discussing watermelons.

 

[Theseus]

I think first you should look up the definition of 'flaming' in this context . perhaps when you understand the meaning of the word you'll see more evidence of it without the need for specific instances being pointed out.

I mean no critism Touche just that I think some folk have a different understanding of what flaming entails

I am perfectly aware what forum/internet flaming is about. Like you I am not new to this. I have been active on message boards since JANET and before the advent of the www.

At one level, your response could be considered a flame. I stated that I would like to see examples of them, i.e. what do you consider to be flaming and you come back with what could be considered a personal attack. The presence of the smiley changes nothing as far as I am concerned, they are an irrelevance and should not be needed in serious debate.

To continue with your final point, I agree, it is for this reason I wanted to know what you were considering as a flame.

 

[peanut]

which is why examples would be useful, otherwise some of us are off talking about apples while others are discussing watermelons.

I have already put a link to the wikipedia definition of 'flaming' if you can't be bothered to click on it and read it you can hardly expect me to answer your question can you.

Once you understand that flaming involves being deliberately disruptful and argumentative ,confrontational and adding nothing constructive to a discussion you'll begin to see examples of that in almost every thread on CC without someone having to lead you by the nose to it.

It is not a question of how bad or how much of it there is it is a question of it being there at all.

if someone hits you for no reason when you are trying to be helpful you're not going to stand and debate how hard they hit you are you

For example I am answering your questions and trying to be helpful even though you are flaming ie being argumentative disruptive and adding nothing constructive to the threads question geddit?

 

[Rhythm Thief]

I have already put a link to the wikipedia definition of 'flaming' if you can't be bothered to click on it and read it you can hardly expect me to answer your question can you.

Hmmm. Got a problem with needlessly confrontational posts, have you?

 

[Arch]

Having had a quick skim of this thread, and looked at the side-thread that Shaun posted to -

(2) on the thread that Shaun posted a link to; where Arch has been accused of not reading what is written - if you hadn't used 'like everything else on Cycle Chat, anything new and useful or enthusiastically proposed is shot down in flames by the armchair knockers who sit on their flat bottoms, do nothing and critisize others for their efforts and interests.'. By starting with 'everything' you will get hackles up - a good piece of advice is never to use 'never' or 'always' when describing people's behaviour. There could have been a less confrontational way to state your view.

Thank you for taking the trouble to work that out. At the time it sounded very much as is Peanut was writing the whole forum off, and that's very unfair on those who put in a lot of effort to keep it running - Admin especially. However, I see now it was all apparently 'tongue in cheek' so, that's ok then.

One other point, Peanut - Mods 'flaming' in threads. Mods are just members you know. We have opinions, ideas, bikes, the lot. When under our own names, we have the right to say what we like, within forum rules. If any of us were thought to overstep the mark, we'd be dealt with, and none of us have more power to do anything than anything else, and indeed we consult on most issues. Don't get hung up on the fact that someone who disagrees with you happens to be a Mod. If they post under their own name, they are doing just that - being themselves.

 

[Mr Pig]

I've been using Internet forums for a long time and generally speaking this one is pretty good. Has it gone down hill? Maybe slightly but I've yet to see any forum that gets it right all the time. Generally speaking I think the mods here do a good job but I'm not convinced they are totally impartial.

From my experience I believe that the success of a forum is almost entirely down to the way it is moderated. Any forum will attract its share of bullies and how these people are dealt with shapes the direction of the whole place. I know a guy who reads this forum but will not join because of some of the abuse he's seen but really, compared to many forums this one is pretty good!

For years I used a forum that was totally unmoderated, it was a disaster! The folk who ran it believed that people should be treated like grown ups and moderate themselves but it doesn't work. I've seen things spill over into the real world a number of times including legal action about things said online and a guy trying to get his nemesis sacked from his job by reporting him to his employers!

Could this forum be tighter? Yes, but it could also be a lot worse! I just stay out of P&L and ignore the few people who think it's their job to try to push me around. It's not hard.

 

[peanut]

One other point, Peanut - Mods 'flaming' in threads. Mods are just members you know. Don't get hung up on the fact that someone who disagrees with you happens to be a Mod. If they post under their own name, they are doing just that - being themselves.

I wasn't getting hungup as you put it. I simply found your remark that my comment was a load of B****X as you so elequently put it , rather offensive.

re flaming I think that you will find that it contravenes the forum rules

I have never used offensive language to you or anyone else on this forum, Mod or not and I don't think that kind of language is acceptable. Maybe its an age thing and you think its perfectly acceptable ?

Anyway I accept your apology for misunderstanding my comment

 

[SavageHoutkop]

I have already put a link to the wikipedia definition of 'flaming' if you can't be bothered to click on it and read it you can hardly expect me to answer your question can you.

Once you understand that flaming involves being deliberately disruptful and argumentative ,confrontational and adding nothing constructive to a discussion you'll begin to see examples of that in almost every thread on CC without someone having to lead you by the nose to it.

It is not a question of how bad or how much of it there is it is a question of it being there at all.

if someone hits you for no reason when you are trying to be helpful you're not going to stand and debate how hard they hit you are you

For example I am answering your questions and trying to be helpful even though you are flaming ie being argumentative disruptive and adding nothing constructive to the threads question geddit?

Whereas from my view I've posted a reasonable request, which is to see some of the posts you are objecting to; and all you've done is direct me to another site to look at their definition of the problem? If I read a definition of flaming, I could think that this post you've just made perfectly fits, and therefore is a flame. Unless you are being hypocritical, clearly you don't think it's a flame.

We have now created two possible flames - my post and your reply - hence my previous request is now not necessary....

(Note: you haven't put a link to flaming as far as I can see, you just suggested I (well, Touche to be precise) should look it up)

To re-iterate my (& Touche's) point, if there is a definition of flaming somewhere, there could be someone who thinks a particular post is a flame - and someone else who thinks it is not a flame - using exactly the same definition. Without seeing examples of what you consider flaming, my previous post aside, how can this discussion progress further?

 

[Tim Bennet.]

I've read all this and I too would find it helpful if Peanut would give a link to a post that illustrates the behaviours he's concerned about.

Eight pages of unfocussed debate could be made more meaningful if we had an exact example to consider.

 

[jay clock]

It is a non issue as far as I am concerned. Firstly I have my settings configured to remove all the non cycling areas from "New Posts" which is how I access the latest chat.

If the concern is that areas supposedly dedicated to cycle-specific stuff in fact degenerate into non-cycling/personal attack, it is not something I have seen.

 

[Shaun]

I've removed some of the less constructive posts from the thread and unlocked it.

Please try to give constructive feedback and refrain from making personal remarks, they're not helpful.

If you can't think of anything constructive to post, then simply leave the thread alone and allow those who are interested to discuss it without interference.

Thanks,
Shaun

 

[Wigsie]

The way this thread has gone is quite interesting.... (thanks for unlocking Shaun). Would it be safe to say that most Forums suffer at the hands of their own success? Surely due to the ever increasing range of personalities.

I have had my differences with some and have had fallings out with others, If I felt I was in the wrong I have apologised and likewise some have apologies to me.

Its about common sense, courtesy & manners, but it also helps not to jump off the deep end when you scan a message and presume you know what the poster meant. There are many regulars here old and new and many opinions of people are formed from post historys which can lead to judgemental assumptions but I would suggest more often than not on here its not intentionally malicious.

The mods do a good job generally I feel and where sometimes can be a little judgmental and one sided surely its just human nature? they are not robots after all?

Sporadic periods away will help us all from time to time, as does giving examples help but only if done sensibly (don't have to name and shame as that will only end badly).

 

[Arch]

I wasn't getting hungup as you put it. I simply found your remark that my comment was a load of B****X as you so elequently put it , rather offensive.

re flaming I think that you will find that it contravenes the forum rules

I have never used offensive language to you or anyone else on this forum, Mod or not and I don't think that kind of language is acceptable. Maybe its an age thing and you think its perfectly acceptable ?

Anyway I accept your apology for misunderstanding my comment

At least I spelt b*ll*cks right...

An age thing? My dear, I'm 40. Does that make me a young whippersnapper?

 

[Arch]

Anyway, to try and be constuctive for a mo.

Lots of people have commented that drivers and so on get more bad tempered at this time of year. The dark nights, the cold weather, it gets people down, even if they don't realise it. IF (and it's big if) there's been more stress on the forum recently, maybe that's the reason. We're all people, we go through cycles of stuff.

I say a big if, because I don't think there's been much of a change. I tend to stick to certain sections, so I have no idea about Race, or the more technical side, but the sections I do visit seem much the same.

 

[Wigsie]

I say a big if, because I don't think there's been much of a change. I tend to stick to certain sections, so I have no idea about Race, or the more technical side, but the sections I do visit seem much the same.

Can we keep ethnicity out of this for a change Arch?








Is that flaming?