Comments in ‘on the road’

[Phil Fouracre]

Can someone enlighten me re: comments and moderation please. The post, just locked, about the cyclist whose brakes failed has confused me. I posted a couple of comments, as did others, that have disappeared, how/why did this happen? Was there a problem with them? If so why no mention or explanation?

[Jdsk]

My guess is that the moderators decided to move the discussion that was about types of brakes rather than the specific reported death to a new thread.

Sounds sensible to me.

Jonathan

[DevonDamo]

Like Jonathan, I suspect the reason the thread about the Dales accident got closed and some of the comments moved to a separate thread on disc brakes was that a bit of sensitivity needed to be shown as someone had been killed.

I think closing the Brexit thread was just plain wrong. Yes, such threads will always turn into Punch and Judy battles, but at least they're contained in their own thread which people can choose to ignore if they don't like that sort of thing. Given this is the crunch moment with regards to Brexit, it's fantasy not to expect this topic to flare up over the coming weeks, so having a dedicated thread is the least worst option. It's inevitable that other threads will now descend into handbag battles as people will be simmering to vent their spleen over the evolving situation at any opportunity.

[mikeymo]

Like Jonathan, I suspect the reason the thread about the Dales accident got closed and some of the comments moved to a separate thread on disc brakes was that a bit of sensitivity needed to be shown as someone had been killed.

I think closing the Brexit thread was just plain wrong. Yes, such threads will always turn into Punch and Judy battles, but at least they're contained in their own thread which people can choose to ignore if they don't like that sort of thing. Given this is the crunch moment with regards to Brexit, it's fantasy not to expect this topic to flare up over the coming weeks, so having a dedicated thread is the least worst option. It's inevitable that other threads will now descend into handbag battles as people will be simmering to vent their spleen over the evolving situation at any opportunity.

I agree. The walled garden or rabbit hole (depending on how you view it) of The Brexit Thread at least kept the discussion in one place. As the separate helmet sub-forum is intended to do. But then again, there are umpteen places on the internet where one can "discuss" Brexit. There's no especial reason why people who ride bikes should have any more informed or original opinions on the subject than anybody else, unless of course the topic is specifically about how Brexit will affect cyclists.

[Phil Fouracre]

Thanks for your comments! I was slightly surprised/saddened, not so much by the locking of the thread - I could see the obvious reason, but, reading through it again, to find individual comments removed struck me as strange. To remove random comments with no explanation strikes me as slightly odd/authoritarian? After all it is supposed to be a discussion group - shutting down and censoring a post that is in effect offering insights into serious safety issues seems a little odd.
When I joined a long time ago I assumed that it was a relatively intelligent adult forum for open and serious discussion about a wide range of subjects, obviously not so
I can see, as you say, that Brexit could provide endless scope for upset and abuse, which would obviously need monitoring, but, surely that is the point of a forum, to discuss and educate??

[Oldjohnw]

I expect people to behave with decency and respect. Human nature means they don't always. But no-one needs to read the Brexit thread if they don't want to. Pity we prorogued a forum thread.

[mikeymo]

I can see, as you say, that Brexit could provide endless scope for upset and abuse, which would obviously need monitoring, but, surely that is the point of a forum, to discuss and educate??

Some mods sometimes seem to set a very low bar as to what constitutes "personal" comments. Though the bar varies widely. I suspect it's based, in some cases, on who the poster is, and on the bias of the mod. But I might be wrong about that, and have no interest in doing any sort of survey. And of course nobody believes that they are themselves biased or that if they are it influences their own decisions.

I'm not sure that the endless upset and abuse that you refer to even would need monitoring, except perhaps for things like libel, disclosure of personal details, threats etc. After all, The Brexit Thread was a separate thread, in an already separate sub-forum, The Tea Room, itself in a group of sub-forums called "Other". The very title of The Tea Room makes the non-specific miscellaneous purpose clear. The strap line could very well be "come here to write/moan about stuff that isn't to do with bikes". It's worth pointing out that if you open the forum website, and choose "Cycling", you don't even see the Tea Room, or the for sale/wanted sections etc.

Generally speaking, the various people who have ended up in my ignore list, as well as making unfounded or aggressive comments to me, are also people who have never offered any useful advice. So that "foes" thing seems to work. Though it's a lot more drastic, I quite like the Facebook "block" mechanism. I wish there was one here, and I daresay some of my interlocutors do too.

In an online forum discussing electric guitar pickups I once saw a threat to kill. Of course the evil moron that thinks dimarzios are any good deserves to die

[mikeymo]

I think that last phrase, meant as humor, could be interpreted as incitement to crime, and should not be allowed

I have an uncomfortable feeling that you are serious. I personally think the intention is clear, given the context, and also the winky face thingy. But feel free to report my post to the mods, who will decide. That is what you "should" do if you genuinely think my comment is "incitement to crime" and also what you both "may" and "can" do. The deletion of the final comment, or the whole post, will be no great loss.

You don't use dimarzios do you?

EDIT: Oh, you've edited your post after I replied.

[Jdsk]

The humorous intention was clear, and you included a smiley to remove any ambiguity.

Jonathan

[reohn2]

Guilty as charged for my lack of sensitivity on the Dales thread as I used the word 'stupid' which was a step too far and I was stupid for using it and apologise the forum my insensitivity.

That said,there were other points removed that IMO shouldn't have been and which weren't moved over to the current disc thread.

[Jdsk]

Congratulations on a straight apology.

Jonathan

[horizon]

Guilty as charged for my lack of sensitivity on the Dales thread as I used the word 'stupid' which was a step too far and I was stupid for using it and apologise the forum my insensitivity.

I read that (and many other posts in the thread) as a passionate plea for people to protect themselves and spare others grief. I would have had no problem with relatives reading it - the whole thread was about cyclists caring for the man who died and sharing their frustration at being too late to help. I found it moving. I'm glad the thread was split as it still stands as a testimony to compassionate concern while the technical details are thrashed out in the new thread.

IMV you have nothing to apologise for (Jonathan's post crossed with mine and I'm not disagreeing with him as such).

[Oldjohnw]

I hope stupid comments (not referring to current discussion) are never against the law. Popular disdain should be enough.

[Phil Fouracre]

Well, that didn’t last long
All I was trying to ask was about the closing down of discussion about something that could be of benefit to others, ie the importance of maintaining your bike! Didn’t want to start a fight!

[Jdsk]

All I was trying to ask was about the closing down of discussion about something that could be of benefit to others, ie the importance of maintaining your bike!

Amongst the other stuff... did you get the information that you were seeking?

Jonathan