Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
boblo
Posts: 810
Joined: 24 Sep 2009, 7:35pm

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by boblo »

I'm not sure it's reasonable to create a thread to justify and then continue to pick over the bones of a banning...

The banned is not here to defend themselves from the criticism of all the wise sages and I'd suggest Moderators should not be creating partisan threads to justify their own prejudices and actions.
Last edited by boblo on 29 Dec 2022, 2:04pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
simonineaston
Posts: 8816
Joined: 9 May 2007, 1:06pm
Location: ...at a cricket ground

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by simonineaston »

The banned is not here to defend themselves
The points I've raised in my recent comments are generalised and have no bearing on the individual. I have not named them or criticised them other than to observe in the most mild manner, that I'm not aware of the intention of their recent contributions that were the subject of the moderation. Happy Days!
S
(on the look out for Armageddon, on board a Brompton nano & ever-changing Moultons)
multitool
Posts: 47
Joined: 27 May 2013, 5:03pm

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by multitool »

boblo wrote: 29 Dec 2022, 1:52pm I'm not sure it's reasonable to create a thread to justify and then continue to pick over the bones of a banning...

The banned is not here to defend themselves from the criticism of all the wise sages and I'd suggest Moderators should not be creating partisan threads to justify their own prejudices and actions.
I disagree. The banned runs a whole website where the banned names and criticises people on other fora who have objected to his repeated attempts to stir up hatred. The banned is busy over there now whining that this forum (and others) have denied him free speech and unfairly banned him. There is no right of reply on his website, so therefore it should be posted here.
User avatar
PedallingSquares
Posts: 557
Joined: 13 Mar 2022, 11:01am

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by PedallingSquares »

multitool wrote: 29 Dec 2022, 3:06pm
boblo wrote: 29 Dec 2022, 1:52pm I'm not sure it's reasonable to create a thread to justify and then continue to pick over the bones of a banning...

The banned is not here to defend themselves from the criticism of all the wise sages and I'd suggest Moderators should not be creating partisan threads to justify their own prejudices and actions.
I disagree. The banned runs a whole website where the banned names and criticises people on other fora who have objected to his repeated attempts to stir up hatred. The banned is busy over there now whining that this forum (and others) have denied him free speech and unfairly banned him. There is no right of reply on his website, so therefore it should be posted here.
I am, or was, a member of his website/forum but have never posted on there.I might.
boblo
Posts: 810
Joined: 24 Sep 2009, 7:35pm

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by boblo »

There is no right of reply on his website, so therefore it should be posted here.
No it shouldn't. This forum is not for every petty, vindictive busy body to get their own back for perceived sleights made elsewhere in the metaverse. Take that elsewhere and sort in your own time.
Last edited by boblo on 29 Dec 2022, 4:39pm, edited 1 time in total.
axel_knutt
Posts: 3619
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 12:20pm

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by axel_knutt »

simonineaston wrote: 29 Dec 2022, 12:03pmThe nascent companies that we now know as the big tech usual suspects started out as maverick left-field, freedom-for-all spaces, driven by youngsters, with stars in their eyes - remember when Google wanted to publish 'all of human knowledge' ?? These ambitions didn't survive the interaction with two key influences, 9/11 & the 2008 global financial crisis. What happended next was a reversal of the sort of things they'd dreamed about. They were required, one way or another, to find out exactly what we wanted and to pass the knowledge on to commercial interests. They achieved this by inventing "the algorithm".
Now it's got all got completely out of hand - and some will argue - beyond our control.
If you give people a tool to use, someone will always use it for purposes that you didn't anticipate and/or don't like. 'Twas ever thus, Dr Goebbels would have been wetting himself if he'd seen the internet and the likes of Cambridge Analytica etc, but at the time Marconi first started the production of radio, the tool Goebbels did use, all the talk was of things like rescuing the survivors from Titanic etc, not the broadcast of propaganda.
Philip Benstead wrote: 29 Dec 2022, 1:23pm It was suggest to me that the www concentrate and highlights view and opinions.

If I had great interest in the thermal vents in Atlantic before the days of www I want to

find like mined persons I would have to place advert in specific publications NOW I would just trawel the to find people.

Now I can find like mined people who belive what I belive or have the same physical, mental and emotional needs and wants as I.


Now if anybody find my need and wants come into conflicting with their emotional, religious and philosophy belive system they can express views which may be upsetting, this in turn will galvanise a response to demolished the creditabily of the view and outcast them from society and may cause them to losses their job and reputation.
Indeed. On the one hand, being able to find like-minded people quickly and easily is a benefit, but on the other, it also makes it quicker and easier to form cliques who just sit telling each other what they want to hear and then label anyone who does otherwise a troll. 'Follow' buttons like on Twitter don't exactly help. I've been blocked and labelled a troll just for suggesting that cycling burns energy, and food production creates carbon emissions, but hey ho, cyclists have their sacred cows just like everyone else.
“I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
toontra
Posts: 1417
Joined: 21 Dec 2007, 11:01am
Location: London

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by toontra »

Just for a bit of background, "Sussex Cyclist" (as is his current nom-de-plume here) was the admin for a cycle forum in the early-mid 2000's, popular with audaxers. In a fit of pique he closed the whole forum down simply because he objected to posters using emojis :D Disenfranchised members went on to create a new forum for themselves, which he himself later joined and started posting nonsense on as well :roll:

He's using his postings on existing forums in an effort to entice/lure people to his own forum where he is king and no dissenting voices are not tolerated. Narcissism and hypocrisy in equal measures IMO.
Last edited by toontra on 29 Dec 2022, 5:28pm, edited 1 time in total.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36740
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by thirdcrank »

I didn't think this was about cyclists' sacred cows
multitool
Posts: 47
Joined: 27 May 2013, 5:03pm

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by multitool »

boblo wrote: 29 Dec 2022, 3:55pm
There is no right of reply on his website, so therefore it should be posted here.
No it shouldn't. This forum is not for every petty, vindictive busy body to get their own back for perceived sleights made elsewhere in the metaverse. Take that offline and sort in your own time.
If you look very closely you'll see this thread was started by a mod. Presumably a "petty, vindictive busy" in your view. I'm not sure how the mod can sort this "offline" since the issue is online.

You, of course, have the option not to view or participate in this thread.
Labrat
Posts: 245
Joined: 3 Mar 2014, 11:58am

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by Labrat »

Just to be clear, when another poster joins the forum solely in order to discuss the same issue, specifically admitting that the reason they are here is because:
No. Its not a coincidence. In fact, I purposely chose this forum based on responses to the recent discourse.
Are they classified as trolling as well? Or does the label only apply if the moderators don’t agree with your opinions?

Double standards?
multitool
Posts: 47
Joined: 27 May 2013, 5:03pm

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by multitool »

If the same identical post is being made on at least 3 fora, and a perusal of author's own website shows that it is a particular obsession of his and that he doesn't want to "promote discussion" but has a very specified direction in which he intends that "discussion" to take then its actually something worse than trolling. It's something verging on pathological.
boblo
Posts: 810
Joined: 24 Sep 2009, 7:35pm

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by boblo »

You, of course, have the option not to view or participate in this thread.
Yeah, I could leave you petty, vindictive busy bodies to it but it's not your choice. The forum is firstly Cycling UK's and the content 'ours' - in that 'we' generate it. Ie not 'yours' to decide who does what and when.

If it's used to malign a banned member in their absence, it becomes bullying and vile. I don't have any view on the individual as I stopped reading their posts at the start of the anti Enigma campaign. But continuing after banning is just cowardly and horrible as they have no right of reply.

This thread should not even exist.
roubaixtuesday
Posts: 6611
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by roubaixtuesday »

Labrat wrote: 29 Dec 2022, 4:26pm Just to be clear, when another poster joins the forum solely in order to discuss the same issue,
That isn't what that poster said, you're misrepresenting them.
pwa
Posts: 18222
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by pwa »

Labrat wrote: 29 Dec 2022, 4:26pm Just to be clear, when another poster joins the forum solely in order to discuss the same issue, specifically admitting that the reason they are here is because:
No. Its not a coincidence. In fact, I purposely chose this forum based on responses to the recent discourse.
Are they classified as trolling as well? Or does the label only apply if the moderators don’t agree with your opinions?

Double standards?
No. The new member appears to have been drawn in by that issue, but has posted less than you or I on the matter. And they have barely, if at all, touched on anything controversial. Whereas SS seems to have been conducting a campaign, but dressing it up as a casual conversation. That is not exactly trolling, but it is dishonest manipulation.
Labrat
Posts: 245
Joined: 3 Mar 2014, 11:58am

Re: Sussex Cyclist's trolling of the forum

Post by Labrat »

pwa wrote: 29 Dec 2022, 4:37pm No. The new member appears to have been drawn in by that issue
So rather than ‘scaring people off’, Sussex cyclist’s posts actually drew new people in? Interesting…
Locked