Submitted by christine on Tue, 24/03/2009 - 15:27.
i didn't read this properly as i was being particularly blonde... but, at the risk of being dim again today, if 'someone' posts an 'open' ride and ends up with say, 32 people riding and they have a couple of weeks to organise with the NWPS to let them know, how is that doing something wrong or disrespectful?
Is it even a rule to be enforced yet? and who/how do we notify them? otherwise do all our rides have to be 19 or under?
Blondie... it was not once stated on the original post, or any later comments that the organiser planned to call NPWS and use legitimate means to do this ride. In fact, the tone of the whole thing was definitely more rebellious and encouraging all to come, no matter what.
The little dig in the original post and then the quip about how it was the moderator's job to sort things with the authorities also supports that rebellious view.
It might not have been so bad if the author hadn't been posting stuff that was clearly going to be unacceptable recently and then throwing a rather public tanty when that previous post was pulled down.
So this was more of a three strikes thing than being given the boot for this single act.
Understand you run the site, but with absolute power comes absolute responsibility. Any moderation should be done in accordance with a written site policy, with clear transparency as to what transgressions have invoked what punishment.
Otherwise you are playing God.
Best regards
Nic (hoping that expressing my opinion on the matter won't get me banned too)
... at least not where I could find them. What I did find was:
"Q: Who maintains this site?
A: You do! No really! If you're a registered user feel free to create new content or comment on any of the other stuff you see here. Authors (that's you) are encourage to integrate useful comments into their posts regularly, so keep an eye on your content."
Arbitary moderation is inconsistent with the spirit of community authoring as stated above ...
What on earth is going on? I thought it was just a simple ride to go out and have an enjoyable ride where everyone had fun, like the old days.
A community site should allow all a freedom of speech, completely separate of personal differences.
The site allows open rides to be posted and its upto the organiser to follow some process to notify NPWS I suppose.
Until there is more rules and control thats the way it is.
Heavy handed censorship, assumption, personal issues, banning people....bloody hell. Where on earth are we taking this site?
To borrow a phrase from a like minded site... "shut up and ride"
I'm sure we're all familiar with how forums work... but suppose this means that for the record that page will get updated with something along the lines of:
Q: I was a wise ass and posted something incredibly rude, inappropriate, illegal or insensitive. Then my post disappeared... WTF?
A: You were 'moderated'. Ie. the 'moderator' judged this post to be unhelpful, or more likely, damaging to the spirit of this site and removed it. Users who find themselves consistently 'moderated' or who step waaaaay too far over the line may find themselves blocked.
... no, it's not what you think, it's Hotcopper.com.au.
On this site people are forever being moderated. Reasons for moderation given are either non-existent, scant or misleading - Mostly people are baffled as to what they have done wrong. I was suspended for two days for posting a link to a stock broker report openly available another website - reason given: "spam".
The site rejects any message that contains profanity - only it does not work properly and it can be very hard to actually get a message posted. Amongst the objectional "profanity" is any reference to competing websites.
Its all very well to post a new "rule" Rob but the application of the rule will be your problem.
As we all have different tolerances and points of view, and dont forget the meaning can be misconstued in email, how then will it be decided that a comment is unhelpful, innapropriate, insensitive or incredibly rude?
We take the piss out of some members which could easily break any or all of the rules. Will all the posts be removed that may offend?
This site has done very well with few rules over the years and imho should remain largely rule free.
You cant please all of the people all of the time...so why try? Let the site remain self moderated and simply maintain the site and remain independant.
Beaureacracy gone mad, there is enough of it in the world without it invading our free time and hobbies.
Craig
I get that wrong I guess I should of checked if it worked hey opps.
Stuart banned there must be a little more to it guys than we all know or what we think we know I imagine things would have to get pretty out of hand to get banned on here.
Submitted by jedijunglesnow on Wed, 25/03/2009 - 08:27.
I actually think this site would be better served if everyone was banned except for myself. And Stuart M. And Goatman cause I've met him. And Damien cause he got me in The Fling one year. And Rob cause he runs it.
I will write about this:
I meet Stuart M just before our first Daughter's where borne in 1999, since then we have become good friends.
We went on a couple Ski Holidays together with our Families and so on.
Stuart is a great guy, but has his view's, so have most of us! He is more outspoken then others, again so are some of us!
On this "Community Site" he has posted a lot of great post's, of the "30,000 comments" I don't think a lot had to be removed, probably
some about the DH Jersey. Other post's of other users have been removed , too, they are still on the site! Banning users? I don't know!?
Private arguments should stay private.
Go to the end of Long trail, have a biff at the lookout, get dirty and shake hands after and have a beer at the Tavern and Bob's ur uncle!!!!
That's all I have to say and will say!
Bernd
Submitted by Little-Ditty on Wed, 25/03/2009 - 13:28.
I cannot recall anything posted on this website that I would find offensive enough to want it removed... ever. (Except maybe some of my embarrassing photos). But I guess I must have a high tolerance for this offensive behahiour then?
My own last word on the issue...
Lets not be dictated to on the proper use of this website by outside factors. Who cares what NPWS wants or thinks? Or any other outside user? You can't censor users over comments made about government departments, organisations etc for that reason alone. (As long as those comments are not threatening, outrageously discriminatory, or abusive). We are the ones determining what we talk about here and what is acceptable, not outside users. And anyway, what's wrong with talk? If you don't like what's said, you put forward your own opinion and have it discussed. We live in a democracy that values free speech and self determination. If not, you have nothing to add here and you should bugger off.
"Any moderation should be done in accordance with a written site policy, with clear transparency as to what transgressions have invoked what punishment."
Without a clearly written and promulgated policy on what is acceptable and what isn't, it's up for whoever is
moderator" at the time to invoke their own set of standards or rules on all users.
A written site policy will let everyone know what is acceptable and what is not acceptable - currently members don't actually know what the boundaries are or what the punishment will be for overstepping the boundaries.
A written site policy will allow users to self regulate and for others to raise objections if they think someone has overstepped the boundaries.
Rob,
I'm happy to get together with any other who wish to volunteer and draft a site policy (possibly with penalties) to submit to the general NobMob community for feedback and hopefully acceptance.
Is there any others out there who would like to help formulate a draft policy for discussion?
Without a clearly written and promulgated policy on what is acceptable and what isn't, it's up for whoever is moderator at the time to invoke their own set of standards or rules on all users.
Yes it is. That's life.
Those living in a utopia would perhaps think written rules might change this, but they'd be wrong. This is because even if you have strict rules it will always be down to the user's or moderator's interpretation of them as to what actions are acceptable. What, are you going to put up a list of words or phrases that cannot be used? How silly would that be!
Rules can only go so far, write some if you like though. Think you'll be wasting your time but go ahead if it makes you feel better.
We've been working on common sense so far. 3.5 years, 1 banned person. As I said before, pretty decent record, non?
Don't believe? Google "Banned Users Statistics" for... erm... some banned users statistics. 1 out of 1500 (us) is the lowest ratio I found in the first few forums checked.
I don’t see it as a waste of time because having standards of acceptable behaviour articulated on the site provides everyone with known boundaries – what is acceptable, what is unacceptable, what will get you moderated, what will not get you moderated. It is even more important given membership is increasing so rapidly.
I will get a few people together to draft it out, then we can put it to the members, because in the end this is a community site.
PM if you want to assist in developing these standards.
..I think you run into major problems with interpretation and application and if is isnt illegal what does it matter?
Common sense (that opens a can of worms too) and self moderation have worked fine as you say. We dont need written rules (as discussed) nor do we need the whole interpretation/moderation left to a single individual with a potential conflict (moderator/webmaster)(Sorry Rob no offense to you personally). It's not utopia and this is what we have to live with and up till now it has worked ok. Lets simply resume the status quo and all be friends again, I think the various point have been made, dummys spat and now we can all get on with it.
If you have to draft something, remember it will have to be approved/moderated, make it simple for heavens sake.
Frankly the discussion should be whether the punishment fits the crime or if in fact a crime has been committed.
I could give a multitude of examples, but hopefully wont need to.
If we are talking about deliberately organising a big group ride in NP without NP notification/consent then it is illegal.
To say it's up to the ride organisers as to whether or not they get consent is naive. If an illegal activity is promoted on the site then the site owners can be charged.
Why should Rob have his balls in a noose just because someone else wants to use the site to make a stand?
I highly doubt Rob just hit the ban button without due consideration.
I believe NPWS have been contacted in relation to the said ride (and others) but as I understand it the process is a little cumbersome at the moment.
The ride is still posted so hopefully NPWS can get back to the organiser in time.
Ouch that's big news! Do we boycott the ride in support of Stuart?
Tom
will be doing this ride - armed with a beer!
Funny trip down NobMoB memory lane....lots of riding back then...
check this out (slow loading, no images)
http://web.archive.org/web/20031029121810/http:/...
http://web.archive.org/web/20070505000340/http:/...
http://web.archive.org/web/20050817152441/http:/...
via the waybackmachine:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://nobmob.com/
Cheers, Hans
____________________________________________
"I thought of that while riding my bike."
Albert Einstein, on the theory of relativity
i didn't read this properly as i was being particularly blonde... but, at the risk of being dim again today, if 'someone' posts an 'open' ride and ends up with say, 32 people riding and they have a couple of weeks to organise with the NWPS to let them know, how is that doing something wrong or disrespectful?
Is it even a rule to be enforced yet? and who/how do we notify them? otherwise do all our rides have to be 19 or under?
MEEE
Blondie... it was not once stated on the original post, or any later comments that the organiser planned to call NPWS and use legitimate means to do this ride. In fact, the tone of the whole thing was definitely more rebellious and encouraging all to come, no matter what.
The little dig in the original post and then the quip about how it was the moderator's job to sort things with the authorities also supports that rebellious view.
It might not have been so bad if the author hadn't been posting stuff that was clearly going to be unacceptable recently and then throwing a rather public tanty when that previous post was pulled down.
So this was more of a three strikes thing than being given the boot for this single act.
Haven't things changed a lot since this site first started.
... isn't that a little heavy handed.
Understand you run the site, but with absolute power comes absolute responsibility. Any moderation should be done in accordance with a written site policy, with clear transparency as to what transgressions have invoked what punishment.
Otherwise you are playing God.
Best regards
Nic (hoping that expressing my opinion on the matter won't get me banned too)
And nobody needs attitude on such a friendly mountain bike site such as this one. Leave that stuff to farkin and the downhillers?
are you talking about mate? You are the one with the 'attitude'!
Nic is making a valid point IMHO.
... at least not where I could find them. What I did find was:
"Q: Who maintains this site?
A: You do! No really! If you're a registered user feel free to create new content or comment on any of the other stuff you see here. Authors (that's you) are encourage to integrate useful comments into their posts regularly, so keep an eye on your content."
Arbitary moderation is inconsistent with the spirit of community authoring as stated above ...
Nic
Nic... this site has been running for three and a half years, has almost 1,500 registered users, over 8,000 posts and over 30,000 comments.
To ban one user for getting out of line in all this time is hardly heavy handed. It's very, very rare to see comments or posts moderated.
You can't please all of the people all of the time, etc, etc. So you're welcome to your opinion, it's all good
What on earth is going on? I thought it was just a simple ride to go out and have an enjoyable ride where everyone had fun, like the old days.
A community site should allow all a freedom of speech, completely separate of personal differences.
The site allows open rides to be posted and its upto the organiser to follow some process to notify NPWS I suppose.
Until there is more rules and control thats the way it is.
Heavy handed censorship, assumption, personal issues, banning people....bloody hell. Where on earth are we taking this site?
To borrow a phrase from a like minded site... "shut up and ride"
I'm sure we're all familiar with how forums work... but suppose this means that for the record that page will get updated with something along the lines of:
... no, it's not what you think, it's Hotcopper.com.au.
On this site people are forever being moderated. Reasons for moderation given are either non-existent, scant or misleading - Mostly people are baffled as to what they have done wrong. I was suspended for two days for posting a link to a stock broker report openly available another website - reason given: "spam".
The site rejects any message that contains profanity - only it does not work properly and it can be very hard to actually get a message posted. Amongst the objectional "profanity" is any reference to competing websites.
Let's not go down this path.
Nic
Its all very well to post a new "rule" Rob but the application of the rule will be your problem.
As we all have different tolerances and points of view, and dont forget the meaning can be misconstued in email, how then will it be decided that a comment is unhelpful, innapropriate, insensitive or incredibly rude?
We take the piss out of some members which could easily break any or all of the rules. Will all the posts be removed that may offend?
This site has done very well with few rules over the years and imho should remain largely rule free.
You cant please all of the people all of the time...so why try? Let the site remain self moderated and simply maintain the site and remain independant.
Beaureacracy gone mad, there is enough of it in the world without it invading our free time and hobbies.
Craig
And I suppose you want the mod to stop fixing up all the silly little mistakes - like the link in a ride meeting just corrected for example?
As I said, three and a half years, one banning. See you all for some more moaning in 2012!
I get that wrong I guess I should of checked if it worked hey opps.
Stuart banned there must be a little more to it guys than we all know or what we think we know I imagine things would have to get pretty out of hand to get banned on here.
I actually think this site would be better served if everyone was banned except for myself. And Stuart M. And Goatman cause I've met him. And Damien cause he got me in The Fling one year. And Rob cause he runs it.
you must be one of those pesky 'downhillers' with 'attitude'!!!
Banned.
I will write about this:
I meet Stuart M just before our first Daughter's where borne in 1999, since then we have become good friends.
We went on a couple Ski Holidays together with our Families and so on.
Stuart is a great guy, but has his view's, so have most of us! He is more outspoken then others, again so are some of us!
On this "Community Site" he has posted a lot of great post's, of the "30,000 comments" I don't think a lot had to be removed, probably
some about the DH Jersey. Other post's of other users have been removed , too, they are still on the site! Banning users? I don't know!?
Private arguments should stay private.
Go to the end of Long trail, have a biff at the lookout, get dirty and shake hands after and have a beer at the Tavern and Bob's ur uncle!!!!
That's all I have to say and will say!
Bernd
I cannot recall anything posted on this website that I would find offensive enough to want it removed... ever. (Except maybe some of my embarrassing photos). But I guess I must have a high tolerance for this offensive behahiour then?
My own last word on the issue...
Lets not be dictated to on the proper use of this website by outside factors. Who cares what NPWS wants or thinks? Or any other outside user? You can't censor users over comments made about government departments, organisations etc for that reason alone. (As long as those comments are not threatening, outrageously discriminatory, or abusive). We are the ones determining what we talk about here and what is acceptable, not outside users. And anyway, what's wrong with talk? If you don't like what's said, you put forward your own opinion and have it discussed. We live in a democracy that values free speech and self determination. If not, you have nothing to add here and you should bugger off.
agree Liam .. well said!
sorry - except the bit about your photos - i haven't had a problem with any of those, in fact the one of you holding lycra is one of my favourites...
Is this a life ban or a sin bin offence?
Should he come back as Stuart N?
I guess there would be no whinging allowed from Mr N this time!!
I agree with Nic.
"Any moderation should be done in accordance with a written site policy, with clear transparency as to what transgressions have invoked what punishment."
Without a clearly written and promulgated policy on what is acceptable and what isn't, it's up for whoever is
moderator" at the time to invoke their own set of standards or rules on all users.
A written site policy will let everyone know what is acceptable and what is not acceptable - currently members don't actually know what the boundaries are or what the punishment will be for overstepping the boundaries.
A written site policy will allow users to self regulate and for others to raise objections if they think someone has overstepped the boundaries.
Rob,
I'm happy to get together with any other who wish to volunteer and draft a site policy (possibly with penalties) to submit to the general NobMob community for feedback and hopefully acceptance.
Is there any others out there who would like to help formulate a draft policy for discussion?
Yes it is. That's life.
Those living in a utopia would perhaps think written rules might change this, but they'd be wrong. This is because even if you have strict rules it will always be down to the user's or moderator's interpretation of them as to what actions are acceptable. What, are you going to put up a list of words or phrases that cannot be used? How silly would that be!
Rules can only go so far, write some if you like though. Think you'll be wasting your time but go ahead if it makes you feel better.
We've been working on common sense so far. 3.5 years, 1 banned person. As I said before, pretty decent record, non?
Don't believe? Google "Banned Users Statistics" for... erm... some banned users statistics. 1 out of 1500 (us) is the lowest ratio I found in the first few forums checked.
I don’t see it as a waste of time because having standards of acceptable behaviour articulated on the site provides everyone with known boundaries – what is acceptable, what is unacceptable, what will get you moderated, what will not get you moderated. It is even more important given membership is increasing so rapidly.
I will get a few people together to draft it out, then we can put it to the members, because in the end this is a community site.
PM if you want to assist in developing these standards.
..I think you run into major problems with interpretation and application and if is isnt illegal what does it matter?
Common sense (that opens a can of worms too) and self moderation have worked fine as you say. We dont need written rules (as discussed) nor do we need the whole interpretation/moderation left to a single individual with a potential conflict (moderator/webmaster)(Sorry Rob no offense to you personally). It's not utopia and this is what we have to live with and up till now it has worked ok. Lets simply resume the status quo and all be friends again, I think the various point have been made, dummys spat and now we can all get on with it.
If you have to draft something, remember it will have to be approved/moderated, make it simple for heavens sake.
Frankly the discussion should be whether the punishment fits the crime or if in fact a crime has been committed.
I could give a multitude of examples, but hopefully wont need to.
If we are talking about deliberately organising a big group ride in NP without NP notification/consent then it is illegal.
To say it's up to the ride organisers as to whether or not they get consent is naive. If an illegal activity is promoted on the site then the site owners can be charged.
Why should Rob have his balls in a noose just because someone else wants to use the site to make a stand?
I highly doubt Rob just hit the ban button without due consideration.
I believe NPWS have been contacted in relation to the said ride (and others) but as I understand it the process is a little cumbersome at the moment.
The ride is still posted so hopefully NPWS can get back to the organiser in time.
permission as far as i understand it for 30 people
If you ride a hardtail then you face suspension.
insist on being male and wearing full lycra on a social ride.. banned!! double banned if it's an all white outfit...
....would be offended!
-------------------------------------------
The Liver is Evil and must be punished
-------------------------------------------