That statement doesnt really answer the question …
Is it possible that the quantity of posts and posters can be related to the number of interesting posts available to read?
It's obvious dilution imo, the aim of the mods etc was to dilute the forums and dilute they have, this is the result.
patriotpro
I am sure its much more cock up than conspiracy
Two of the bannees I know off forum. Both had been vociferous, forthright and direct* on the various update threads and one of them does this sort of stuff for a living. The mods were I am sure getting somewhat exasperated with the situation and snapped and banned them both. perhaps harshly perhaps not depending where you are sitting. Its a shame as both brought much.
As for post count. Its obviously down and I find less stuff to engage with. I suspect the forum is big enough to survive but no doubt its wounded.
* or noisy and objectionable 😉
My biggest gripe with the new forum is that I can't see posts that I have commented on any more. Before I could comment on something that interested me and a few days or a week later I could quickly check out if there had been any replies in the "threads started" and "threads commented on". Losing this functionality is a big loss to how useful the forum is to me.
EDIT...oops. thought I had best check and this functionality has been reinstated to some degree!
I added pics from flickr this morning by just using the BBCode option from flickr. Not sure why its so difficult?
Doesn't work properly for me any more, you get extraneous XML after the picture e.g.
[url= https://farm1.staticflickr.com/908/27874892698_dcb6822af5_k.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm1.staticflickr.com/908/27874892698_dcb6822af5_k.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/Jtd7sf ]IMG_1351[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/brf/ ]Ben Freeman[/url], on Flickr
Actually, that is a bit better than it was, still got url= garbage there
Being redirected to really quite dodgy phishing sites by the ropey ads here would be my guess for people leaving. Even as a subscriber I'm automatically logged out once a week so have to run the gauntlet just to log in again.
The dilution intent was made quite clear some time ago, the result is what you have now. Perfect example being this thread would been in to 5 pages now as it's provocative.
What's left now is the creation of the mods so hardly an accident. Would be interesting to hear if they are happy with the result...
The dilution intent was made quite clear some time ago, the result is what you have now. Perfect example being this thread would been in to 5 pages now as it’s provocative.
This has never been a thing at all sorry to shatter your illusion.
The mods were I am sure getting somewhat exasperated with the situation and snapped and banned them both. perhaps harshly perhaps not depending where you are sitting. Its a shame as both brought much.
That’s their version of it and given the number of complaints we’ve received over the years for them and the number of warnings they’ve it was only ever going to go one way.
EDIT…oops. thought I had best check and this functionality has been reinstated to some degree!
They have just messed with the font size really though, still doesn't tell you what the previous version did...
No illusion to be shattered so no need to apologise drac.
I suppose as long as you getting the desired site 'impresssions' though, that's the main thing to anyone with vested interests in relation to advertising revenue, etc.
You keep believing that then Patriotpro.
That’s their version of it and given the number of complaints we’ve received over the years for them and the number of warnings they’ve it was only ever going to go one way.
It's always good for moderators to discuss banned members, seeing as they can't answer back.
So I should just let TJ tell misconceptions then, again, no I don’t think so.
It’s always good for moderators to discuss banned members
... anonymously.
We've discouraged people from discussing banned members in the past for exactly that reason, it's not fair.
Can't we have a list of banned members? Cause I haven't got a clue who's been banned!
Having said that, I haven't seen Junky around for a while or THM!
So I should just let TJ tell misconceptions then, again, no I don’t think so.
He's giving his opinion. You are giving yours.You could choose to say that you won't discuss it further.
… anonymously.
We’ve discouraged people from discussing banned members in the past for exactly that reason, it’s not fair.
You're right that it's not fair, so stop doing it. And please stop the pretence that it's anonymous, you know perfectly well that names have been quoted recently.
My view really not theirs Drac and I see your comments as fair enough. I obviously don't know your viewpoint.. One of them is claiming " no prior warnings" but thin ice is obvious - certainly in hindsight. 😉 And yes discussing banned members is fruitless.
Until you offer up a something else drac, i'll have to i suppose.
tbh it's no biggy but you should be grateful of the speculation, at least it's racking up thread count!
you know perfectly well that names have been quoted recently.
We can't control others' speculations. We've not mentioned any names (or confirmed any, for that matter).
In any case, I can't see an issue with saying "a couple of users have been banned following multiple warnings." Why else would we ban people? .About the only other thing I can think of is gross misconduct.
My view really not theirs Drac and I see your comments as fair enough
Probably best you stop then as it’s twice I’ve had to correct you now.
What am I supposed to offer Patriotpro you’ve claimed that mods have some form of conspiracy going on to dilute the forums, I’ve told it’s not true.
You are giving <span class="skimlinks-unlinked">yours.You</span> could choose to say that you won’t discuss it further.
Or I could correct him.
Or I could correct him.
You have already had your say. My opinion is that it's really poor behaviour from a moderator.
We can’t control others’ speculations. We’ve not mentioned any names (or confirmed any, for that matter).
It's hardly speculation, as you know.
In any case, I can’t see an issue with saying “a couple of users have been banned following multiple warnings.”
Thats not all that was said, as you know.
O hai guys!
I see this thread is going exactly as expected.
So what if numbers are down? Want the numbers to go up? Post more. Don’t like that others aren’t posting and thus entertaining you sufficiently? Well, there’s always pinkbike (other bike sites are available also)
That or (quietly, please) bask in your own superiority, knowing you were right all along
You have already had your say. My opinion is that it’s really poor behaviour from a moderator.
Oh sorry for replying to you.
Oh sorry for replying to you.
No need to get snippy: I was referring to the fact that you have already given your opinion on the bannings.
I suppose as long as you getting the desired site ‘impresssions’ though
you should be grateful of the speculation, at least it’s racking up thread count!
You seem to be confusing moderators with site owners. Impressions and thread count affects us as much as it affects you.
Kryton57 has had another car thread open for over an hour, with zero replies. Someone desperately needs to take the piss.
Sad times.
You seem to be confusing moderators with site owners.
For better or worse, you have been acting as spokespeople for STW so I suppose it's not surprising that you get conflated.
Glad I cleared that up, then.
It’s not opinion I stated a fact to correct misconceptions as I say a reply.
Kryton57 has had another car thread open for over an hour, with zero replies. Someone desperately needs to take the piss.
That man needs some new material
Has anyone tried starting a thread a bout Brexit? that will get the post number up 😉
You're a bad man.
(-:
Donald Trump, Our Saviour: A STW Story...
It’s not opinion I stated a fact to correct misconceptions as I say a reply.
It really isn't, because you aren't the arbiter of an undeniable truth. You're telling it how you see it from your perspective. Something I don't think you should be doing, as I've said. We've no way of knowing if you've acted reasonably towards the individuals concerned (who says the complaints or warnings are just?) so to say that their banning was inevitable is only true if you'd decided that it's what you wanted to happen.
FFS!
Alternatively:
Find something that is blatantly racist and start a thread ask everyone is this racist?
start a thread asking if you have been overcharged by your LBS?
start a thread saying that Sick bike co. are bobbins
We’ve no way of knowing if you’ve acted reasonably towards the individuals concerned
True enough.
However, your knowing is not a prerequisite for successful moderation of the forum. At the risk of being blunt, the circumstances surrounding the issuing of warnings or bans to other users is none of your business.
I would hope that the majority of users would trust us to act in a fair and reasonable capacity, and I've certainly tried to be as objective and transparent as I can be in this respect. There's a very small but vocal minority that appears to resent the fact that the site has moderators at all and will never be happy as what we do, but there's not a great deal I can do about that. If you don't trust us then I'm sorry, but ultimately that's your decision.
I have a question about getting out of a car lease contract, can anyone help?
There are many things wrong with this forum but I don't think the level of moderation is one of them. Any modding done to me has, sometimes after a period of reflection, seemed fair.
However, I would also suggest to both Cougar and Drac that their loyalty to STW has affected their objectivity when it comes to the results of the forum upgrade and that has shown in the tone of their replies.
Any modding done to me...
you had a word with yourself? 😉
electronic bicycles sound like fun maybe a thread about them would draw in a few posters?
I should also say - I can understand how a level of frustration could lead to that reaction and that's really a reflection on the way they've been left as the "public face" of STW while those that should be communicating are apparently in hiding.
A conspiracy isn't strictly true as that usually involves a plan carried out in privacy, whereas yours was made clear
you say tomato, i say tomato, i couldn't give a four ex tbh, just passing a bit of time.
having said that tho your replies in general are tetchy for some reason....
