When echo chambers go bad, part two...
🙂
I received a ban because my sense of humanity is extreme and unpopular.
Truly, we are not worthy.
I did however point out the bigotry regarding gender, misogyny and racism on the forum, including yours for which I received a ban because my sense of humanity is extreme and unpopular. The second one came after I pointed out your racism again under a different profile, and the connection was made to me.
Despite your repeated claims to the contrary, you weren't banned for any of those reasons. This is simply a fabrication.
And for what it's worth, despite your earlier accusations you have never, ever received either a warning or a ban from me as moderator.
This is hilarious.
Woah! Steady on there cougar, those allegations are libelous slander and untrue. Anyone else would be banned for your attack.
You launched a targeted smear campaign across social media CC:ing half the Western world, targeting STW generally and me personally, based on a misunderstanding. When I finally got it into your skull that you’d made a mistake you apologised and thanked me for the role I provide here – quietly via PM where no-one else could see your climb-down. I can give you a screenshot of that for your collection if you like.
Yes, I took to twitter to highlight the bigotry on the forum and cc'd in Cycling UK as they had just launched their cycling inclusion campaign. I was silenced on here but you can't crush me on twitter, cycling and human rights are two things I'm passionate about and it deeply saddens me to see the largest mtb magazine in Europe being so demeaning and exclusive and unwelcoming towards minorities.
YOU were the one who then made contact with me on twitter, I go by my old profile name on it and I had no way of knowing who you are on that platform.
You say you are one of the least prejudice people yet you were blaming "Asians" playing in the park for the spread of covid, you've used the N*word on the forum and attempted to justify it, you think it banter to equate black people to monkeys and call people P* and none of your views have been in support of minorities.
How do you think Rachel felt when she begged for the bigotry to stop, how do you think I feel now that you have the sycophants on board?
The only time I've reached out to you was to apologise, but you even used that against me and now YOU'RE playing the victim. Grow up
This is hilarious.
It's frustrating.
@scotroutes, are you jumping on the wagon? I should have put quote marks as that was an accusation against me
crikey
This is hilarious.
It’s gone past that, now it’s just ****ing weird.
How do people take posting on a chat forum so damn seriously?
I know!
Brig back Kylie Friday - those were the days!!
This is hilarious
It isn't. It's a bit sad frankly. Both cougar and faerie have some valid points to make but this spat is derailing what was an interesting and informative thread to the point where it should probably now be closed.
It had been informative and I'd like to think a few readers (not necessarily participants) might stop and think on whether their first instincts about the worthiness or otherwise of the story were right. Others may have learned from it, some may have changed their opinions on it, others still may have had their opinions reinforced - whether for good or bad depends on their and your viewpoint.
It's not an easy subject, spiritually or legally and those that try to present it as a simple choice miss the point. It's very nuanced. But by talking and explaining I think those that are willing can learn.
Well... I tried to lighten things earlier with a joke that ...didn't quite er... make the grade. It was canned and I got a mod warning*.
These threads are developing a pattern of intensity which doesn't really work on what should be a relatively light hearted chat forum.
*with a bit more explanation and body language, it went down a bit better in the pub.
How do people take posting on a chat forum so damn seriously?
Because it is a difficult subject area and I think people are talking past each other pretty badly now. Hence why I am just responding to this rather to one of the answers to my point.
those allegations are libelous slander and untrue
It's a statement of fact. Go check your screenshots.
YOU were the one who then made contact with me on twitter, I go by my old profile name on it and I had no way of knowing who you are on that platform.
My Twitter handle is UKCougar and you had no way of knowing who I was when I replied to you in response to your attack on me?
You say you are etc etc...
You twist everything anyone says in order to make it suit your narrative and are still asserting in public now that things were a certain way after admitting to me in private that you realised they weren't and apologised for misunderstanding.
I've just explained exactly what you did to me and your "too extreme degrees of compassion" reaction is to slap me down?
Oh I give up. You probably think I'm making that up too.
Have we added gender to politics, religion and wheel size yet? Think of the Guinea pigs.
You being a moderator is relevant as it gives you power over regular forum users.
I may get wound up by Cougar about things but he has never (ab)used his "mighty power" as a mod in discussion to close things down. And if he has been found wrong in his posts he has always acknowledged it and apologised.
Top bloke, with a high horse that is probably a bit more of a Shetland Pony.
He is one of the OK ones. Give him a break.
He is one of the OK ones
I'm going to second that.
with a high horse that is probably a bit more of a Shetland Pony.
That's probably the greatest description of me I've ever heard.
Cougar -
You’ve received a warning from me (ironically) for offensive comments about transgender people
That was the one. I didn't consider what I'd said to be offensive. I can see that other opinions are available.
faerie
I have only ever promoted compassion and equality towards others.
See, it doesn't really work like that. When you are 'promoting compassion and equality' for transpeople some women believe that you are removing, or at least softening, their rights and protections. It doesn't really matter wether you agree with them, by being 'compassionate' to one group you are not showing compassion to another group. In your view your are being compassionate, in the view of others you are attacking them.
No doubt you'll just say they are bigots so it doesn't matter, but again in their view they are the victims.
Dammit, I knew I shouldn't have started posting.
but this, truly, is one of the more inclusive bike sites
there are a few members who have a way to go still. More inclusive is not the end of the journey.
I wasn't going to say anything else as this has clearly run its course but
More inclusive is not the end of the journey.
Is worth repeating.
Some of the attitudes displayed on here are disappointing considering what a hotbed of liberal bed wetters this place is supposed to be. It's like once Rachael was gone it didn't matter any more. FFS even the ****er that drove her away was hoisted up as a martyr.
@theotherjonv best of luck to your lad, sounds like he won a watch with you as a dad though.
Freedom of speech is one thing but that does not equate to abdication of responsibility or lack of consequences for your actions. The forum admin would do well to remember that not moderating people's opinions has its own consequences.
@Faerie you may be correct but that doesn't make you right. FWIW I agreed with your argument 100% until you started laying into Cougar, there was absolutely no need for that. This is like the racism thread all over again, why the **** can two people on the same side share a difference of opinion without it descending into farce? You want gaslighting how about me getting accused of being a white supremacist and racist for daring to have an opinion on a version of events you presented and stood back from as everyone tore into me and made up blatant lies to discredit me?
I don't think Cougar is particularly right here but I know he's not a vindictive person and I sure as hell know what it's like having the mob descend. Not cool.
We're all adults so ****ing act like it.
You say you are one of the least prejudice people yet you were blaming “Asians” playing in the park for the spread of covid, you’ve used the N*word on the forum and attempted to justify it, you think it banter to equate black people to monkeys and call people P* and none of your views have been in support of minorities.
Wait, whit!?
More inclusive is not the end of the journey.
No, there’s always more to do, but going all in at the group that broadly agrees with you, just maybe not as much as you, is just alienating allies.
My Twitter handle is UKCougar
Err, have we met?
you can’t crush me on twitter
😂😂😂
This is simply amazing
Imagine taking the internet so seriously
So as long the bar staff refused to serve e.g. a hen party dressed as characters of some kind that obscured their faces sufficiently that they didn't look enough like their I'd, or a bunch of dudes dressed as the spice girls equally, then they wouldn't be guilty of discriminating against the young lady in the article?
you think it banter to equate black people to monkeys
Oh, wait, is this a reference to the "is the phrase 'jungle drums' racist?" thread someone started? That's a particularly desperate leap of inference if so. I think perhaps someone else's posts might be being attributed to me here?
Yeah, I thought I might have got that wrong.
There was a suggestion not long ago that people should use 'they' as a gender neutral version of him/her s/he. It hasn't really caught on, partly because it is confusing - people start looking for a group of people. So clearly that isn't the solution.
Oh, wait, is this a reference to the “is the phrase ‘jungle drums’ racist?” thread someone started? That’s a particularly desperate leap of inference if so. I think perhaps someone else’s posts might be being attributed to me here?
I thought it was something to do with the Danny Baker/Royal Chimpanzee thread.
I have long since realised my own error in this and have apologised time and time again
If you genuinely understand the twin nature of that error, stop apologising. You've learned, can't ask for more than that.
use ‘they’
I do that sometimes, perhaps should have this time. I often fall into the hole of assuming people on this forum are male, sadly. I realised I’d probably got it wrong as soon as I posted this time.
Cougar, that sounds more likely to be the thread about the “Royal Baby photo”. Time to get this thread back on track or closed perhaps.
often fall into the hole of assuming people on this forum are male, sadly.
Yep, me too. There are a few who I think are male but have user names usually associated with the distaff side royally mess with my head. Still not sure about a couple....
There was a suggestion not long ago that people should use ‘they’ as a gender neutral version of him/her s/he. It hasn’t really caught on, partly because it is confusing – people start looking for a group of people. So clearly that isn’t the solution.
I generally try to use "they" not necessarily just as a 'gender neutral' term but as 'gender unknown,' though I do slip occasionally because it's retraining learned behaviour. I think it is the solution: "they" isn't implicitly plural, wider usage would remove that assumption and the alternative suggestions are crimes against language.
I thought it was something to do with the Danny Baker/Royal Chimpanzee thread.
Ah, you might be right. Still, I'm not quite sure what crime I'm supposed to have committed on that thread either. I don't keep detailed notes on what I've said on year-old threads let alone what anyone else has. This is all getting a bit uncomfortably stalkery.
... in fact I've just skimmed that thread and I don't appear to have posted on it at all? Have I missed something? Confused dot com.
https://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/danny-baker-2
they” isn’t implicitly plural, wider usage would remove that assumption and the alternative suggestions are crimes against language.
It's certainly one of the better ones. I'm not sure it is the solution, if it were, it would be more common. I am definitely in the language should clarify camp, and I still can't read an article that uses they to refer to a single non cis gender person, without going back and re-reqding to figure out who the other people are.
Not a fan of Zey and zer then?
I’m not sure it is the solution, if it were, it would be more common.
And if it were more common, it would be the solution. That's how (English) language works.
This is a bit of a 'smash the patriarchy' argument. Defaulting to "they" might not be ideal but is it not preferable to defaulting to "he"?
I'm trying to grow out of correcting people over pointless pedantry. I've learned, there are no winners here. But it seemed relevant to the discussion to correct whoever it was who assumed faerie was a 'he' on a thread specifically discussing gender discrimination.
I am definitely in the language should clarify camp, and I still can’t read an article that uses they to refer to a single non cis gender person, without going back and re-reqding to figure out who the other people are.
Do you similarly struggle with "Doctor" when there's only women in the room?
Not a fan of Zey and zer then?
🤢🤮
I understand the logic but it's kinda special pleading. English doesn't work by making up words and demanding people use them, rather words evolve and become part of regular vocabulary because people think "ooh, that's a good idea." This is another 'best intentions' idea which has the opposite effect to the one intended.
Do you similarly struggle with “Doctor” when there’s only women in the room?
Only if there is more than one of them. Then I prefer Doctors. For clarity.
Given that language grows and evolves I expect we will come up with something that doesn't confuse singular with plural, or vice versa. S/he used to be prescribed in some forms of writing, largely academic, a long time ago now, but that didn't last either.
Things said on the Internet have real life consequences and carry on into our day to day lives.
That was exactly the point I made to you earlier tonight when you were boasting about your compassion and your response was to lambast me for it.
Eighteen months ago you made my life absolute hell for no actual reason beyond a misunderstanding that you've acknowledged was a misunderstanding, then you gave precisely zero shits about it when I finally admitted this to you earlier tonight which wasn't a particularly easy thing to do.
When this thread was closed outside of my knowledge or control you immediately assumed that it was all my orchestration and leapt back on social media to start round three. Using the same posts from years ago that you've told me you understand are out of context and bogus. Why?
What do you want from me, what else can I do? I have nothing left.
Tomhoward, I don't look for the worst in people they write that for themselves. Did you just post to put me down and add to my harassment from the many sycophants? That would be a bit shit, wouldn't it?
No, I didn’t. I was actually pretty impressed with your posts in the early stages of the tackling racism thread, and others, but you seem to have jumped the shark. You’ve run all the real bigots out of (this) town and are now going after people for nothing, even those that are on your side, just disagree with you on things like implementation.
I don’t look for the worst in people they write that for themselves.
You sure it’s not your interpretation of what they write?
Harassment? All I see are people responding to your posts, which are pretty heavy going so invite robust responses. Constantly battering someone for something they have apologised for is a shitty thing to do. Especially if you then take that thing to another audience, without context.
This used to happen in the bad old days of the forum (yep, things are loads better now), a lot of people got banned for what you are doing. Had nothing to do with race, gender, or anything else you claim to fight for, it was just bullying.
Cougar I offered you an apology at the time, which you have repeatedly used as a weapon against me to prove that you are right and have used it again here.
You offered me an apology at the time then proceeded to cart on with your smear campaign regardless at least twice more that I'm aware of. That's not an apology.
Dunno about "repeatedly used it as a weapon," I could be wrong but as far as I can remember it's the first time I've even mentioned it.
I didn’t single you out
That's a lie. It's right there still in screenshots with my moniker at the top as recently as Tweets you made tonight going "does this jog your memory?" (including the ones you deleted, but I took your advice about screenshots). You absolutely singled me out, there were many more at the time.
you are in a position power being a moderator
That's a lame argument we've already discussed. I'm posting as a user just like you.
allowing discriminatory comments to stand whilst deleting and banning people who contradict you.
That's an outright lie.
Tonight you have orchestrated a witch hunt against me
I haven't 'orchestrated' anything. That's another lie.
I've told you what you did to me, something I should have done at the time but was too messed up to do. That is all, no more no less. And your "extreme compassion" response was to stick the boot in.
and slandered my character
What have I written tonight that's factually incorrect? If I'm wrong I'll gladly apologise.
you have never expressed regret over any of your previous comments
Yet another lie. If you can't be bothered to dig up old threads beyond your screenshots you have one example on this very page. "I have long since realised my own error in this and have apologised time and time again."
as I have had the good grace to do before.
In secret and quickly dismissed in public.
It seems a weak response (doesn’t it?) but I am sorry that this has caused you emotional angst
Are you? Genuinely? Then why are you still hoisting ages-old out of context photos up on Twitter with my name at the top, knowing that this is both unfair, unrepresentative of the site / forum and traumatic for me at a personal level?
having experienced it myself I really wouldn’t wish it on anyone
And yet.
You.
Caused.
It.
You.
And you have the audacity to sit there lecturing me about witch hunts and a lack of regret. Get in the sea, you're still doing it to me now and demonstrably give zero ****s about that.
have you considered how Rachel or Jon felt?
Have you asked her to find out rather than using people as bargaining chips to win an argument? Rachel is a friend, my trying to defend her is where your N-word argument initially came from in the first place IIRC.
Dunno who Jon is so I can't comment on that.
sorry Faerie - I have to agree with Tom.
Beyond the obvious looneys, I don't think anyone here has an agenda other than a genuine discussion of social issues - many of which are extremely knotty and emotive. People are going to disagree. I've really valued your input into those discussions, particularly around race, as I'm sure most of us have.
We seem to be in a weird spiral where both you and Cougar are defending themselves against the others accusations, and both interpreting the others defense as further attack.
Besides the side-bars going on in twitter (I don't twitter) - I'm familiar with all of the "incidents" listed by cougar above - and I don't believe you are representing them fairly, thus eliciting such a strong defensive response from him. Rightly so, this is hurtful stuff - in his position I would be defending myself too, probably in much stronger terms. I don't know Cougar or you from Adam/Eve, but it looks to me like you need to take a step back.
has Hitler been mentioned yet?
As has already been pointed out, this thread has now turned into an imitation of the original issue. If I had repeatedly attacked a forum moderator, constantly had a go at other forum members and then taken the whole attack on STW onto other platforms then I would have a life ban by now. But then I'm just an old, straight, white guy.
As it's now been taken off-forum can this thread now be closed.
