A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Moderators being rather picky?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old June 18th 14, 07:13 PM posted to uk.net.news.moderation,uk.rec.cycling
Wm...
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,327
Default Moderators being rather picky?

Wed, 18 Jun 2014 15:58:13
k
uk.net.news.moderation Sara Merriman

In article , Phil W Lee
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 19:46:31 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:



Matt was never a complainer - he was a bore. But he stayed on-topic,
and was always polite and well-mannered.


In which case, his posts would have been rejected as not complying with the
charter - remember this bit?

"...of interest to cyclists..."

Not all cyclists are interested in the same things, of course.


Sara! It is you are replying to. See what Ms Mockford
had to say about replying to them recently.

--
Wm
Ads
  #22  
Old June 18th 14, 07:32 PM posted to uk.net.news.moderation,uk.rec.cycling
Judith[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,000
Default Moderators being rather picky?

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 11:27:15 -0300, Phil W Lee wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 19:46:31 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:



Matt was never a complainer - he was a bore. But he stayed on-topic,
and was always polite and well-mannered.


In which case, his posts would have been rejected as not complying with the
charter - remember this bit?

"...of interest to cyclists..."



Yes - rather than "... of interest to the moderators.." which seems to be the
main criterion.

  #23  
Old June 18th 14, 07:48 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default Moderators being rather picky?

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 15:45:06 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

On 18/06/2014 15:35, Bertie Wooster wrote:

JNugent wrote:
On 18/06/2014 15:27, Phil W Lee wrote:
Bertie Wooster wrote:


Matt was never a complainer - he was a bore. But he stayed on-topic,
and was always polite and well-mannered.


In which case, his posts would have been rejected as not complying with the
charter - remember this bit?


"...of interest to cyclists..."


Is it being polite and well-mannered which is not "...of interest to
cyclists..."?


No, it's the "I'm not interested in anything with which I disagree"
interpretation of that part of the charter.


Oooo... You ARE a one, Mr Wooster...


Weren't me... I'm not that sharp.

'Twas the work of The Forger.
  #24  
Old June 18th 14, 07:50 PM posted to uk.net.news.moderation,uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default Moderators being rather picky?

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 11:27:15 -0300, Phil W Lee wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 19:46:31 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:



Matt was never a complainer - he was a bore. But he stayed on-topic,
and was always polite and well-mannered.


In which case, his posts would have been rejected as not complying with the
charter - remember this bit?

"...of interest to cyclists..."


Which was interpreted by the moderators as being:
"...of what we want to be of interest to cyclists..."

Clearly if Matt B's comments were not of interest to cyclists, no
cyclist would ever respond, and he'd soon stop posting.
  #25  
Old June 18th 14, 07:51 PM posted to uk.net.news.moderation,uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default Moderators being rather picky?

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 19:13:58 +0100, "Wm..."
wrote:

Wed, 18 Jun 2014 15:58:13

uk.net.news.moderation Sara Merriman

In article , Phil W Lee
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 19:46:31 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:



Matt was never a complainer - he was a bore. But he stayed on-topic,
and was always polite and well-mannered.


In which case, his posts would have been rejected as not complying with the
charter - remember this bit?

"...of interest to cyclists..."

Not all cyclists are interested in the same things, of course.


Sara! It is you are replying to. See what Ms Mockford
had to say about replying to them recently.


He's really very good.
  #26  
Old June 18th 14, 08:19 PM posted to uk.net.news.moderation,uk.rec.cycling
Clive George[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6
Default Moderators being rather picky?

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 19:50:30 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 11:27:15 -0300, Phil W Lee wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 19:46:31 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:



Matt was never a complainer - he was a bore. But he stayed on-topic,
and was always polite and well-mannered.


In which case, his posts would have been rejected as not complying with the
charter - remember this bit?

"...of interest to cyclists..."


Which was interpreted by the moderators as being:
"...of what we want to be of interest to cyclists..."

Clearly if Matt B's comments were not of interest to cyclists, no
cyclist would ever respond, and he'd soon stop posting.



Goodness me, how I am not surprised.

A year's furlough, near enough; and the atmosphere in uk.rec.cycling is the
same poisonous brew it was when I left. One mission-poster defending another,
and both for attacking the cyclists who have found a way to not have to listen
to them.



Welcome to the atmosphere you and other idiots like you created. All the
people who enjoy cycling and want to talk about it have buggered off
elsewhere, to avoid the poison you repeatedly spread.
  #27  
Old June 18th 14, 09:07 PM posted to uk.net.news.moderation,uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default Moderators being rather picky?

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 16:19:19 -0300, Clive George
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 19:50:30 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 11:27:15 -0300, Phil W Lee wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 19:46:31 +0100, Bertie Wooster
wrote:



Matt was never a complainer - he was a bore. But he stayed on-topic,
and was always polite and well-mannered.


In which case, his posts would have been rejected as not complying with the
charter - remember this bit?

"...of interest to cyclists..."


Which was interpreted by the moderators as being:
"...of what we want to be of interest to cyclists..."

Clearly if Matt B's comments were not of interest to cyclists, no
cyclist would ever respond, and he'd soon stop posting.



Goodness me, how I am not surprised.

A year's furlough, near enough; and the atmosphere in uk.rec.cycling is the
same poisonous brew it was when I left. One mission-poster defending another,
and both for attacking the cyclists who have found a way to not have to listen
to them.



Welcome to the atmosphere you and other idiots like you created. All the
people who enjoy cycling and want to talk about it have buggered off
elsewhere, to avoid the poison you repeatedly spread.


Your application to join the urcm moderation team is looking
increasingly like Turkey's application to join the European Union.
  #28  
Old June 18th 14, 09:18 PM posted to uk.net.news.moderation,uk.rec.cycling
Rob Morley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,173
Default Moderators being rather picky?

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 17:19:48 +0100
Sara Merriman wrote:

In article , Nick
wrote:

On 18/06/2014 15:58, Sara Merriman wrote:

In which case, his posts would have been rejected as not
complying with the charter - remember this bit?

"...of interest to cyclists..."

Not all cyclists are interested in the same things, of course.


Well given the two most recent threads are on recumbent panniers
and dog **** on shoes, I would have to agree with that comment.


Are they? I haven't been there in years.


It's a bit ... quiet.

  #29  
Old June 18th 14, 09:31 PM posted to uk.net.news.moderation,uk.rec.cycling
Rob Morley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,173
Default Moderators being rather picky?

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 21:07:53 +0100
Bertie Wooster wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 16:19:19 -0300, Clive George
wrote:

snip

Your application to join the urcm moderation team is looking
increasingly like Turkey's application to join the European Union.


You need to pay more attention to the From: because the forger is
a rather good mimic.

  #30  
Old June 18th 14, 09:37 PM posted to uk.net.news.moderation,uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,958
Default Moderators being rather picky?

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 21:31:28 +0100, Rob Morley
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 21:07:53 +0100
Bertie Wooster wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 16:19:19 -0300, Clive George
wrote:

snip

Your application to join the urcm moderation team is looking
increasingly like Turkey's application to join the European Union.


You need to pay more attention to the From: because the forger is
a rather good mimic.


As I've already said, the forger is damn good.

He knows all the main characters from the old days of urc.

I think I know who it is.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Up yours from the URCM Moderators Judith[_4_] UK 0 February 22nd 13 01:22 PM
URCM Moderators are learning Judith in England UK 4 November 1st 12 08:58 PM
Danger: URCM Moderators at work Judith[_4_] UK 12 October 4th 12 02:51 PM
Nominations invited for new moderators JMS UK 5 September 18th 10 11:14 AM
CN not picky about advertizers Ewoud Dronkert Racing 1 August 18th 06 08:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.