[Closed] P*s*ing contests

Yes, I suspect TJ isn't long for this singletrackworld.

Some contributors need to understand that overbearing and aggressive posts written in a domineering style do not generate discussion; they just cause interested parties to say.....'stuff this' and walk away.

aracer - Member

Yeah, but it's always in response to a complete idiot, so pissing them off is about the best outcome you can hope for - and any alternate response is far too nuanced for them to cope with.

(in response to a humorous thread about stuff drivers say that degenerated into a pedantry contest about the difference between road tax and VED and who pays what)

Just learn to recognise the signs of big hitters, and back out the thread.

Must admit, I'm one who tends to 'walk away' from the p**s*ng contest threads

Nuance and tone is absent from these written threads (unless the author is a skilled writer) and it's too easy to get pulled into a contest with someone

I had a recent thread which suffered from this. I got irritated because assumptions were made about my views (rather than people actually reading them) and, if I'm honest, made a comment I shouldn't have (at aracer)

aracer - if you're reading I'm referring to the 'hard of thinking' quip which I shouldn't have made. Apologies to you. Mea culpa.

@Jamie; when you refer to 'big hitters' what, exactly, do you mean?

It would be very easy to interpret 'big hitters' as meaning opinionated keyboard warriors; not exactly intellectual giants - more like intellectual midgets.

@thisisnotaspoon; yes, another good example. Best if contributors would just say their piece and move on. I guess STW forums are fully reflective of the variety of opinions out there (or here) in the real world. What a concerning and depressing thought that is.

Pissing contests, you can either walk away or just go with the flow 😉

[quote=frankconway ]The most recent example is 'Dog attacks/police response' thread which has been recently closed.

Yeah, but that was clearly because Jamie was being rude about the forum 😈

[quote=thisisnotaspoon ](in response to a humorous thread about stuff drivers say that degenerated into a pedantry contest about the difference between road tax and VED and who pays what)

eh? 😕 are you suggesting my post was being rude/aggressive towards other forum users? I suggest you go back and re-read the thread and have a look at the context (and maybe bear in mind the comment you make about the thread 😆 )

[quote=flashinthepan ]aracer - if you're reading I'm referring to the 'hard of thinking' quip which I shouldn't have made. Apologies to you. Mea culpa.

I can't quite remember what thread that was - though I'm sure I just laughed and probably pointed out it was an ad-hom to undermine your point, so no worries and apology accepted (not that it was necessary - I can take a bit of bantz without getting upset 🙂 ).

Though I am slightly worried that I've got two mentions on this thread already (I think sometimes people take me too seriously) 😳

Frank - You are always going to get this in a public forum where emotive issues are thrashed out. The ban hammer is wielded when illegal and out and out abuse happens.

When it becomes circular bow out, it's easy, there is no compulsion for you to join in with things that aggravate you, pick another thread. Let those that want to chase their tails knock themselves out.

To be frank, I like the fact this forum isn't for the most part over zealously censored and difficult topics can be thrashed out with discourse, indifference, agreement and a bit of mischief.

The conceptual penis as a social consrtuct strikes again.

frankconway, I agree with your comment

Some contributors need to understand that overbearing and aggressive posts written in a domineering style do not generate discussion; they just cause interested parties to say.....'stuff this' and walk away.

It's even more disappointing when some of the protagonists have prior form and have publicly acknowledged their argumentative approach - but do nothing to change their behaviour.

However, it is very understandable that such a debate can get very heated/passionate:

a) because being confronted by an aggressive dog can be terrifying. For me just writing about it brings back the strong memory of the unpleasant adrenaline rush and 'fight or flight' syndrome kicking in. I suspect that many of those who wrote strongly about out of control dogs experienced something similar, and that can cause people to be very forthright when writing about the subject, especially when dog owners are dismissive/demonstrate an entitled attitude.

b) some people on the thread seemed to be dismissive of those fears, based on their own experience (including as dog owners) implying that the problem was with the person who is afraid and might possibly overreact or act in a way which makes things worse.

Finally, Boblo made the following comment on that thread:

There's a rather unpleasant bullying undertone on here now.

Seems *some* people have recognised a certain, formerly argumentative individual is trying to change/make amends and they are going out of their collective way to bait and make capital of this. It's not right and *they* should be **** ashamed of themselves.

Having re-read some of the comments, I agree with Boblo: there seemed to be repeated goading, condescending and sneery remarks playing the man (TJ) and not the ball, which looked like they were deliberately intended to provoke an emotional response.

there seemed to be repeated goading, condescending and sneery remarks playing the man (TJ) and not the ball

Bit like this thread really
FFS the thread is closed just leave it!

I have apologised for being intemperate on that thread.

Yes I should have known better than to respond to the goading and I apologise again here for my intemperate language and my part in making it a stupid circular argument

It's not a debate. It's taking turns to shout opinions.

Ya' just gotta take the forum for what it is.

If it gets heated and you don't like it, walk away.
If it gets nasty and you feel goaded, walk away.
If it turns into a few well known posters provoking an argument, walk away.
If it becomes threatening, report it, walk away.

Not all threads turn into a pissing contest, 50% do, 50% don't.

But "big hitters" are easy to spot, the Mods spot them too.

As with any forum it is written and the posts can be made hours apart with some posters just making one comment, others going back and forth a bit. Difficult to directly address the points and counter points and due to that frustration starts, tempers flare etc,.

The same discussion face to face with the same people would be a different matter and may actually get somewhere. I say may....

I don't think the threads turn in to pissing contests as such. It's more that you end up with a couple of posters with diametrically opposed viewpoints and neither will walk away or agree to disagree. I don't frequent a lot of other forums or use other social media, but I reckon it will happen in those places too.

The same discussion face to face with the same people would be a different matter and may actually get somewhere. I say may....

And this too

By coincidence I was going to start a similat thread to this after the antagonising content in my 'Cadence thread yesterday. I'm not saying I didn't play my part in that, but after I'd returned home I'd realised I'd let somebody antagonise me and perhaps the only one being affected was myself.

I don't come here for points scoring but certainly in the bike forum if someone asks a question no matter how dumb or niaive it may seem to others, 99% of the time its being asked on the basis of recieving some sensible advice. Why do people have to jump in, troll and insult others on that basis?

The Chat forums is perhaps different in that communicating debate - as above - can be different when written but I'm a big advocate of healthy debate. Not everyone has to agree with each other, but but inside and outside STW there needs to be more tolerance of peoples opinions and values - agreeing to disagree - rather than resort to anger and insults.

I for one made several decisons on my outlook on life last night, arguing with faceless people on STW - mainly because I can't shut off the mental angst it causes - being one of them.

Always worst on a Saturday evening as the post-ride (we all rode our bikes yesterday didn't we?) refreshments kick in.

It's been said but 'last wordism' seems to infect Internerd discussions much more than face to face would. You rarely see normal grown ups, in public, repeatedly batting back and forth with a 'Yeah but [i]you[/i] don't understand' followed by 'No, [i]you[/i] don't understand' ad nauseum.

This stuff is often seen with kids but this medium seems to bring the kid out in us probably part due to the lack of non verbal cues.

There was also an undertone of picking on people probably due to them making themselves an easy target (during and prior). I don't care if the 'grown up' 5 year old's want to shout 'ner ner' at each other across the ether, but I really object to the nastiness.

I really hope at least one of the protagonist's in this last bout has been dealt with severely to 'encourage' people to just stick to the primary school stuff (if they really must) rather than the personal attacks.

BTW Just discussing this contravenes one of the rules (IIRC) ergo, we're all doomed (banned). 😀

Just remember op, there are some real, grade A, bell ends on this forum.

It gets boring when keyboard geeks just go tit for tat trying to explain the ways in which the other person is wrong. A couple of mods do this quite regularly.

Big yawns.

Always worst on a Saturday evening as the post-ride (we all rode our bikes yesterday didn't we?) refreshments kick in.

Didn't get the chance yesterday. Most of the day was occupied by dog training and new experiences whilst he's at a very young and impressionable age.

Pick up a new bike tomorrow so that should balance it out 🙂

...keyboard geeks just go tit for tat trying to explain the ways in which the other person is wrong. A couple of mods do this quite regularly.

Exactly. Setting the tone for others to follow.

Bullying is rife on this forum and it's allowed to happen which basically means the owners/mods condone it. Take pleasure in it, even...

Have the mods on this forum ever seen a bicycle

I'd realised I'd let somebody antagonise me and perhaps the only one being affected was myself.

I think I worked this out about ten years ago and made the decision then that I would never get wound up again by some dick head I've never met or likely to meet! For that reason, I simply avoid threads I'd normally contribute to.

Bullying is rife on this forum

Is it? Or is it a case of if you can't see it, you are the problem?

Now, gimme your dinner money!

This site is waaay better tan some I've seen.

Same story though, writing isn't the bast method of communication especially as you can't hear tone or easily detect nuance or sarcasm. So it's easy to react and easy to fire off a reply.

Same as others tend to avail some threads and step away now from others

Have the mods on this forum ever seen a bicycle

I seen a Unicycle this morning so halfway there.

I've never seen bullying in three years on here. I've witnessed plenty of pointless arguments and even been involved in (and possibly started) a few. Then again I have quite a thick skin so possibly don't notice bullying. For what it's worth I think the mods do a decent job, especially considering they are doing it for free.

I have quite a thick skin so possibly don't notice bullying.

So it takes having a thin skin to recognise bullying...?

@funkmasterperp You might not recognise it then. Look back at the thread being discussed. When you start to negatively disect an individual's personal/professional background in public, for me, that's bullying. It wasn't done once 'by mistake', it was done repeatedly to create a reaction.

negatively disect an individual's personal/professional background in public

This is one of the reasons I try to remain reasonably anonymous on this particular forum. Some of you lot are ****ing nasty and vindictive and I refuse to open up my life to that kind of behaviour.

So it takes having a thin skin to recognise bullying...?

For me, probably yes. That's why I wrote what I did. That and it's not something I particularily look for tbh. I was bullied badly as a child (physically) and probably don't spend enough time on social media to recognise the on line equivalent. I'll try and see things from a different perspective.

@boblo - I'll take another look at the insanity of the dog thread. Wish me luck!

For me, probably yes. That's why I wrote what I did. That and it's not something I particularily look for tbh.

For me it takes empathy and a little bit of compassion thrown into the mix. You don't have to go looking for it to spot it when it happens.

I have plenty of empathy and compassion thanks. Stop picking on me 😉

I just see people acting like dickheads and not knowing when to quit arguing as opposed to a one sided bullying scenario.

boblo

When you start to negatively disect an individual's personal/professional background in public, for me, that's bullying. I

[devilsadvocate] Because of the anonymity of a forum people willingly divulge personal and professional information to qualify their opinions. Over years this obviously happens quite a lot and if someone is prone to protracted debate they'll probably cite their personal/professional experience quite a lot.

[/devilsadvocate]

I struggle to remember who is what though because I don't have any visual reference as to who they are other than their forum names and similar sounding names get muddled so I've stopped trying.

@jimjam Reasonable point, though this was way beyond that.

The final incident was (to paraphrase): 'You're an abject professional failure because...'.

That's just nasty.

Fair enough, in that case I agree with you, amorphous collage of English IT/engineering/middlemanagement/Octavia driving/Stove owning/dog kicking/cheese eating guy.

I just scanned the dog thread and corrected the factual inaccuracies of supposed zoologists who should have known better than to play fast and loose with the facts 😆

The final incident was (to paraphrase): 'You're an abject professional failure because...'.

That's just nasty.

I must have missed that bit, but agree it's out of order and utterly childish. Says more about the person posting it than the person it's aimed at.

I just scanned the dog thread and corrected what I perceived to be the factual inaccuracies of supposed zoologists who should have known better than to play fast and loose with the facts

I don't know who you could be talking about. Just studied it for a while 🙂

You're my goto zoologist for evermore funkmasterp.

You're my goto zoologist for evermore funkmasterp

You're going to lose a lot of debates 😀

Folk who think that bullying on here is bad/common are just snowflakes.

The final incident was (to paraphrase): 'You're an abject professional failure because...'.

That's just nasty.

I must have missed that bit

When I tried to find the specific comments in question again last night to re-read them before posting on this thread, I could not find them and supposed that they had been deleted (by a moderator possibly), but TJ's response to them was still there.

As others have said, it is difficult to discern nuance and tone in the written word of posts on an internet forum, but I had the very clear sense that - in conjunction with some of that poster's other comments - the concern being expressed about TJ's work issues and his well being, was quite false, and was being done deliberately to wind him up.

I'm sorry, bullying does happen. I'm not particularly susceptible to it - but it does happen.

As for TJ, never had an issue with the way he writes. We agree on some stuff but disagree on a lot too. Fundamentally, I just have never seen the issue.

Wannabe Big Hitters

[img] [/img]

Just remember op, there are some real, grade A, bell ends [s]on this forum[/s] in society.

will read some of the politics/argument threads just to see if there is a spread of opinion - not sure but sometimes think see posters with multiple names arguing with themselves just to keep things going? stuff is best ignored and hopefully when stuff like this appears - around post 4 in this thread do what the OP did and carry on - reasonable question with a full on tosser comment - can't moderate 100% but the ban hammer should be that ban.
[url] http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/importance-of-cadence [/url]

but sometimes think see posters with multiple names arguing with themselves just to keep things going?

I would love this to be true.

Oh no you wouldn't,

Yes I would

I tend to stay away from any thread that has 4-5 pages of comments these days as the original thought and intention of starting it has generally been so diluted or interfered with that there seems little point.

jamj1974 - Member

I'm sorry, bullying does happen. I'm not particularly susceptible to it - but it does happen.

Agree, but the form or manner of bullying that goes on in this forum is a byproduct of some of the rules and is strange. On other forums where anything goes in terms of language and all out personal abuse, the bullying is not so pointed or personal because it's typically more hyperbolic.

As for TJ, never had an issue with the way he writes. We agree on some stuff but disagree on a lot too. Fundamentally, I just have never seen the issue.

The issue is the incessant, persistent and borderline obsessive drilling down or digging in on certain points. And I say that fully conscious that I am prone to the exact same behavior.

As soon as you click on one of these threads....

You're in competition.

Bullying is rife on this forum and it's allowed to happen which basically means the owners/mods condone it. Take pleasure in it, even...

We've issued quite a few bans over recent weeks some quite lengthy ones so no we don't condone or take please in it.

I find it so amusing that some posters have a point of view that they won't be budged from and try so hard to sound clever in their arguements that they end up typing utter bloody nonsense.
Sometimes it is just a "listen to me! I'm more intelligent than you!" but that I guess is the definition of a pissing contest.
Another hilarious one was being told "make your mind up" when I asked a question and adjusted my opinion according to the answers. Superb that, eh Drac 😆

I like the idea of complaining about people being dogmatic by starting another thread after one is blocked to continue complaining about someone being dogmatic.

Superb that, eh Drac

I'd agree or disagree if I had the slightest idea what you were no about.

[quote=anagallis_arvensis ]I like the idea of complaining about people being [b]dogmatic[/b]

Well played 😆

tend to stay away from any thread that has 4-5 pages of comments

This. Only exception being the pics / what have you made threads.

I've been predominantly a lurker on here for a looong time and have seen peaks and troughs in the level of argumentativeness (sp?). Overall it seems to have got more lefty and professionally offended over time - probably reflects the mainstream of society. I do tend to come here after reading the news to soak up some contrary viewpoints.

There are some tedious, pedantic, abrasive so and so's too. To be honest i don't look at usernames that much but if i did i imagine i could identify some folk I wouldn't miss...

Nuance and tone is absent from these written threads (unless the author is a skilled writer) and it's too easy to get pulled into a contest with someone

I think this is a big part of it, certainly. You lose a lot of subtlety of language when you're communicating solely in text. Face to face you can throw an insult at a mate with a smile on your face and they know you're only teasing, in text you lose that nuance and folk can take it the wrong way, react badly and hey presto, we have an argument.

That said, there are those who seem to wilfully misinterpret things in order to argue or score Internet Points. I was accused of something a little while ago, and fair enough, the original question as posted could have been taken that way. I corrected what I'd said and explained several times over what I meant and why I was asking the question which [i]should[/i] have cleared things up, but I might as well have been talking to the wall.

Some people have long memories, and are more than happy to dredge up past grudges from discussions weeks or even years ago. Those who have been here a long time and who tend to be more active in the more... emotive discussions are carrying a lot of baggage. TJ still gets ribbed about helmets for instance, which stems from debates from like four years ago.

Some people just like a good [s]argument[/s] debate - a competitive debate even - and that's fine (I'm probably one of those people too). With a worthy foil it can be entertaining and educational, with others it can be an exercise in frustration.

Some people just like to provoke others and get a reaction - the very definition of a troll. We've at least one of them serving a month's ban currently for just that, and his next one will probably be a lifetime ban.

Some folk, a few of the old hand "big hitters," are very clever. They've been here a long old time and they know exactly what they can and can't get away with and have long since perfected the art of getting away with murder without doing anything that clearly breaks the rules. You guys, you're bastards to moderate. (-:

Some people, eh, they're just bloody stubborn, tenacious or belligerent. The particularly belligerent ones don't tend to last long; we've a few who just keep creating accounts for us to ban, if we don't spot them straight away then they always out themselves sooner or later because they just can't help themselves being unpleasant.

Whilst I'm wall-of-texting, woe betide you if you've got a Moderator tag next to your name. There's a couple of folk who have a hardon for taking cheap pot-shots at us simply because we're Moderators (there's a couple of relatively gentle ones on this thread even), and as I've said several times in the past 99% of the time we're using the forum as simple users just like everyone else. I accept that perhaps we should be "leading by example" but reject the notion that we should be censored exceptionally as a special case. I'd expect the rest of the team to pull me up if I step out of line (I actually once tried to ban myself when I realised I'd gone too far but the admin control panel won't allow it, so I self-banned and didn't post for a few days).

To be frank, I like the fact this forum isn't for the most part over zealously censored and difficult topics can be thrashed out with discourse, indifference, agreement and a bit of mischief.

Cheers. That's pretty much what we aim for.

Despite some claims to the contrary, we don't hand out bans lightly. The most common reason is probably for persistent behaviour (whether on a single thread or over a longer period of time) rather than for an isolated incident - we've asked you to stop doing something, you've carried on, you've left us with no other option. If you've accrued a number of warnings for the same thing then you'll get some time off, but being banned for an individual post is unusual.

I think this is a big part of it, certainly. You lose a lot of subtlety of language when you're communicating solely in text. Face to face you can throw an insult at a mate with a smile on your face and they know you're only teasing, in text you lose that nuance and folk can take it the wrong way, react badly and hey presto, we have an argument.

In person or on a page makes no odds to the crux of a disagreement. The whole purpose of teasing is to assert dominance, even if only in, or for, a moment, and is still little more than an attempt to deviate from the direction of discourse. Teasing is only the mildest sort of violence in a social situation, and violence is only ever the failure of reason. It's more a matter of getting away with teasing in person because people are less likely to confront it due to social etiquette or just plain old lack of confidence/assertiveness. The flip side of that, though, is that some people are more likely to apply aggressive strategy in written form, and remain obstinate to the point of being unreasonable, simply because they can - there's no real consequence. As somebody astutely pointed out earlier in this thread: there are no debates on STW, just posting of differing opinions. I doubt that many have the discipline for it; but that's not why most folk are here, is it?

And we're away. (-:

As somebody astutely pointed out earlier in this thread: there are no debates on STW, just posting of differing opinions.

I'm not sure as I'm convinced.

The recent dog threads, yes, I'd agree. That was a textbook example of a lot of people all believing they were right and not listening to a word anyone else was saying. To suggest that there are "no debates, just different opinions" though, well, I'd say that's unfair.

Though in STW tradition I'll ask, how are you defining a debate here? At what point does two people with different opinions exchanging views become a debate? Does one have to change their mind (rare but it happens)?

It's when things turn into a mass debate that I get worried! 😆

in text you lose that nuance and folk can take it the wrong way, react badly and hey presto, we have an argument.

Yes, the problem with alot of people on here is they're too uptight/take things too seriously.

Arguing/getting emotional/crying over out of control dogs or cadences on the internet. Get a grip!

scotroutes - Member
Folk who think that bullying on here is bad/common are just snowflakes.

I know ur trollin' but still.

[quote=davidtaylforth ]I know ur trollin' but still.

I'm surprised you noticed, it's not exactly an area of expertise for you.

<sigh> I have a feeling I might be required to add one of these on this thread 😉

😀

eh? are you suggesting my post was being rude/aggressive towards other forum users? I suggest you go back and re-read the thread and have a look at the context (and maybe bear in mind the comment you make about the thread )

No (although it does read a bit "you're either with us or against us")

Or are you disputing that it degenerated into a pissing contest over who could be more pedantically correct about VED?

Arguing/getting emotional/crying over out of control dogs or [b]cadences[/b]

I'd just like to point out I[i] [/i]wasn't [i]emotional[/i] over my reduction in natural cadence. However I will admit to being emotional to the words "mid pack no hoper" which in my view were unnecessary in the context of the thread.

[quote=thisisnotaspoon ]Or are you disputing that it degenerated into a pissing contest over who could be more pedantically correct about VED?

No, but I had nothing at all to do with that - if anything I attempted to deflect discussion away, which is why I'm somewhat confused why you picked out [b]my[/b] post. I'm wondering what it was about it which stood out for you.

[img] [/img]

I'd just like to point out I wasn't emotional over my reduction in natural cadence. However I will admit to being emotional to the words "mid pack no hoper" which in my view were unnecessary in the context of the thread.

🙂 I agree

I'd just like to point out I wasn't emotional over my reduction in natural cadence. However I will admit to being emotional to the words "mid pack no hoper" which in my view were unnecessary in the context of the thread.

I agree

Now that I've read it so do I, and if anyone had thought to report it we could've done something about it at the time.

Stop being agreeable, it comes across very offensive David T 😉

Cougar, i didnt report it as i didnt feel it was insulting enough to warrant it. I felt responding myself was the best course of action.

But as i pointed out, i'd probably have been better off ignoring it.

Fourth post from a new user and completely unprovoked, yeah, I'd say that was worth reporting.

The recent dogs thread, yes, I'd agree. That was a textbook example.

Enough said..elephants and room spring quickly to mind.

Coug's comment about text being easily misconstrued is spot on I reckon. Krypton, the post that you objected too was a good example. Made me giggle at first, but could also see how you might have taken offence at it. Surely the poster was just ribbing you??

[opps crossed posts with the above...clearly not, ignore what I said]

As Coug's has also said in the past,, people come here for the bikes and stay for the BS. Amazing the level of sensitivity given the rough and tumble of our chosen pastime. But lose the banter and ribbing and you end up with a sterile place that will die a death like other forums before. There's not that much to discuss about bikes after all...

Surely the poster was just ribbing

That wasnt his response when I called him out though was it? And, if you look at his limited History you'll see he makes claim to be some sort of mentor/inspiration to teenagers, so why then in your 4th post revert your personality to try to character assasinate a helpless old man?*

*well, 45yo.

I didn't follow it further tbh - I had some coffee to clean up 😉

Surely the poster was just ribbing

That wasnt his response when I called him out though was it?

Yeah, I think that at least in part this goes back to what I was saying earlier about history. It's really not clear from that post whether it was intended as a harmless (if crap) joke, and with a new user we've absolutely no context in which to frame it. If I jokingly called a mate a cockwomble then they'd laugh or throw something equally rapier-witted back at me; if I did the same thing to a random stranger in the pub I'd get my head kicked in.

I think what I'm trying to say is, hiding behind "it's only banter" is only acceptable when both parties are in on the joke. Otherwise, it's not banter, it's being a cockwomble.

I didn't follow it further tbh - I had some coffee to clean up

😆

True, it made me smile only because at K's age I had become a little obsessed about things like cadence as a triathlete (bike and pool cadence) and it was away good for forumites (different forum) to burst the bubble (excuse me kryton) As you say, context is everything

with a [b]new[/b] user we've absolutely no context in which to frame it

smells like an alternate log in to me

smells like an alternate log in to me

Exactly my first thought, and I had a pretty high suspicion as to whom as well. However, they've registered with a work email address which pretty much tells us exactly who they are, so it would appear not.