![]() |
It's a continuation of a bad idea.
50+ has always had the reputation of being a relaxed place to ask questions without being told to move along (to another forum) or to be made to feel uncomfortable for asking. IMO there is a policy change being put in place here. If so you are welcome to it at your own peril. Bruce nailed it. We are cyclists and we are of a certain age group. It's never been just another forum topic. |
And where is the beer, anyway?
Sorry, I forgot - they don't do free beer at the Senior Centers! |
If you want this place rockin', import a few of the young Foo babes and have them say they've always found mature older men really hot.
|
Originally Posted by Road Fan
(Post 15350928)
And where is the beer, anyway?
Sorry, I forgot - they don't do free beer at the Senior Centers! |
Originally Posted by Dudelsack
(Post 15350944)
If you want this place rockin', import a few of the young Foo babes and have them say they've always found mature older men really hot.
|
Originally Posted by Dudelsack
(Post 15350114)
There is a song that is so annoying and obnoxious that my son threatened me with bodily damage (well not really, but he didn't like it) if I ever played it in his presence again. I've never met anyone who can get half-way through it without trying to gouge out their eardrums with a sharp object.
The song: "I'm so cute" by Frank Zappa, from his Sheik Yerbouti album. It only made sense that I should do a cover. Instead of any number of things I need to be doing, I just recorded the first eighth of the song on my GarageBand for iPad. I'm going to use chipmunk voices for the chorus, and for the solos also. My own voice sounds a bit like Zappa's, so I figure I have his lines covered pretty well. When it's done, I'll post it to Soundcloud. Then I'll be arrested and shipped down to Gitmo. I'll keep you posted. |
Originally Posted by Road Fan
(Post 15350928)
And where is the beer, anyway?
Sorry, I forgot - they don't do free beer at the Senior Centers! |
Originally Posted by Road Fan
(Post 15350848)
...
I also have the Assisted Living feeling in here. I don't like it, as funny as the concept is. |
I like the name 'Pub 51'....now if I can just crawl out the door to my bike......
|
|
Originally Posted by Siu Blue Wind
(Post 15349895)
*sigh* Only blue stars in here. Methinks nobody wants this. :notamused: Hey, we tried!! :o
|
What did I come in here for?
|
I would rather have a bottle in front of me than a colonoscopy
|
First, let me say that I appreciate the effort of moderators to make the experience of participating on BikeFourms a more agreeable one for folks. It’s nice to know that moderator’s are taking their work seriously.
I respectfully suggest, however, that this thread is a misguided effort. While there are those who have been annoyed and/or made their voices heard concerning the appropriateness of non-cycling related threads in the 50+ forum, they always have the option of not opening a particular thread. Hence, to some extent I see those complaints as something the individual can handle with relative ease on their own. Simply don’t open or read threads that don’t appeal to you. However, there is another issue here worth considering. With a single thread delegated for all non-cycling related items it necessitates that the reader work through numerous posts to get to something that might be of interest. Let me give just one example. We’ve had members post in the 50+ about health issues with which they or their loved ones were facing, some of them quite serious. It was not uncommon for them to be asked to give updates. When such events took place, the reader could easily come into the 50+ and scan thread titles to see if there was recent activity in the thread that was first posted, or if there were a new thread labeled as an update. This then allowed quick, easy and reasonable access to the information the reader was seeking. If however, all such posts are in a single thread, it makes it less than reasonable to ask that the reader sort through what is sure to be a wide range of topics (some of which the reader may have no interest in at all) to find what he or she is seeking. Yet, if there was no interest in the updates, the reader does not have to return to the forum or open the new one. I believe the current system of thread titles works quite well. I don’t think the approach suggested here will do much except herd readers into a thread that may have many things within it they would not have opened if they were in their own thread. Hence, the possibility for more acrimony, not less, increases. The role of discernment concerning the tone of a given thread must be quite challenging for moderators. It requires a level of judgment that must include the ability to detect true animosity, personal attacks, and/or flaming versus good natured and acceptable banter. When a person feels that posting is getting out of hand and is directed toward them, they can PM the individual and let them know. If that should not resolve the issue, alerting the moderators seems quite appropriate. I would encourage moderators, if they are not already doing so, to respond to issues of appropriateness of a thread by advising that readers do not open them or return to them if they are not what the reader is looking for. |
Originally Posted by eja_ bottecchia
(Post 15350996)
You have wayyyyy too much free time. Stick to watching The Batchelor.
This is going to be so cool.... |
Originally Posted by CbadRider
(Post 15350005)
The threads that were causing issues are those where people just wanted to post about stuff that's going on in their lives. They wanted the camaraderie of 50+ but the threads weren't cycling related.
This is the place for those topics. Talk about your grandkids, how you're going nuts being stuck indoors during winter, what kind of pie works best as a recovery food, or how you can't wait until you can quit your job and retire. All of that stuff can stay in this thread and it won't get moved to another forum. You are moderating so-called off-topic threads here, while allowing the insulting comments in the Touring forum's "26" balloons for touring?" thread stand? |
Originally Posted by NOS88
(Post 15351264)
First, let me say that I appreciate the effort of moderators to make the experience of participating on BikeFourms a more agreeable one for folks. It’s nice to know that moderator’s are taking their work seriously.
I respectfully suggest, however, that this thread is a misguided effort. While there are those who have been annoyed and/or made their voices heard concerning the appropriateness of non-cycling related threads in the 50+ forum, they always have the option of not opening a particular thread. Hence, to some extent I see those complaints as something the individual can handle with relative ease on their own. Simply don’t open or read threads that don’t appeal to you. However, there is another issue here worth considering. With a single thread delegated for all non-cycling related items it necessitates that the reader work through numerous posts to get to something that might be of interest. Let me give just one example. We’ve had members post in the 50+ about health issues with which they or their loved ones were facing, some of them quite serious. It was not uncommon for them to be asked to give updates. When such events took place, the reader could easily come into the 50+ and scan thread titles to see if there was recent activity in the thread that was first posted, or if there were a new thread labeled as an update. This then allowed quick, easy and reasonable access to the information the reader was seeking. If however, all such posts are in a single thread, it makes it less than reasonable to ask that the reader sort through what is sure to be a wide range of topics (some of which the reader may have no interest in at all) to find what he or she is seeking. Yet, if there was no interest in the updates, the reader does not have to return to the forum or open the new one. I believe the current system of thread titles works quite well. I don’t think the approach suggested here will do much except herd readers into a thread that may have many things within it they would not have opened if they were in their own thread. Hence, the possibility for more acrimony, not less, increases. The role of discernment concerning the tone of a given thread must be quite challenging for moderators. It requires a level of judgment that must include the ability to detect true animosity, personal attacks, and/or flaming versus good natured and acceptable banter. When a person feels that posting is getting out of hand and is directed toward them, they can PM the individual and let them know. If that should not resolve the issue, alerting the moderators seems quite appropriate. I would encourage moderators, if they are not already doing so, to respond to issues of appropriateness of a thread by advising that readers do not open them or return to them if they are not what the reader is looking for. |
Originally Posted by Dudelsack
(Post 15351286)
|
Originally Posted by CbadRider
(Post 15350011)
:innocent:
Yep, that's whats on my mind today. |
Originally Posted by NOS88
(Post 15351264)
The role of discernment concerning the tone of a given thread must be quite challenging for moderators. It requires a level of judgment that must include the ability to detect true animosity, personal attacks, and/or flaming versus good natured and acceptable banter.
|
Originally Posted by bruce19
(Post 15350895)
I see 50+ as a community of people who have at least two things that draw them here....cycling and a certain place in life we call "age." It doesn't bother me to have people discuss subjects like grand-kids, relationships, art, music, etc. If I was having a gathering of friends at my house it wouldn't occur to me to say "Anyone who wants to discuss anything other than our common interests will have to take it into the kitchen." Now I realize that this isn't my "house" but when you have the option to avoid any topic that doesn't interest you simply by not clicking on the thread why not just do that at your discretion? If I were a Mod (God help me) my line would be drawn with personal attacks not with thread topics. Just sayin'.
... Ya gotta give our caretakers credit though: it IS a solution! |
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
(Post 15351699)
Perhaps the issue may be that the "good natured and acceptable banter" that you and some others find acceptable, was considered NOT acceptable by the moderators because it seemed to be excessive and mostly conducted amongst just a handful of the posters, and off putting to others not in the clique.
|
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
(Post 15351699)
Perhaps the issue may be that the "good natured and acceptable banter" that you and some others find acceptable, was considered NOT acceptable by the moderators because it seemed to be excessive and mostly conducted amongst just a handful of the posters, and off putting to others not in the clique.
|
Thank God! Finally, someone tells me just what the hell that "addiction" thread in the 41 is supposed to be about.
|
Originally Posted by CraigB
(Post 15352020)
Thank God! Finally, someone tells me just what the hell that "addiction" thread in the 41 is supposed to be about.
That's the best I could figure. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:04 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.