[Serpico]

It causes Toby and I an inordinate amount of hassle .

Are you getting bullied?

[shark]

It causes Toby and I an inordinate amount of hassle .

Are you getting bullied?

Its a matter of opinion who is getting bullied here. Justified or not, defamatory or not, whether you are promonent/public type figure or not, being repeatedly called a cunt and having no means of reply could also be viewed as bullying.

BTW thanks (not) for shit stirring Dave when you know how much grief we get.

[GCW]

I'm sure your intentions were good, Fiendy, but I can't see many of the problems being sorted out without getting rid of half of the members.   It don't look at UKC very often, so I rarely moan nowadays.  I am not filling in your survey Alan, but if you want to know, here's what I think:

Forums wise, I can't see how you'll do much with the silly threads, other than lock them instantly.  The ones I worry about more are the "smoking in the car with kids doesn't harm them" threads.  Or the more insidious ones, I noted when I clicked Fiend's link that there was a thread saying "speeding's bad" based on children's deaths in a coach crash that had no basis on speed.  That kind of lack of respect for the families worries me.  Similar to the "accident at X- what are the gory details" threads.  These are a result of the type of users, so I can't see it changing.

I'm sure everyone is aware of problems of some UKC staff personalities, differences of opinion etc, so that's not an issue and it won't change anyway.

Articles wise, there's very few thing on UKC that interest me.  The recent Indian Face thing was a bit odd, I didn't see the point really.  It isn't good journalism, which is how UKC portrays itself.  Occasional articles are interesting, but then have a thread attached to them with the usual daft arguments.  Like Ondra coming over to crush sport- exciting stuff as no big wads come here usually- and we get a discussion on why he's crap as he doesn't try trad.  Again, i can't see how to change that.

News on UKC is occasionally OK, but anything bouldering related will have been on here 2 days before.  Anything WorldWide and newsworthy will generally have been on Mr Pohl's blog before UKC get hold of it, although there have been a few things recently where UKC got there first.

The ad banner that overlaps the menu buttons at the top is annoying, or is it just forcing people to click on the links?  The drop down search thingy doesn't work for me as you have to hover the mouse in one place, and it sometimes slips off and you lose the search.

The thing about UKC is what it could be.  I used to go on there a lot 10 years ago or whenever.  At that time you'd ask a question and get a sensible answer, and I don't remember it containing so many non-climbing threads.  Now you ask a question and you seem to get either a wrong answer or people going off on a tangent.

UKC could be amazing if it were more focussed on climbing- it has the funding, the links (RockFax etc) and dedicated staff.  For me, personally, the proportion of quality climbing/ bouldering stuff at present is too low to make it worth my time trawling through all the rubbish.  I know the 2 sites are totally different, but on here someone coming along with stupid views or an attitude get smacked down pretty quickly so moderation can be more superficial.  I admit that with sponsors etc, UKC has to be far more careful with what is said but it seems comments that are debating, but contrary to UKC party line, are zapped.  Which seems odd to me considering the number of other comments that are far more offensive and are left.


Anyway, as I said above, it doesn't affect me really as I don't go on UKC much- I realised truth and logic will always lose out to the tide of waffle on the forums.  Shark, I'm not trying to cause you issues I'm just offering Alan James an opinion without having to fill out a long form asking how much I earn, and without posting on UKC.  Feel free to delete the thread if it's going to cause issues.

[shark]

Shark, I'm not trying to cause you issues I'm just offering Alan James an opinion without having to fill out a long form asking how much I earn, and without posting on UKC.  Feel free to delete the thread if it's going to cause issues.

No issues with that at all - it made enlightening reading.

[dave]

BTW thanks (not) for shit stirring Dave when you know how much grief we get.

Excuse me? I'm only commenting on the kind of behavior that the previous posters on here have evidenced. Hardy shit stirring. You can delete my post from this thread and the message is still the same. The fact mick has no direct channel of reply on here is his own doing, he shot himself in the foot and I'm not going to get the violin out for him. As for the grief you guys get, that only serves to further prove the point.

If you want to go down the road of censoring users then you're on a slippery slope. What if dave cameron emails you about people calling him a cunt, or bono?

[Paul B]

I filled it in, if everyone that thinks its rubbish doesn't bother then the results they get back are going to be very one-sided and not stand a chance of making any difference (you can always hope). Personally I used to use UKC a lot before I found UKB, every now and again I still got pulled towards a debate and regret doing so. Each to their own.

I understand the hassle the C word brings you Shark but Mick hasn't got a leg to stand on when he does things like cite your real name in a post (when you haven't used it), delete your original post and then ban you from replying (as he did recently with Jasper). Its a bit like:

[tomtom]

Would it be alright if we were to say that we think someones a cunt? After all we're not then calling them a cunt... 

 

[GCW]

Alan- thanks for the e-mail.  I have just replied.

[clm]

a faecal miasma, I think the whole point of the miasma is that it can be penetrated.

Not for all of us. Though not banned i have had a post deleted.   

[SA Chris]

I think just about everyone has at some time or another.

[nik at work]

I've filled in the survey for much the same reasons as Paul B cites (and also the outside chance of winning a rope which would be handy  )
I broadly agree with GCW's points. UKC does have the potential to be excellent but right now IMHO it falls short.

[GraemeA]

Call me a cunt instead if you like. That would be preferable.

Sorry to be so slow on the uptake Shark - I've been away for a few days- so just to keep you happy I will call you a cunt. Problem is you would make a Pathetic Cunt so it doesn't really ring true.

[Jaspersharpe]

If it walks like a duck etc.

Mick's behaviour towards me was obviously not just to do with the post that he deleted and banned me for. It was quite blatantly MASSIVELY biased due to my use of UKB and I know I'm not the only one to experience this. He took a very cheap shot (that didn't even make any sense) and then hid behind his privileges as a moderator to ensure there was no possible defence or right to reply.

This is not moderation, it's abuse of power in the worst possible way. "I've no argument against you so I'm just going to silence you........... cos I can.".

Personally, I don't want anything to do with a place that's run like that and it's no fucking loss to me.

Perhaps Mick should spend less time trawling UKB for insults about himself and then whining about them and more time thinking about why people would feel the need to insult him in the first place?

 

[slackline]

If it walks like a duck etc.

It waddles?

[Jaspersharpe]

No, it's a cunt.

[mrjonathanr]

Would it be alright if we were to say that we think someones a cunt? After all we're not then calling them a cunt... 

 

Alvin Martin, West Ham Defender of yesterday, to referee, awarding penalty against the Hammers- "What would happen if I called you a cunt?"

Referee - "Careful Alvin, I'd send you straight off."

Alvin - "What would happen if I just thought you were a cunt."

Referee - "Nothing. You can think what you like."

Alvin - "Right then. I think you are a cunt."

Stallioni for Diplomatic Ambassador to UKC. Vote now.

I quite like some aspects of UKC (ie tabloid newscasts) and find trawling the forums quite entertaining from time to time, but there's an awful lot of drivel. There is on UKB too but it's more often ironic than unintentional.

[stevej]

Oi, I walk like a duck 

As for ukc, they should make me a mod. There'd be one rule: Don't be a dick. If you break it, you're banned. Easy. I'd turn that place around quicker than you can say retrobolt.

The current rather personal moderation is obviously way out of line but the massive problem is that idiots talking nonsense are allowed to get away with it. Rather than KGB-style mysteriously vanishing posts (and the 'don't talk about the things we made disappear or so will you' rule), being more open about moderation and bans would soon make people learn (mass mod edits with 'banned for trolling' would work but that'd probably need a software overhall). It's a real bummer that so much infantile junk gets posted because there are/were so many good, knowledgeable and really helpful climbers, alpinsits etc. on it.

It's getting more like a *chan by the day, it's even got memes ffs. If they don't want that to happen they've got to moderate it far more severely by being a lot stricter on the junk, at least when it ends up in rock/ice/alpine. Pointless, usually uninformed arguments about three-pebble-slab, bolts, grades, "what's he ever done on grit" and treadmills should definitely get shitheaped. Yeah, they should definitely make me a mod. Maybe I do 'walk like a duck'...

[BB]

to ensure there was no possible defence or right to reply.
 

I'm not a fan of Mick or anything, just playing devil's advocate, but is this not the issue that's causing our insect overlaords so much hassle? Mick has been called names, but is banned thereby ensuring he has no possible defence or right to reply.

[tomtom]

So why not let him in? We could have a poll/vote?

[Jaspersharpe]

Let's remember that it wasn't an isolated incident, Bubba got sick of his behaviour and banned him. He's had plenty of chance to defend himself previously on here but hey, let him back on for me.

He wouldn't last long before showing his true colours and getting banned again anyway, which is pretty impressive seeing as how tolerant this site is.

Incidentally, has he actually asked to be allowed back on? 

[Norton Sharley]

Gone beyond:  This site is being viewed at the moment by people outside of the average bouldering population and that as a result we should maybe all be a bit more careful about what we say on here?

[erm, sam]

and that as a result we should maybe all be a bit more careful about what we say on here?

Is this it? Has UKB jumped the shark! So soon.

[Fultonius]

I haven't been on UKC much in ages. I saw a newsflash about Tim Emmit's new E10.

I replied saying "F*in hell, that must be death on a stick!!!"  which was intended as a compliment, i.e. Waddage to Tim for an impressive, bold ascent.

So, after that followed a barrage of patronsiing nonsese from 17yr olds about my lack of knowledge of the uk trad grades. WTF 

That'll be that last time I venture over that way for a while... 

[SA Chris]

I hate patronsiing nonsese from anyone

[Fultonius]

I'm considering puntering you for that, old man!