I didn’t participate in that thread, but there were multiple personal attacks, it seemed to be going in circles too. It didn’t seem overly productive from my outside vantage.
1 Like
No there was not. It had a lot of valid points and some good information.
I wasn’t making personal attacks. I was standing up to people that were making personal attacks, is that what you mean?
You are proving my point, perception is reality. You perceive that you were not making personal attacks and I perceive that you were.
Who is right?
1 Like
It’s worth noting that when determining whether a thread is becoming personal/too abusive, we don’t differentiate between who is being attacked.
Abuse directed towards a specific poster is just as likely to get a thread closed down as any abuse that poster might direct at anyone else.
As moderators, we try to be neutral and don’t have vendettas against individual posters.
It might be that the person on the receiving end of the abuse still doesn’t want the thread closed, but it’s our role to help keep such behaviour in check.
1 Like
So, why are certain individuals allowed to get away with repeated personal attacks and others not when they mirror them?
There were a number of people in that discussion seeking to uncover what the data process was, there were others standing on the outside shout “stop talking”. People didn’t have to keep commenting if they didn’t want the discussion… Why did they continue? Eventually, one person just kicked everybody out the room.
The discussion was shut down by a mixture of trolls trying to distract it and people in a position of responsibly not taking an objective view as to whether the discussion should happen.
You could temporarily remove those “dishing out” from being able to comment!
Just to clarify, I didn’t find you abusive. I felt you misunderstood what I was seeking. I did disagree with people demanding the discussion be shut down and sadly, their tactic to undermine the discussion eventually worked (as it always does with them).
I observe these forums a lot (partaking on occasion), the same people behave in the same way and have done so for 2 years!
TBH I thought that thread had veered right back onto the rails just before it was shut down 
3 Likes
As an outsider looking in and a regular contributor i felt the thread was going round in circles.
The OP’s thread was never going to be answered here and would have been better being taken directly up with Zwift.
I think the point of this forum got lost along the way.
The tipping point for me was the derogatory use of the term “kid”.
3 Likes
Was just about to say the same thing. There were posts raising legitimate questions but those were lost among a bunch from those that seemed determined to have the last word.
For me, that comment came about by the poster at which it was direct knowingly repeating the same question over and over again. I did find it interesting how people ignored the trolling but focused on the individual standing up to the trolls.
But did they personally attack you or your argument?
That’s most likely why it got shut down, someone may have been repeating the same thing over and over but you also kept engaging them. That was just going to keep circling around and lead nowhere.
That seems to be how people get things shut down when they disagree. There were two people attempting it.
Tim, just going to say this from my personal experience as both a moderator (elsewhere obs) and as someone who gets his hackles up when other people are making personal attacks. If you ‘stand up to an attack’ by making your own personal attack, moderators are not going to distinguish between the two.
To be clear, I only scanned that thread after it was locked, enough to see that I also thought it went nowhere pretty quickly. So I’m not weighing in on who attacked who first. But even if ‘the other guy started it’, responding with a personal attack is still a personal attack (again, saying this from experience). And once enough of them fly back and forth Hatfields and McCoys style, it doesn’t matter for a mod team who ‘started it’. Not when both sides are engaging in it. Not trying to vilify you or take sides. Peace.
4 Likes
Me. They stated I had “an agenda” and ‘other motives’.
I can see that.
I shouldn’t have reacted with the word “kid” that was out of frustration.
2 Likes
Think this thread has also run it’s course. To be fair it should never have been created and the concerns taken up with Zwift directly to avoid further inflammation of the issues raised.
1 Like
I suppose it has.
I would be interested to know if certain individuals who were so adament at shutting down the discussion had any vested interest in the Zwift API? Was there a reason for what was quite a vitriolic response to the discussion?
Maybe these questions are rhetorical!
I have now taken up with Zwift directly.