Inequity.

[Ripples]

A member, graycyn, posted about her new Concept2D and her goal of improving fitness and losing weight. Her thread was abruptly shut down and locked on the basis it was "blog" despite her statement she only intended to post only occasionally.

Yet FatBrit, also battling with weight and fitness, has a thread going in the training section which is now four pages long, posting on his progress but his thread is not considered a "blog."

Why the disparate treatment between a male and female member of this community?

[Citroen]

Point out the wonky threads with the report button and they can be locked.

This is a forum funded by Concept2 not a blog hosting site.

[Tenshuu]

I'm not sure I disagree with Ripples sentiment...

Jonathon's "Indecent Intervals" thread is more bloggy than what Graycyn posted.... We've had other threads similarly formatted stick around.

I had a thread that I had kept active for a few weeks under the same umbrella.... I don't see why these other threads couldn't just be moved under "training" and be left as a open platform of a training log where others can comment.

Banhammer hand seems twitchy.
EDIT - Don't want to double post...

Point out the wonky threads with the report button and they can be locked.

This is a forum funded by Concept2 not a blog hosting site.

How does one flag an entire thread? I see "Report Post" buttons. But apparently my request to close a "Wonky thread" that is essentially a blog, was ignored?

I'm not seeing where you are drawing the line of "This post is a blog" and "This post isn't a blog".

Can you actually describe to me the differences between Graycyn's post for accountability and the (In)decent Intervals thread by Jon? What makes Gracyn's a blog and Jon's not?

Maybe they should all be closed and everyone should just post in the "What workout have you done today?" thread. Since apparently that's the only place you're allowed to talk about your own training progress here.

[Ripples]

Point out the wonky threads with the report button and they can be locked.

This is a forum funded by Concept2 not a blog hosting site.

Again I ask: why the disparate treatment between two members of this community?

I personally don't view anyone who asks for encouragement or advice as "wonky." Isn't that one of the purposes of this forum?

[DavidA]

Point out the wonky threads with the report button and they can be locked.

This is a forum funded by Concept2 not a blog hosting site.

Again I ask: why the disparate treatment between two members of this community?

I personally don't view anyone who asks for encouragement or advice as "wonky." Isn't that one of the purposes of this forum?

I was also not quite sure what was so different about graycyn's thread compared to a number of other threads here. They seem very similar to me, and hers didn't seem to be any more wonky. (I don't have an issue with any of them. They might be helpful to the thread starter, or others, or both.)

David

[Slothful1]

I've been chewing on a response for a while, along with my weekend chocolate bounty.

I can see how the inconsistencies have crept in. On one hand I see the Citroen side, that this forum isn't designed / intended to host a large number of one-way blog-type blasts that get occasional comments from others. On the other hand, I can see how starting a thread for an individual's needs, might attract other contributors, and lead to a group of individuals starting to work together and discuss relevant issues. But you don't know until you've started a thread whether it will take off or not.

In my opinion, Navigation Hazard gets a special pass on his Indecent intervals thread because he has been a long-time contributor to this and the old UK forum, and so has earned some benefit from his many hours of contributions to help others' training. So he probably shouldn't be seen to create a precedent for others.

My suggestion might be that if a thread goes onto a second or third page and it's becoming clearer that it isn't attracting others to join the discussion, then it is declared a blog, and the individual is invited to shift it somewhere more appropriate. If it's a topic that is already being covered by an active thread, then the discussion could be pointed there.

I would propose that graycyn be given a chance to test the water on others being interested in joining her on her journey, before any need to relock the thread.

Dave

[Dangerscouse]

I've been chewing on a response for a while, along with my weekend chocolate bounty.

I can see how the inconsistencies have crept in. On one hand I see the Citroen side, that this forum isn't designed / intended to host a large number of one-way blog-type blasts that get occasional comments from others. On the other hand, I can see how starting a thread for an individual's needs, might attract other contributors, and lead to a group of individuals starting to work together and discuss relevant issues. But you don't know until you've started a thread whether it will take off or not.

In my opinion, Navigation Hazard gets a special pass on his Indecent intervals thread because he has been a long-time contributor to this and the old UK forum, and so has earned some benefit from his many hours of contributions to help others' training. So he probably shouldn't be seen to create a precedent for others.

My suggestion might be that if a thread goes onto a second or third page and it's becoming clearer that it isn't attracting others to join the discussion, then it is declared a blog, and the individual is invited to shift it somewhere more appropriate. If it's a topic that is already being covered by an active thread, then the discussion could be pointed there.

I would propose that graycyn be given a chance to test the water on others being interested in joining her on her journey, before any need to relock the thread.

Dave

Hear hear. Well said Dave and this echoes my thoughts, FWIW

[Citroen]

Dave has said it in a much better way than I could.

[Tenshuu]

I've been chewing on a response for a while, along with my weekend chocolate bounty.

I can see how the inconsistencies have crept in. On one hand I see the Citroen side, that this forum isn't designed / intended to host a large number of one-way blog-type blasts that get occasional comments from others. On the other hand, I can see how starting a thread for an individual's needs, might attract other contributors, and lead to a group of individuals starting to work together and discuss relevant issues. But you don't know until you've started a thread whether it will take off or not.

In my opinion, Navigation Hazard gets a special pass on his Indecent intervals thread because he has been a long-time contributor to this and the old UK forum, and so has earned some benefit from his many hours of contributions to help others' training. So he probably shouldn't be seen to create a precedent for others.

My suggestion might be that if a thread goes onto a second or third page and it's becoming clearer that it isn't attracting others to join the discussion, then it is declared a blog, and the individual is invited to shift it somewhere more appropriate. If it's a topic that is already being covered by an active thread, then the discussion could be pointed there.

I would propose that graycyn be given a chance to test the water on others being interested in joining her on her journey, before any need to relock the thread.

Dave

I did feel that my comparison of Jon's thread was a bit far to the opposite side of the spectrum, being well aware of his long-term positive contributions to the forum and community. The point was definitely more to point out how trigger-happy the particular lock felt - knowing that I had a thread open last spring with the intention of a 'training log' that could have been labeled 'blog' by many as time went on - and comparing to the aforementioned thread, mine probably could have been closed.
I decided to let the thread die and if I felt I wanted to post my training publicly to the forum, I moved it to the "What have you done today" megathread, unless I needed guidance on specific things of a workout.

I like your suggestion going forward on feeling for a momentum of collaboration and discussion before immediately closing a seemingly blog-like thread.


Thanks Dave! Well clarified.

[jackarabit]

I understand perfectly well how rules and regs capture some infractions and conveniently ignore others. Case in point: Jon Bone’s “Indecent Intervals” thread.

As Tenshuu suggests, Mr. Bone’s bona fides as an indoor rower and man of intellectual accomplishment are unassailable. These may be among the very best reasons to tolerate what is most assuredly a personal blog. As you commented, this anti-blogging rule may need restatement. I suggest a tripartite structure:

1) The Rule.

2) Enforcement of The Rule in the case of ‘infractions’ by the hoi poloi and (just possibly?) the fair sex.

3) Helpful Advice to powerful and useful friends how to avoid the appearance of being a blogger.

[johnlvs2run]

Removing some threads about C2 training and leaving others appears to be quite arbitrary (wonky).
Perhaps instead of being removed, threads "blogging" about C2 training could simply be moved to a blogging category.