Raining/quite raining is an understatement. It was a torrential downpour basically all evening. Don’t know how much time that adds to the steeple, but I know that I got soaked to the bone after about a 3 minute walk yesterday.
My take, how many athletes at any given meet are unable to interview with LR due to sheer time constraints? A lot. One athlete chooses not to speak to one media outlet and instead of just letting it slide, they make an off the record comment public for clickbait. Now we have a 6 page thread about every topic but the one that actually matters.
Quigley was an Olympian in the steeplechase, and finally has raced after a very long period of injury. That should be exciting news and should spark a debate about how she raced, where her fitness could go this year, or will she make the worlds team. Instead out of 6 pages there’s 3 relevant comments. I for one am very excited to see her healthy and back on the track. If she can keep training going, maybe she can run under 9:30 and have a shot at worlds. Would be a cool comeback to see.
Rojo is quite right to criticize what the users have made IG into. But far worse than that is the ownership of IG.
If you want to talk about inappropriate stewards of an online community, Facebook/Meta has been several orders of magnitude worse than LRC could ever hope to be. In several ways. It’s not even close. It’s like LRC has slapped someone and Meta has committed genocide.
But any tiny business can throw free products and/or a small payment at Quigley and get her to peddle their wares on instagram.
I respect her right to do what she wants to do but anyone thinking this is justified because the owners and mods and community of Instagram are any better than the owners and mods and community of LRC, I think you’re uninformed.
Rojo is quite right to criticize what the users have made IG into. But far worse than that is the ownership of IG.
If you want to talk about inappropriate stewards of an online community, Facebook/Meta has been several orders of magnitude worse than LRC could ever hope to be. In several ways. It’s not even close. It’s like LRC has slapped someone and Meta has committed genocide.
But any tiny business can throw free products and/or a small payment at Quigley and get her to peddle their wares on instagram.
I respect her right to do what she wants to do but anyone thinking this is justified because the owners and mods and community of Instagram are any better than the owners and mods and community of LRC, I think you’re uninformed.
Nah. This crappy site allows armchair dorks to verbally abuse professionals behind a wall of anonymity. TYou don't have a problem with that because you've never been remotely fast enough for anyone to care about your performances.
If you want to talk about inappropriate stewards of an online community, Facebook/Meta has been several orders of magnitude worse than LRC could ever hope to be. In several ways.
Are you really comparing a social media platform with two billion daily active users and hundreds of executives to… …a running website with a singular message board run by two brothers that hosts what… two thousands users a day?
Not even comparable.
We know who the inaction falls on here. They actively comment. They have burner accounts. It’s the Brojos.
Stephanie, We've never met but we have mutual acquaintances. I won't use the word "delusional" with you because it's overwrought, but I think you're wildly misguided here (though I don't question your sincerity). No one holds the Blowhard Jos responsible for the vile stuff posted on the forums, but we do hold them responsible for 20 years of poor and slanted moderation. Put another way, you are in fact deluding yourself if you think they're doing "everything they can" to moderate the site properly. LRC doesn't HAVE to be a cesspool, but it is because of the poor moderation. Imo, it reflects both (a) a deliberate intention to monetize the site via clicks, and (b) a stubborn and obtuse (and misguided) commitment to "free speech" that apparently to them means, for example as was stated recently, that downvotes are better than deleting overtly racist/sexist toxic nonsense. I honestly don't know how Robert and Weldon sleep at night knowing the monster that they've created and CAN control but won't. I guess they console themselves with the revenues. You, however, shouldn't be part of it. I love running too much to quit the site entirely, but as I've said I won't give direct $$$ to the site (shoot, I subscribe to FloTrack and MileSplit and The Athletic...I'M the target audience) until it's fixed. It is 20% better, maybe, in the last year but still has a long way to go.
While "pages of personized abuse" may be a bit exaggerated, many women in our sport take a dim view of the LRC message board and, by extension, the journalistic side of Let's Run. Too often, discussions of athletes on this board degenerate into allegations of doping, body shaming, TMZ styled gossip mongering, defining people by their looks, demeaning individuals on their gender, color, political views, etc. Some have simply had enough of the mean spirited and immature takes displayed on this site. I personally know many women athletes that speak very ill of this site. Rest assured, it isn't just Colleen Quigley.
I also agree with you that the forum should be a place for free expression. You are also well aware that your stance on this matter also comes with consequences. People are free to blast athletes on LRC within your moderation guidelines but athletes and other luminaries in the running community are also free to avoid talking to LRC if they feel attacked, hurt, or disrespected by it. Like it or not, the message board reflects on the site as a whole. If you are going to allow caustic and hurtful commentary by the users, then don't be surprised if you, your brother, Gault, Stephanie, and others are denied access. No need to apologize. You have made a business decision and that decision will reap rewards in some areas and cause pain in others. Athletes that avoid speaking to LRC are the same as people that refuse to do business with companies that have sketchy records on product quality, sourcing, wages, and human rights. You have made a choice and they have made a choice.
I’m a woman who has been on LetsRun for 17 years. The message board isn’t any different than a comments section, Twitter or Reddit. It’s moderated as best it can with a limited number of actual humans. I don’t recall anything coming directly from the staff of LetsRun I’d find sexist and if I did, I’d call them out on it.
This is strawman deflection silliness, you defend the poor policies here because you gained attention through this site. If the intent is to be as low level and vile as twitter or Reddit then mission accomplished. But “where your dreams become reality” doesn’t quite jibe with that outcome. It’s been suggested thousands of times that most of the trash would easily get cleaned up simply by requiring registered login to post. It would go miles in the direction of leveling up discourse and curbing the implication that the brojos post criticism anonymously.
Stephanie, We've never met but we have mutual acquaintances. I won't use the word "delusional" with you because it's overwrought, but I think you're wildly misguided here (though I don't question your sincerity). No one holds the Blowhard Jos responsible for the vile stuff posted on the forums, but we do hold them responsible for 20 years of poor and slanted moderation. Put another way, you are in fact deluding yourself if you think they're doing "everything they can" to moderate the site properly. LRC doesn't HAVE to be a cesspool, but it is because of the poor moderation. Imo, it reflects both (a) a deliberate intention to monetize the site via clicks, and (b) a stubborn and obtuse (and misguided) commitment to "free speech" that apparently to them means, for example as was stated recently, that downvotes are better than deleting overtly racist/sexist toxic nonsense. I honestly don't know how Robert and Weldon sleep at night knowing the monster that they've created and CAN control but won't. I guess they console themselves with the revenues. You, however, shouldn't be part of it. I love running too much to quit the site entirely, but as I've said I won't give direct $ to the site (shoot, I subscribe to FloTrack and MileSplit and The Athletic...I'M the target audience) until it's fixed. It is 20% better, maybe, in the last year but still has a long way to go.
The Jobros are simply less proficient Zuckerbergs.
Stephanie, We've never met but we have mutual acquaintances. I won't use the word "delusional" with you because it's overwrought, but I think you're wildly misguided here (though I don't question your sincerity). No one holds the Blowhard Jos responsible for the vile stuff posted on the forums, but we do hold them responsible for 20 years of poor and slanted moderation. Put another way, you are in fact deluding yourself if you think they're doing "everything they can" to moderate the site properly. LRC doesn't HAVE to be a cesspool, but it is because of the poor moderation. Imo, it reflects both (a) a deliberate intention to monetize the site via clicks, and (b) a stubborn and obtuse (and misguided) commitment to "free speech" that apparently to them means, for example as was stated recently, that downvotes are better than deleting overtly racist/sexist toxic nonsense. I honestly don't know how Robert and Weldon sleep at night knowing the monster that they've created and CAN control but won't. I guess they console themselves with the revenues. You, however, shouldn't be part of it. I love running too much to quit the site entirely, but as I've said I won't give direct $ to the site (shoot, I subscribe to FloTrack and MileSplit and The Athletic...I'M the target audience) until it's fixed. It is 20% better, maybe, in the last year but still has a long way to go.
I think you hit the nail on the head when you stated that the priority is (1) traffic, and (2) the freedom of speech aspect. But I believe that the latter pushes through in order to keep clicks up. There is a lot of funny, informative, and useful content on here, but the traffic would be greatly reduced with higher/effective moderation. It is also something that they truly do not want to do, IMO. That is a choice that they are free to make, and there will never be a solution that satisfies a polarized population.