It's not LRC, it's the Internet that's the problem.
It's not LRC, it's the Internet that's the problem.
Otherprosports wrote:
Athletes in every pro sport that is actually covered by major media (unlike track) has to weather comments by people on social media. Why should PRO runners be any different? This is such an inconsequential site that it is very easy to avoid unless you go out of your way to visit.
Agree with this 100%.
Go to the fan forums for any pro sport and you will see brutal devastating comments all the time.
The more popular/major media (periodicals, TV) can be almost as bad.
Anyone who becomes a semi public figure is subject to sharp criticism and low blow insults.
Other pro athletes don't spend much, if any, time worrying about it. Other pro athletes are required to face the media and angry fans , often times live, and they quickly learn to grow thicker skin, take the high road with responses, and ignore things. High school or younger football players, basketball players, cheeleaders, valedictorians, rock stars, etc. have to learn to put up with and deal with this abuse in person and esp. on social media at a young age.
Its not just the LRC message boards.
Yes, the abuse can be disgusting and its not right. But its hard to stop.
Cain herself admits that she learned at a young age to stop visiting LRC because she did not want to read negative things about herself.
I believe she missed out on a lot of great running coverage, and should have just avoided the message boards.
I believe that LRC does a great job of respectfully covering running and the people in it with the primary features and articles. The website as a whole undeservedly gets a bad rap by some for some of the things in the message boards.
But the message board comments and message board itself are easy to avoid if you want. Even when LRC uses the message boards to supply more instantaneous coverage of an event in the primary features and articles section, the links to the message board are clearly labeled "MB". Easy to avoid if you want.
It will be impossible to totally clean up the message boards. If people learn to accept them for what they are, and avoid them if you are worried about being offended, we would all be better off.
If the components of LRC were movies, the primary article and content section might occasionally stray into "PG-13" territory. Most of the message board content is suitable for anyone 13 and under. but the message boards do stray into "R" rating and beyond territory.
If you are not an adult, do not want to act like an adult, or can't act like an adult, don't visit the message boards.
If you visit the message boards, you must understand that most of the content is subjective opinions. You can take it or leave it.
Kind of getting sick of this thread. She had a point that people said things about her when she was 12, that is ridiculous.
Now she is 23, times have changed.
I am 35, people have said very nasty stuff about me, but I am not a national class runner so if I complain about it, I don't have enough of a following to generate any real discussion.
Does that make it ok for anyone to say nasty stuff about me, or anyone? Definitely not.
I hope Cain makes the Olympic team. 9:20 something for 3k indoors is a start but I would say she would have to improve leaps and bounds.
I say if you are a very optimistic person, she has a chance. I say she doesn't make the team but I am rooting for her. I hope her focus is more on success as a runner and less from bashing letsrun
magasad wrote:
The thing is, I don't think the brojos can fix this site.
It would require work, which as two people completely devoted to dubyaing their ways through life they are mortally opposed to.
Or, it would require dipping into their trust fund to hire someone to do the work. Even thinking about hiring someone is more work than the brojos ever want to do.
Or, it would require not being so fruastratingly wishy-washy. They should just come right out and say they don't give a damn and that's that.
fake news wrote:
Or, it would require not being so fruastratingly wishy-washy. They should just come right out and say they don't give a damn and that's that.
True, I think they want to change some things but I don't get the sense they care too too much.
They seem to want to bend to some pressure but are ok with other things.
I mean, the site is littered with profane and lewd remarks if you look for them. Many things on LRC that haven't been reported. LRC just doesn't care. The only way would be to have mandatory registration and some kind of verification process. That would ensure someone can't quickly create an email and then create another one.
I think LRC knows this is a possibility but is reluctant to act on it. Or they will prove me wrong.
On pokerstars for example, you have to prove who you are and if you are caught cheating, you can be banned and they can even take the funds in your account. If people had to verfiy their ID through this site, that would probably make them think differenty about what they say.
Either public criticism as an athlete fuels one and makes one better or the criticism ruins an athlete. Many athletes do not do well when criticized. See Jim Everett circa 20 years ago attacking sport journalist, Jim Rome. Jim Rome to Jim Everett's face called Jim Everett, Chrissy Everett. Everett attacked Jim Rome live on tv. Jim Everett's career sank there after. Most athletes need blinders. Most athletes do not do well reading sport columns and most athletes do worse reading on-line critics.
either public criticism ... wrote:
Either public criticism as an athlete fuels one and makes one better or the criticism ruins an athlete. Many athletes do not do well when criticized. See Jim Everett circa 30 years ago attacking sport journalist, Jim Rome. Jim Rome to Jim Everett's face called Jim Everett, Chrissy Everett. Everett attacked Jim Rome live on tv. Jim Everett's career sank there after. Most athletes need blinders. Most athletes do not do well reading sport columns and most athletes do worse reading on-line critics.
Based on the front page quote it seems like the line that hurt most was the one predicting she would slow down as she turned into a woman. If a 12 year old girl is so fast someone on a message board says she must be a boy that's not going to hurt that girl's feelings. But the one that came true, yeah I get it that really sucks, truly.
As was said earlier, if you're going to get all butthurt reading someone's thoughts, but you keep doing it then that's on you for not having self-discipline.
women or men, I always thought and heard, that if you were from the Northeast you tough. If you can't make it here, you make it anywhere. Mary is a disappointment for sure.
historysfinist wrote:
women or men, I always thought and heard, that if you were from the Northeast you tough. If you can't make it here, you make it anywhere. Mary is a disappointment for sure.
She is tough. She’s calling you all out on your hypocritical bullshit. I greatly admire her for that.
If you create a profile as a victim, you will be forgiven for any wrong doings. Transgender? You are supported for beating little girls in a race. Black actor? You can stage a fake crime. Woman? Title IX will create scholarships for running 17 minutes even though thousands of guys run 14:30. Murderer? Create a dateline story about your terrible upbringing. Adulterer? Claim mental illness. Alcoholic? It is a disease.
Yeah, the chronology makes it so obvious.
1) Salazar gets banned for doping.
2) Cain suddenly goes to the media with a story about her being "abused" by Salazar.
3) Cain becomes a professional victim and nobody asks her about her being on the juice.
Tougher than running wrote:
You are caught in a circle. There is no right
or wrong when it comes to speech. Speech is a legally protected right. Consistency with law is the allowance of free speech.
Freedom of speech refers to the freedom from government interference with speech. You can personally advocate for complete freedom of speech on letsrun, but it is not constitutionally protected in the way you imply.
zerzer wrote:
Yeah, the chronology makes it so obvious.
1) Salazar gets banned for doping.
2) Cain suddenly goes to the media with a story about her being "abused" by Salazar.
3) Cain becomes a professional victim and nobody asks her about her being on the juice.
There is no evidence that she cheated. Why does she have to respond to your accusation? It would be pointless, anyway, as you would not believe her denials.
Why then should we believe any of her accusations against Salazar and why should he have to defend her comments?
Tougher than running wrote:
You are caught in a circle. There is no right
or wrong when it comes to speech. Speech is a legally protected right. Consistency with law is the allowance of free speech.
yeah man, lets like make up our own arbitrary meanings for what the laws say about free speech, I like it! You on to something.
Law probably says I have a right to poop. So I can poop anywhere right? I poop on your car! I poop in your mail box!
poop poop poop!
Tougher than running wrote:
Why then should we believe any of her accusations against Salazar and why should he have to defend her comments?
You don't have to. You're saying she should respond to baseless doping accusations even though she can't prove a negative.
No. The opposite. We should not believe her. She should not respond to accusations nor should Salazar.
I'll bet that you can't take the criticism either, which is why you're not posting your life story for strangers to ridicule. When you speak respectfully of others, which may include suggesting different training methods, they should have no problems. When they do terrible things, they should expect criticism. But there is no reason to be obsessively running down other athletes as if their success means that we should respect no boundaries whatsoever with them. The question really becomes what psychological problem is in many of the letsrun critics that leads them to target teenage girls with personal attacks.
Facts is facts right wrote:
Based on the front page quote it seems like the line that hurt most was the one predicting she would slow down as she turned into a woman. If a 12 year old girl is so fast someone on a message board says she must be a boy that's not going to hurt that girl's feelings. But the one that came true, yeah I get it that really sucks, truly.
As was said earlier, if you're going to get all butthurt reading someone's thoughts, but you keep doing it then that's on you for not having self-discipline.
If you believe he has a psychological problem, it is dangerous to point it out. Many here seem to resort to name calling when they don't like what someone else has to say. A good debate is healthy. Name calling shuts it down. Telling someone that they are not as smart as you also shuts it down.