Mary Cain Calls Out Letsrun

no-jo wrote:

physics defiant wrote:

letsrun is like alcohol and cigarettes. People make a lot of money off them despite the potential for harm but nobody is forcing you to consume them.

I don't think these analogies work very well for media platforms like Letsrun. Their business models are different. With a critical mass of attention and thus influence in a community, responses like "nobody is forcing you to consume" ignore that this is not about your own consumption but about everyone else's.

The point is that "not consuming" is moot when everybody else's consumption has direct implications for you and how people look at you (and people like you, for that matter!). Such is the nature of bullying.

I realize it's a difficult problem, but many open forums have found constructive ways of dealing with it.

Nonsense.

someone tell me why the people always quick to resort to calling people snowflakes are the ones that get triggered when someone tells them they shouldn't spew vitriol willy-nilly under the guise of free speech?

quicker deletion wrote:

rojo wrote:

Our moderation for the most part is decent. It's just no necessarily fast enough for everyone. The reality is letsrun doesn't have have a big sexism/racism/homophobia problem. We, like the entire Internet, have a moderation problem. I've always said moderating is the hardest thing we do but unlike facebook and twitter you can pick up the phone and reach us within seconds.

So after telling us over an over again that we should use the report post function, you are now telling us that we need to call you if we want a timely response? Could you clarify which is the preferred method of communication?

He never said you "needed" to call. The report post function works fine and will suit most people's needs. But if something needs more attention or explanation, the phone is an option. It's nice to be able to talk to a real person if you want.

snowflake wrote:

someone tell me why the people always quick to resort to calling people snowflakes are the ones that get triggered when someone tells them they shouldn't spew vitriol willy-nilly under the guise of free speech?

This x 1000

First, and after reading this thread, last, time here. 60+ year old white man who has seen a few things, including how the kinds of comments that seem all too common here can damage people and the sport. Before I go:

1) Advising people just to not read or to turn away doesn't do anything. It only allows the limp, toxic impotence to grow and spread and influence others. It makes you an enabler, and in your silence you imprint consent. Show some courage and stand up for the people and the sport you love, and stand up against the people who would hurt them.

2) Behind every one of the hateful, attacking comments is a stunted weasel who gave up, both intellectually and emotionally, by the 7th grade, in every aspect of their lives. Most of these bros are permanent losers who can only feel successful and empowered by climbing over and belittling others, especially women, using sports as a shield and an excuse, and who find out too late that even that doesn't work.

3) To those people I say, stay the hell away from the women in my life. Stay away from my partner, stay away from my daughter, stay away from the women I run with, stay away from the women they run with, and on and on. Go find another sport, or stay away from sports entirely, they don't seem to be for you; in this one, we raise each other up, we don't tear each other down. If you have to manufacture garbage, save the world the trouble, turn it on yourself in your miserable little corner of your miserable little room, and leave everyone else alone.

Like I say out loud to the bros shooting crap in the locker room: "You better not be talking about my daughter or any of her friends." Shuts the impotent cowards right the eff up like the impotent cowards they are.

Soprano wrote:

He never said you "needed" to call. The report post function works fine and will suit most people's needs. But if something needs more attention or explanation, the phone is an option. It's nice to be able to talk to a real person if you want.

I didn't claim that Rojo said that we need to call. I claimed that Rojo said that we need to call if we want a timely response. You don't think that's an accurate interpretation or Rojo's post, in which he acknowledged that the moderation is "not necessarily fast enough for everyone" and then went on to say that we should call if we want something dealt with quickly?

I'm not sure what your answer to the question I actually asked is. Do we need to call if we want a timely response?

snowflake wrote:

someone tell me why the people always quick to resort to calling people snowflakes are the ones that get triggered when someone tells them they shouldn't spew vitriol willy-nilly under the guise of free speech?

They generally are not.

You just perceive it that way due to your six sided personality.

and I would say that you perceive it the opposite due to your six sided personality! it's okay, the ess-jay-dubyas are being held at bay by strong brave men like you

quicker deletion wrote:

I'm not sure what your answer to the question I actually asked is. Do we need to call if we want a timely response?

Then read my post again, because I answered you already. ;)

Soprano wrote:

quicker deletion wrote:

I'm not sure what your answer to the question I actually asked is. Do we need to call if we want a timely response?

Then read my post again, because I answered you already. ;)

You did not. You said to call if something require "more attention or explanation." My question regarded the expediency of attention, not the amount of attention. ;)

snowflake wrote:

and I would say that you perceive it the opposite due to your six sided personality! it's okay, the ess-jay-dubyas are being held at bay by strong brave men like you

strong and brave is not a flake characteristic.

quicker deletion wrote:

You did not. You said to call if something require "more attention or explanation." My question regarded the expediency of attention, not the amount of attention. ;)

Soprano wrote:The report post function works fine and will suit most people's needs.

Feel free to call us if you need this explained further.

Soprano wrote:

quicker deletion wrote:

You did not. You said to call if something require "more attention or explanation." My question regarded the expediency of attention, not the amount of attention. ;)

Soprano wrote:The report post function works fine and will suit most people's needs.

Feel free to call us if you need this explained further.

Why are you not willing to simply say either "yes, calling will yield faster results" or "no, both means of communication reach us in real time and will be handled at the same speed"? You are obfuscating when there is no need to do so.

Well here is the thing. I follow a lot of sports and comment on them. And having done so I can say that commentary about female high school distance runners is generally a bit out there. The issue is baked in given that female high school xc runners progress differently than boys. This results in a degree of snobbery and sadism that you don't really find in other high school sports. And it will attract the jerks and the trolls predicting burnout, peaking, plateauing and the like and it will also be an outlet for misogyny and immaturity.

But here is another thing. Which is that this sadism and blood sport aspect of the sport is not just a message board phenomenon. I mean the NY Times wrote an entire article on Tuohy when she was just a sophomore talking about the alleged cruelty of being a female high school phenom xc runner and that how she was already doomed. As a sophomore. That article was really an exercise in the very cruelty the reporter was claiming to be reporting on. If that is the attitude of the official media (and you see it over and over on the topic), then how should we expect a message board to be with the usual message board antics?

I'm not defending the comments made about Cain and others. In additional to being classless to begin with we are talking about real people and in her case a high school kid. But the attitude you often see at the very top regarding this aspect of the sport is pretty bad to start with.

Soprano, you explained it well. Now that users can't change handles in a thread... Can you please implement an ignore users function?

I'm just as tired of users wrongly calling out LRC, but reporting them isn't fair as it's their free speech.

Go away Mary. You are annoying. You’re more famous now because of being annoying than when you were good. I liked you better when you were good and just kicked ass.

Soprano wrote:

quicker deletion wrote:

You did not. You said to call if something require "more attention or explanation." My question regarded the expediency of attention, not the amount of attention. ;)

Soprano wrote:The report post function works fine and will suit most people's needs.

Feel free to call us if you need this explained further.

You're wasting your time responding to these whiner trolls Soprano, they are not in good-faith trying to help anything

Eyeroll wrote:

https://twitter.com/runmarycain/status/1218224844262838273?s=21

Give me a break. Has anyone checked to see if such a thread even existed? I suspect what Mary Cain is really upset about is that a number of people here (no Mary not the same person posting multiple times in their mom's basement) found her NYT video distasteful and thought she was a narcissist unrealistically whining that running at an elite level was hard. #marycainnotaneliterunner #somegirlswinsomegirlscomplain #peterpansyndrome

Mary Mary, why ya buggin'?