Squats the Story MkII- Off topic thread

juke · 19-11-2016 11:48PM

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

If you're right (and you probably are), then there's been a pattern of acceptance of this from the mod team; of course he's gonna continue to do so and push a little further. To roll back on that so suddenly, employing the harshest of punishments is poor form.

I *think* only admin's can permban - as in the case here. I don't think the fitness mods had any input at all.

dashoonage · 19-11-2016 11:52PM

I heard the news and had to log in to see if its true.....No more healing for Hanley:(

Dtp1979 · 20-11-2016 12:23AM

Has the person that banned him anything to add?

WHIP IT! · 20-11-2016 12:29AM

A pretty sad state of affairs.

That Poster had a Log here that stretched back about eight years and was a goldmine of info... and all it took was one keyboard warrior to open up a thread one day and decide to look at the hole instead of the donut...

Now the people who use this Forum for advice, guidance and insider knowledge are robbed of one of its best posters.

I can't tell you how much I've learned from the well-informed posters on this Forum over the past 6/8 years - all of it for free, and much of it from the bad man who hurt some poor boy's feelings one time.

Mellor · 20-11-2016 05:37AM

What was the tread that caused the issue?

Blacktie. · 20-11-2016 09:49AM

Mellor wrote:

What was the tread that caused the issue?

He posted up his most recent email. Some random came along and basically started shouting advertisement and got angry when Hanley didn't crawl under a rock in response.

Mellor · 20-11-2016 10:34AM

What his the email that had a pretty concise list of resources, podcast, books, webpages etc

Nervous Wreck · 20-11-2016 11:11AM

Mellor wrote: »

What his the email that had a pretty concise list of resources, podcast, books, webpages etc

Yep, but at the end it said something along the lines of "E-mail me if I can help further" and "Come have a free PT session and a week's training in RevFit on us" so people screamed advertising.

Mellor · 20-11-2016 11:42AM

LMFAO

No doubt these complainers contribute lots to the forum themselves, all selflessly of course

Nervous Wreck · 20-11-2016 11:54AM

Mellor wrote: »

LMFAO

No doubt these complainers contribute lots to the forum themselves, all selflessly of course

Haven't seen them before.... or since. :P

Mars Bar · 20-11-2016 12:28PM

I think Hanley has given more than he has gotten from his time on Boards.

However, I thought his responses on the thread was bang out of order and would be actionable anywhere on the site. The whole thread was a bit of **** show.

Certainly didn't expect to see a permaban on his account!

cloudatlas · 20-11-2016 06:12PM

Hopefully cool heads prevail and everything is smoothed over. I'll just add to the Hanley love in by saying that I'm seeing great results from his 'simple program to get stronger' and he just presented that without asking anybody to sign their life away.

MightyMandarin · 21-11-2016 10:50AM

I've only been active here for about 2 years but in that time it's been clear to see who knows their **** around here and who doesn't. Hanley had an argumentative posting-style at times but you cannot deny he knew his stuff well but most importantly, could tell it to newbies in a way that didn't make their heads explode.

Hanley getting banned is just yet another sign of why boards is dying a slow death. Too many dickhead mods, adherence to silly rules and a clear lack of reasonableness which can clearly be seen in this case. Banning a poster for 'advertising' even though he's been giving away free info and advice for ****ing years is one of the dumbest decisions I've seen on here in a long time.

Anyway it's their loss, because Hanley will still have his gym and clients, but boards and the fitness forum will have lost one of their top posters.

Mellor · 21-11-2016 11:05AM

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Hanley getting banned is just yet another sign of why boards is dying a slow death. Too many dickhead mods, adherence to silly rules and a clear lack of reasonableness which can clearly be seen in this case.

I can't be certain, but I don't think that this one had anything to do with the mods.
It was a site ban afaik.

MightyMandarin · 21-11-2016 11:13AM

Mellor wrote:

I can't be certain, but I don't think that this one had anything to do with the mods. It was a site ban afaik.

I tend to group Mods,Category Mods, Admins etc. in the same group.

The fact it's a site ban makes it even more laughable though imo.

pumpkin4life · 21-11-2016 11:16AM

I copied the guy's "work out the same thing with a different exercise" and his squat program and long story short, the aul swole gains for the Pumpkin have shot up.

Lad knows what he's talking about and unless he was being a real twat, its ridiculous, stupid out that he was banned.

Mr. CooL ICE · 21-11-2016 11:17AM

I was away for a few days so have no idea what happened in that thread, but here is my 2c.

I can understand why boards must come down hard on people using the site for advertising, but this was different. As stated, hanley was a huge part of this forum. If making a decision as drastic as sitebanning an individual, it should be looked at in the context of the effect it would have on the community the individual was part of. In this case, the admins got it 100% wrong.

Sangre · 21-11-2016 11:19AM

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Crazy to permaban one of the best contributors to the forum. Particularly when boards is losing members and the Fitness forum has been in decline for a long time.

For no reason in particular, I stopped coming around here for about year (maybe more?). Just popped back in last week and I was very surprised by how quiet it gotten. Very few posts.

On the Hanley subject, I have no inside knowledge but I'd be very surprised if the site-ban wasn't as a result of repeated warnings or behind the scene conversations. Unlikely that a one-off post like that resulted in a site-ban, Whether thats justified or not is another thing!

ford2600 · 21-11-2016 11:23AM

MightyMandarin wrote: »

I tend to group Mods,Category Mods, Admins etc. in the same group.

The fact it's a site ban makes it even more laughable though imo.

I had a look at current threads active for last month.

The only threads are the usual (how to get toned, drop weight, 5 by 5 etc). Like or dislike him Hanley was the only person opening threads to teach/instruct; deadlift/squat webinars, powerflifting competition advice, how to do pull ups, 3 min nutrition video etc etc.

I learned a lot for free as did lots of others.

Of course it was a partly marketing strategy, but one which was a great deal for users.

Nervous Wreck · 21-11-2016 12:14PM

Sangre wrote: »

For no reason in particular, I stopped coming around here for about year (maybe more?). Just popped back in last week and I was very surprised by how quiet it gotten. Very few posts.

As COH said, there used to be a strong community on here that had some great nights out (though I only ever went to two) but when the forum started to quieten, so did the community aspect. Less community feel led to a quieter forum and it's just spiralled downwards in that pattern ever since.

To their credit, Hanley and a small few other regulars have been attempting to fight this over the last while by starting interesting topics, offering free advice etc. but it's been an uphill battle to say the least.

This move will only drive more people away and, very shortly the ONLY threads left on this forum will be the multitudes of "rate my diet" and "what program to get big" threads. And they certainly have their place. But what they don't do is start a conversation. That's what's been slipping fromantic this forum the last 3+ years and the absence of real, substantial conversation is what will see this forum really die.

JJayoo · 21-11-2016 01:00PM

Hanley is the new Harambe

PowerToWait · 21-11-2016 03:25PM

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

The posters that rushed to denounce Hanley in the thread in question have returned to contributing zero

I presume I'm one of these. I thought the way he reacted to the poster who called 'advertising' was out of order, and before that he insulted a lot of posters on here saying they were 'cheap'.

I'm not sure if you're saying people shouldn't voice their opinion of a post and I haven't checked in here since, I've no idea what was said on the thread after my post and before the deletion, but I presume it was salty.

I wasn't expecting him to be banned, certainly not site banned but I would imagine that thread wasn't the sole reason somehow.

I don't know how people can blame other posters for another individual being banned. It's just silly. People are banned for their own actions not the actions of others.

I've been on here since the Bradpants days, G'em as a moderator, Cardioshoot me on the piss, great bantering and there seemed to be room for fun. IMO things are a bit serious, (yeah, I can see how that might be seen as ironic) people ask a straightforward question and the tone is often a bit 'rolleyes' in response, with a deconstructing of the question and all the rest. There sometimes seems to be a race to show who knows how much about what.

The place has gone quiet, but I honestly believe a lot of people are 'afraid' to post because a lot of the time the replies are of a hectoring nature, and the place is fairly cliquey lets be honest.

Alf Veedersane · 21-11-2016 04:45PM

PowerToWait wrote: »

I presume I'm one of these. I thought the way he reacted to the poster who called 'advertising' was out of order, and before that he insulted a lot of posters on here saying they were 'cheap'.

Not necessarily you but most of the posters ducked into the Fitness forum to tell how rustled their jimmies were before leaving again.

And the 'cheap' comment, in the context it was applied, was fair enough. Though maybe there's a better adjective for someone who balks at paying X for training in a very good facility but will spend that regularly on booze and takeaways over a weekend. That was the context.

I never said people shouldn't give an opinion. I just find it odd when some people's sole contributions to a forum are to say "down with that sort of thing"

Nervous Wreck · 21-11-2016 06:05PM

Sangre wrote: »

On the Hanley subject, I have no inside knowledge but I'd be very surprised if the site-ban wasn't as a result of repeated warnings or behind the scene conversations. Unlikely that a one-off post like that resulted in a site-ban, Whether thats justified or not is another thing!

Just on this, Hanley received no prior warnings in relation to this. He got a warning for the "your mum" comment (which, incidentally, I'm baffled that anyone reported, given how obviously OTT it was on the Silly Scale) but the permaban for advertising was completely out of the blue. No other warnings/infractions in several years. *shrug*

LuckyLloyd · 21-11-2016 08:45PM

Nicolas Cage wrote: »

I was away for a few days so have no idea what happened in that thread, but here is my 2c.

I can understand why boards must come down hard on people using the site for advertising, but this was different. As stated, hanley was a huge part of this forum. If making a decision as drastic as sitebanning an individual, it should be looked at in the context of the effect it would have on the community the individual was part of. In this case, the admins got it 100% wrong.

The Admins have been getting calls like this wrong for years. They are ignorant of how communities work and immune to arguments of how key individual contributors are in situations like this. Whatever, the time where there's nothing much to Admin marches inexorably closer.

Mellor · 21-11-2016 11:15PM

MightyMandarin wrote: »

I tend to group Mods,Category Mods, Admins etc. in the same group.

A lot of people probably do group them together. But its not fait imo.
The mods are guys like bluewolf, Brian?, metamorphosis, etc who are fitness orientated themselves, and regularly contribute themselves. They certainly were aware that Hanley occasionally mentioned Revfit.

The Admins are various others with potential little or not interaction with the forum.

Alf Veedersane · 21-11-2016 11:23PM

It makes no sense that the CMods aren't consulted. They're there to monitor the specific forums and have a better understanding of the context of any particular issue.

Though maybe the Admins don't care. Maybe they have enough contributors across the other forums and Fitness dying would make no difference to them.

Transform · 22-11-2016 08:25AM

MightyMandarin wrote: »

I've only been active here for about 2 years but in that time it's been clear to see who knows their **** around here and who doesn't. Hanley had an argumentative posting-style at times but you cannot deny he knew his stuff well but most importantly, could tell it to newbies in a way that didn't make their heads explode.

Hanley getting banned is just yet another sign of why boards is dying a slow death. Too many dickhead mods, adherence to silly rules and a clear lack of reasonableness which can clearly be seen in this case. Banning a poster for 'advertising' even though he's been giving away free info and advice for ****ing years is one of the dumbest decisions I've seen on here in a long time.

Anyway it's their loss, because Hanley will still have his gym and clients, but boards and the fitness forum will have lost one of their top posters.

baffled by all of this.
No good deed goes unpunished

kumate_champ07 · 22-11-2016 09:56AM

Mellor wrote: »

A bad fit bike might be better, but that doesn't mean it's good.
Even a perfect fit bike will result in constant hip flexion and no extension.
Obviously at the extreme end, TDF athletes sacrifice heath for performance. But I can't imagine a situation with a recreational rider where is doesn't also apply. (bar recumbent bikes I suppose, which are ironically more efficient).

Actually his cardio is split between running (sprints), rowing and the bike. Intervals on the rower I believe.

I will concede that if you only want a bike for lifting in the air like that, then it might not affect your hips.

Nobody used Rory as an argument against cycling. Rory prompted the question. The evidence was based on the physical position. Neither is anybody suggesting that if you ever sit on a bike your hips will suddenly fall off. It's simply that the hyper flexed position is contributes negatively.

I'm sure that you understand the idea that sitting is bad for us. Well it's the same, but a bit more intense on the bike.

The fact that Conor uses a bike proves nothing tbh. Nobody said that the negatively aspects can't be countered. They can. You just need to offset the muscle shortening effect. I know for certain that Conor does a hell of a lot of mobility work. It's pretty reasonable to assume that he easily outweighs the negatives.

so what exactly was the point you and Hanley were trying to make? do you realise that pro cyclists do supplementary mobility work anyway? my own club have strength&conditioning sessions twice weekly with a big focus on mobility. track cyclists spend more time in the gym than on bikes, sprinters rely heavily on squats,box jumps,deadlifts. there are more positives to cycling than negatives. you guys just seem to be so dismissive of anyone thats not in your small group of popular regular posters.

if you're involved in sports you should be doing mobility work already

LuckyLloyd · 22-11-2016 11:26AM

kumate_champ07 wrote: »

so what exactly was the point you and Hanley were trying to make? do you realise that pro cyclists do supplementary mobility work anyway? my own club have strength&conditioning sessions twice weekly with a big focus on mobility. track cyclists spend more time in the gym than on bikes, sprinters rely heavily on squats,box jumps,deadlifts. there are more positives to cycling than negatives. you guys just seem to be so dismissive of anyone thats not in your small group of popular regular posters.

if you're involved in sports you should be doing mobility work already

Their point was that cycling is terrible for mobility. You seem to have taken exception to that, but haven't refuted it. Bar indicating that those who cycle a lot should get a well fitted bike and do lots of mobility work to compensate for being in a compromised position for extended periods.

Moreover, in the context of it being terrible for mobility, it makes perfect sense for an elite athlete with lots on the line to eschew the activity completely.

Squats the Story MkII- Off topic thread

Comments