Should FLYER be reinstated

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

I vote Yes :o

He's a little crazy, but he does bring up a lot of questions which I find interesting, maybe others don't. There's many things I've learned from reading his posts and he's very informative regarding dope, shame he doesn't know or doesn't show much else.

Since when is a well-rounded education/interest in a variety of topics a requisite for posting on this forum?

Gimme a break.

S/he shouldn't be banned.

I don't think so. IMHO he became too accusatory and confrontational for a polite board like ours.

We must all remember to be civil with our dealings here and Flyer had many chances to take the high road but instead chose to attack people.

I seriously considered leaving this forum at one point because of him. It seemed like if one posted a question about saddles, he might go on a rant about how the pros hide syringes in the seat and Paris Roubaix is so tough on riders because the cobblestones keep shooting EPO and testosterone into their asses!

The other thing that bothered me was he'd make these blanket statements and accusations and never back them up with proof. Also, his guilt by association belief sure didn't work for me. In my mind, and in my legal system, one is innocent until proven guilty.

Tim

If he would limit his post on doping to threads about doping and not attack anyone that mentions a pro cyclist or training or just about anything in any context.
He was irritating but I don't take most things here too seriously.
He is a cyclist and part of a brotherhood, the irritating part,but a part, so whatever happens is cool with me and my insignifigant opinion.

lumpy...you considered leaving cause of him?

are you serious. ahahhahahahahhahaa :eek:

Yes he should be reinstated.
He wasnt any more confrontational then those who attacked him for being "Wrong".

Lumpy thats your opinion about him being wrong. He has his. thats no reason for him to be banned cause neither you or him are right.

Euphoric- How many people openly accused Flyer of doping? Of selling dope? How many sent him threats in PM's? For that matter how many people besides Flyer did any of these three things to anyone? He went too far and he got what he deserved.

lumpy...you considered leaving cause of him?

are you serious. ahahhahahahahhahaa :eek:

Yes he should be reinstated.
He wasnt any more confrontational then those who attacked him for being "Wrong".

Lumpy thats your opinion about him being wrong. He has his. thats no reason for him to be banned cause neither you or him are right.

I never once said he was wrong. In fact, I can't recall ever seeing a post from someone saying Flyer was wrong. All he was asked to do was back up his blanket accusations. Flyer didn't do that. Instead he'd accuse you of being a doper or a doping apologist - when all you wanted was a link to his evidence.

Yeah, I did seriously consider leaving. I got tired of never knowing when he'd aim a rant at me simply because I questioned him. There's plenty of other forums where the mods keep everyone in line. It's about time they did it here.

Sadly, a man with a fund of valuable knowledge, but penniless when it came to tact, or even rhetoric for that matter.

It's been very odd to watch both Flyer, and Ed Arzouian, men who undoubtedly KNOW a great deal in their respective cycling niches, but who have a complete and total lack of understanding of the human being.

But as far as bringing him back goes, he never really and truly offended me; however, he did alienate me. So bringing him back wouldn't affect me at all.

[QUOTE=House]Euphoric- How many people openly accused Flyer of doping? Of selling dope? How many sent him threats in PM's? QUOTE]

who cares if he accused you of selling dope or even pm'd you with some useless e thug garbage. If he kept on pm'ing and was threathening lives. Ok thats too far, but threatening to whoop you or other baby stuff I see no issues with. It goes on everyday on many forums all over the net.


the problem , when trying to back up accusations like that is. There isnt going to be some magical website you can google up that will have all the answers. When something like doping in cycling (which is known to go on ) and is covered up /or beat lots of times, its gonna be hard to find evidence to post up on a message board. The only thing you can do is keep your stance on your opinion and try to educate people about it. If he truly was in the sport (which it sounds like) then Im sure most of his evidence stands true with a google link or not.
Sure he may have not done it in the nicest of ways but last I checked thats the way the internet is most of the time.
Im sure he could say almost the same things in person and it woudl come across completely different.

anyways. If people really had huge issues with him ,t hey could hit "ignore user" and be done with it.

Do you guys think we'll ever find out why he got booted?

I never completely left but there were times when I was gone for a month or more and it was mostly because I grew tired of the same old posts, over and over, the same rants and the same claims of proof, backed only by circumstantial evidence and attacks launched on anyone who didn't agree. Throughout the forums I'm a member on, he's the only one I've ever felt the need to place on my ignore list and based on the number of threads created in his *ahem*... "honor", I would have to believe that I'm not alone.

For myself, the forum is a better place without him. I appreciate that he knew a lot about doping, but he seemed to feel that everyone should instantly bow to his views or be labeled a doper, doping apologist or worse. If you let him know that you didn't agree, he'd often take to posting blatant lies as if you were suddenly his worst enemy.

If the majority here think it's a better forum with him, then I'd welcome him back. But I might well leave minutes later because, in my opinion, he turned conversation, debate and heated discussion into an absolute battlezone where the only goal is to obtain surrender and take prisoners. Some may find that entertaining. In find it tiring.

Banned.

No tact, rude, accusatory, intentionally trolling with nearly every post, generally not pleasant to deal with. Yea, let's bring him back... :rolleyes:

Whahahah.........

Don't take everything so serious and behind those 1000 something posts there was GOOD information that I didn't know of. He got me thinking and that's good.......still IF his goal was to get me out of cycling then he didn't succeed. In the end I couldn't care less IF LA dopes or the whole peloton, I would still be watching the races.....

So conclusion: the banning is stupid! OR there is some very good reason, but the mods are very quiet indeed......



I never once said he was wrong. In fact, I can't recall ever seeing a post from someone saying Flyer was wrong. All he was asked to do was back up his blanket accusations. Flyer didn't do that. Instead he'd accuse you of being a doper or a doping apologist - when all you wanted was a link to his evidence.

Yeah, I did seriously consider leaving. I got tired of never knowing when he'd aim a rant at me simply because I questioned him. There's plenty of other forums where the mods keep everyone in line. It's about time they did it here.

Whahahah.........

Don't take everything so serious and behind those 1000 something posts there was GOOD information that I didn't know of. He got me thinking and that's good.......still IF his goal was to get me out of cycling then he didn't succeed. In the end I couldn't care less IF LA dopes or the whole peloton, I would still be watching the races.....

So conclusion: the banning is stupid! OR there is some very good reason, but the mods are very quiet indeed......
I have named three things he has done that would have gotten himbanned on any message board out there but you, and others still can't figure it out. Go to google and you can find all the "knowledge" Flyer had. He was someone who wanted attention and knew that by googling a few articles, repeating them over and over and going on the attack when people asked questions that would prove whether he had any real knowledge, some would fall hook, line and sinker for it. He's over move on.

I have named three things he has done that would have gotten himbanned on any message board out there but you, and others still can't figure it out. Go to google and you can find all the "knowledge" Flyer had. He was someone who wanted attention and knew that by googling a few articles, repeating them over and over and going on the attack when people asked questions that would prove whether he had any real knowledge, some would fall hook, line and sinker for it. He's over move on.

<------agrees with House.

I have named three things he has done that would have gotten himbanned on any message board out there but you, and others still can't figure it out. Go to google and you can find all the "knowledge" Flyer had. He was someone who wanted attention and knew that by googling a few articles, repeating them over and over and going on the attack when people asked questions that would prove whether he had any real knowledge, some would fall hook, line and sinker for it. He's over move on.
I agree with everything you said. Yet, that doesn't really outline my reasons for perferring to see him gone. He was just completely incapable of recognizing that he might be wrong. Anyone who didn't agree with him on every point was attacked like his worst enemy. He was libelous, rude, childish, rigid and completely without the ability to understand that suspicion doesn't equal proof.

Like I said before, if the majority here think the forum is better off without him, then I say, support the majority. But I can't include myself in that segment nor do I see myself as likely to remain active on the forum if I have to deal with him flaming me, spreading lies and generally misrepresenthing the comments of every poster courageous enough to disagree with him. I tried to call him out on a few of his more blatant lies and he seemed to feel uncompelled to respond -- probably because he knew he had lied. I even pulled him off my ignore list just to check. As soon as I was done checking, he went right back on ignore. It's where he belongs, in my opinion. And now he's on the forum's ignore list.

While I never had any problem with Flyer's presence on this forum there were problems I had with his postings:

1. "Tous Dope" - There's enough evidence to prove this isn't true - Willy Voet's Book, David Millar's testimony (he won clean) etc.

2. He never answered straight questions (like, "Do you actually like cycling", "What are your credentials")

3. Her would go off topic wildly - (e.g. you're discussing Armstriong and he'd bang on about Mark French)

4. His belief that billion dollar pharmaceutical companies (e.g. Amgen) saw cycling as 'big business'.

When it comes to this topic, I only have respect for the opinions of the likes of Limerckman, who have been involved at a high level, love cycling and are willing to take on board alternative views.

On whole, knowing about Mr Armstrong and his blackberry, the owners of this site have no option to ban a man like Flyer, who I have always regarded as akin to the 'we didn't land on the moon types' (Armstrong was probably doped for that too).

Euphoric- How many people openly accused Flyer of doping? Of selling dope? How many sent him threats in PM's? For that matter how many people besides Flyer did any of these three things to anyone? He went too far and he got what he deserved.

I'm pretty sure I accused him of doping - just for fun. :p

I vote Yes :oOf course let him back in.