# A kinder, gentler VRC...



## gregg (Sep 30, 2000)

Hello All,

With the recent retirement of the old moderators, I asked both of the new moderators (MendonCycleSmith and da'HOOV) that now would be a good time to try and open up the VRC community a bit.

In short, I am asking for a less (for lack of a better word) elitist forum. No, I don't want to see junk posted here, but it doesn't have to be all high end either. The Barracuda and the Iron Horse that were recently posted were fine. Yes, there is a line, but it will now be drawn a bit lower than before.

And please keep the insults and negativity to yourself. Don't post "it's ugly" or other pointless insults. If something doesn't appeal to you, tell us why you don't like it. (Like, it's Tange but it's not Prestige and Prestige is better because....) Or, if you really don't like something, and don't feel like explaining your criticism...how about just skipping that thread and respond to something else you DO like?

This is just a vague overview of what I'd like to see VRC become, and it will up to the mods to decide the details. I'm no VRC expert, so I will defer the call to both Craig and Stan (and input is always welcome by me, as far as how things are being run in here. Don't agree with a call a mod has made? PM or email me and LMK and I will look into it). While we may not all like the same kinds of bikes for the same reasons, I think we can all appreciate the desire to share our vintage-retro-classic mountain biking passion.

Thanks for reading this and for contributing to a broader, more open VRC.

-gregg


----------



## tductape (Mar 31, 2008)

Gregg,
The interest in old mountain bikes has outgrown the MTBR VRC format.There is more needed here than just a request from the main mod to play nicely. MTBR needs to adjust accordingly or loose the market share of advertising to a forum more willing to appease demand. 
Respectfully,
T


----------



## gregg (Sep 30, 2000)

Aemmer said:


> Gregg,
> The interest in old mountain bikes has outgrown the MTBR VRC format.There is more needed here than just a request from the main mod to play nicely. MTBR needs to adjust accordingly or loose the market share of advertising to a forum more willing to appease demand.
> Respectfully,
> T


So then, are you suggesting we split VRC into two forums? Or maybe add a sub-forum (like the "Attic" for high end only. or the "basement" for low end only)?

-g


----------



## AZ (Apr 14, 2009)

How would you differentiate between the two , IMHO all old mtbs are *****in .


----------



## muddybuddy (Jan 31, 2007)

gregg said:


> So then, are you suggesting we split VRC into two forums? Or maybe add a sub-forum (like the "Attic" for high end only. or the "basement" for low end only)?
> 
> -g


I've been thinking for a while that that might be the best solution. One dealing with not necessarily high end but more Vintage, Collectible and Historically Significant type stuff and one for just typical older bikes. Not that there wouldn't probably be a lot of nice bikes in that forum also but these are generally two different types of bikes. This may be a bit of a moot point though as it seems that many of those who actually have the bikes that would fit in the first group seem to have taken their ball and gone home and haven't been posting pictures or any real inforation lately anyway.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

I miss the "we eat our young" days...


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

AZ.MTNS said:


> How would you differentiate between the two , IMHO all old mtbs are *****in .


It is possible.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

bushpig said:


> It is possible.


the high end forum should have a initiation rite. a sadistic, brutal intiation conducted by Rumpfy. Fillet Brazed would supervise. Hollister would give the final blessing when he deciided suffering was enough.

aaaaahhh...


----------



## muddybuddy (Jan 31, 2007)

colker1 said:


> the high end forum should have a initiation rite. a sadistic, brutal intiation conducted by Rumpfy. Fillet Brazed would supervise. Hollister would give the final blessing when he deciided suffering was enough.
> 
> aaaaahhh...


Thank you sir. May I have another.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

colker1 said:


> the high end forum should have a initiation rite. a sadistic, brutal intiation conducted by Rumpfy. Fillet Brazed would supervise. Hollister would give the final blessing when he deciided suffering was enough.
> 
> aaaaahhh...


It'd be brutal, but I like the idea of it. You could be sure that all the members would have thick skin and know how to take a joke and roll with the punches.


----------



## ameybrook (Sep 9, 2006)

Rumpfy said:


> It'd be brutal, but I like the idea of it. You could be sure that all the members would have thick skin and know how to take a joke and roll with the punches.


Such a place could never exist...


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

Ahh...I think it already does


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

da'HOOV said:


> Ahh...I think it already does


Spoken like someone in the know.


----------



## richieb (Oct 21, 2004)

Perhaps just rename the VRC - 

"Old Mountain Bikes and Hugs spoken here!"

I suggest discarding the Vintage and Classic monikers, as they may be misleading...


----------



## mtnwing (Jan 13, 2004)

Rip Vrc


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

mtnwing said:


> Rip Vrc


VRC will keep on going. It is and will be different though. Less of some kind of passion but equal amounts for the nostalgia of biking back in the day.


----------



## CS2 (Jul 24, 2007)

If we don't open up to include more bikes we risk becoming an online country club with the same 5 guys posting to every thread about the same 5 out of business manufactures. People are going to loose interest fast.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

CS2 said:


> If we don't open up to include more bikes we risk becoming an online country club with the same 5 guys posting to every thread about the same 5 out of business manufactures. People are going to loose interest fast.


 you know the line: what's the point in belonging to a club that accepts me? or something like that...
Groucho knew.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

Well, since we're being civil, I'll jump in, and add a bit. 

BP, thanks for that, it's probably the best way to describe it. 

mtnwing, please just add something beyond useless handwringing, show what you run, is that too much to ask?

Richieb, honestly, if you start singing Kumbaya, I'm gonna reach through this computer and.... Old bikes man, no hugs, if your stuff sucks, you'll now, just without character assassination in the mix, is that so wrong?

Rumpfy, how's your collection of cricket bat's holding up? 

Okay, that's done. Over in the Cannondale forum, there's a very active (non sticky even) thread called the Uber V thread. It's at least a year old, with over a thousand posts, and over 83K views. If that one can still be on the first page, with no help from a sticky, I challenge you guys with this. How about a thread dedicated to the bikes you love, the ones this place started about? If there's enough love to keep a forum alive around it, how about you start a singular thread for just high end old rock star stuff. It's still under the VRC umbrella, and I'm sure it'll be a place of interest. I'd happily remove stuff that was errantly posted to keep it pure. 

If there's enough interest and material, as you guys seem to insinuate there is, I can't see it being a bad thing. You have a club house, it's kept clean by it's members, and if you can hold your nose enough to look at other threads when you stop by, your knowledge will be allowed to percolate down through the other threads you care to drop in on. 

Just thinking out loud, let me know what you think...


----------



## erkan (Jan 18, 2004)

I have a personal hobby in internet marketing, I think this is just a result of this forum drawing the same old people who are ad-blind, the forum need new content to attract new users that will click on ads and generate money.

What I mean is, this part of mtbr is popular but they are not making enough money on it, by expanding user-generated content to new areas in this subforum they hope this part of the forum will make the same amount of money as other forums. I can in a way understand that with the economy crisis in USA and all that.

Now, making money on forum is one of the most difficult tasks there is, mtbr sure has got the amount of traffic but traffic costs on the internet.

Money is more important than what vintage part of the forum is about, if you fail to understand that nobody is interested in 300LX bikes you should not be an admin at all in an MTB forum IMHO.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

erkan said:


> Money is more important than what vintage part of the forum is about, if you fail to understand that nobody is interested in 300LX bikes you should not be an admin at all in an MTB forum IMHO.


You're new here, aren't you? 

This kerfuffle nothing to do with money, of course the site as a whole needs to generate income via advertising, but the VRC is not being inundated with new users wanting to know about lesser bikes because they're being told to come here by admins hoping to make extra ad dollars. Or do I totally misunderstand what you're saying?

I'm perplexed as to why you would even think such a thing was the root of it. You've been a member since '04, anyone from the "office" ever tell you what forums to visit, or what to do?

Thought not....

Welcome aboard though, toss out some pics, and let's talk bikes:thumbsup:


----------



## Schmitty (Sep 7, 2008)

Man, you'd think this forum was about brokering peace in the Middle East. It takes the cake, even for the net.

How about this:

There's about a half dozen usual suspects who pen negative/derogatory/useless posts over and over and over. How about they don't post unless they have something useful/insightful/new to add?

That's all I got.

-Schmitty-


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

+1.....................................................................+55


----------



## Guest (Jul 20, 2009)

below is a PM i sent to Stan about a year ago in respond to a PM i got from him on a somewhat derailled thread. there's nothing personal in there (i deleted my rude insults  ) so i think it's ok to post it. summarises how i felt back then and still do. 

i'm done with fighting for this, especially now that quantity over quality is "dictated" from above. quality doesn't come in huge amounts and i don't mean quality in bikes. quality in what and how people contribute. 

weird how "newbies" who didn't even experience much less contribute to the "good old days" think they can comment on the current situation. 


Hi Stan,

...i was only referring to the "relax guys" and "everybody has a place here" part of your reply because i disagree with those statements. 

I think it's important that the forum members - those who are in there with their hearts and alot of passion for the subject - speak up if members post in a way that is not "in line" with what the forum is (was?) meant to be. 

Either if bikes are posted that don't fit in or people abuse the forum in their own interest. That thread fits into both categories i'd say.

I think someone deserves to be "challenged" if he has an old bike lying around and doesn't care to do at least a bit of own research about it nor cares to formulate his post so that the others can at least get a clue on how to help. 

The forum used to be about love and passion for old bikes. Now there are more and more posts about random old bikes someone happened to run across or pick up cheap without even having the desire to get that specific bike in first place. 

That is just reverse of how it should be: You can't get that particular bike out of your head and the desire to have it is so big that you start to learn about it (if you don't know from back then) and then start the search. And that's what you share on the forum.

Now it's more like "hey i found that old piece of junk and am too lazy or careless to learn about it. tell me why i should like it" - or tell me how to sell it best...

Not sure if you followed how retrobike.co.uk developed over the years. There was NO resistance at all to keep things "clean". Only tolerance (i think it's just ignorance and carelessness) and that's how it looks like there now. 90% old junk, no passion, dumb questions, useless threads and even sub-forums for modern bikes and off-topic chat. Again, there's not a single person to define what is "clean" or crap nor should it be formulated. A healthy community with a sufficient amount of passionate regulars will balance it out. 

And that's what i and others am occasionally trying to do. It's just difficult to set people straight without being harsh, rude or insulting but still bringing over the message loud and clear. In most cases, especially if there's a involved it's a gentle attempt to make people think about it but some seem to need a more intense massage. 

...

I think there are examples that someone gets ample positive support if his heart is beating for a "POS" and he has alot of passion for it for whatever reasons. But those people at least know what they have. 

I think having a POS and being careless and ignorant is what makes our blood boil.

Makes me sad that emotions go up and good people go against each other. It's really easy to get along with *us*. We just demand a minimum amount of passion and want to see a development in the right direction if people keep coming back.

Cheers, Carsten


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Carsten said:


> below is a PM i sent to Stan about a year ago in respond to a PM i got from him on a somewhat derailled thread. there's nothing personal in there (i deleted my rude insults  ) so i think it's ok to post it. summarises how i felt back then and still do.
> 
> i'm done with fighting for this, especially now that quantity over quality is "dictated" from above. quality doesn't come in huge amounts and i don't mean quality in bikes. quality in what and how people contribute.
> 
> ...


:thumbsup: :yesnod:

Due diligence.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

what Carsten said.

I especially dislike the "hey, write my eBay ad for me" posters

ymmv


----------



## jeff spicoli (Jan 28, 2008)

hollister said:


> what Carsten said.
> 
> I especially dislike the "hey, write my eBay ad for me" posters
> 
> ymmv


Why not? What else are you gonna do with your vast knowledge of vintage mountainbikes?
I like visiting here to see some pics of old bikes but I'll also go on the beginner forums and answer stupid questions. Why do some of you have such a problem with that? I started mountainbiking in 1990 because it was fun and the other riders were a pretty cool bunch who helped each other out passing on trail knowledge and the like. So I ask you is a hardcore VRCer(and we all know who you are) a real mountainbiker????


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

jeff spicoli said:


> Why not?


because more than half the time its not disclosed up front that brains are getting picked for someones profit. its insulting

go ahead and read Carstens above post again jeff


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

Carsten said:


> We just demand a minimum amount of passion and want to see a development in the right direction if people keep coming back.


Thanks for that, I'm honestly trying to understand this whole thing, cause I fail to believe that all this fuss is over a desire to be mean to anyone with a cheaper bike.

Is it a concern that new people join? Seems not. Is it a concern if they have a crappy bike? Seems not, as well. Is it a concern over increasing prices due to increased competition? Again, seems not. And you seem to indicate practice of what I've seen which is a decent level of tolerance to all.

So why can't things go on as they have? It would appear anyone can say as they like, within reason. Call folks on being dumb and lazy, or mining for info. Everyone has in the past, and I think it's for the best. Best way for a forum to run, by it's own members. That's what makes it feel like a family. No one ever said that wasn't okay, it's just not cool to abuse someone to the point that they call in the cavalry. Send 'em packing with a smile on their face, you know? If they keep coming back, and causing trouble, that's when a good member should be calling for deeper action by a mod or admin. That's what I think we're here for, to keep things running well, for the folks who make it what it is.

My mother in law, is a lot like most I imagine She's a children's librarian, and has a big thing about the F bomb. She gets all flustered and says, if you have to use that, you just aren't being creative.

Kinda how I look at the rules here now. Be creative, and concise, not crude.

It would appear we all like to command the written language enough, this ought to be easy......

If I'm not making any sense, I wish someone would speak up, cause it sounds right in my head, perhaps I'm nuts though.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

I think certain whiners need to stop thinking that this is THEIR personal forum. They seem to forget that this is just one of 50 or so forums on mtbr and its not even one of the original forums at that. Some of us have actually been here since the mid-90s when the place was a mere dozen or so forums. There were no manufacturer forums, no overlapping forums for the same thing (we now have two light forums, one for the commercial stuff and one for the DIYers), no regional forums, and certainly nothing for vintage gear as 90% of what gets posted in here was still considered NEW and/or state of the art at the time. If you want your own forum with your own rules, do what the F88ers did... martyr yourselves and bugger off to that forum already.


----------



## giantbikeboy (Dec 3, 2004)

CS2 said:


> If we don't open up to include more bikes we risk becoming an online country club with the same 5 guys posting to every thread about the same 5 out of business manufactures. People are going to loose interest fast.


Bingo! This is quite entertaining.


----------



## mechagouki (Nov 30, 2007)

DeeEight said:


> I think certain whiners need to stop thinking that this is THEIR personal forum. They seem to forget that this is just one of 50 or so forums on mtbr and its not even one of the original forums at that. Some of us have actually been here since the mid-90s when the place was a mere dozen or so forums. There were no manufacturer forums, no overlapping forums for the same thing (we now have two light forums, one for the commercial stuff and one for the DIYers), no regional forums, and certainly nothing for vintage gear as 90% of what gets posted in here was still considered NEW and/or state of the art at the time. If you want your own forum with your own rules, do what the F88ers did... martyr yourselves and bugger off to that forum already.


Props to DeeEight for putting things clearly in perspective.

Whilst my 2007 join date no doubt makes me a 'newbie' in the eyes of Carsten and others, I have used MTBR as an information source for a long time, always reading the rider reviews before I bought a bike or part and scanning the forums for tech info when I needed it. I eventually became a member just so I could view images in the forums. early on in my membership I posted pictures of a steel frame I bought trying to ID it, some of the 'talent' were dismissive and unhelpful, (indeed the frame's maker is still unknown), and I'm pretty sure I was accused of fishing for a value so I could flip the frame on eBay (I still have it - stripped and awaiting a respray). It wasn't a hugely positive experience, but I stuck around because I do have a deep interest in the brief but fascinating history and evolution of mountain bikes. I hope the forum will continue to prove useful to any and everyone who needs it. If you don't like what you see why would you waste your time coming here and posting?


----------



## Farmfield (Jun 27, 2009)

Discussions on the internet should always be carried out as if you were standing a couple of feet from you opponent - and imagine you both have machete's...

Just face it, you wouldn't go 'Your bike sucks!' to a guy holding a machete, would you now? xD

As a forum 'pro' I personally believe there's no other way to battle this kinda thing accept with good moderators/moderation...


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Farmfield said:


> Discussions on the internet should always be carried out as if you were standing a couple of feet from you opponent - and imagine you both have machete's...
> 
> Just face it, you wouldn't go 'Your bike sucks!' to a guy holding a machete, would you now? xD
> 
> As a forum 'pro' I personally believe there's no other way to battle this kinda thing accept with good moderators/moderation...


I disagree. Part of what makes a forum an interesting place for debate _is_ the fact that you can say exactly how you feel, and not have to worry about that machete.

However, if someone wants to talk to me about their Trek Antelope, I'll very honestly tell them to their face that the bike sucks. Its my personal opinion...but they should also know that their bike isn't much to be excited about.

I would consider myself a forum 'pro' as well.


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

Rumpfy said:


> I disagree. Part of what makes a forum an interesting place for debate _is_ the fact that you can say exactly how you feel, and not have to worry about that machete.
> 
> However, if someone wants to talk to me about their Trek Antelope, I'll very honestly tell them to their face that the bike sucks. Its my personal opinion...but they should also know that their bike isn't much to be excited about.
> 
> I would consider myself a forum 'pro' as well.


Isn't there a difference between a bike that's not much to be excited about and one that outright sucks? Huffy = sucks Lower end Barracuda/Balance = Not much to be excited about.

And really...if someone meets you at the trail head and strikes up a conversation and happens to mention that they're riding the beloved Trek Antelope they bought way back in the day, you're going to tell them that it sucks??? If so, you've got issues to work out...really....:skep:


----------



## Linoleum (Aug 25, 2008)

sho220 said:


> And really...if someone meets you at the trail head and strikes up a conversation and happens to mention that they're riding the beloved Trek Antelope they bought way back in the day, you're going to tell them that it sucks??? If so, you've got issues to work out...really....:skep:


Unfortunately the message needs to be delivered with a baseball bat because its starting to turn the VRC forum into a basketcase/fixer uppper/flip forum. That same Trek Antelope would probably be welcomed with open arms in the Trek forum. Plus they'll get even better responses in the Trek forum about BB width, proper fork rake, etc. Win win. Why not (re)lift the standards around here?

Batter up!!!! 

(just playing devils advocate you buncha softies!)


----------



## richieb (Oct 21, 2004)

It is well known that certain members post bikes as a passive sales technique...you know who you are...


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

i am with Carsten: i don't know why i should "accept"more people w/ open arms. 
i don't want more people and i don't work here.


----------



## cegrover (Oct 17, 2004)

Linoleum said:


> Unfortunately the message needs to be delivered with a baseball bat because its starting to turn the VRC forum into a basketcase/fixer uppper/flip forum. That same Trek Antelope would probably be welcomed with open arms in the Trek forum. Plus they'll get even better responses in the Trek forum about BB width, proper fork rake, etc. Win win. Why not (re)lift the standards around here?


Interestingly, there are very few hits if you search things like Antelope and 830 in the Trek forum. I spend some time in the forums for specific bike brands, and it's very rare that discussion there centers on anything past a few model years back.

The fact is, people looking for help on adjusting canti brakes (not to mention u-brakes and rollercams), dealing with threaded headsets and/or dealing with anything fewer than 8 cogs is better off coming here for help.

Personally, I'm always happy to see someone excited about riding something older and of good quality (i.e. bike store bike, not dept. store bike). That enthusiasm (often renewed after years out of the saddle) sometimes grows into a deeper passion for vintage MTBs. People have to start somewhere.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> I think certain whiners need to stop thinking that this is THEIR personal forum. They seem to forget that this is just one of 50 or so forums on mtbr and its not even one of the original forums at that. Some of us have actually been here since the mid-90s when the place was a mere dozen or so forums. There were no manufacturer forums, no overlapping forums for the same thing (we now have two light forums, one for the commercial stuff and one for the DIYers), no regional forums, and certainly nothing for vintage gear as 90% of what gets posted in here was still considered NEW and/or state of the art at the time. If you want your own forum with your own rules, do what the F88ers did... martyr yourselves and bugger off to that forum already.


and whose forum is it anyway? where is the one who owns it? why doesn't "he"receives the strangers w/open arms? 
are you the owner?
as far as i see you use the forum to pormote your eventual stash of tires, stems or whatever. you don't post that much... and yet you feel entitled to tell those who came w/ th idea in the first place, Rumpfy, that it's not his forum. I mean.. Rumpfy sucks but he came up w/ the idea of this forum, a vintage forum. Then we have a bunch of johnny come lately telling him how to behave or worse.. how to classify vintage bikes.
you don't like the VRC style, go post in retrobike. what? can't sell in Europe? want the american Joe to buy your parts?


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

colker1 said:


> and whose forum is it anyway? where is the one who owns it? why doesn't "he"receives the strangers w/open arms?
> are you the owner?
> as far as i see you use the forum to pormote your eventual stash of tires, stems or whatever. you don't post that much... and yet you feel entitled to tell those who came w/ th idea in the first place, Rumpfy, that it's not his forum. I mean.. Rumpfy sucks but he came up w/ the idea of this forum, a vintage forum. Then we have a bunch of johnny come lately telling him how to behave or worse.. how to classify vintage bikes.
> you don't like the VRC style, go post in retrobike. what? can't sell in Europe? want the american Joe to buy your parts?


haha. good post, Colker.


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

colker1 said:


> i am with Carsten: i don't know why i should "accept"more people w/ open arms.
> i don't want more people and i don't work here.


I don't think we should accept people who can't even compose a simple sentence..."i don't want more people and i don't even work here"??? what does that even mean???

I'd like to be the next moderator so I can break out the ban stick on colker... Can't use caps??? You're banned!!!!!!!!!


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

sho220 said:


> I don't think we should accept people who can't even compose a simple sentence..."i don't want more people and i don't even work here"??? what does that even mean???
> 
> I'd like to be the next moderator so I can break out the ban stick on colker... Can't use caps??? You're banned!!!!!!!!!


see the difference: i spoke in my name while you used "we". who are you to speak in the name of others? while at it you go w/ the most authoritarian ideas; ban? who asked you to ban anyone?


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

colker1 said:


> and whose forum is it anyway? where is the one who owns it? why doesn't "he"receives the strangers w/open arms?
> are you the owner?
> as far as i see you use the forum to pormote your eventual stash of tires, stems or whatever. you don't post that much... and yet you feel entitled to tell those who came w/ th idea in the first place, Rumpfy, that it's not his forum. I mean.. Rumpfy sucks but he came up w/ the idea of this forum, a vintage forum. Then we have a bunch of johnny come lately telling him how to behave or worse.. how to classify vintage bikes.
> you don't like the VRC style, go post in retrobike. what? can't sell in Europe? want the american Joe to buy your parts?


Haha! Classic! Great post FC. :thumbsup:


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

sho220 said:


> Isn't there a difference between a bike that's not much to be excited about and one that outright sucks? Huffy = sucks Lower end Barracuda/Balance = Not much to be excited about.
> 
> And really...if someone meets you at the trail head and strikes up a conversation and happens to mention that they're riding the beloved Trek Antelope they bought way back in the day, you're going to tell them that it sucks??? If so, you've got issues to work out...really....:skep:


I was trying to be gentle with my choice of words.

And if someone tries to strike up a convo with me about their Trek Antelope, I promise the look of absolute disgust and disinterest will be loud and clear on my face. If they ask me what I think of the bike, I'll tell them the truth.

Yes, I'm a bike snob.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

DeeEight said:


> I think certain whiners need to stop thinking that this is THEIR personal forum. They seem to forget that this is just one of 50 or so forums on mtbr and its not even one of the original forums at that. Some of us have actually been here since the mid-90s when the place was a mere dozen or so forums. There were no manufacturer forums, no overlapping forums for the same thing (we now have two light forums, one for the commercial stuff and one for the DIYers), no regional forums, and certainly nothing for vintage gear as 90% of what gets posted in here was still considered NEW and/or state of the art at the time. If you want your own forum with your own rules, do what the F88ers did... martyr yourselves and bugger off to that forum already.


Ya you've been around for a while, good for you. Guess what, so have I.


----------



## richieb (Oct 21, 2004)

I just don't want the forum to be lame anymore...is that too much to ask?

The fact of the matter is that, last October, when my dog Monty died suddenly of leukemia, after talking about it and crying with my wife, I came here and shared with my online bike geek friends and felt like there was a connection there. I can't explain it, but it was there.

Now, somehow, there is a complete emotional disconnect and foreign-ness to VRC that really makes it feel, well, obscure and remote. I feel nothing compelling me to come back here, other that the faint possibility that the crumbling remnants of what used to be here still seem like they may be able to make a return, and that is why the majority of my posts have been about fostering the knowledge and kinship that used to be a VRC staple.

I came here for the community as much as the subject matter. In fact, the subject mater was secondary, more of the tie that bound the community. Now, the subject matter is diluted to the point of obscurity, and has completely alienated the community that I grew to appreciate.

I'm sorry if the rest of the new folks don't appreciate this point of view, nor the MTBR folks, but it's the sad reality that the New World Order VRC has become.


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

I get that. Good post.
J


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

richieb said:


> fostering the knowledge and kinship that used to be a VRC staple.
> 
> .


richie,

I agree. I think thats what everyone wants. But the past is past, and things do/have change/changed. I hate to put it in terms of "sides" but thats what it has become. Both sides have to bend a little to make this thing work. If we don't like what's posted or said or implied by someone, we need to be adult and just move on. PM the poster if you must but quit the bickering, insulting and BS on the site.

In simpler terms, and I'm not trying to make this about me but use me as an example...if you don't like what I post, just ignore it. If I don't like what you post, I'll ignore it.

There are some definate personality issues here...just avoid posts by those people. If you don't respond, the post doesn't inflate and will probably return to the valid subject matter or die.

There's been some pretty pointed posts in the last few days...where the members have said what they felt, fine. You got it out of your systems, now move on. You can start right here, if you don't like what I've said, ignore it, won't hurt my feelings a bit.

JMHO


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

colker1 said:


> and whose forum is it anyway? where is the one who owns it? why doesn't "he"receives the strangers w/open arms?
> are you the owner?


Its the WHOLE MTBR MEMBERSHIPS you tool. Or was that obvious bit lost on you.



> as far as i see you use the forum to pormote your eventual stash of tires, stems or whatever. you don't post that much... and yet you feel entitled to tell those who came w/


I don't post that much because you and several others are a bunch of whiney pansies who'd rather have an elite little clubhouse of your own where you get to decide what's acceptable to be posted. And I actually use the classifieds to sell stuff when I have stuff to sell. I didn't create a umpteen page "trading" thread like one of you started. Trading, that's a laugh. I mentioned I had sharkfins available to trade and got PMs from people offering money straight out.

On that subject of tires... why aren't you calling out firstflight on their 10k of tires post? That was VERY blatantly a violation of mtbr's posting guidelines. But oh wait, the rules and mtbr forum guidelines don't apply to them, or to you, or to rumpfy or several others. apparently.



> you don't like the VRC style, go post in retrobike. what? can't sell in Europe? want the american Joe to buy your parts?


Why don't you? Oh wait...they probably would eat you up and spit you out the way you behave. No wonder this place got created. So you'd have someplace to hide from the retrobike users.


----------



## jeff spicoli (Jan 28, 2008)

WOW!! This is better than the 90210 reruns my wife is watching on soapnetwork
Wouldn't it be easy to make a sub forum for Bush Pig, Fillet-brazed, Colker1, Rumpfy, Carsten, Cegrover, and the like? This is MTBR right? I've never met a real mountainbiker who acts like any of those douchebags. Forgot to add hollister and filletbrazedforever to that list. Probably forgetting some.............


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

DeeEight said:


> On that subject of tires... why aren't you calling out firstflight on their 10k of tires post? That was VERY blatantly a violation of mtbr's posting guidelines. But oh wait, the rules and mtbr forum guidelines don't apply to them, or to you, or to rumpfy or several others. apparently.


Its good to be the king KMR....but I've always taken out a classified ad for stuff I sell, so make sure your facts are straight.
As for FFB...you build and maintain a resource like Jeff and Wes has for the VRC community, and we'll let your posts like that slide.

You've provided us with...uh...snurfle?


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

jeff spicoli said:


> WOW!! This is better than the 90210 reruns my wife is watching on soapnetwork
> Wouldn't it be easy to make a sub forum for Bush Pig, Fillet-brazed, Colker1, Rumpfy, Carsten, Cegrover, and the like? This is MTBR right? I've never met a real mountainbiker who acts like any of those douchebags. Forgot to add hollister and filletbrazedforever to that list. Probably forgetting some.............


Please don't compare any of us to fillet brazed forever. Thats way WAY outta line.


----------



## richieb (Oct 21, 2004)

jeff spicoli said:


> WOW!! This is better than the 90210 reruns my wife is watching on soapnetwork
> Wouldn't it be easy to make a sub forum for Bush Pig, Fillet-brazed, Colker1, Rumpfy, Carsten, Cegrover, and the like? This is MTBR right? I've never met a real mountainbiker who acts like any of those douchebags. Forgot to add hollister and filletbrazedforever to that list. Probably forgetting some.............


The sad part is that those are the very people who fostered and grew the VRC forum in the first place before you, or 90% of anyone else here even knew vintage MTB's were a hobby.

What you're saying is that we should take the people who were here first and built this place and cordon them off in their own "reservations" so we can enjoy the fruits of their labor...how very...oh what's the word I'm looking for here...


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

richieb said:


> What you're saying is that we should take the people who were here first and built this place and cordon them off in their own "reservations" so we can enjoy the fruits of their labor...


They "happened" to be first, if they hadn't done it others surely would have. There are lot's of people with knowledge out there. Sure the "founders" here are an excellent base...but they are not the only ones "in the know". I'm not discounting their importance to the forum, but I'm not about to discount anyone elses either just because they came along later (or maybe haven't been here yet). :thumbsup:


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

jeff spicoli said:


> WOW!! This is better than the 90210 reruns my wife is watching on soapnetwork
> Wouldn't it be easy to make a sub forum for Bush Pig, Fillet-brazed, Colker1, Rumpfy, Carsten, Cegrover, and the like? This is MTBR right? I've never met a real mountainbiker who acts like any of those douchebags. Forgot to add hollister and filletbrazedforever to that list. Probably forgetting some.............


First off, Fillet Brazed Forever is not to be confused with me or any other person on your "list".

Second, I've always sorta liked you just because of your avatar and name. Apparently though, you're callin' us douchebags for... whiny posts like yours.

Anyway, I complained a little initially, but I'm long over it and don't care about what happens on this forum. There are people on here who understand what the problem is/was. If by now you're still bewildered, I don't know what to say. Hint, it wasn't just the bikes. Also, Stan stepping down, I think, will solve 90% of all the issues the board has had over the last little while. I feel, it was pretty much him that singlehandedly brought this forum down. The guys that couldn't see his insults/abrasiveness, etc but then supported him in his ways also helped. But Stan was the protagonist, I feel. He did pretty good causing drama and crying the blues and playing the victim trying to get "blue collar" guys on his side. Some saw right through it, some did not.

People are still complaining about the change that's taken place. What's done is done. No need for a sub-forum.

lastly, I'm pretty sure I've never seen any contributions from you on this forum ever. Other than whining. Does that make you a non-mountainbiker/douchebag too?

As for not being a real mountain biker, let's go ride.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Rumpfy said:


> Its good to be the king KMR....but I've always taken out a classified ad for stuff I sell, so make sure your facts are straight.
> As for FFB...you build and maintain a resource like Jeff and Wes has for the VRC community, and we'll let your posts like that slide.
> 
> You've provided us with...uh...snurfle?


Except again... letting their posts slide violates mtbr's rules... rules you supposedly were supposed to enforce when you were a moderator. What... mtbr's rules don't matter to you? Really then you should do ala F88 and start your own website. Oh booo hooo hooo...the forum you started doesn't love you or listen to you anymore. Never once bothering to care that you owe it all to mtbr ALLOWING you to have a forum. They certainly didn't have to start one. They could just as easily close it down. And as to FB's comment about 90% of the recent problems being stan's fault... gee... you guys DID vote for him as one of the new mods. What... you expected that would make him your puppet or something and he'd just do whatever you told him to do?!?


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> Its the WHOLE MTBR MEMBERSHIPS you tool. Or was that obvious bit lost on you.
> 
> I don't post that much because you and several others are a bunch of whiney pansies who'd rather have an elite little clubhouse of your own where you get to decide what's acceptable to be posted. And I actually use the classifieds to sell stuff when I have stuff to sell. I didn't create a umpteen page "trading" thread like one of you started. Trading, that's a laugh. I mentioned I had sharkfins available to trade and got PMs from people offering money straight out.
> 
> ...


BS. you just used first flight tire thread to announce how many tires your "distributor" made available to your "customers". 
at least start a thread of your own.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

jeff spicoli said:


> WOW!! This is better than the 90210 reruns my wife is watching on soapnetwork
> Wouldn't it be easy to make a sub forum for Bush Pig, Fillet-brazed, Colker1, Rumpfy, Carsten, Cegrover, and the like? This is MTBR right? I've never met a real mountainbiker who acts like any of those douchebags. Forgot to add hollister and filletbrazedforever to that list. Probably forgetting some.............


"real mountain bikers"? oooohh... that's sooo 2000. not vintage enough.:nono:


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

da'HOOV said:


> They "happened" to be first, if they hadn't done it others surely would have. :


where are the others? fact is.. they did it. and they have a passion and knowledge you nor me have it.
i come here, for all these years, to grab whatever knowledge these guys have. i come here to see beautifull bikes these guys build.
sure.. there is a bit of attitude ere and there. nobody is perfect (except me) but it's pretty much SS Mike, FB and a couple others who are into the top end of the mountain bike food chain that made this forum what it is and sure ain't a parking lot for used bikes.


----------



## mechagouki (Nov 30, 2007)

This thread is better than Wrestlemania.


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

Kinder and gentler? Ironic!


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

bushpig said:


> Kinder and gentler? Ironic!


isn't it a kind and gentle world we live in?


----------



## richieb (Oct 21, 2004)

It's funny...all the guys who are being accused of being mean, etc, are actually the ones being civil and presenting fair, honest views of why things are going the way they are here in the VRC.

It is the "newer" folks and other "regulars" who are being the most venomous and just calling names and causing trouble...interesting.

Also funny is that there is so much "If you don't like the way the forum is going, start your own." to the veterans here, yet none of the newbies think that maybe that is a direction THEY should go, in order to create a forum THEY would like, instead of changing the way this one is...er, was.


----------



## cegrover (Oct 17, 2004)

jeff spicoli said:


> WOW!! This is better than the 90210 reruns my wife is watching on soapnetwork
> Wouldn't it be easy to make a sub forum for Bush Pig, Fillet-brazed, Colker1, Rumpfy, Carsten, Cegrover, and the like? This is MTBR right? I've never met a real mountainbiker who acts like any of those douchebags. Forgot to add hollister and filletbrazedforever to that list. Probably forgetting some.............


Wow, I managed to get labeled a douchebag. I'm honored, but I'm not sure why I'm on your list. I respect the knowledge and experience of everyone else on your list and enjoy most of their posts. I also realize they have ten times my VRC knowledge, as I was just a mostly casual rider in the 80s and early 90s who then took 10+ years off and get serious about MTBs and VRC five years ago.

I also differ with most of those on your list on the 'entry bike' point, in that I generally support letting the newbies come in and show their version of passion and I often think their treatment here is out of line. That being said, I can also detect sarcasm when I see it and I think some newbs invite it. I also like what Stan does - at a minimum, he's finding dirty old bikes that are generally interesting and is cleaning them up so they can live a longer life and, hopefully, be used.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

colker1 said:


> BS. you just used first flight tire thread to announce how many tires your "distributor" made available to your "customers".
> at least start a thread of your own.


No what I actually said was that a montreal distributor (babac if you want the name... want the phone # for them too to see if they have any of the tires left?) cleared out all their tires of that type (skinwalls) about three years ago and most of Babac's accounts are held by shops and/or home-garage repair businesses throughout eastern canada. I said I bought 40 or so tires myself, they were all in NOS condition (no rubber cracking problems at all, or dry rubber or anything... they all were factory fresh shape and I examined each one myself) and I long since sold them all but kept a couple sets for myself. One set I kept thus went onto my 1984 RM Fat City Flyer.

But fine, make up your own conspiracy theory to go with what I actually said. Its the sort of drivel i've come to expect from you and your lot in here.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> No what I actually said was that a montreal distributor (babac if you want the name... want the phone # for them too to see if they have any of the tires left?) cleared out all their tires of that type (skinwalls) about three years ago and most of Babac's accounts are held by shops and/or home-garage repair businesses throughout eastern canada. I said I bought 40 or so tires myself, they were all in NOS condition (no rubber cracking problems at all, or dry rubber or anything... they all were factory fresh shape and I examined each one myself) and I long since sold them all but kept a couple sets for myself. One set I kept thus went onto my 1984 RM Fat City Flyer.
> 
> But fine, make up your own conspiracy theory to go with what I actually said. Its the sort of drivel i've come to expect from you and your lot in here.


you didn't say all that. :nono:


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

Holy crap, where's the popcorn?

I just want it on record that I, as mod, am letting this run it's course, no censorship here 

You guys obviously have some issues you need to work through, have at each other, you all apparently seem to be enjoying it.

I too, am enjoying the irony in this threads name, versus it's content.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Not all in the first message but gee...when I said I bought 40 and only had a couple pairs left it should have been obvious I wasn't trying to sell any (ESPECIALLY SINCE I bought tires that weren't actually skinwalls). And when I said the skinwalls were spread bike stores in eastern canada, it should also have been obvious that I wasn't looking to sell any tires. I added the condition of the rubber in a followup to something FFB raised about proper storage of tires.


----------



## jeff spicoli (Jan 28, 2008)

da'HOOV said:


> They "happened" to be first, if they hadn't done it others surely would have. There are lot's of people with knowledge out there. Sure the "founders" here are an excellent base...but they are not the only ones "in the know". I'm not discounting their importance to the forum, but I'm not about to discount anyone elses either just because they came along later (or maybe haven't been here yet). :thumbsup:


I agree with Stan maybe instead of douche bags I should have said Elitists. So what if someone shows a pic of their not period correct build. Maybe make a sub forum for the rest of us.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

jeff spicoli said:


> I agree with Stan maybe instead of douche bags I should have said Elitists. So what if someone shows a pic of their not period correct build. Maybe make a sub forum for the rest of us.


Elite is a good thing. anyone that tells you otherwise is dragging you down. always aim for the best.

you want lesser knowledge? lesser bikes? go ahead... i won't be in your way. i won't be around, i promise. i have zero interest in wasting my time looking at cheap bikes.


----------



## wv_bob (Sep 12, 2005)

mechagouki said:


> This thread is better than Wrestlemania.


All it needs is a video of Stan and FB going at each other with folding chairs.


----------



## richieb (Oct 21, 2004)

*Elitist...*

Elitist - a term made famous by the Republican party this past year in order to make being average or below average alright. Sure it's alright, but sub-par is nothing to strive for or be proud of.

I'd MUCH rather be part of the elite with respect to my bike collection, my intellect and the people I associate myself with. Why not try to be your best?

rb


----------



## wv_bob (Sep 12, 2005)

It was less about making average or below alright, and more about making average or below people hate those that have done better.

Other than that I agree


----------



## cegrover (Oct 17, 2004)

wv_bob said:


> It was less about making average or below alright, and more about making average or below people hate those that have done better.


That actually sounds exactly like what the Democratic party does. Of course, neither major party is worth a damn.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

wv_bob said:


> It was less about making average or below alright, and more about making average or below people hate those that have done better.
> 
> Other than that I agree


Yep.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> Holy crap, where's the popcorn?
> 
> I just want it on record that I, as mod, am letting this run it's course, no censorship here
> 
> ...


At least its contained in one thread. Its like family therapy.


----------



## muddybuddy (Jan 31, 2007)

Rumpfy said:


> At least its contained in one thread. Its like family therapy.


Maybe we should all get together for a group ride.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

bushpig said:


> Kinder and gentler? Ironic!


Can't say there's no passion here.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

DeeEight said:


> Really then you should do ala F88 and start your own website.


DOOOONE!



DeeEight said:


> And as to FB's comment about 90% of the recent problems being stan's fault... gee... you guys DID vote for him as one of the new mods. What... you expected that would make him your puppet or something and he'd just do whatever you told him to do?!?


Stan as mod was a combination of things. To prove a point and also to see how long he'd last. Results are as expected. I didn't expect Stan to be a puppet.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

Rumpfy said:


> DOOOONE!
> 
> .


where?


----------



## gregg (Sep 30, 2000)

For the record, Stan didn't really want the mod job. I kinda talked him into it and said, "give 'er a go and if things don't go well, you can always turn in your keys." I did have some concern about Stan as mod, so I conferred with a couple of the "regulars" and they thought that it could work, too. But a moot point now, as he has stepped down.

And in no ways is this meant to indicate that Stan was the source of the problems. Far from it. I wanted change, and I knew that regardless of who took over, it would be a challenge.

I appreciate all the feedback in here, and it seems that there is no clear, single answer. It's not so much that I want quantity over quality....I want civility over rudeness. Cases like what mechagouki stated above...that's what I want to try and avoid. No, it doesn't need to be all hugs and singing Kumbaya....but I don't want the grumpy snobs chasing away the newbies either. 

So, with Stan's stepping down, I will confer a bit more with Craig and see how things go from here. I got additional feedback (both via PM and email) about the 2 forums idea, and the majority gave that a thumbs down. This thread will now be unstuck and we return you to your regularly scheduled programming. Kindler/gentler? Indeed.

-g


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

*what?*



Rumpfy said:


> Stan as mod was a combination of things. To prove a point and also to see how long he'd last. Results are as expected. I didn't expect Stan to be a puppet.


Prove a point? to who, you? 

How long I'd last? with you and your legion harrassing nearly every post I made? 

Results as expected? again, by who, you? 

I stepped down because I knew you guys wouldn't quit with the BS and it was detonating the forum further down the hole than when MCS and I took over.

You"re not only a self described jerk, add pompous and arrogant to that.

Sorry to the decent forum members for my little tirade, I promise to try to be kindler and gentler from now on.......:skep:


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

Let's refrain from name calling. Otherwise, spew away!


----------



## Schmitty (Sep 7, 2008)

gregg said:


> I appreciate all the feedback in here, and it seems that there is no clear, single answer.
> 
> -g


Sure there is... MODERATION.

It seems I've been lumped in as a 'Stan/newbie' Don't know Stan from Jesus, and as far as being 'new' who gives a ****.

The cheap bikes blow. The best way to cull them is to NOT POST TO THE GARBAGE THREADS. Look back at some of the lame threads with tons of posts of late.. garbage, and unfortunately, the majority of the content. Mods can ditch crap threads too, and for sure should CENSOR all the snippy little inside derrogatory comments, regardless of who posts them. Give warnings and timouts.KEEP IT ON TRACK. Guess what, the crew who gets their jollies doing that crap will stop if their posts are removed. Crap threads will die out if they are not responded to, etc etc.

As far as 'tenure', who cares. Old or new, give good posts, or get out. This isn't a private clubhouse.

Less crap posts. Less drama. More VRC content.

-Schmitty-


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

Schmitty said:


> Sure there is... MODERATION.
> 
> It seems I've been lumped in as a 'Stan/newbie' Don't know Stan from Jesus, and as far as being 'new' who gives a ****.
> 
> ...


just say no to authoritarian measures.
better live w/ annoying personalities than under a clean police state like authority.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

da'HOOV said:


> Prove a point? to who, you?
> 
> How long I'd last? with you and your legion harrassing nearly every post I made?
> 
> ...


To who? Why my legion of course!


----------



## Schmitty (Sep 7, 2008)

colker1 said:


> just say no to authoritarian measures.
> better live w/ annoying personalities than under a clean police state like authority.


Seems a bit heady considering the given subject matter of VRC.

-Schmitty-


----------



## gm1230126 (Nov 4, 2005)

Rumpfy said:


> To who? Why my legion of course!


IVMTB...while they say the "I" stands for international we all know it stands for Illuminati


----------



## gm1230126 (Nov 4, 2005)

richieb said:


> It is well known that certain members post bikes as a passive sales technique...you know who you are...


You must be talking about Rumpfy and that Tomac Raleigh:thumbsup:

Oh....come on RichieB...you never decided to go in a different direction with your collection and sold off not even one bike without more than a few people here knowing about it??? Really?


----------



## J_Westy (Jan 7, 2009)

Schmitty said:


> The cheap bikes blow. The best way to cull them is to NOT POST TO THE GARBAGE THREADS. Look back at some of the lame threads with tons of posts of late.. garbage, and unfortunately, the majority of the content.
> 
> -Schmitty-


It really is that simple.

Happens all the time on the eurovan forum I use. The old timers get weary of the newbie/dumb/same-ol' posts and don't touch them. If the newbie is lucky, some freshman will take pity and answer his/her question before the OP goes on a tirade about the elitists 

I'll also say that you all have been very professional to this newbie when it came to my pedestrian Cannondale posts and my thrifty klunker project - thanks for that.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Eurovan eh? I got a 1987 Westfalia... less than 98,000kms on the odometer.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

Schmitty said:


> Sure there is... MODERATION.
> 
> The cheap bikes blow.Mods can ditch crap threads too, and for sure should CENSOR all the snippy little inside derrogatory comments, regardless of who posts them.
> 
> Less crap posts. Less drama. More VRC content.-


I think there's middle ground. Part of what makes this place a family is the ability to bust some chops. If folks don't learn that paying not attention to the social mores of a certain culture, they will be just like dumb fat Americans, bumbling about Europe, offending as they go. Better to go in to a place quietly, perhaps get a reminder that you aren't in Kansas anymore, then either adapt and enjoy, or move on.

I am firmly in favor of being civil. This does not mean that anyone isn't welcome to voice any opinion they choose, and even be a bit sassy about it (pardoning the old fashioned verb of course). What they will get dinged for is being an a$$hole. It's just no longer cool. I like how several folks who might have been considered pot stirrers have stepped up and just told someone the deal with a WIW or two, you know who you are

I can't be here all the time. So I rely on you all to help with this. The more you guys (and gal ) claim this as yours, and make it work, the better it'll get.

To folks who just don't get it? Your gonna hear about it, first from them, and after continued cluelessness, from me. That's how folks become family, by learning the ropes, and figuring out how to hang.

Thanks for letting me ramble, I hope I'm starting to get somewhere here.


----------



## hairstream (Apr 20, 2008)

skanks.


----------



## richieb (Oct 21, 2004)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> I think there's middle ground. Part of what makes this place a family is the ability to bust some chops. If folks don't learn that paying not attention to the social mores of a certain culture, they will be just like dumb fat Americans, bumbling about Europe, offending as they go. Better to go in to a place quietly, perhaps get a reminder that you aren't in Kansas anymore, then either adapt and enjoy, or move on.
> 
> I am firmly in favor of being civil. This does not mean that anyone isn't welcome to voice any opinion they choose, and even be a bit sassy about it (pardoning the old fashioned verb of course). What they will get dinged for is being an a$$hole. It's just no longer cool. I like how several folks who might have been considered pot stirrers have stepped up and just told someone the deal with a WIW or two, you know who you are
> 
> ...


This is pretty much how it was...and will give the VRC its best chance of surviving.


----------



## JoelovesDirt (Apr 28, 2008)

richieb said:


> This is pretty much how it was...and will give the VRC its best chance of surviving.


OK. Now I feel all warm and fuzzy. Just keep that Filletbrazedforever freak off the airwaves.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

gm1230126 said:


> IVMTB...while they say the "I" stands for international we all know it stands for Illuminati


Either 'I' will work.

Problem is that its the same five guys posting the same bikes over and over again. Less fighting though.


----------



## jeff spicoli (Jan 28, 2008)

JoelovesDirt said:


> OK. Now I feel all warm and fuzzy. Just keep that Filletbrazedforever freak off the airwaves.


+1 That dudes worse than almost all of you except maybe Carsten. He seems to think he's Gary Fisher. Is he?


----------



## eastcoaststeve (Sep 19, 2007)

jeff spicoli said:


> +1 That dudes worse than almost all of you except maybe Carsten.


Jeff,

Say what you will about Carsten, but you have to respect his knowledge and his stable. I indirectly bumped heads with him over some stupid stuff and I've got to say I regret it...he's a good guy with a lot of passion for the finer things VRC...he shouldn't get lumped in with that goofball FBF.

just mho,

Steve


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

So we actually all agree about FBF?! Amazing!


Carsten I hate though.


----------



## J_Westy (Jan 7, 2009)

*Westfalia*



DeeEight said:


> Eurovan eh? I got a 1987 Westfalia... less than 98,000kms on the odometer.


Your T3 sounds minty!

Here's our T4:


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

hairstream said:


> skanks.


Are you being creative, cute, a poor speller, or is that some kind of double entendre?:skep:


----------



## ameybrook (Sep 9, 2006)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> hairstream said:
> 
> 
> > skanks.[/QUOTE}
> ...


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

ameybrook said:


> MendonCycleSmith said:
> 
> 
> > He loves that word for some reason.
> ...


----------



## Schmitty (Sep 7, 2008)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> I think there's middle ground. Part of what makes this place a family is the ability to bust some chops.


I can live with that, but pages and pages of 'chop busting'? It spirals out of control. I can see one or two rounds, but it needs to be reigned in after a bit. I agree that moderating this place in it's current state would be a major pita. It would take a while to get it back to cruising altitude.

-Schmitty-


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

Schmitty said:


> but pages and pages of 'chop busting'? It spirals out of control.It would take a while to get it back to cruising altitude.


Yep, it sure does, and I'm confident we're heading into a better mindset collectively. I'm communicating with several different members about they're status, and have received nice notes, from both sides of this seemingly endless, and bottomless debate.

I'm hoping that everyone realizes, what I want is a forum where I have to do little, to nothing. Folks should be speak their mind openly and without need of censure and everyone either gets along and polices the place now and then with good natured humor, or acts like an adult, and uses the ignore feature prominently displayed on the program, in the seatback pocket in front of you. Fasten your seatbelts low and snug across your lap, and enjoy your flight. :thumbsup:


----------



## Berkeley Mike (Jan 13, 2004)

*Keep it simple.*

It's not a mission from God for someone's idea of Vintage purity. Agree, disagree, or ignore. Just keep it civil.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

Berkeley Mike said:


> It's not a mission from God


Yeah, say that from the side of trying to herd all these cats.....


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> Yeah, say that from the side of trying to herd all these cats.....


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

Nice.:lol:


----------



## ededwards (Dec 21, 2007)

Carsten said:


> Not sure if you followed how retrobike.co.uk developed over the years. There was NO resistance at all to keep things "clean". Only tolerance (i think it's just ignorance and carelessness) and that's how it looks like there now. 90% old junk, no passion, dumb questions, useless threads and even sub-forums for modern bikes and off-topic chat. Again, there's not a single person to define what is "clean" or crap nor should it be formulated. A healthy community with a sufficient amount of passionate regulars will balance it out.


I don't post on here often but do 'lurk' as there can be some really interesting and informative stuff (once you get past all the nonsense). I suppose I'll be 'called out' as a newbie for that. Whatever.

However, although being rational tells me that I should ignore this and move on, I feel compelled to respond to the nonsense/arrogance quoted above and in a few posts.

I am utterly bewildered by some of the stuff in this and similar posts and that quoted above. This isn't some sort of X Men good v evil fight for supremacy with sides having to be taken - or it certainly shouldn't be. And the snidey anti-Retrobike comments are simply pathetic, especially when made by people who post there. To be clear, VRC and Retrobike offer different things, sometimes to different people but clearly with a good amount of overlap so participating in discussion at one does not preclude, or compromise, participation on another. Or it certainly shouldn't.

I realise that this post is providing the oxygen that the guys who wish to prolong this 'debate' want but felt I needed to comment for me if nothing else.

Oh, and "no passion" at Retrobike? Check out the vibrant rides/meets section http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewforum.php?f=5 . Oh, and how about having 40 odd riders (many very odd) at a 24 hour race http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=64139 . Oh, and the first World Championships for old mountain bikes (www.owmtbc.org) which seems to be of interest to Charlie Kelly and Gary Fisher. No passion? Pfft


----------



## mechagouki (Nov 30, 2007)

Actually this being your first post ever it's understating things to say you don't post here often

I agree though that the contempt shown to Retrobike by some VRC members is uncalled for, childish and basically mean. 

But Retrobike's huge membership, constantly changing content and lack of unpleasantness between members 9for the most part) would indicate that they are doing something right.

Some will no doubt accuse Retrobikers of lacking passion, taste and knowledge. 

Oh well............


----------



## richieb (Oct 21, 2004)

ededwards said:


> Oh, and the first World Championships for old mountain bikes (www.owmtbc.org) which seems to be of interest to Charlie Fisher and Gary Fisher. No passion? Pfft


Who is Charlie Fisher?


----------



## ededwards (Dec 21, 2007)

mechagouki said:


> Actually this being your first post ever it's understating things to say you don't post here often


Just being British and modest (and yes, I have a lot to be modest about).

Must not linger as may 'see the light', have to return to my passionless existence....


----------



## mrkawasaki (Aug 2, 2006)

mechagouki said:


> I agree though that the contempt shown to Retrobike by some VRC members is uncalled for, childish and basically mean.
> 
> But Retrobike's huge membership, constantly changing content and lack of unpleasantness between members 9for the most part) would indicate that they are doing something right.
> 
> Some will no doubt accuse Retrobikers of lacking passion, taste and knowledge.


Per capita, the motley rabble that are the RB peasants would surely be at top table when it comes to keeping the flame alive, especially when they started the 'race' 10 years late... how that must grate with the exiled haut monde in their private bunker! 

Mr K


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

mechagouki said:


> the contempt shown to Retrobike by some VRC members is uncalled for, childish and basically mean. .


it's called criticsm. VRC people take a lot of criticsm 24hrs a day. at retrobike criticsm is is seen w/ too much suspicion..

But Retrobike's lack of unpleasantness between members 9for the most part) ....[/QUOTE]

the same could be said reversing VRC x retrobike. it's a matter of POV.

Some will no doubt accuse Retrobikers of lacking taste and knowledge.

Oh well............[/QUOTE]

it's a matter of taste, indeed.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Why are we even talking about Retrobike right now?


----------



## Jupke (Mar 14, 2007)

_Why are we even talking about Retrobike right now?_

Correct, this is about:
- Nice vs Unpleasant
- Tolerance vs Intolerance
- Passion vs Obsession
- Silent majority vs Offensive Minority
Etc, etc..........


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

Jupke said:


> _Why are we even talking about Retrobike right now?_
> 
> Correct, this is about:
> - Nice vs Unpleasant
> ...


don't forget: taste x tasteless.
hypocrisy x sincerity


----------



## wv_bob (Sep 12, 2005)

richieb said:


> Who is Charlie Fisher?


It's Gary's brother .. how'd you get in here without knowing that?


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

wv_bob said:


> It's Gary's brother .. how'd you get in here without knowing that?


and he had a team of sexy female detectives called Charlie's angels. one of those girls invented the ahead set... based on the kama sutra.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

mrkawasaki said:


> Per capita, the motley rabble that are the RB peasants would surely be at top table when it comes to keeping the flame alive, especially when they started the 'race' 10 years late... how that must grate with the exiled haut monde in their private bunker!
> 
> Mr K


what's wrong w/ private bunkers? as long as no one is there is blatantly ignorant of mtbs there is nothing wrong w/ a cozy bunker.


----------



## mrkawasaki (Aug 2, 2006)

Rumpfy said:


> Why are we even talking about Retrobike right now?


Because Carsten and Colker would seem to insist that the apparent differences between sites be drawn into your internal struggles - they would appear to be making examples of 'how not to do it', when it comes to running and contributing to a vintage mountain bike forum. 

If Retrobike can be left out of this then we're all the better for it - just don't expect us to not offer a defence (just as you would if the comments were reversed) - it's our passion y'know! :thumbsup:

Mr K


----------



## mechagouki (Nov 30, 2007)

Rumpfy said:


> Why are we even talking about Retrobike right now?


That's a good question........the site (RB) has little in common with this forum, it has never claimed to be a serious resource for the VRC enthusiast, and it has a relaxed, good-humoured attitude to the frequently eclectically equipped and eccentrically styled bikes posted by its members. There's no comparison, yet some VRC members insist on making one.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

mrkawasaki said:


> Because Carsten and Colker would seem to insist that the apparent differences between sites be drawn into your internal struggles - they would appear to be making examples of 'how not to do it', when it comes to running and contributing to a vintage mountain bike forum.
> 
> If Retrobike can be left out of this then we're all the better for it - just don't expect us to not offer a defence (just as you would if the comments were reversed) - it's our passion y'know! :thumbsup:
> 
> Mr K


Don't drag me into your agenda please. 
leave me out of this [email protected] 
don't quote my name. please avoid any mentions to my name. I don't know you, i don't care about other websites.

i am posting on MTBR VRC. that's all i care.


----------



## mechagouki (Nov 30, 2007)

colker1 said:


> Don't drag me into your agenda please.
> leave me out of this [email protected]
> don't quote my name and i am asking also to the mods to please delete any mentions to my name. I don't know you, i don't care about retrobike.
> 
> . i am posting on MTBR VRC. that's all i care.


but: (unaltered, sequential quotes)



Carsten said:


> Not sure if you followed how retrobike.co.uk developed over the years. There was NO resistance at all to keep things "clean". Only tolerance (i think it's just ignorance and carelessness) and that's how it looks like there now. 90% old junk, no passion, dumb questions, useless threads and even sub-forums for modern bikes and off-topic chat. Again, there's not a single person to define what is "clean" or crap nor should it be formulated. A healthy community with a sufficient amount of passionate regulars will balance it out.





colker1 said:


> i am with Carsten: i don't know why i should "accept"more people w/ open arms.
> i don't want more people and i don't work here.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

mechagouki said:


> but: (unaltered, sequential quotes)


did i mention your website in my post?

wtf? go drag the names of your buddies. not mine. i don't know you nor i care.

find the name of your website in my posts.. in this thread and then come back to me.
i said i am not interested in too many people and your actions pretty much explain my attitude.:madmax:


----------



## mechagouki (Nov 30, 2007)

colker1 said:


> did i mention your website in my post?
> 
> wtf? go drag the names of your buddies. not mine. i don't know you nor i care.
> 
> ...


It's not 'my' website (in fact I was an MTBR member before I registered with Retrobike).

You stated that you were 'with' Carsten following a post in which he held up Retrobike as the worst case scenario for the future of the VRC forum. If you didn't agree with everything in his post you should have been more careful about stating your agreement, an actual mention of retrobike was not required, it was inferred.

Anyway, I'm irritating myself by stooping to pedantic dissection of past posts. I'm not trying to start a fight, I just don't see the relevance of Retrobike ever being mentioned in relation to the state of the VRC forum.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

mechagouki said:


> I just don't see the relevance of Retrobike ever being mentioned in relation to the state of the VRC forum.


Hey, news flash guys, this isn't Retrobike 

If you and Colker really want to browbeat the subject, could you do everyone a favor, and take it to PMs? Consuming publicly visible space with negative talk about a site that we aren't even looking at is silly.

Sheesh guys, move on already......


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> Hey, news flash guys, this isn't Retrobike
> 
> If you and Colker really want to browbeat the subject, could you do everyone a favor, and take it to PMs? Consuming publicly visible space with negative talk about a site that we aren't even looking at is silly.
> 
> Sheesh guys, move on already......


 i have no interest in English Drama.
My interest is in Rare, Classic, Vintage Mountain Bikes only. American, made in the USA bikes. Shimano and Suntour, Dia Compe. The more rare the better.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

mrkawasaki said:


> Because Carsten and Colker would seem to insist that the apparent differences between sites be drawn into your internal struggles - they would appear to be making examples of 'how not to do it', when it comes to running and contributing to a vintage mountain bike forum.
> 
> If Retrobike can be left out of this then we're all the better for it - just don't expect us to not offer a defence (just as you would if the comments were reversed) - it's our passion y'know! :thumbsup:
> 
> Mr K


Don't get all high and mighty on me. 
You guys have your issues over there, same as anywhere. It happens with the growth of a forum and conflicting personalities and views.


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2009)

mrkawasaki said:


> Because Carsten and Colker would seem to insist that the apparent differences between sites be drawn into your internal struggles - they would appear to be making examples of 'how not to do it', when it comes to running and contributing to a vintage mountain bike forum.
> 
> If Retrobike can be left out of this then we're all the better for it - just don't expect us to not offer a defence (just as you would if the comments were reversed) - it's our passion y'know! :thumbsup:
> 
> Mr K


should be fairly easy to understand that my comments where just that, MY view and opinion expressed in a one year old PM and used as an attempt to make my argumentation more clear. it obviously has got nothing to do with mtbr and any other member on here than me. call it Carsten vs. RBUK if you want to but leave mtbr and anyone else on here out of the equation.

i expressed the same opinion to you and john before i left RBUK to explain why i think the mods in my view should do more to keep a certain standard up on RBUK. there was no interest. it just tells me that quantity (in terms of "members", post count and traffic) is more important than quality. as long as more people come in than leave things are good.

seems like as long as knowledge and information comes for free those "in the knows" are welcomed and valued members but the moment they ask something in return they are chased away.

i did not want to support such a cheap attitude.


----------



## soreyes (Mar 16, 2007)

mechagouki said:


> ...
> Whilst my 2007 join date no doubt makes me a 'newbie' in the eyes of Carsten and others, I have used MTBR as an information source for a long time, always reading the rider reviews before I bought a bike or part and scanning the forums for tech info when I needed it. I eventually became a member just so I could view images in the forums. early on in my membership I posted pictures of a steel frame I bought trying to ID it, some of the 'talent' were dismissive and unhelpful
> ... It wasn't a hugely positive experience, but I stuck around because I do have a deep interest in the brief but fascinating history and evolution of mountain bikes. I hope the forum will continue to prove useful to any and everyone who needs it. If you don't like what you see why would you waste your time coming here and posting?


seconded


----------



## ededwards (Dec 21, 2007)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> Hey, news flash guys, this isn't Retrobike
> 
> If you and Colker really want to browbeat the subject, could you do everyone a favor, and take it to PMs? Consuming publicly visible space with negative talk about a site that we aren't even looking at is silly.
> 
> Sheesh guys, move on already......


That is a very sensible suggestion, don't really see what purpose such discussions serve even though I could not, finally, resist responding.

However the following really doesn't help.....



Carsten said:


> should be fairly easy to understand that my comments where just that, MY view and opinion expressed in a one year old PM and used as an attempt to make my argumentation more clear. it obviously has got nothing to do with mtbr and any other member on here than me. call it Carsten vs. RBUK if you want to but leave mtbr and anyone else on here out of the equation.
> 
> i expressed the same opinion to you and john before i left RBUK to explain why i think the mods in my view should do more to keep a certain standard up on RBUK. there was no interest. it just tells me that quantity (in terms of "members", post count and traffic) is more important than quality. as long as more people come in than leave things are good.
> 
> ...


Thanks Carsten, that's helpful context - your view is completely valid but so is the view of others. I remember PMing you to see what was wrong when you asked to be deregistered from Retrobike even though it struck me at the time as strange that anyone would ask to be deregistered from a forum - surely not posting serves the same purpose? Not as dramatic and attention seeking though I guess.

It is a shame that you are no longer posting on Retrobike as you have a lot of knowledge to share although with the attitude that a forum you clearly don't understand should bend to your wishes of how it should be perhaps it is for the best always round as it really wasn't going to happen, was it? And while we're vaguely on the subject, why does VRC not feature more 1992 Orange Clockworks? I'm interested so it should be here. I'd note that the latter may be an example of the much vaunted British sense of humour, Then again, maybe not.

Apologies again for posting regarding this, very unseemly, but such cheap shots about a cheap attitude does require a response.

Vive le Retrobike. Vive la VRC. But, equally importantly, vive le difference.

Off to ride a heap of junk, passionlessly

Ed


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

ededwards said:


> That is a very sensible suggestion, don't really see what purpose such discussions serve even though I could not, finally, resist responding.
> 
> However the following really doesn't help.....
> 
> ...


why don't you post the Orange Clockwork? instead of posting we shouldn't post replies like this one you just posted or that someone shouldn't draw attention to a prevailing forum attitude he dislikes... just like your post?


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

Makes me really glad I stepped down  .... ( I know, you're glad too :thumbsup: ) 

This is just....well...silly  .


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

colker1 said:


> i have no interest in English Drama.


Doesn't look like you pass up any kind of drama...you never hesitate to toss in your 2 cents no matter how pointless...


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

sho220 said:


> Doesn't look like you pass up any kind of drama...you never hesitate to toss in your 2 cents no matter how pointless...


i will give you a usefull insight on life: sometimes you don't get the full meaning of what's going on. then it's better to watch, listen and then give your 0.2c.

unless you hate me and that would be cool in itself.


----------



## jeff spicoli (Jan 28, 2008)

colker1 said:


> i will give you a usefull insight on life: sometimes you don't get the full meaning of what's going on. then it's better to watch, listen and then give your 0.2c.
> 
> unless you hate me and that would be cool in itself.


Pass the popcorn. You guys rock.:thumbsup:


----------



## mechagouki (Nov 30, 2007)

I bet Gregg is real impressed with how much kinder and gentler everyone is being.......


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

mechagouki said:


> I bet Gregg is real impressed with how much kinder and gentler everyone is being.......


keep inciting the flames.. you are doing great.


----------



## pinguwin (Aug 20, 2004)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> they will be just like dumb fat Americans, bumbling about Europe, offending as they go.


MCS, as one who has traveled 7-8 years of the last 17 years, this is just complete BS. That image of Americans (Norteamericanos as they are called here) is just so dated and simply not valid. If forced to stereotype, I can think of a number of nationalities far worse than the U.S., it's not even close in some cases as to countries worse than the U.S. I know, it's off subject, but as one who has to hear that when traveling and I ask for proof backing it up, I have yet to hear anyone who can defend that position with current information. I am not proud of being from the U.S., it's just the passport I carry. Yeah, yeah, discuss vintage bikes, I know.



ededwards said:


> ask to be deregistered from a forum...Not as dramatic and attention seeking though I guess.


Ed, Carsten and I discussed this subject on the phone. I will not explain his reasoning as he can do that if he wants, but I will say it had absolutely nothing to do with being a drama queen.

Alright, that's two comments not bike related. Ok, off to get some empanadas before an all-night bus and boat ride.


----------



## jeff spicoli (Jan 28, 2008)

da'HOOV said:


> Makes me really glad I stepped down  .... ( I know, you're glad too :thumbsup: )
> 
> This is just....well...silly  .


Good call Stan. These guys are???? Maybe need to get a ????? Not gonna call anybody names. Popcorn


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

jeff spicoli said:


> Good call Stan. These guys are???? Maybe need to get a ????? Not gonna call anybody names. Popcorn


what do you mean Jeff? pretend we are in a bar, drinking a couple beers.. let loose, open up:


----------



## soreyes (Mar 16, 2007)

Isn't this the part of the thread where someone jumps in and says: "just kidding around, don't you get it?"


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

soreyes said:


> Isn't this the part of the thread where someone jumps in and says: "just kidding around, don't you get it?"


wouldn't that be great?:thumbsup:


----------



## GlassTrain (Oct 22, 2008)

I don't drink anymore.


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

da'HOOV said:


> Makes me really glad I stepped down  .... ( I know, you're glad too :thumbsup: )
> 
> This is just....well...silly  .


Stan,
Emoticons will not and and never have hidden your intent in these types of posts.
Sorry but I just had to say it.
Jeff


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

pinguwin said:


> MCS, as one who has traveled 7-8 years of the last 17 years, this is just complete BS.


Hey there, I'm willing to go off topic a bit, bit not to engage in any sort of pissing contest.

First off, I used that as a metaphor, in a context of a broader point, and whether it's a current state of things, really isn't at issue.

Second, my travels around the US have enabled me to see an absolutely staggering number of beefcakes, folks who are rotund to the point of it being kinda sad. Way more than when I was a kid in the 70s, and yep, a significant number of their kids are worse off than they. I would have to believe that some of these people have sufficient funds to travel abroad, be it for work, or pleasure. Of those, I am equally confident that some of them are raised in such a fashion, that they feel the whole world should be at their beck and call, simply cause they're from the good ol' US of A. Not saying that all who travel, fit this bill, and I apologize if you felt I included you in this, as I've seen your pics in some pretty hot pants, and you ain't fat


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

da'HOOV said:


> Makes me really glad I stepped down


Hey, at least it's all in one thread


----------



## gm1230126 (Nov 4, 2005)

It's very easy to determine who are members of the famed IVMTB site are by reading through this post. What amazes me is why they started a private club/site for themselves in the first place after all the time they spent creating and contributing to VRC and then have all of a sudden come running back to VRC when they don't like anything but upper end 93 and earlier mostly Cal made bikes....especially when the direction here has switched to all older bikes. Seems to me and others to be an attempt to go back to they way things were???? Why? Can't you get your fill of bashing one another's bikes in your own private membership forum? Is there not enough activity to keep you from getting bored looking at the same bikes over and over? Why now come back? Just to ruffle feathers?


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

jeff said:


> Stan,
> Emoticons will not and and never have hidden your intent in these types of posts.
> Sorry but I just had to say it.
> Jeff


And just what do you see as my 'intent'? Something sinister I hope.

And don't be sorry  oops, another emoticon, should I not use them anymore?:nono:


----------



## richieb (Oct 21, 2004)

gm1230126 said:


> It's very easy to determine who are members of the famed IVMTB site are by reading through this post. What amazes me is why they started a private club/site for themselves in the first place after all the time they spent creating and contributing to VRC and then have all of a sudden come running back to VRC when they don't like anything but upper end 93 and earlier mostly Cal made bikes....especially when the direction here has switched to all older bikes. Seems to me and others to be an attempt to go back to they way things were???? Why? Can't you get your fill of bashing one another's bikes in your own private membership forum? Is there not enough activity to keep you from getting bored looking at the same bikes over and over? Why now come back? Just to ruffle feathers?


Huh? I don't get it...


----------



## azjeff (Jun 3, 2006)

pinguwin said:


> I am not proud of being from the U.S., it's just the passport I carry.


*WTF?*


----------



## mrkawasaki (Aug 2, 2006)

Rumpfy said:


> Don't get all high and mighty on me.
> You guys have your issues over there, same as anywhere. It happens with the growth of a forum and conflicting personalities and views.


All 'high and mighty' - a tad rich for one with such a thick skin!   I answered YOUR question directly and without malice or goading (lots of emoticons too!) - do you recall 'why is Retrobike even being talked about in THIS thread?'???

As introduced by Carsten and 'supported' by Colker - both now in various states of denial ('a year old PM blah blah' and 'I never said such a thing'; 'don't use my name' and the tired classic 'can't you take a joke'... etc) - we ALL agree that it should left out of this debate, but some guys have an agenda that all too commonly utilises Retrobike as either a covenient negative illustration or occasionally something a tad more libelous or insulting. As I mentioned before, a defence or in this case an early request to leave us out of it is entirely reasonable - not at all 'high and mighty' (unless one wishes to fan the flames of meatpuppetry further? )...

You should know by my track record that I have consistently tried to broker the benefits of cordial and respectful public relationships (even though you spurned me when I called to play...  ), this is what I continue to do within the forum as a moderator, here as a punter (and to an extent with organising OWMTBC) - I am a committed believer in putting something back. However I will not stand to one side when Retrobike is needlessly cited in a public forum by a few in the negative - particularly when their points are 'debatable' to say the least. If the current thread participants wish to wifully froth over at my defence of Retrobike, then they are the ones with the agenda that should bear scrutiny - take it to PM, the bunker or the bar!

On your last point about 'our issues' - you know it, bro! Who'd be a moderator - having to untangle the reams of contentious drivel penned by an army of self obsessed keyboard warriors! :madman:  Boy would I love to jump in and attempt to wreak the single cell havoc some people appear to enjoy doing! 

Mr K - as always, in moderation!

PS. One thing I have learnt here though - it seems we are only months away from 'paying for the knowledge' (for vintage Klein at least! )


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

mrkawasaki said:


> As introduced by Carsten and 'supported' by Colker -


 Ed Edwards sends me a PM, i reply and now another "retrobiker" is using it on an open discussion. No ethics. 
Ok... i will leave my restraint and show a bit of truth, cause you and Ed deserve ...

your website attitude towards bikes is ridicule. you "decorate" bikes. "ooohh... i think the red Paul derrailleur is out of place. It needs silver!" nevermind the build is totally absurd from a functional POV ... "nice... but you must have a butterscotch psycho to look good." you guys recommend a TIRE for it's color and not it's traction! it's plain moronic. 
you have no clue. 
I i think it's YOUR fault, the moderators fault, to promote that level of ignorance. it's a freak show out there.
No wonder you two show no sense of ethics here.


----------



## Schmitty (Sep 7, 2008)

gm1230126 said:


> It's very easy to determine who are members of the famed IVMTB site are by reading through this post. What amazes me is why they started a private club/site for themselves in the first place after all the time they spent creating and contributing to VRC and then have all of a sudden come running back to VRC when they don't like anything but upper end 93 and earlier mostly Cal made bikes....especially when the direction here has switched to all older bikes. Seems to me and others to be an attempt to go back to they way things were???? Why? Can't you get your fill of bashing one another's bikes in your own private membership forum? Is there not enough activity to keep you from getting bored looking at the same bikes over and over? Why now come back? Just to ruffle feathers?


ZING!!

-Schmitty-


----------



## mechagouki (Nov 30, 2007)

colker1 said:


> your website attitude towards bikes is ridicule. you "decorate" bikes. "ooohh... i think the red Paul derrailleur is out of place. It needs silver!" nevermind the build is totally absurd from a functional POV ... "nice... but you must have a butterscotch psycho to look good." you guys recommend a TIRE for it's color and not it's traction! it's plain moronic.
> you have no clue.
> I i think it's YOUR fault, the moderators fault, to promote that level of ignorance. it's a freak show out there.
> No wonder you two show no sense of ethics here.


Thanks for discovering the previously unknown link between aesthetics and ethics, there's probably a thesis there somewhere.

It's called fun BTW, if you're no longer having any here, go beg, fawn and ingratiate your way into IVMTB, just remember, your reason for wanting to join will be judged by the "VRC Illuminati", so it had better be unassailably good.


----------



## wv_bob (Sep 12, 2005)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> Second, my travels around the US have enabled me to see an absolutely staggering number of beefcakes, folks who are rotund to the point of it being kinda sad.


I live in what some newspaper/magazine/TV show decided is the fattest, unhealthiest city in the country. There's going to be a reality show produced here in the fall related to that. Do I shake my head when I see the people that are being singled out here? Yeah sure. Do I run over and dance around them jeering "fatty fatty 2 by 4, couldn't get through the kitchen door"? Of course not.

So, you see, dissing other people over being fat is a lot like dissing them because their bike isn't up to some arbitrary standard. Just imagine if a fat guy posted a low end bike, double the fun I guess.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

gm1230126 said:


> It's very easy to determine who are members of the famed IVMTB site are by reading through this post. What amazes me is why they started a private club/site for themselves in the first place after all the time they spent creating and contributing to VRC and then have all of a sudden come running back to VRC when they don't like anything but upper end 93 and earlier mostly Cal made bikes....especially when the direction here has switched to all older bikes. Seems to me and others to be an attempt to go back to they way things were???? Why? Can't you get your fill of bashing one another's bikes in your own private membership forum? Is there not enough activity to keep you from getting bored looking at the same bikes over and over? Why now come back? Just to ruffle feathers?


sure do seem to pay a lot of attention to others... and make a lot of assumptions... remember last time you started doing that? that was so funny.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

mechagouki said:


> Thanks for discovering the previously unknown link between aesthetics and ethics, there's probably a thesis there somewhere.
> 
> It's called fun BTW, if you're no longer having any here, go beg, fawn and ingratiate your way into IVMTB, just remember, your reason for wanting to join will be judged by the "VRC Illuminati", so it had better be unassailably good.


you "forgot" to quote me where i say one of your colleagues posted a PM i sent to another of them. i guess you find that "fun"as well..or is it a retrobike thing? 
having said that, i had enough of talking about your website. this talk goes nowhere. have a nice day.


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

colker1 said:


> Ed Edwards sends me a PM, i reply and now another "retrobiker" is using it on an open discussion. No ethics.
> Ok... i will leave my restraint and show a bit of truth, cause you and Ed deserve ...
> 
> your website attitude towards bikes is ridicule. you "decorate" bikes. "ooohh... i think the red Paul derrailleur is out of place. It needs silver!" nevermind the build is totally absurd from a functional POV ... "nice... but you must have a butterscotch psycho to look good." you guys recommend a TIRE for it's color and not it's traction! it's plain moronic.
> ...


Yeah...I saw this eggplant purple Fat with a hideous yellow saddle, orange forks, mismatched tires, crappy Uno seatpost, radial laced front wheel.....oh wait...that was here...and it was you...

Oh...and what I find moronic is that in a thread about parts that last, you disregard LX derailleurs as the "uglyest rear derrailleur from shimano." and "DX looked better." So it's about style not function???

You are a basket case...ut:


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

sho220 said:


> Yeah...I saw this eggplant purple Fat with a hideous yellow saddle, orange forks, mismatched tires, crappy Uno seatpost, radial laced front wheel.....oh wait...that was here...and it was you...
> 
> Oh...and what I find moronic is that in a thread about parts that last, you disregard LX derailleurs as the "uglyest rear derrailleur from shimano." and "DX looked better." So it's about style not function???
> 
> You are a basket case...ut:


did Fat city ever had a purple eggplant color?


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

colker1 said:


> did Fat city ever had a purple eggplant color?


are you about to give me more usefull insight on life???


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

sho220 said:


> are you about to give me more usefull insight on life???


 you in need of more? i like to "help".LOL.


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

colker1 said:


> you in need of more? i like to "help".LOL.


LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

We could keep the VRC forum and add a "Lord of the Flies" forum.


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

Fillet-brazed said:


> We could keep the VRC forum and add a "Lord of the Flies" forum.


Who's got the conch?


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

Who wants to see the piglet


----------



## Schmitty (Sep 7, 2008)

Shayne said:


> Who's got the conch?


Screw the conch, show me the Mantis!

-Schmitty-


----------



## mechagouki (Nov 30, 2007)

sho220 said:


> Yeah...I saw this eggplant purple Fat with a hideous yellow saddle, orange forks, mismatched tires, crappy Uno seatpost, radial laced front wheel.....oh wait...that was here...and it was you...
> 
> Oh...and what I find moronic is that in a thread about parts that last, you disregard LX derailleurs as the "uglyest rear derrailleur from shimano." and "DX looked better." So it's about style not function???
> 
> You are a basket case...ut:


LOL!

Somebody's 'pretend' beer bottle is about to get broken and jammed into somebody's 'pretend' face.

Can someone pass me a 'pretend' bar stool?


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

mechagouki said:


> LOL!
> 
> Somebody's 'pretend' beer bottle is about to get broken and jammed into somebody's 'pretend' face.
> 
> Can someone pass me a 'pretend' bar stool?


Pretend Bar fight! Where's the pretend pool cue???


----------



## pinguwin (Aug 20, 2004)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> ...absolutely staggering number of beefcakes, folks who are rotund to the point of it being kinda sad. Way more than when I was a kid in the 70s,...I've seen your pics in some pretty hot pants, and you ain't fat


As far as the rotund part...no doubt! I joke with people abroad, "Everything in the U.S. is better and bigger. Our cars are bigger, our canyons are bigger, our trees are bigger, our people are bigger too." Most people laugh as they know exactly what I am talking about. No offense taken at your comments, just that I should write up a little faq and hand it out to people on that Ugly American schtick. Today someone said to me, "Flacko en verde" (slender in green(shirt)) to get my attention.

Oh and as far as the hot pants go, just found another pair I am going to be ordering. You will all be sure to see them when I return.

And Azjeff, what I meant by the comment was I don't wave the flag at all. To me the U.S. is just another country among many with some great things and some not so great things. I would say back to talking about bikes but that seems to be in the minority lately.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

mechagouki said:


> LOL!
> 
> Somebody's 'pretend' beer bottle is about to get broken and jammed into somebody's 'pretend' face.
> 
> Can someone pass me a 'pretend' bar stool?


what do you mean?

how is your gt decorated? does it match your skirt?


----------



## mechagouki (Nov 30, 2007)

colker1 said:


> what do you mean?
> 
> how is your gt decorated? does it match your skirt?


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

Oh yeah
I see the difference
The skirt has those pink and green flowers


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

This thread is getting angrier and angrier. Seems like the "new blood" is as nasty as any of the "blue blood" would care to be, but maybe that is just me.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

bushpig said:


> This thread is getting angrier and angrier.


Agreed. I've given everyone plenty of rope, and yet you insist on hanging yourselves, over, and over, and over, and over, and over......

I let this run, so folks could come back to planet earth, hash out some personal grievances, and perhaps just kind of blow off steam.

I really like that's it's remained contained to just one thread, thanks for that.

If the whole RB vs VRC, and assorted other *****fests can't simmer down to a low boil, I will lock this though, it's just getting unhealthy. Folks who weren't part of the problem, are now getting some whacks in at the pinyata too.

Time to go home, the parties over. :thumbsup:

Now bring some damn bikes, will you?


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> Folks who weren't part of the problem, are now getting some whacks in at the pinyata too.


I love that line. 

(and I thought the pinata left.)


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

Fillet-brazed said:


> I love that line.
> 
> (and I thought the pinata left.)


Crap, that's what I get for living in the Northeast, can't even spell pinata properly (so much for the "educated elite")


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

bushpig said:


> This thread is getting angrier and angrier. Seems like the "new blood" is as nasty as any of the "blue blood" would care to be, but maybe that is just me.


... the carpetbaggers!


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> Crap, that's what I get for living in the Northeast, can't even spell pinata properly (so much for the "educated elite")


Any good Mexican food out there?


----------



## pint (Oct 6, 2008)

WOW...you guys are funny! These are bikes were talking about, right? With the stress level here, an "outsider" might think you were deciding the fate of the world...


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

It's not bikes, its people's values and tastes that is being discussed. Consequently everyone gets feisty. I think it is pointless and has poisoned the well.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

bushpig said:


> It's not bikes, its people's values and tastes that is being discussed. Consequently everyone gets feisty. I think it is pointless and has poisoned the well.


i remember a while a go this was the most laidback easygoing forum on the internet; everyone minding their own business, searching for parts and bikes of their preference. there were NO fights, no hastle, no drama. 
what went wrong? maybe it was too good to last.


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

bushpig said:


> It's not bikes, its people's values and tastes that is being discussed. Consequently everyone gets feisty. I think it is pointless and has poisoned the well.


on that we can agree...but I don't think it's beyond saving, far from it.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

colker1 said:


> i remember a while a go this was the most laidback easygoing forum on the internet; everyone minding their own business, searching for parts and bikes of their preference. there were NO fights, no hastle, no drama.
> what went wrong? maybe it was too good to last.


yep, I agree with all that. I was really bummed at first to see the change and the consequent changes in attitudes around here, but yeah, it couldn't have lasted as it was as a public forum.

It's been discussed over and over and over what happened, how it should be, who/what caused it, but I think it's high time to just let it turn into whatever it turns into.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

Fillet-brazed said:


> yep, I agree with all that. I was really bummed at first to see the change and the consequent changes in attitudes around here, but yeah, it couldn't have lasted as it was as a public forum.
> 
> It's been discussed over and over and over what happened, how it should be, who/what caused it, but I think it's high time to just let it turn into whatever it turns into.


i seen it happen on rbr. non cycling was so creative, so funny and anarchic... suddenly, all of a sudden it went to hell and hatred was what was left.


----------



## GoldenEraMTB (Aug 25, 2008)

DeeEight said:


> I think certain whiners need to stop thinking that this is THEIR personal forum. They seem to forget that this is just one of 50 or so forums on mtbr and its not even one of the original forums at that. Some of us have actually been here since the mid-90s when the place was a mere dozen or so forums. There were no manufacturer forums, no overlapping forums for the same thing (we now have two light forums, one for the commercial stuff and one for the DIYers), no regional forums, and certainly nothing for vintage gear as 90% of what gets posted in here was still considered NEW and/or state of the art at the time. If you want your own forum with your own rules, do what the F88ers did... martyr yourselves and bugger off to that forum already.


I've been reading DeeEight posts for years, here and on the bikeforums.net site...love the frank, concise, and truthful/correct nature of his posts...oh, and love the ugly builds as well :thumbsup:

All the stuff I read on VRC is from years ago anyway, so it doesn't matter who posts what anymore. I only signed up here since I signed up on retrobike and fatcogs, thinking that I shouldn't be a lurker, and actually participate...what a load of **** I stepped into, a world of mental illness that leads to isolation. I should've remained a lurker.

To the people stating that one should research before they come seeking info; here's news, much of the research that turns up on google or through other links, leads back to posts here and other similar forums, and is sometimes incorrect or incomplete, so why not come onto this froum and just ask to see if anyone has more accurate or new information to contribute.

It's funny seeing some of these "Elite", a few years back when they didn't know all that much, and were informed/instructed without abuse. Now after they acquired that knowledge through the consideration of posters more knowledgeable than themselves they can't do the same for other newbs...each one teach one. No, they have this sense of self-importance instead with little to no tolerance for the errors of others.

you know who you are.


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

GoldenEraMTB said:


> I've been reading DeeEight posts for years, here and on the bikeforums.net site...love the frank, concise, and truthful/correct nature of his posts...oh, and love the ugly builds as well :thumbsup:
> 
> It's funny seeing some of these "Elite", a few years back when they didn't know all that much, and were informed/instructed without abuse. Now after they acquired that knowledge through the consideration of posters more knowledgeable than themselves they can't do the same for other newbs...each one teach one. No, they have this sense of self-importance instead with little to no tolerance for the errors of others.
> 
> you know who you are.


I like the way you think...and I like DeeEight too.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

GoldenEraMTB said:


> I've been reading DeeEight posts for years, here and on the bikeforums.net site...love the frank, concise, and truthful/correct nature of his posts...oh, and love the ugly builds as well :thumbsup:
> 
> All the stuff I read on VRC is from years ago anyway, so it doesn't matter who posts what anymore. I only signed up here since I signed up on retrobike and fatcogs, thinking that I shouldn't be a lurker, and actually participate...what a load of **** I stepped into, a world of mental illness that leads to isolation. I should've remained a lurker.
> 
> ...


let's post more of GOOD bikes and less complaints. voila: a better forum.


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

GoldenEraMTB said:


> you know who you are.


I don't know who you are referring to. If you are going to accuse people of "mental illness" you better have the courage to do so by name and not in this amorphous way. Bringing up an old and stinky thread to add more fuel to the fire and no new content, is pretty weak in my book, but, hey, at least Stan likes it.


----------



## mechagouki (Nov 30, 2007)

colker1 said:


> let's post more of GOOD bikes and less complaints. voila: a better forum.


Talk about the pot and the kettle.............

Hey at least the resurrection of this thread lets some of the older members keep their post count average up:thumbsup:


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

bushpig said:


> Bringing up an old and stinky thread to add more fuel to the fire


Agreed, and locked down.

Move on, things are looking up, lets keep it that way. Need to chat about a PERSONAL issue with a PERSON? That's what PM's are for.


----------

