Moderators (requests and notices)

I'm not looking to police Thom or put him out of business but I think it's important a platform remains to counteract his bullshit factory.

I agree with this, but at risk of sounding sanctimonious, there's also the idea of 'values' that as the Cycling Shed touched on, every club embodies or espouses one way or another.

LFGSS, for all its diversity and rough charm, is a place I like because the tedious sexist, homophobic, racist shite you find a lot of other places just isn't tolerated. It makes me think of the history of cycling clubs like Clarion.cc who have a really rich history in fighting fascism and having a positive social consciousness that has become a part of the fabric of the sport/hobby.

I mentioned the Jews thread because when it popped onto my radar a few weeks ago I was really disappointed to see it at a point where others were arguing very strongly in the Mamnick thread for an entirely different set of values, and it hadn't been stamped on quite as firmly as I think it should have been, ostensibly because of free speech or the right to offend "it's the internet." It seems the opposite applies here and I don't see why.

Thom's sockpuppet/supporter described this place as a place for soft southern flat white drinking social justice warrior twats, and that's fine by me. It's also a place that has values and stands up for them, as tedious or crudely expressed as some other people on the forum find this. Hiding the thread does no service to anyone other than Thom, where it could exist to inform others about what is frankly deeply abhorrent behaviour towards other cycling clubs like RSF, as well as people who object to him, and of course, his views.

It's sad that a Rutland.cc member has resorted to burning their jersey over issues that their affiliation with Thom exposed, but equally, it's good because silence is about the same as complicity and if you look around at the wider social and political atmosphere we're in, more than ever these shitty right wing views need to be challenged and exposed for what they are. Hopefully Rutland's president is taking it on board, or the members will see fit to remove him.

TL:DR So yeah. I don't think we should be doing the guy any favours, and I think it reflects poorly on the place if we do.