Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:02:49 04/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 11, 2000 at 14:00:13, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On April 11, 2000 at 09:54:00, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>>>Not a problem. Didn't vote for you this time. Thought you were too young >>>>and hot-headed to be a moderator. Nothing has changed that opinion yet... >>>You seem to be ignoring the fact that moderation is a team effort here. >>No I'm not. When a police officer sees something obviously illegal under >>way, he takes care of it first, and then asks questions to see if his initial > >You're still absolutely ignoring the fact that it wasn't "obviously illegal." > >NOBODY (except you, of course) thought it was obviously illegal. Everybody >thought RR = Ossi. I haven't seen a poll that suggests that "everybody" thought it was Ossi. I didn't think so, so _everybody_ provably didn't think so, since "everybody" must include me. I think others have expressed similar concerns. And again I fall back on usenet news guidelines, which say "no personal email unless posted by the original author". It wasn't posted by Ossi, or else I would assume he would have signed up as Ossi, since he isn't that bashful. Since it wasn't posted under his name, it seems illegal. Without evidence to the contrary, that is the end of the story. In such a case, the correct action is to delete first, then re-post if the deletion was in error. Private email is "private" _and_ "copyrighted". > >Your pathetic explanation for why it's obviously illegal is that Ossi would have >said, "Here's an e-mail I wrote..." > >I've already explained why this is silly. But think about it another way. When >you write a post here, do you precede it with, "Here's a post I'm writing..."? >No, obviously not. You hope that the reader will see your name at the top and at >the bottom and can make the assumption that YOU wrote the post. What's different >in the RR situation? You see Ossi's name at the bottom and a fake name at the >top. What's to imply that Ossi isn't using the fake name? Now, I assume you >don't speak German and you might not recognize the name as fake; this makes my >judgement (although eventually proven wrong) better than yours in this case. That is all baloney. It was _obviously_ a quoted email. Which is quite a bit different from just posting plain text here. Your judgement was wrong. It still is wrong. A post containing private email should be removed unless the author posts it. That is simple nettiquette, courtesy and completely legal. Someone posts anything that seems wrong, it should be deleted and then restored if it is determined it was appropriate. Otherwise it can continue to damage the person it discusses. Even though later on someone realizes "Oh, that was private and I will now delete it several days after it was posted." I am sure that the target of the email would be quite happy. Or would he? After all he was only embarassed until you decided it was clearly wrong for the post to stand. I don't agree with that. Many things are judgement calls. But private email is _not_ among them. > >Here's another thing to think about. When you quote a message on CCC, doesn't it >get preceded with "On ... Tom Kerrigan wrote:" so as to save you some typing? If >you quote something, the obvious course of action is to attribute the quote. >This wasn't done in RR's post. > >Now, if you can think of some OTHER reason why RR's post was "obviously >illegal," I'm sure everybody would like to hear it. Just read the thing. It is obvious to me. > >With regard to the name calling, I'm thinking of something you said: > >>>>Not a problem. Didn't vote for you this time. Thought you were too young >>>>and hot-headed to be a moderator. Nothing has changed that opinion yet... > >I assumed that you meant my handling of this situation was immature and >hot-headed. But if you just wanted to call me names, fine. > >-Tom I meant you are simply hot-headed. How many times did you storm off of ICC after talking to Bruce/myself when you were actively working on your program? Hot-headed --> quick-tempered --> etc. Not like "jackass" or something. Just someone with a temper they can't control.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.