Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 09:19:06 07/02/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 02, 2000 at 11:57:46, Pete Galati wrote: >All this would do is provide interesting data. But the amount of reads that a >post gets isn't very relavent to it's suitability to be in the forum. The real >problem here is moderation for the sake of moderating. > >By _now_ I've come to realize that almost nothing needs to be moderated. The >place basically moderates itself. In anther thread, I just asked James >Robertson if he was going to release his program Insomniac, but blsss thought it >sounded like I was attacking him about that, so he spoke up and said something. >No moderator was needed, blass stepped in and said something. > >A _large_ percent of what these guys do isn't needed. If they'd do less, most >of their problems would go away, and everything that was too off-topic to be >here would just expire and sweep itself under the carpet. No bean counter >needed. The last thing we need is an ego feeding or crushing bean counter so we >can have people writing posts designed to get more read counts. Because I'm >sure I could adjust the way I title the subject of my posts to get more people >to read them if I wanted, that's not very hard to do. I don't know if I agree with you, but you sound like an excellent moderator candidate. The whole election thing is coming up soon, I guess. bruce
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.