Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 18:02:04 07/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 2000 at 15:43:13, Pete R. wrote: >On July 22, 2000 at 05:37:07, Dave Gomboc wrote: > >>On July 22, 2000 at 04:46:46, Mark Ryan wrote: >> >>>On July 22, 2000 at 04:09:34, Andrew Williams wrote: >>> >>>>On July 22, 2000 at 01:59:33, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 21, 2000 at 18:28:40, Andrew Williams wrote: >>>>> >>>>>[snip] >>>>>>I happen to agree that the original "who is the best programmer?" post >>>>>>was likely to cause problems, but at least one other moderator posted a message >>>>>>where he said it was an interesting topic. >>>>>[snip] >>>>> >>>>>Sorry to exacerbate such problems! ;-) >>>>> >>>>>Dave >>>> >>>>Yeah. You should be ashamed of yourelf! :-) >>>> >>>>Seriously, the point I was trying to make was that although the original >>>>post didn't appeal to me, you (to take another member at random) did like >>>>it. So in a poll of two randomly selected members we have a 50-50 split. >>>>It's hard to make a case for deleting the post in those circumstances. >>>>(Until hindsight kicks in, of course). >>>> >>>> >>>>Andrew >>> >>>There was nothing wrong with the original post. The fact that sub-threads >>>degenerated into negativity is not the fault of the original post, which was >>>on-topic and straightforward, a list of the poster's 5 "best" programmers. If >>>you are an automobile manufacturer, you know that some people are going to >>>become reckless/drunk drivers, but you still must manufacture the automobiles. >>>The original post was valid; some of the sub-threads were nasty. >>>Regards, >>>Mark >> >>That's how I look at it too. >> >>Dave > >And I thought it was a worthless thread that nothing good could come of, and I >would have nuked it, and then laughed at anybody who cried about censorship. So >don't elect me as moderator then. :) Who the hell is Walter Irvin, and who cares >what programmers he likes?!? It was a troll, or at best simply a stupid >chat-room mentality topic, and I think this list is above that. Or should be. Moderators don't get to do everything the way they'd like to. Some people criticized me for posting a message to a thread telling people to stop posting to it, but I shrug that off. That solution is less severe than deleting the thread outright, which is what I used to do before. I view it as a compromise. :-) I also let many posts that aren't terribly relevant (but on the other hand, are not egregiously horrible) sit around, mainly because I don't receive moderator email complaining about them. In the cases that I do get such mail, I know that somebody felt bothered enough to complain, so I take action at that point. I don't presume to know who Walter Irvin is. I generally take the "offered names" at face value unless the user gives me a reason not to. This web board is above some things, but not as many things as I'd like. You can't have it all. <shrug> Dave
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.