Author: Don Dailey
Date: 11:54:42 07/09/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 09, 1998 at 13:36:31, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >On July 09, 1998 at 12:50:57, Don Dailey wrote: > > >>This is one I would delete. It was a clear personal attack. If it >>wasn't, what is? Why was it not deleted? If this one is not deleted >>I do not know how we justify deleting any others, it is not fair to pick >>and choose these arbitrarily. The next guy can ask why you are deleting >>one personal attack and not another. I am strongly in favor of >>simply being consistant. Is there anyone who does not feel this was >>a personal attack? Did we not agree to delete personal attacks? >> >>As far as modifying it, I do not think this is a good approach. I >>don't mind deleting offensive posts but I don't feel right about >>changing the meaning because "asshole" certainly has a different >>meaning than using someones name. >> >>It's not our job to edit the content of posts. With personal >>friendships I do the same, I do not change the meaning of things >>said about my friends when I pass it along to them, but if something >>hurtful is said I may choose to remain silent and avoid a lot of trouble. > >I think you made the same mistake that Bob did. He didn't call someone else a >name, it was just a header on his own comments. > >The reason he did this is that indirectly I called him this name on r.g.c.c. So >he's trying to get at me by bringing this stuff here. > >Regarding Sean, I would like to try to convince him that: > >A) A post of his that he thinks was deleted was not deleted. I'm going to go >looking for it. > >B) CCC didn't give its mailing list to Ed. Sean was angered by an email he got >from Ed, and assumed for no reason that I can determine that Ed had gotten >Sean's address from CCC. Steven and Ed deny this, Ed claims that the mail went >to Sean because Sean had signed up to get mail on Ed's Rebel site. Sean doesn't >buy this explanation, apparently. I don't know how this can be proven to him. >I didn't get any email from Ed. Did anyone else get email from Ed or not get >it? Would some threshold level of "I didn't get the mail" and "I got it, but I >signed up on Ed's site, or at least might have" convince him? > >Regarding additional content of your post, I don't like the idea of editing >posts either. > >As a side-topic, do we want to have a delete-profanity-on-sight system? >Personally I don't care either way, I can live with either kind of situation. >Some people seem to feel pretty strongly though. > >bruce Yes, I see that I did take this out of context. Although I would prefer not seeing the profanity, I would not favor deleting it unless it is used to attack or hurt people. If it was used to deliberately hurt the group or drive people away I would view it as an attack on the group as a whole. There is no getting around the fact that in some cases a judgement will have to be made. I just want this to be done as objectively and consistantly as possible. - Don
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.