Author: KarinsDad
Date: 21:57:47 06/04/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 04, 1999 at 22:51:49, Mark Young wrote: >On June 04, 1999 at 19:03:51, Steven Schwartz wrote: > >>Nominees... >>A while back, there was a thread started called >>"Kasparov is a GOD". It ostensibly dealt with the >>world champion and not, necessarily, computer >>chess. How would you handle such a thread? And >>did it need handling? >> >>- Steve (ICD/Your Move) >>P.S. I recommend that other threads directed >>toward nominees have the word "nominee" in the >>subject heading. > >It don't care it posts like "Kasparov is a God" and the Bobby Fischer posts are >allowed or not. I would just like to see some kind of consistency in the >standard. If one thread is deleted then its hard to justify how the other stays >if it was deleted because its off topic. And if Posts dealing with chess players >but regarding chess is off topic then why do threads like "Subject: Why do >poster's have problems spelling GM Rohde's name?" get left untouched by the >moderators when such topics have nothing to do with chess or computer chess. I do not think it will be easy to handle your request Mark. Since people are only human and make mistakes, the only two ways I see to even attempt to be totally consistent are to either allow all posts or to delete all posts that break the rules. Either way, we all lose. I think any moderator can only try their best to stay consistent somewhere in the grey area in between. And since each moderator is a different individual, you will get different results, not only between groups of moderators every six months, but also between individual moderators working at the same time. Regardless of that, there will be some who praise the moderator's actions and some who condemn. The real issue is not one of which posts are deleted and which stay, but rather one of people getting upset because of a post being deleted (usually when it is one of their own posts getting deleted). There is also the issue of why posts are deleted not being shared with everyone (that is always good for a controversial thread). If people just took a step back and realized that access to and posting on CCC is a privilege and not a right, then they would realize the need for moderation. And with that realization can come understanding that it is more important to keep CCC running smoothly than it is to have any given post be accessable to the masses, specifically when a given post does NOT break any of the rules. In other words, in the large scheme of things, moderators ARE trying their best to be consistent and to do the right thing, but they are only human. They make mistakes too. So, if a non-offensive on topic post does get deleted, the rest of us should not make such a big deal out of it since CCC is a privilege and not a right. Instead of making a big deal of it to everyone by posting a message to the entire group, us as individuals should send an Email to the moderators (and hence also to Steve) and let them decide whether a mistake has been made. If the deletion stands, chances are that a mistake was not made and that the person offended is overreacting. I believe that the six people nominated are all reasonable people and would be willing to owe up to a mistake. I hope that was clear, but it is late, so who knows? KarinsDad :)
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.