Author: KarinsDad
Date: 10:47:18 06/08/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 08, 1999 at 13:13:09, Will Singleton wrote: > >On June 08, 1999 at 11:21:36, KarinsDad wrote: > >>On June 08, 1999 at 09:51:09, Steven Schwartz wrote: >> >>>Nominees... How about this one? >>>If a member's message is deleted and the member chooses to >>>defend his position on the CCC Message Board, should he be >>>permitted to? And if so, to what extent? >>>- Steve (ICD/Your Move) >> >>I think it is fine to defend a position here. >> >>However, you first have to have something to defend. >> >>Just because a post is deleted does not mean that you have something to defend. >> >>The basic idea of moderation for an inappropriate post is to delete it and send >>an Email explaining the basic reasons to the appropriate party(ies). If someone >>gets a message deleted and thinks that it is unfair, the FIRST thing they should >>do is Email Steve and the moderators asking for more detail and/or explaining >>why they thought deletion was appropriate. If a mistake was made, it can then be >>corrected WITHOUT a major thread on it. >> >>However, if no mistake was made, then the moderators can respond back that they >>feel no mistake was made, etc. >> >>At this point, if the member still feels that his message was deleted >>inappropriately, then he can post a message to the board. However, the problem >>that usually occurs here is that a member will say "Moderator x deleted my post >>unfairly and then sent me this mean Email about it ...". I understand if a >>member is frustrated, but starting off a message in this vein is also >>inappropriate. The LAST thing you want to do as a member is post controversial >>messages concerning the deletion of a post. The moderators try to be fair, but >>when people rant and rave aggressively and point fingers at the moderators, they >>are setting themselves up for another deletion. > > >So you're saying that you think it's ok to post a message questioning the >decision to delete a msg, if that message is phrased correctly. If that's your >position, I wish you good luck with it. Perhaps you could give an example of an >inappropriate post, along with an acceptable follow-up questioning it's >deletion. There is no black and white here (and if I gave an example of an inappropriate post, you would have to delete it :) ). However, an appropriate follow up might be: Subject: My message on "Kasparov will beat Anand" was deleted Message: I did not attempt a troll here and my message was indicating that due to his use of computers, Kasparov has a much greater repertoire of theoretical novelties than Anand, so statistically speaking, he should be more prepared for the tournament. I do not feel that this is off topic since it is discussing the user of computer programs. The title may have been a little troll-like, but that was not really my intention, I just thought the title was catchy sounding. I asked if reposting with a cleaned up title would be ok, but was told that it would be deleted as well. Now, here is a border-line case where I could see that one or more moderators are on vacation and one moderator is in a crappy mood and this potential mistake occurs. As can be seen, the message did not slam a moderator. The person was trying to be reasonable and the original message was close enough to computer chess that it should not have been deleted. So, I would not delete the follow up. In fact, I may un-delete (I assume that the files are just renamed) the original post if enough people Emailed me that a mistake was made. Who knows? I realize that the current moderators (in an attempt to minimize controversy and to stay consistent) took the position that discussions on moderator decisions are off topic and can be deleted. After a while, the next set of moderators may come to that conclusion as well. If they do, they do. I do not think, however, that if people are being reasonable that it is required. It may be required if people are being unreasonable. > > >> >>Now, some troublemakers WANT to have a second and third post deleted JUST in >>order to be able to proclaim how unfairly the moderators are being. This is just >>being a nuisance and such a person should be given a warning to shape up or they >>will be shipped out. I think that everyone has a right to express their opinion, >>however, they do not always have a right to express their opinion in whatever >>manner they wish. >> >>Examples of poor expression are: >> >>"My post got deleted, so I quit CCC.". Come on, grow up. If you wish to not post >>here due to a conflict, then do not post here. Do not post that you will no >>longer be posting here. This is an intentional troll. >> >>"My post got deleted and I cannot believe the Email I got from the moderator >>over it.". The contents of an Email between a moderator and a member should NOT >>usually be up for discussion. If the moderator goes WAY overboard with an Email, >>forward a copy of it to Steve. He can decide impartially whether he should talk >>to the moderator over it. Just because a member thinks that an Email is >>overboard does not mean that any other reasonable person will think that and we >>do not need a controversial thread here on it. >> >>"My post got deleted and it had nothing wrong with it. The previous poster was >>the culprit.". Sometimes threads get deleted. Just because a given message is >>non-contentious does not mean that the entire thread isn't way out in left >>field. If an entire thread or an entire branch of a thread gets deleted, DO NOT >>make a big deal over it. Chances are that you were responding to the >>inappropriateness of the thread anyway, so let it go. >> >>I have no problem with people disagreeing with a deletion on the message board, >>but pick your fights wisely. If you are cursing up a blue streak in the message, >>DO NOT post a message on how unfairly you were treated just because you were >>responding to someone else who mildly cursed at you. >> >>The more ALL of us try to resolve these conflicts off of the message board, the >>more ALL of us can read more posts on computer chess related topics. >> >>KarinsDad :) > > >Sounds pretty reasonable, on the whole. Here's a hypothetical for you. Let's >say a member becomes angry over his deleted post, and re-posts the message, >along with some commentary about how he can't understand why the post was >deleted, here everyone, look at it. Or, someone takes it upon himself to >re-post the messages of other members that were deleted. And, say further that >this person is well-known and has some standing in the chess community. >Hypothetically speaking. What do you do? > >Will Hypothetically speaking, I attempt to use my brain (please, no jokes on this hypothetical ability). I do not ALWAYS delete the follow up, nor do I ALWAYS allow it to stand. There is no pat answer. It is situational dependent. Setting up a rule that you always delete the follow up since it is off topic is an easy way to take the decision away from you and a way to justify the moderator's actions as being consistent. But, some people feel that this is unfair in all cases, so I doubt I would want to start out that way if I were elected moderator (however, if a lot of people are abusive of this, I may change my mind). 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.