Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 00:02:33 07/23/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 1999 at 01:23:18, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >On July 22, 1999 at 21:37:30, Mark Young wrote: > >>I'm not the one stirred up over the cop analogy, but analogy was inaccurate. I >>just hope two of the moderators in the future can get together and agree on a >>policy of how the moderation should be handled. As of now we have three >>standards, one for each moderator that is on duty. Under this policy when >>Fernando was on duty, I guess he could reinstate the post you deleted. I hope >>you can see the illogic in such a standard that we have now. Two of you must get >>together someway and set one standard, so the members know what can and can not >>be posted. > >I think that this is fair, but I hope that you're bottom line here is that I did >some evil thing by deleting that post. > >I've heard three arguments against deleting that post: > >1) The content was fine. None of us has been able to see the content, so it would be hard to argue with this method. :-) The impression I'm getting from the thread is that the content wasn't, though. >2) The poster is protected because he's a moderator. IMO this would be a ridiculous argument to make. Regular member activity and moderator responsibility are separate notions. This would be more obvious if you three did as some other web boards do: use your own account (e.g. Bruce Moreland) when posting regular message, and use a moderator account when making a post regarding moderation of a thread (like KarinsDad "let this thread die" post.) >3) The deletion process was not proper. The deletion process is up to you three. [snip] >bruce Well, three strikes, I'm outta here. :-) 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.