Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Moderation: Thorsten's Post Deletion

Author: Dann Corbit

Date: 14:25:30 08/30/99

Go up one level in this thread


On August 30, 1999 at 15:55:57, Fernando Villegas wrote:
>I understand that some post by Thorsten -or several- has been deleted due to
>complains about his wording. An adjetive or a verb that was not liked by some
>people here.
Perhaps the real problem was one in translation.  I am quite sure that Thorsten
was not really advocating wife beating.  Sometimes, when we try to say something
in a language that is not our mother tongue, it does not come across the way we
mean.  I know, because I lived in a foreign country (Turkey) for two years and
spoke the language with some difficulty.  Sometimes, what I said came out
comically, and sometimes with a very bad meaning I did not understand.

>I do not know what Thorsten will do about this, if he will stay
>here or not. If he does not, then another member of this site will be lost and
>no any member to be sure, but one that has contributed with lot of material not
>only about CSTAL, but in general all the stuff concerned with chess computers.
Thorsten is a very sensible person.  I suspect that he will stay and remain a
valuable contributor.  OTOH, we are all free to come and go as we please.

>What was the sin of Thosrsten? He was too harsh for some too much delicate
>skins. By the way, it is curious to see that many times the delicate-skin-people
>are the very same that treat people they does not like with the utmost lack of
>respect.
Two separate issues.  Your first is:
"What is the level at which a post should be removed?"
This is a judgement call.  The moderators acted on their best judgement.  It may
have been good or bad, but they did their best.
Your second is:
"Sometimes those calling for removal are impolite."
In such a case, the impolite posts should also be removed.  A response should
have no special status as far as posting goes.

>I have been treated as a thief, then as a guy making jokes that
>deserved to be in the rest room wall, etc. Or as a kind of impostor, a man
>trying to produce havoc just because I answered the post againts me or because I
>putted my answer in the beginnig of the page and not in the middle or because I
>resigned my post as moderator or because...
People will treat you both fairly and unfairly.  The same goes for me and for
all others.  When (in the role of moderator) a post is deleted, I will be
charged with censorship. When (in the role of moderator) a post is *not*
deleted, I will be charged with failure to perform my assigned duty.  In other
words, you can't please everyone.  I have my own policy that when someone gives
me counsel, I can only improve from it.

>Thorsten has received also all kind
>of attacks and I do not rememeber -correct me if I am wrong- he has been asking
>deletions of any kind. But then somebody ask the deletion of his post and at
>once he is satisfied.
Moderators can (and do) ignore requests to delete posts.  In all cases, the post
must be scrutinized and a decision must be made.  Deletion of a post always
causes controversy -- sometimes possibly exceeding that of the post itself.
However, those who are serving as moderator must act according to the way they
think best.

>It is a pity that CCC is beginning to be in the hands of any crazy
>fundamentalist that just ask something to be deleted because he is insulted or
>injured in some way or another.
We [citizens/members of CCC] are all (personally) in control of the situation.
By attempting to keep our posts topical and friendly, 99.999% of the problems
are avoided.  Then, if one of your posts is deleted for being in the other
fragment of a percent, then just consider that you have to sustain a small
injury for the sake of having a moderated newsgroup.  Now, there are certainly a
lot of people who value freedom of expression *at all costs* and there is
nothing wrong with that position.  For such persons, there is
news:rec.games.chess.computer for expressing absolutely anything they could ever
want to say.

>Sometimes are just the so called "profanities"
>-my God, what an stupid word-, some times are an adjetive that cannot be
>withstood, sometimes is because suposedly you are making a gender attack over  a
>lady and so and so.
On the one hand, I think that 'political correctness' has gone to silly extremes
in society today.  On the other hand, we really should be sensitive to the
feelings of others.  Is what we say really so valuable that it should never be
touched even if it deeply offends others?  Is our right of freedom of expression
really more valuable than the feelings of other persons who may become
insulted/offended?  Clearly, it is incredibly difficult to draw the line and say
"Here is where a sentence has become too offensive and there is where it is OK."
 Hence, moderators -- being only human -- will make plenty of mistakes.  But if
we simply learn to live with them we can exist quite nicely.  And if we think
the cost is too high, then we can go elsewhere.

>Where this ends?  Are we kids in Disneyland? Is this site an
>only-american-style-of-life place and so everybody must abide to -for us in
>south america or in europe- crazy rules, idiotic customs, fanatic views of the
>world, puritan conditionated reflexes?
I have seen requests for post deletion from all areas of the globe.  I think
that your view that only Americans would moderate in a particular manner is not
accurate.  In any case, it seems that Americans were elected (except for one who
left the job to yet another yank).  Whether a custom is idiotic or not is
cultural.  Whether a view is fanatic or not is social.  Whether a view is
Puritan or not is simply an opinion.  The moderators are those chosen (except
for one who got the chair by abdication).  Hence, we must live with these
choices until the next round.

>Let me be clear: I am not blaming a moderator, I am not blaming moderation, I am
>not blaming but an attitude that has got more and more  force doing of this
>place something more and more boring,  punitive and self censored, the worst
>kind of it.
Boring is in the eye of the beholder.  I (for instance) consider sex jokes
boring and stupid.  But that's me.  Someone else might think that talking about
alpha/beta cutoff is boring and stupid.  However, for this forum, boring verses
not-boring has nothing to do with how topical a post is.  If something is
topical and boring it should stay.  If something is not-topical and interesting,
there is (perhaps) a judgement call whether to leave it or remove it.  If
something is off-topic and offensive, it should be removed immediately.

>By the way, I have not too much hopes this post will stay here too
>much time.
Why not?  Discussion of topicality is always topical for any forum.  That's a
Usenet policy with a long and glorious tradition.[hpbr]




This page took 0.01 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.