Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:34:22 10/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 05, 2000 at 02:52:31, Christophe Theron wrote: >On October 05, 2000 at 01:06:53, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On October 05, 2000 at 00:49:06, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On October 04, 2000 at 18:13:13, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>On October 04, 2000 at 17:44:46, Torstein Hall wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 04, 2000 at 16:22:36, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>The accusations from SMK is still here. He has an obvious right to answer!! >>>>> >>>>>If you think this do not belong here, you should have stopped the accusations >>>>>first! Now I feel that to be fair, the answer should stay for a while. >>>> >>>>You are assuming that the moderators read all the messages and also that someone >>>>has complained. The complaints have started only recently. I (for instance) >>>>read only a fraction of the messages, and the topic for this thread was totally >>>>uninteresting to me. Now that people have started to holler about it, some >>>>action will be taken. Possibly, all threads related to this topic will simply >>>>be removed. >>> >>> >>> >>>Dann, sorry to say this, but if you have missed the message where Stefan accused >>>Marcus, then you and the moderation team are doing a poor job. I can't believe >>>it. >>> >>>The current world champion posts a new topic with a flashy title, and no >>>moderator reads it? Come on... >> >>My wife nearly died, and I have been at the hospital with her. > > > >I'm really sorry to read this, Dann. I hope she's alright now. > >I understand how futile this discussion can appear then. > >I apologize. > >Take good care of you, of her. We can all be busy at times. I have barely been on ICC lately, yet most know I am almost always there from 9pm-1am or so _every_ night. But with a daughter getting married on October 14, at my house, my wife has kept me busy beyond belief. I didn't read any of the thread until some complaints popped in via email... Don't assume that just because it has a flashy title it gets read. I am not particularly interested in the topic, and didn't read it at all until the last couple of days... > > > > Christophe > > > > > > >> I missed over >>one week of messages completely. And I really don't read messages that look >>political, no matter who wrote them unless some quirky thing catches my >>attention or for some other strange reason I decide to read it. I don't read >>messages about chessmaster, and I don't read messages about many other topics >>that keenly interest many others. This is an incredibly busy month for me, and >>I have hardly been reading here at all. Over on the Winboard forum, someone was >>asking if something has happened to me! >> >>>I don't think you missed it, so I'm going to assume that the moderators have >>>read Stefan's accusing message. >> >>What purpose is served by lying about it? I don't care one bit about the matter >>either way, though I do think it is silly to try to hold a trial in the press >>for either party. >> >>>In this case, as Stefan's message (which contained obvious personal attacks) has >>>not been moderated AT ALL, then Marcus has the right to answer and his message >>>should be left here. Even if people complain about it. It is simply called the >>>right to answer. >> >>WHO used the moderator form to send a message to the moderators on that post? >>ANSWER: Nobody. And really, honestly, I didn't read it. >> >>>On the other hand I perfectly understand that the moderators are worrying about >>>a possible expansion of the thread beyond any reasonnable limit. >>> >>>I think that posts under the same topic that are obviously trying to add fuel to >>>the flames should indeed be moderated. But if somebody has a fact to give about >>>the topic, it should be allowed. >> >>It has probably come to the time where all the threads should be removed about >>that topic. It's pointless at best. If someone really wants to go on about it, >>there is always news:rec.games.chess.misc or whatever. >> >>>I also think that Stefan and Marcus should be allowed to discuss the matter in >>>the public place, because it is apparently the way they have chosen. Provided >>>they try to control themselves and stop insulting each other. >> >>If insults are flying it's already too late for that. Since people are now >>becoming annoyed at the mess, I think it is a waste of time to discuss it here. >>A big flame fest is sure to ensue. Does *anyone* really imagine that personal >>differences are going to be settled by banter about it in CCC? Will either of >>the interested parties _really_ be able to detach themselves enough from their >>own feelings to the degree necessary for a calm rational discussion? Is it >>really the case that it could not better be handled via email, or (better yet) >>both parties apologizing to each other, a warm slap on the back, and a promise >>to buy each other a beer the next time they meet? >> >>>This story sounds like such a nonsense that I believe there has been some >>>misunderstanding at some point. >> >>Could be. I still don't really know the particulars, and I have only read *one* >>post on the topic (the one that was complained about) which was written by >>neither Marcus nor Stefan. >> >>>If some people in the group can help them to see the light, then the discussion >>>has its place here. We have already seen worse and more useless threads on CCC, >>>and we're still there... >> >>The existance of useless threads does not make them a good idea. The threads >>are starting to cause a stir. Will continued discussions really solve any >>issues? Or will the scratching cause more itching which causes more scratching >>which causes more itching.
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.