Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 03:51:06 10/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 11, 2000 at 06:45:36, Jason Williamson wrote: >On October 10, 2000 at 01:53:27, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On October 09, 2000 at 22:50:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On October 09, 2000 at 14:01:32, Ed Schröder wrote: >>> >>>>On October 09, 2000 at 10:37:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 09, 2000 at 03:28:35, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On October 08, 2000 at 22:57:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>There was absolute no need for the moderators to interfere. Remember the >>>>>>>>occasion when you was subject to moderation? How did it feel? That's what >>>>>>>>you are doing each time you interfere so it better should be big when you >>>>>>>>decide to speak as a moderator using your power, because that is the >>>>>>>>position you have as an elected moderator. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>NOBODY interfered. >>>>>> >>>>>>Yes you did. >>>>>> >>>>>>When I asked you the question if you were talking as CCC member or >>>>>>as CCC moderator you said the latter. >>>>>> >>>>>>Ed >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Please. It seems definitions are very _loose_ today. Go look up "interfere" >>>>>and then tell me how I interefered in any of the chessmaster threads, in any >>>>>way or fashion. I _asked_ the poster to choose more suitable subject lines. >>>>>I didn't prevent him from posting _anything_. I didn't remove _anything_. >>>>>I didn't threaten to remove _anything_. I didn't threaten any kind of action >>>>>at _all_. >>>> >>>> >>>>>So exactly how did I interfere? >>>> >>>> >>>>BH wrote: >>>>>>>and when the threads here also have complaints about the subjects. I don't >>>>>>>mind the chessmaster threads, as I said during moderator elections. But I >>>>>>>don't like "world cup underway". A person can't hold a "world cup" event. >>>> >>>>ES: >>>>>>Fine with me as long as you say that as a CCC member. >>>> >>>>BH: >>>>>I believe that this falls under the moderator job description. >>>> >>>> >>>>Here for instance you admitted that your criticism to a header description >>>>was done in the role as moderator and not as being a CCC member. It is a >>>>warning to all CCC members. >>>> >>>>Do we need this? I don't think so. Which is and was my whole and only point. >>>> >>>>Ed >> >> >>>Why would it matter whether it was done as a member, a moderator, or by the >>>president of the United States? >> >>That we have discussed in length by now. Time to stop. >> >> >>>Did you go to school? >>> >>>College? >>> >>>If you did, how on earth did you respond when a teacher criticized your writing >>>style and suggested you do some things differently? That's all this was. >> >>A teacher teaches children. >> >>Ed > >Hmm, I am not a child, yet I have "teachers" at University. > >JW CCC is not my classroom, I'm not your professor, no one in here is my student. We are not in the teaching business here, are we. Enrique >>>A >>>critical remark about the subject not agreeing with the body of the post. Any >>>writing teacher would complain if the title of a paper had _nothing_ to do with >>>the content. Or if the title was greatly misleading... >>> >>>I didn't even threaten to "flunk" him. :) Just asked him to be more >>>reasonable in choosing the subject. >>> >>>That certainly fits within the definition of "moderator". Again from my >>>Webster's...
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.