Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Moderation: STOP NOW.

Author: Bruce Moreland

Date: 16:03:20 11/19/00

Go up one level in this thread


On November 19, 2000 at 18:24:46, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On November 19, 2000 at 12:10:02, Ed Schröder wrote:
>
>>On November 19, 2000 at 10:09:12, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On November 19, 2000 at 07:34:52, Jeroen van Dorp wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I don't follow.
>>>>
>>>>I suspected that much.
>>>>
>>>>>I put "moderation" in the subject, and told Thorsten
>>>>>to cut it out.
>>>>
>>>>You said as moderator he had to stop talking because he said something he didn't
>>>>know about in your opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>>No I didn't.
>>
>>Yes you did.
>>
>>Jeroen was 100% right in his previous posting.
>>
>>Ed
>
>
>So I didn't tell Thorsten his post was off-topic?
>
>You _did_ read the entire thread, right?
>
>
><no?>
>
>thought so...

If you look the oldest direct ancestor of this post, no, you didn't, and that is
the whole point.  The chronology is as follows:

Your first post was this one.  You should go back and read it again.

http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?139458

17-Nov 2239, Bob (from the above post): "You don't understand what is going on,
so please keep your mouth shut about it."  Absolutely no mention of topicality.
That was pretty much your whole post.  You told Thorsten to be quiet not because
he was off topic, but because he didn't know what he was talking about.

18-Nov 1448, Jeroen: Annoyed post from Jeroen where he criticizes the above, and
he has a point.  He says you should have mentioned topicality, not the quality
of his post.

18-Nov 1541, Bob: You say that Thorsten's post was off-topic, but you don't see
why Jeroen was bothered.  he's not arguing that the post was topical, he's
arguing that you should have mentioned that it *was not topical* in your first
post.

18-Nov 1846, Jeroen:  Null post.

18-Nov 2109, Bob: Null post.

18-Nov 2139, Jeroen:  Null post.

19-Nov 0011, Bob: You told Jeroen that you told Thorsten to stop posting on the
subject.  This is essentially a null post.

19-Nov 0734, Jeroen: He told you that you told Thorsten to stop talking about
the topic, because you said that Thorsten didn't understand the topic.  He told
you *again* that you should have told Thorsten that he was off-topic, not that
he didn't know what he was talking about.

19-Nov 1009, Bob.  You denied what Jeroen said.  You said that you'd told
Thorsten that he was off-topic, and that you'd merely "added" that Thorsten
didn't know what he was talking about.  You then essentially asked how Jeroen
could be on your case, since the thread was off-topic and obviously should have
been shut down.  You missed the point again.

19-Nov 1210, Ed.  In your previous post you said that you hadn't told Thorsten
to stop talking about things he didn't know about, and Ed challenged you on
this.

19-Nov 1824, Bob.  You questioned whether Ed had read the whole thread.

Here is what I think is going on.

You didn't mention topicality in your original post to Thorsten.  This bothered
some people who don't share your political viewpoint, or at least don't believe
that you should be shutting down threads because people are *wrong*.

Subsequent posts by Jeroen, later by Ed and myself, have tried to get you to see
your original mistake.  You steadfastly refuse to get the point, and tempers are
heating up.

This current problem is your fault, you are the one who is wrong here, and if
you would take the time to understand what people are saying to you, perhaps you
could see that you are wrong.

Here is Jeroen's original post:

http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?139572

He very clearly stated what was wrong with your original post.  He told you what
you should have said instead.  The he got sarcastic with you because he was
bothered by what you did say.

If you would have read and understood what he said in that post, this could have
been solved at that point.  But instead of realizing that Jeroen was critical of
what *you* said, you missed this very clear point and responded as if he was
defending Thorsten's right to discuss the topic.  Jeroen has never argued that,
at least not in this thread.  He just took issue with the *way* you shut down
the thread.

bruce



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.