Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 17:08:23 12/03/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 03, 2000 at 16:40:05, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On December 03, 2000 at 15:09:04, Harry Field wrote: > >>Your trying to drive the Bob guy from another term as moderator, right? > >I don't want to fight with Bob but I also don't want to lose my mind doubting my >own memory or my understanding of common English words. > >I want to get rid of the election posts. They are off-topic and causing >trouble. > >The original reason, posted in the group by Bob, that Thorsten was told to stop >with the election thing, is that he didn't know what he was talking about. The >validity of this reason was questioned by several people. The next argument was >that Thorsten was off-topic, and this was stated very emphatically. > >Now when I agree that Thorsten was off-topic, and attempt to use this to show >that the subject is off-topic, I'm told that the real problem is that Thorsten >was abusive. This is an attempt to side-step my argument about topicality. > >But it's not my argument, it's Bob's argument, repeated several times with >emphasis. > >I feel frustrated by Bob's continued assertions that I am wrong whenever I say >anything on this issue, even when I simply quote things that Bob himself has >said repeatedly and with great emphasis. It is very difficult to have a >discussion with someone when you can't even stipulate their most basic points >without their attempting to debate them with you. > >A: The earth is round. >B: No, it's flat. >A: It's obviously round. >B: Ok, assuming it's round, how about this ... >A: Your point is false because you can't assume the earth is round. > >Wouldn't this drive *you* crazy? > >bruce If that were happening, yes. In the case of Thorsten's post, there were too problems... 1 it was off-topic. 2 it was abusive (anti-US). As I have said before, and I believe my actions support this clearly, off-topic is not a reason for deletion, unless someone complains. In the case of Thorsten's post, complaints happened immediately. Even before I read his post. In the election case, your complaint was the _first_ complaint I received. I don't have a problem with a 100% computer chess forum. I don't have a problem with a forum that tolerates off-topic discussions so long as they are cordial. In the case you mention, I saw the post subject (by Thorsten) and chose to not even bother reading it. Until someone complained. Three people emailed me almost instantly about "US bashing". I asked him to stop. I don't see where it really matters whether the primary reason was off-topic, or abusive. Does it really matter? One strike is enough. Two is more than enough. I also don't see the need to micro-read/interpret every single word I write so literally. If you want to do that, then read things I write for publication, since I write and rewrite those very carefully. Things I write here are written just as though they came up in an impromptu verbal conversation. I don't try to develop a BNF for everything I write here, to be sure that it parses properly and that the semantics are not unclear... maybe that is a mistake... unfortunately I can't find anybody here that doesn't do the same at times...
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.