Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:39:43 12/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 05, 2000 at 20:32:59, Michael Cummings wrote: >On December 05, 2000 at 10:31:50, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On December 05, 2000 at 00:53:27, Michael Cummings wrote: >> >>>On December 04, 2000 at 23:15:08, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On December 04, 2000 at 08:52:12, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Here is a good case in point. obviously 100% off-topic. Nothing to do >>>>with computer chess. not one suggestion to delete it. I have no problem >>>>with such posts. But it would seem that some do. And some don't. How is >>>>this different from the constitution discussion? From the legal discussion? >>>>etc? >>>> >>>> >>>>Pardon me while I go take something for this headache. Caused by trying to >>>>figure out just what "standard" everyone wants to see... >>> >>>I think this is fine, its a bit of harmless fun in what looks like to be a >>>heated discussion that pops up amoung the programmers every now and then. >>> >>>Its not like this was the start of a thread, just a bit of harmless fun in the >>>middle of one. >>> >>>If he had started a new thread with this topic then I would have given it the >>>flick. To me their is a difference as to when and how a post is posted as to >>>what effect it has. >>> >>>If you, me and the others had not commented on your post on how you feel this >>>should affect your moderation of posts, then I think there would of not been one >>>reply to his post. >>> >>>Delete the new posts that start of as being really off topic, but keep the ones >>>like his that are just a bit of harmless fun in the middle of one. >> >> >>The problem is that if I graded exams/projects that subjectively, I would not >>have a single student signing up for courses I teach. And justifiably so. As >>I recall, the US Constitution was a sub-thread. If it wasn't, it could have >>been. Does it make sense to chop it as a thread, keep it as a sub-thread? > >But that is why you are moderator to then use your subjective view to keep this >place calm. > >If someone starts a thread under the heading "US Elections" or "US making fools >out of themselves" and then went on to make fun of how long this election is >taking. Then that should be deleted, no matter even if there is right or >sensible information contained within it. Those types of posts are there to >start a fire, cause we know people like to word bash other countries. > You _do_ read this place, right? :) notice what happens when I (or another moderator) says "stop here." when a post veers off topic significantly. The moderator issue thread becomes longer than the _original_ thread... :( >But on the other hand if there is another thread which starts off computer chess >related, and in the 20 or so posts contained within that thread two are about >what type of car they drive, then that is fine as long as it does not get out of >hand and turn into a 50 post thread about what type of car they drive. > >I just think it depends on what you and most people would regard as carrying an >off topic thread far enough. I would say once somethig goes past ten posts in a >thread and it is getting right off topic then some warning should be posted >within the thread, telling them to take it elsewhere. > >Simply put all new posts should be computer chess related. If they are not, then >it depends on the content and what the thread is likely to turn into as to >whether you should delete it or give a warning from the start of the thread. > >Thorstens post was always going to cause urguements. Cause no matter what, every >U.S person is going to see any comment on how they run the elections and what is >happening as U.S bashing. > >It is just the way it is, cause the U.S media loves to say, "Leader of the Free >world", "US are the world leaders". So of course when people start to comment on >their country they will want to defend it, cause the U.S people have these words >continually shoved down their throat through the media and government. > >Just like I dare anyone to say that Australia is not the best in the world in >Rugby Union, Rugby League, Womens Hockey, Netball, Cricket (just beat West >Indies to make it a NEW WORLD RECORD for 12 strait test match wins). >To me it is all a form of brainwashing. You hear enough times how good you are, >you start to believe it without question. > >I think being a moderator you have to at least know how proud people are going >to be of their countries cause that is what they have been bought up to >learning. Ever wondered when communist countries used to have their people line >up to get bread and soap, and still these people loved their country thinking it >was the best way to live. > >Just like if anyone had a go at Australia, whether right or wrong, I would >defend and tell them off :) > >At least our 2000 Olympic games was declared the BEST GAMES EVER, which did have >the U.S a bit peeved, cause the IOC President only said in Atlanta "It has been >most exceptional" which means the Atlanta games is the only one of late that >never hand the honour of being called the best games ever. Which is pretty much >a huge slap in the face. > >See even though my last comment is true and correct, how many people will attack >what I said even though it is the truth. Is it U.S bashing or just a true >statement of fact.
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.