Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:55:19 04/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 23, 2001 at 19:22:45, Chessfun wrote: >On April 23, 2001 at 18:20:18, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 23, 2001 at 16:42:49, joe dean wrote: >> >>>On April 23, 2001 at 11:26:15, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On April 23, 2001 at 10:16:08, Duncan Stanley wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 23, 2001 at 09:42:22, Andrew Williams wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 23, 2001 at 09:10:25, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On April 23, 2001 at 07:47:09, Duncan Stanley wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On April 23, 2001 at 07:17:13, Jeroen van Dorp wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>My personal opinion is that if someone is not abusive in it's language or >>>>>>>>>towards co-posters, and if it's not considered way off topic he's free to post >>>>>>>>>his thoughts here. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Repeating the same arguments over and over again is logical, as the same >>>>>>>>>discussions pop up over and over again. >>>>>>>>>Is he supposed to change his opinion with every new thread about the same >>>>>>>>>answer? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Good chess, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>J. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>When I was in the process of falling out with all the 'main' people here, I was >>>>>>>>also engaging in long email correspondences with Enrique, who was trying to >>>>>>>>salvage the situation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>One thing he said was that if you're a programmer here, and you become an >>>>>>>>'outsider' then you lose 'protection' against attacks from all the little guys. >>>>>>>>He said they don't dare attack anyone who is 'under the wing of the important >>>>>>>>ones like Ed, Bruce and Bob'; but as soon as they sense that you don't have this >>>>>>>>protection they will mercillessly and personally attack you for anything and >>>>>>>>everything. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I told him I could live with it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>He said they'ld kill me. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Chris, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Welcome back in the first place. It would be nice that one of the moderators >>>>>>>once and for all put an end to the ban of your name. Maybe we then can all >>>>>>>make a fresh new start again. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Personally I have never seen you as an outsider. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Ed >>>>>> >>>>>>Dave and Tom and I invited Chris back under his old name >>>>> >>>>>This is factually incorrect. >>>>> >>>>>You did not 'invite me back'. >>>>> >>>>>I spoke *privately* with Tom Kerrigan who informed me that there was no ban. >>>>> >>>>>Actually, I was able to demonstrate to him that there actually was a de facto >>>>>ICD ban in place because my name, or any combination of bits of it, and unknown >>>>>to the moderators who were not imposing any ban, was unable to get past the >>>>>registration robot. >>>>> >>>>>Tom Kerrigan put a temporary fix on this robot-ban, by-passing the system and >>>>>sending a manual password, but as far as I know the robot-ban is still in place. >>>>> >>>>>So, actually, there is a power above the moderators that they don't know about. >>>> >>>> >>>>Actually, I asked you to return "normally" as well. But the majority of >>>>people here were against that idea, for whatever reasons. I don't mind living >>>>in the world of "majority rules" even if I am not happy with all the decisions >>>>that are made. I do find myself quite happy in a Rolf-less society, which was >>>>the main reason CCC was created. So in some respects, he caused "good" to >>>>happen. >>> >>>Majority rules is for questions such as does the tourney take place in Germany >>>or USA, 30 vote USA, 15 vote Germany, the tourney is in USA. >>> >>>Majority rules is not for 1 person has one opinion 29 have another opinion, the >>>1 person is eliminated. >>> >> >>That hasn't happened so I don't know what to say. When I suggested that we >>unlock the real account, member response was significant. Since I was elected >>by those same members, it seemed reasonable to listen to them... >> >> >> >> >>>> >>>>In your case, your obsession with the ICCA leadership causes you to dropp off >>>>the deep end too often. I don't agree with everything the ICCA does, nor do >>>>I think much for some of the decisions made by the TD at some of the recent >>>>ICCA events (Mike Valvo was the best TD we ever had, followed by David Levy. >>>>The rest have been pretty much incompetent). However, I'm not "anti-ICCA" >>>>in any form, since the organization has done much for computer chess over the >>>>years... >>>> >>>>As far as ICD goes, you seem to carry your dislike of the ICCA over to this >>>>organization as well. I've seen nothing to convince me that Steve or Tim take >>>>covert action. They won't delete accounts without moderator agreement. If we >>>>ask them to block a specific ISP or domain, they do so if the reason is a good >>>>one. I personally think they want to interfere just as little as they can get >>>>away with, since they are running a business as well... >>> >>>So Chris Whittington says the ICCA is flawed, makes no personal attacks in the >>>process, and says his _name_ is locked off the server and Tom, Dave and Dave >>>moderators did not know that, which is a criticism of the server but not a >>>personal attack and >>> >>>he gets banned from the server we assume. >>> >>>Curious especially after Eduard Schroeder just welcomed him back and made a >>>peace suggestion offer to the moderators. >>> >>>Why ban when peace was in the air? That makes more war we assume. >>> >>>Explanation? >> >> >>Simple. I will do what the members here _ask_ me to do. If you want "him" >>back (I hate talking in third person when I _know_ who I am talking to. :) ) >>notify the moderators via email. Or suggest it as an opinion poll topic, such >>as "how long does a ban remain in place?" or "Should we discontinue the ban >>on Chris?" or anything else you want to ask or suggest. > > >I'm a little lost here. Discontinue the ban on Chris?. >If he is banned then how come he is currently posting? when he has >acknowledged that Duncan Stanley is Chris Whittington. Here is the problem: It is trivial to sign up via the many free email providers scattered all over the planet. And it is effectively impossible to detect this if someone wants to hide it. Of course, if they really don't want to hide this, then their writing style will reveal their identity (don't forget Rolf raised his head here last year using a pseudonym that escaped recognition until his writing style and odd vocabulary gave him away.) This means that this can't be prevented. As a moderator, I don't read every post here, as I don't have time. Which means it is _very_ likely that if a pseudonym chooses his threads carefully, I may never see his writing. Since there are only three moderators, it takes time for one of us to trip over a post and recognize the poster. I have mixed feelings about "banning" someone. In the case of Sean Evans, I think he should be banned for at least 200 years. _ALL_ he tried to do was stir up trouble. Just visit r.g.c.c for a sample. Troublemakers should be euthanized as quickly as they are recognized. Chris is another case altogether. He doesn't continually stir up trouble. He does go off the deep end at times and will offend someone by using some famous arch-ville from the 20th century. His ban was imposed by previous moderators. When we "change shifts" we try to pass on known problems, bans, etc, to the new group so that they know what has transpired. I don't know of an easy way to "un-ban" someone unless previous moderators say "XXX was banned for 90 days for ... " or something. That is perhaps a short-coming in how we are doing this at present... > >Personally I doubt Chris cares one way or the other whether others >want him back or not. And probably the majority don't care either way. >I am not sure that any group of moderators should be able to issue lifetime >bans to members. Maybe for the term of those moderators or if towards the end >of their term three months or so sounds enough.......I must be mellowing. > >Sarah. I disagree in the case of S.E. as he caused trouble, was kicked out, came back as an alter-ego and caused trouble, etc... multiple times. As far as Chris goes, that is an interesting point to discuss. I also get more mellow each day. :)
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.