Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 21:03:14 04/05/98
Go up one level in this thread
>Posted by Fernando Villegas on April 05, 1998 at 19:23:20: >Ed: >There is -seems to me- a contradiction between recognizing there are not >rules and then to say that the rol of FG is to watch over this. But if >there are not rules, watching is done thorought what? Casuistic rules, >the feeling of the moment? Of course to ask moderation is OK, but then I >cannot see what else can be done without rules, or what can be done of >good with rules. I suppose this is a matter of fact, FG exist, etc, but >let me tell you I have perceived here and there -not from you- some >hints of autocratic attitude, an slight smell of "if you do that once >more, you will see what happens with your registration". >What I want to say, Ed, is that we must be more moderate in asking >moderation with the sword of FG in or out the sheath. >Respect to my joke, nobody would know if translation was not done. It >was kind of private joke for Enrique, unfortunately uncovered by a pious >man. Anyway, I am sorry. >Fernando Hi Fernando, One thing for sure, I was happy to see you posting again :) Case closed, ok? About rules, as you said yourself, I also hate the big brother is watching you concept. The FG has no big list of rules for moderation. We talked about that but didn't come out. IMO on every rule you make you get 2 new exceptions on that rule in return. In the end you have a list which is a contradiction in itself. Another BIG problem with making a list of rules is culture. The FG started with 10 people. 7 Europeans and 3 people from USA. We discussed many topics and scenario's in the very beginning. It was surprising to see that on "several" topics the Europeans were in full agreement with each other while the Americans felt the opposite. Culture........... nice problem. So we have the guide-line: CCC = RGCC - personal attacks. And in my opinion everybody understands that rule. As said before you can't expect the FG to make 100% good decisions. Life and faced situations is too complicated for that. Instead of that common sense in combination with the above general rule is our guide-line to watch over CCC. Is that perfect? I guess not. And I will never claim it. However if you think we should have a set of rules for every possible situation I challenge you to make such a list. We can certainly need all the help we can get. But I predict I can shoot any list you come up with into 1000 pieces by just mentioning exceptional cases. Bottom line, we are doing our best. If we make mistakes we will admit them, correct them and also will learn something from it. As for the underlying fear of losing your registration (I wonder if this isn't the heart of this discussion) we operate in 3 levels. - a warning - a yellow card - a red card A warning is without consequences, a second yellow card will result in a red card. A red card means you temporarily lose your registration. This gives the FG power over people. The FG could miss-use this power. This is the underlying fear I taste in your questions. Currently we have a group of 8 people (2 too less IMO). This high number is a good thing since in case we disagree we simply vote and the majority decides. This to prevent the miss-use of power you perhaps fear. In case you have doubts on 1 or 2 members of the FG (as you suggested above) there are still 6 or 7 others. Bottom line, the chance you get a yellow or red card for the wrong reasons is almost zero. In the current FG of 8 people that should be 5 people which is unlikely. Last bottom line, this board (unfortunately) is moderated. However if you stick to what you have signed by registration it's unlikely you will ever hear from us. - Ed -
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.