Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 10:29:00 05/23/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 21, 1998 at 16:44:17, Steven Schwartz wrote: >Amir, Bruce, and Karsten >I posted a question for all nominees a couple of days ago. >The other nominees have responded. >I think it would be helpful, for comparison purposes, if >you could answer the question below. Thanks >- Steve > >If you were to rate your tolerance for "off-topic" >posts in CCC on a scale from 1 to 10, where would >you place yourself? > >1 - Being extremely tolerant of every post except obscenity >10 - Being extremely INtolerant of anything posted that is not > directly related to computer chess > >In addition to a number from 1 to 10, you may want to also >write something to further qualify your numerical value. I don't like the question since it forces people to give a subjective and easily mis-stated and mis-understood answer to an important question. I think it might be possible to come up with a correct answer to this. The group as a whole can decide what it will allow and what it will do if its rules are broken. But as of now it seems that discretion is left to the moderators, so I will describe my attitude about this. I don't like extended off-topic discussions. This was one of the problems with r.g.c.c., the discussion would start out on-topic until someone would use an analogy or illustration or something, then you'd get fifty posts about that, and that was usually some controversial point of economics or history or something. These topics are fine, but there are other places reserved for these topics. It is not censorship to ask that these topics be kept out of here, it is merely an effort to get people to classify their posts so that people who are interested in A can find out about A by reading the A group, and people who are interested in B can find out about B by reading the B group. If someone is totally hot about B, and thinks that everyone else should be totally hot about B, they should be discouraged, strongly if necessary, from continually discussing B in the A group. The preceding two paragraphs express a viewpoint, but don't say anything about my level of tolerance for off-topic discussions. I think that my use of the word "extended" is important. I don't care about little drabs of off-topic stuff, but if it gets out of control it should be stopped. I think that people should avoid calls for extended discussion of off-topic subjects, and I think that people should try to have some sense about which subjects to avoid. I don't think people should worry about it too much as long as off-topic stuff doesn't get out of control. It's not necessary to nip every little thing in the bud. Nothing has been said yet about enforcement. I think that the best form of moderation is self-moderation -- you don't send the post about one of the topics that will cause problems, you don't accuse the other guy of being stupid, a cheater, or a thief. A concrete statement of what is encouraged and discouraged helps, and I think was almost have that in the FAQ. Perhaps it could be expanded upon a bit. If someone messes up and posts something nasty, I think they should be asked or told to stop, depending upon what they say and how much additional trouble they've caused. If someone is here mainly to cause trouble, they should be prevented from posting. 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.