Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 09:26:41 10/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 19, 2001 at 02:29:19, Dann Corbit wrote: >On October 19, 2001 at 02:20:08, Derrick Daniels wrote: > >>On October 19, 2001 at 02:02:11, Ed Schröder wrote: >> >>>On October 18, 2001 at 21:58:05, Derrick Daniels wrote: >>> >>>>.. >>> >>>Derrick, >>> >>>Postings calling people names are removed. That's against the CCC >>>charter. >>> >>>Regards, >>> >>>Ed Schroder >>>CCC moderator >> >> Hi Ed >> >> I don't recall calling anyone names, i spoke about the organization >>kasparov.com and said that they were greedy to charge people to view exclusive >>interviews, that is and was my opinion, but not a personal attack in anyway. >>Certainly nothing offensive enough to be censored. > >Certainly "greedy" would have to be considered an undesirable trait. > >People did send in complaints. The moderators acted reasonably. > >This is a moderated forum. That means that there are limits on what you say, >and those limits are governed by the charter you read and agreed to when you >joined. > >I consider your telling Christophe Theron to "get his act together" to be a very >offensive way to phrase what is probably a user error on your end. Here I am >referring to: >http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?193470 > >I suggest the following rephrasing: >"I am having a problem configuring Chess Tiger to work correctly. For some >reason, it loses on time on my machine. What am I doing wrong?" > >Now, imagine that you are Christophe. Which format would you find the most >palateable? > >Benjamin Franklin said, "You can catch more flies with a teaspoon of sugar than >with a gallon of vinegar." > >I can certainly be abrasive at times, as can just about anyone. But if we do >exercise a bit of effort to be especially civil, it would just be that much >nicer, wouldn't it? I think this is nuts, as it relates to moderation. People get emotional and have strong opinions, and this comes out in their posts. It's not allowed to make personal attacks here, but this shouldn't be confused with criticism. I would hate it if the moderators forced people to neutralize all of their language in order to say anything. In particular, I can conceive of no reason why someone shouldn't be allowed to call a company greedy. If someone wants to talk about a company's policies, that seems on-topic to me. What message is being sent by this latest post removal -- that someone can't say that they are unhappy because a web site is charging to view content? That someone can't say that they don't like the content at a web site? What's next, it's going to be against policy to say that you don't like a way that a program plays, because this might hurt the programmer's feelings? Eesh, what a boring place CCC will be, with those rules in effect. I see nothing wrong with the post you refer to, which states, in total: "I thought this problem was fixed in the latest tiger version????? Come on chris get it together." You'd moderate that? That's riduculous. Come on, Dann, get it together. Could be worse though. I tried to send a post to another forum, and it was rejected because I used the word "crap". 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.