Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 22:34:57 01/01/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 02, 2002 at 00:09:22, pavel wrote: >On January 01, 2002 at 23:31:49, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On January 01, 2002 at 17:27:32, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>Opinion: >>>Banning is not an act that should be done by vote of the CCC membership. >>> >>>Will we remove everyone who is unpopular? Unpopular opinions are necessary, as >>>they test out our ideas. I really like some of the posters who are less popular >>>than the others. >>> >>>Banning should be done by the moderators based upon their reasoned opinions. >>> >>>I notice that he has not posted here for a few days and that his old posts seem >>>to be gone. >>> >>>I suspect that the moderators may have already taken appropriate action (whether >>>banning, or kicking him out for a week or whatever). >>> >>>Aside from this board, if he is doing illegal things, then he should be arrested >>>and put in jail. But I don't think the board should act on his outside >>>activities. Of course, that is a judgement call, and if the moderators feel >>>differently, they should be free to do as they see best. >>> >>>Since the issue has now died down (one way or another -- maybe Gogi just knocked >>>it off...) then I don't see a lot of value in trying to have a trial by opinion >>>poll. >>> >>>Sometimes, posters just get off on the wrong foot. 'ERIC' springs to mind. He >>>started off with a flurry of stuff that was pretty odd, but he soon calmed down. >>> >>>As for passionate people -- I say the more the merrier. No sense turning this >>>place into a library. Of course, whatever anyone does should be within the >>>confines of the charter. >>> >>>And there is always CTF (which seems to be pretty well a free for all right >>>now). >> >> >> >>That's a lot of patience, philosophy and intelligence for somebody who most >>certainly does not deserve it. >> >>This place is quite strange. You can kick anybody in the ass and have a good >>laugh then watching people wondering "was it such a bad action?", "isn't it >>useful in some way?", "what is justice eventually?", "Should we take action?", >>"Do we have the right to take action?" and so on (watch the discussion >>degenerate into "is there a god?", "is there life on Mars?", "isn't Goran the >>inventor of the Rubik's cube?"...). >> >>We are weak. >> >> >> >> Christophe > > >I agree. I don't understand why a making a decision against this guy is so hard. >It's obvious that this guy isn't here for good intention, or he is just plainly >insane. > >pavs I don't like leaving so much quoted material in here, but I think that you've all said stuff that I'd like to address. We should not have trial by opinion poll. It's the moderators' job to decide here. If we want to talk about how the place should be run, I don't see why that's bad, but we have three guys who will make decisions that we all hope will be wise, and if they disagree with us, no problem. We should be careful who we get rid of and why. If we get rid of people because they have enemies or become generally unpopular, we are going to cut down on the opinion pool too much. There have been a few cases where someone has been under fire for saying something perfectly reasonable, although perhaps insane, wrong, or unpleasant, and people have wanted to get rid of them. I don't support that. I don't think that we are weak. Other groups have a permanently (and hopefully benevolent) dictator who gets rid of trouble-makers very quickly and with much less fanfare, so it's possible that someone who just wants to attract attention will find less fertile ground in places like that, but this group, for whatever reason, has always been run by its members. Things should be done with some concern for the diversity of opinion here. As I've said in other places, I think this is a tricky case. I believe the first banning we had here involved an accusation of bad behavior outside of the group. I think that set a very bad precedent. I would like to know how we should handle cases where someone resorts to outside attacks on the people he discusses with here. If someone is going to partake in a discussion here, get annoyed with them, then send them viruses in the mail, this could be a matter for outside authority, but I don't see why it couldn't be a matter for us as well. But it's the moderators' decision as to what to do. 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.