Author: Don Dailey
Date: 11:14:54 09/06/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 05, 1998 at 22:50:44, Larry S. Tamarkin wrote: >Thank you for your well thought out reply; it certainly satisfies the majority >of what I think is important in the free expression of ideas, except for one >small (really big), item. That is that the offending party has to feel >apologetic toward those whose post he or she is questioning. Obviously the most >unlikely of people to apologize or feel that they have done wrong, are also the >most likely to be banned! - Thats why I feel it is more important for the >moderaters and those who are attacked to be 'Big' about those who have slung at >them. After all, they are the most respected people by all, and also the >majority usaully come to the 'front' in order to refute mistaken post and views. Naturally, we are interested in this issue of feeling apologetic. I thought it was understood when I said the individual must feel regret. A direct apology by an individual would certainly be enough to convince us of the sincerity of a members desire to continue with the group and definitely demonstrates respect for others. One point often missed is that we don't judge or arbitrate disputes. It might very well be that we think one side is right and the other is wrong. But we are only concerning ourselves with keep the bad stuff off the newsgroup. That also means the "wronged party" might be just as guilty of posting material that shouldn't be on this newsgroup. We don't view "defending yourself" by counter-attacks as a legitimate post. - Don
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.