Author: Marc van Hal
Date: 11:56:14 06/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 07, 2003 at 18:14:30, Mike Byrne wrote: >On June 07, 2003 at 17:14:46, Roger D Davis wrote: > >>On June 07, 2003 at 11:24:49, Dan Andersson wrote: >> >>> I agree about the topicality of the CB posts in the main. But here were some >>>posts that I/we deleted that were not simple consumer complaints. Thus it was >>>decided they had to go. >>> >>>MvH Dan Andersson >> >>You guys must have deleted the posts before I read them. In any case, I didn't >>realize that bad feelings about Chessbase could be so intense. I understood that >>some people were annoyed, but I wasn't aware that some their reactions were so >>intense that their posts had to be deleted. I can't say that I'm not sympathetic >>to the posters, though rules are rules and should be respected. Hopefully >>they'll be back with posts that are toned down to be within the charter, so that >>the word gets out, and the spirit of consumer advocacy is well served. > >I am just as "guilty" as Dan in deleting some posts. The funny thing is, Dan, >Tony and I in constant communication with each as we share with each other the >reasons why posts are being deleted. Amazingly, for the most part we are in >100% agreement. > >With that said, we (I think Dan and Tony would agree with me here) do not enjoy >deleting posts. Especially in cases where the reply "is within" guidelines - >but it quotes the original post that was "not within guidelines", or perhaps >just being even in the same thread. If you delete a post for "breaking the >rules " you must also delete all replies that quote the relavant section that >was not within guidelines. In some cases, you must delete the whole thread. >Perhaps that is where some "frustration" with the moderators is stemmimg from. > >Anybody who wishes to ne a moderator - let me know and I will nominate you for >the next election. You can take my spot. ;>) > >Seriously, feel free to post your compliants about J8 or Chessbase, but please >post in sensible "non abusive" manner within the guidelines of the CCC Charter. > >Thanks, > >Michael The guidlines should be changed then What if someone attacks a person because of his ilegal activetys? You would call that unsound which it is not. Also if you don't explain rules in enough detail. It is up to the reader what he makes of it. Also if you would always exactly folow the rules as you quoted them this forum was almost impossible to keep up. Personaly I think 1 attack on a certain point of the problem should be enough. At this specifik subject. But all people want to get rid of their steam in their own way. If we want to focus on how the solve the certain problems! We should make a list of the problems. So the other party can better see where to look at. At least if you want to give them the chance to solve the problems. Ofcourse plenty of mistakes where made. And I got the feeling most of them where made because of miscomunicating in the team who worked on the program And miscomunicating between the program team and Chessbase. So a good excuse and a good and fast solvation of the problems would be on it's place. Marc
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.