Author: Roger D Davis
Date: 23:37:45 09/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 08, 2003 at 20:40:07, Jeroen van Dorp wrote: >I have followed the discussion, and I have no particularly relevant opinion >about programs like this deadking. > >But from the discussion I can conclude that the legal status of such a program >is unclear. As a result you changed your opinion to "Let's ban these subjects >because most people here don't like these kind of subjects". This has nothing to >do with violating the charter, but with catering the majority (or maybe a >minority - who knows) of posters. > >So from your own observation you can't conlude that it violates the charter, and >given the many responses it's also hardly clear that these subjects are indeed >unwanted here. > >Suddenly you leave the discussion, make a new top post and state that the >subject is violating the charter. > >You may understand that although I have no thoughts about deadking, I _do_ have >some thoughts about your way of handling this. > >Your claim of upholding the charter simply doesn't cause the subject to violate >the charter. > > >J. Jeroen, You said, "from the discussion I can conclude that the legal status of such a program is unclear." In other words, it's questionnable...which is the wording of #5 of the charter... That means you have to support the moderator. Roger
This page took 0.01 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.