Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 08:51:54 11/05/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 05, 2003 at 10:04:14, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>On November 04, 2003 at 23:54:45, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On November 04, 2003 at 18:12:28, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On November 03, 2003 at 21:05:26, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>
>>>>On November 03, 2003 at 14:57:34, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On November 03, 2003 at 13:40:05, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On November 03, 2003 at 13:22:35, Mike Byrne wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On November 03, 2003 at 09:26:22, Mridul Muralidharan wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Recently I came to know that Vincent Diepeveen has been banned from CCC
>>>>>>>>without explaination.
>>>>>>>>Especially before , during and after an important event like world champs !
>>>>>>>>Is this true ? and if yes , why ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Regards
>>>>>>>>Mridul
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Vincent has a one month suspension. He was told why he was suspended via email.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Noverber 30th , he will be able to post again - for those that want to mark
>>>>>>>their calendar.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Membership to CCC is a privilige not a right. If you break the rules, your
>>>>>>>privilige might be taken away. Also, an FYI, the CCC moderators have an
>>>>>>>agreement that we do not take any action on suspensions/bannings unless all of
>>>>>>>us are in agreement. So any time there is any action, you should know the vote
>>>>>>>was 3-0. So some times we may appear to be slow in taking action, but on the
>>>>>>>other hand when we do take action - it's unaminous. That protects memebers
>>>>>>>somewhat against kneejerk reactions to posts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Michael Byrne
>>>>>>>Moderator
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Well done, but why has this been done behind the curtains?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christophe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>How else would you do it? Do you want the moderators to discuss
>>>>>Vincent, his postings, their opinions, _all_ in public? That would
>>>>>not be a good way to operate. We vote on the moderators, and then we
>>>>>let them moderate. If we don't like the way they do their job, we vote
>>>>>for someone else next time...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>That's certainly not the way democracy works. As CCC is supposed to work like a
>>>>democracy, things like that should be done in the open.
>>>>
>>>>A simple message "The moderators have decided to ban Vincent for a month because
>>>>of his repeated violations of the CCC charter" would have been enough. If people
>>>>want to discuss the decision, well it's not forbidden.
>>>>
>>>>I'm definitely *against* hiding the moderators' work. When somebody steps on the
>>>>line, the moderators can contact him by email and/or post a "MODERATION" message
>>>>in answer to the offending message. I'm in favor of a public warning.
>>>>
>>>>When somebody is banned, it deserves a public announcement. If it does not, what
>>>>will???
>>>>
>>>>Transparency in the moderators' work is important. In any democracy, the justice
>>>>decisions are published officially.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Christophe
>>>
>>>Actually, that is wrong. When someone gets fired from a company, does that
>>>get publicized? Nope.
>>
>>
>>
>>Coworkers know. Same here.
>>
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>Not the same thing. "co-workers" might be 10 people. "here" might
>be 10,000 people...
>
>Not to mention the fact that discussing thre reasons for a ban in public
>could expose one to legal tort...
So what?
Christophe
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> It is a private matter unless the person getting fired
>>>chooses to take it public. It is his particular "world" that has changed,
>>>and he should have the opportunity to choose whether it remain private or
>>>become public...
>>>
>>>The common practice is "praise in public, chastise in private". It works
>>>pretty well...
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.