Author: Chessfun
Date: 10:17:59 02/05/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 05, 2004 at 12:10:19, Wayne Lowrance wrote: >On February 05, 2004 at 11:19:15, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On February 05, 2004 at 10:14:59, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On February 05, 2004 at 08:23:45, Mogens Larsen wrote: >>> >>>>Hey! >>> >>>>There's has been a disturbance in the force. Mainly in terms of numerous aliases >>>>controlled by dubious characters. I think the time for action has come. To do >>>>away with the evildoers, sooner rather than later. Therefore I propose this >>>>contingency plan as electory platform for the upcoming moderator elections. >>> >>>Having been in politics some time i must admit that i am starting to dislike >>>those who just are busy making more and more rules. The only result is that no >>>one will use those rules unless someone can use such a rule to his own >>>advantage. That's the classical problem in european politics nowadays. >>> >>>Especially when the state has to follow its own rules they really go to far. >>>After speaking for 1 year with 2nd chamber (comparable with congress in USA), >>>and province members (comparable with state politics) it still will take years >>>to correct something where all political parties agree now more or less that it >>>is wrong, except of course national health care. They are just counting bodies >>>and are not convinced unless a major amount of bodies shows up. >>> >>>Now you propose to make for a small forum more and more rules, just meant to >>>control 1 person, who is very recognizable right now which i prefer. It will be >>>real bad when he starts to spell better, which he sure will do when you force >>>him. >>> >>>Take Rolf Tueschen, the CCC was supported by Hyatt to get created in order to >>>get rid of Rolf Tueschen. Just do some search on google on tueschen + hyatt. >> >>Better do your homework better. _I_ had _nothing_ to do with the creation of >>CCC. I started posting here weeks _after_ it was created. I don't like this >>format, usenet news is _far_ better. But I came because others came. I didn't >>come first, regardless of your rambling suggestion. >> >>Rolf was _not_ the main reason for CCC. There were _several_ reasons, as in >>people that were abusive on r.g.c.c. >> >>> >>>Now you want to create new rules for a single member which i *can* very easily >>>recognize now thanks to his spelling of english, even worse than mine. >>> >>>If you accept new rules and stick to them, this person will like Rolf Tueschen >>>learn how to fall within the rules meanwhile still writing the same crazy >>>nonsense. >>> >>>Yet others will be a victim of it when some moderator person X dislikes a person >>>Y. No way to escape then. >>> >>>I find this a bad idea. >>> >>>Note that most here somehow recognize easier a person than some engine playing >>>under a different name. I'm amazed by that. >>> >> >> >>It is still necessary. Otherwise you end up with moderators that are >>incompetent or have some agenda of their own, and they use their cadre of >>aliases to force their choices on the rest of us, if the "clones" are not caught >>and weeded out as they come in. >> >>One simple idea is "you can not vote if you don't average five posts a week in >>the 6 months prior to the election." I can't imagine our "canadian friend" >>creating 300 fake IDs and then posting something sensible from each, doing 3000 >>posts a week. :) >Bob I don't care for this one too much. You might have folks just increase >posting to meet voting requirement. I am not that active in posting so I would >not be able to vote. Then again perhaps your intension is to eliminate my class >of participant as well....Wayne p.s. I check in here at least 3-4 times each day >and read the posts that interest me..... Actually Wayne it would seem you have around 25 or so posts during the last 6 months, so you'd be ok. !! opps Sarah. >> >>If you don't have rules, you have anarchy. Anarchy is _bad_. >> >> >> >>>>1) Punishment of the inability to capitalize correctly, ie. to write or print in >>>>capital letters appropriately. >>>> >>>>Examples: >>>>a) i'm incapable of remembering passwords, so now i have a few hundred aliases >>> >>>passwords,so :) >>> >>>>(Here "i" should be "I"). >>>> >>>>b) what? that wasn't me! really, it wasn't! (Here there should be capitalization >>>>after question and exclamation marks) >>>> >>>>Both violations will result in a warning and then expulsion if repeated. >>>> >>>>2) Excessive use of question and exclamation marks, ie. more than one in >>>>succession. Misuse of ldots (...) will not be accepted either. >>>> >>>>Failure to comply with those guidelines will have consequences similar to 1). >>>> >>>>3) Free accounts from yahoo, hotmail, aol and maybe others will not be allowed >>>>without a plausible profile. This determination is subjective and without >>>>appeal. Only a written testimony from a reliable member in triplicate will be >>>>accepted. >>>> >>>>No profile equals termination of membership. >>>> >>>>4) Last, but not least, good conduct. From good manners to correct quoting >>>>techniques. >>>> >>>>Regards, >>>>Mogens
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.