Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Moderator questions

Author: Dave Gomboc

Date: 15:51:29 12/13/98

Go up one level in this thread

On December 12, 1998 at 14:35:44, Bruce Moreland wrote:

>Everyone can have opinions about how to moderate this group, but if I am going
>to vote for someone in particular, I would like to know how they would handle
>real cases.  Some of these happened, or happened more or less, and some of them
>are purely hypothetical, and some are a mix of real events and hypothetical
>It is easy to talk in the abstract about how you would moderate this place, but
>it is harder when the actual events hit you in the face, and I think that any of
>these is likely to come up.
>So, in the following cases, the question is, how would you handle this?

This is an interesting list, Bruce.  I figured I'd give my responses, just
because I want whoever the future moderators are to know what me as a
constituent would want them to do.

>1) Some random member that nobody has ever heard of, and who has never written a
>post before, writes as his first post some random nonsense laced with obscenity,
>not necessarily directed at anyone.

Biff (delete) the account.

>2) A regular poster responds to a post about Fritz by calling ChessBase a "shit
>company".  A few days later he does it again.  Another poster responds with a
>defense of ChessBase, and concludes by making unfavorable comments about this
>guy's intelligence.  Chessbase hater replies with a very long obscenity-laced
>tirade against ChessBase and against this second guy.

The first guy gets warned for the first post.  The second guy gets warned for
the follow-up post.  The first guy gets the boot after the flame post.  For
exactly how long would depend on the severity of the post, but minimum one
month, with no particular maximum.

>3) A member complains to you that a regular poster compared him unfavorably with
>Adolf Eichmann on, and includes with his complaint a
>long narrative about how seriously he takes this, since his family suffered at
>the hands of the Nazis, and demands that someone like this not be allowed to
>continue posting where he can see it, meaning in CCC.

This is a tough one for the fellow who wrote you.  The person who is being
complained about hasn't done anything wrong on CCC.  Moderators can't monitor
the world: it's important to stick to monitoring the part you're supposed to.
Namely, CCC posts.

>4) Same guy as in the previous example complains to you that this guy is now
>copying his CCC posts into r.g.c.c., and is responding to them there in such a
>manner that would clearly be against the CCC charter if he made his responses in

If the moderator hasn't already suggested to the person that they might be
better off not reading r.g.c.c., now is the time to do it.  There is some risk
that this person is not going to remain a member of the CCC because of their
disagreement with such a moderator, and that's unfortunate, but something that
will have to be lived with.

>5) Same guy as in previous example complains that in response to one of his CCC
>posts, his nemesis wrote a sarcastic reply to it (in CCC), including a ":-)" at
>the end of the post.  You look at the reply and can see the sarcasm, but it's
>not something that ordinarily would have demanded attention.

If it's not something that ordinarily would have demanded attention, it doesn't
demand any attention now either.

>6) A regular poster refers to a banned member as a "jerk" in a CCC post, which
>is a more or less true assessment, in your opinion.

"Jerk" isn't severe enough to merit a warning.  Let it slide.  Calling somebody
a jerk once doesn't meet my standards of what a personal attack is.

>7) Some guy registers from a hotmail account as "Donald F. Duck" and starts
>posting informative stuff.

If anonymous accounts are permitted, do nothing.  If anonymous accounts are not
permitted, ask the poster for their real name, etc.  Should they refusal to
provide it, biff the account.

Moderators should make a decision as to whether people may post to CCC
anonymously, so long as the moderators know who they really are.  (I assume the
answer is no at present, but this is a reasonable alternative for someone who is
uncomfortable publishing their real name due to extenuating circumstances.)

>8) A member posts instructions regarding how to break the copy protection on
>some commercial chess program.

A warning to the poster, and inform the author of the software if possible, so
that they may take any possible measures.  Of course, probably they cannot do
anything except change the protection scheme for the next version of the


Dave Gomboc

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.