Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:59:04 12/13/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 13, 1998 at 23:01:02, SEAN EVANS wrote: >On December 13, 1998 at 22:22:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>that is utter nonsense. You do realize that if you get arrested by a city >>policeman, who is sworn and empowered only to uphold the law within the legally >>defined city limits where he works, that he *still* contacts county, state >>and federal law enforcement agencies to see what *else* you might have done, >>and that is used against you in your arrest. And that they may even contact >>Interpol if they think it is necessary. > >Bob... bad analogy, this is CCC and Cyberspace not New York city and Interpol.. >completely different... but I understand your theory. > >>Actions outside CCC are a part of overall behavior... and misbehavior >somewhere else is just as valid to consider here as it is where it actually >occurred. > >Uhhhh... Bob what you have just stated is a post or statement made *anywhere* on >the Internet could and should be used against a CCC member. If a Board Member >is anti-pornography and a CCC member was caught posting at a pornographic Usenet >NG utilizing Deja News, does this mean they deserve to be carded.... If so the >person *may* honestly have grounds for a lawsuit against the Board member and >ICD as they control the server.... Nope.. you twist as badly as Rolf. I don't care if you are a peeping tom in your neighborhood, because that has *nothing* to do with CCC. But if someone posts disruptively in another forum, *that* can certainly (IMHO) be used when evaluating the suitability of that person for here... The subject is posting, not whether you are a porno-lover/hater or whatever.. only about what is the likelihood of someone posting reasonable stuff here... and nothing more. but nothing less either... > >>When scout leaders are evaluated for positions such as scoutmaster/assistant >>scoutmaster, their actions *outside* the scouting environment are *definitely* >>used to accept/reject them. > >Again Bob.... this is CCC and Cyberspace not the Boy Scouts, whether a person is >irresponsible in some areas of their lives is irrelevant, conduct at CCC is and >can only be the ultimate judgment.... if CCC Member(A) called CCC Member(X) a >foul name at the ICC, should another member be able to Cherry Pick that post and >send it to the CCC Board... Does the Board *really* know what is happening at >ICC, perhaps there are other posts, chat line discussions etc. causing the >*post* in question to be foul.. the variables are endless and therefore, your >theory can never work properly... It's not irrelevant if the topic is "posting". Ie in scouts they don't ask if you gamble, or if you drink in private. They worry about how you will behave when supervising young boys. Ditto here... how will you post and behave here? Probably exactly the same as you post and behave in similar circumstances somewhere else. "get it?" "similar circumstances"... > >>This "premise" is baloney... it might be how you'd "like" it to be, but that >>doesn't mean that is the way it "ought" to be... > >This is the way it *is*, has *always* been and should *stay*....and I applaud >the current Board Members for realizing this !! > >>moderators can't "police" usenet, but there is nothing in CCC's charter to say >>they can't use behavior there to affect their decisions here... > >Bob... your stating an "OXYMORON" if they are judging Members behaviour >off-board then they are "policing" Usenet... Nope... they are policing *here*. they can't control what is done elsewhere, but they can certainly use that to affect decisions made *here*... > >BTW.. nice job on your KKup2 Crafty game... right now my CM5500 game is >floundering my opponent *still* has not moved.. read my post to *you* at rgcc >about it.. > >Cheers, > >Sean
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.