Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Question to Moderators...

Author: Richard Pijl

Date: 02:09:59 05/06/04

Go up one level in this thread


On May 05, 2004 at 20:31:28, steven blincoe wrote:

>Mike
>
>>We do give more leeway to programmers with Bob's stature.
>It may not be fair - but its reality,
>
>please understand i am in noway singling Bob out for his comments in particular
>to be honest, Bob, although the one being attacked, in my opinion has behaved
>with a good amount of honor and Dignity
>my question was regarding at what point (if any) is a  thread stopped
>i did after all wait 4 days before i raised the issue

The obvious answer:
A (sub)thread is stopped when it is conflict with the charter.
In practice this means that we're quite strict on posts that have a commercial
content/intent or a questionable legal status, independent of the status of the
poster.
With posts that are off-topic we usually have no problems as long as they will
not provoke a discussion. We have CTF for that.
Abusive and/or personal attacks are more difficult to handle. Here the status of
the poster does count, and interpretation may differ for each moderator. If one
of the moderators believes that there is sufficient ground for deleting a
post/thread, then it will go.

I personally look at the following components before deleting a post (other
moderators may have different criteria):
- Does it contain foul language. If yes, it will be deleted
- Does it contain on-topic arguments. If no, the chance increases that it will
be deleted
- Is the poster a by-stander in the original discussion. If yes, the chance
increases that it will be deleted
- Has the poster caused trouble in the past. If yes, the chance increases that
it will be deleted (and the poster will be under review for corrective measures)
- Did the poster contribute anything useful(=on-topic) in the forum. If no, the
chance increases that it will be deleted. (and the poster will be under review
for corrective measures)

To be clear: Corrective measures are not necessarily a ban.

>
>the decision to be more lienient with a particular group of members as opposed
>to the general membership at large...this is made by all 3 moderators in private
>discussion or it is something simply and quielty "understood"?
>i am not asking to make any trouble whatsoever, i simply trying to understand
>how it works here

As you can read in the moderation philosophies of the current moderators, CCC is
about exchanging ideas/information etc about computer chess. Discussions, even
heated ones, are part of that.
Unfortunately there have been some disruptive users that caused more trouble
than contributed content. We try to take firm actions against those persons. And
we just know that a particular group of members that get themselves in heated
discussions do not have the intent to be disruptive.

http://www.talkchess.com/ccc/resource/moderators/index.html

>i have posted on several other sites,the principal one being the dedicated
>chess computer site from Austria
>several well known experts in the field of  chess computers post on this site
>and i cannot say i remember a different standard being applied to them on what
>they can or cannot post
>
>i also realize then i am probably even now pushing what is tolerated for my
>class of membership.

Fortunately not :-)

Richard.



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.