Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Moderator questions

Author: Lanny DiBartolomeo

Date: 17:50:14 12/19/98

Go up one level in this thread

On December 14, 1998 at 16:29:13, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On December 14, 1998 at 01:49:33, Micheal Cummings wrote:
>>Hello Robert
>>First of all I would like to say that this is just a posting place on the
>>interent. A place to give and exchange info and ideas.
>>You reference to a father checking up on his daughters new boyfriend is a bit
>>over the top in relation to this matter.
>>I will give you an example, just say your son forgot to feed the cat an hour
>>ago, and you tiurn around and treat him like he just went a killed someone. A
>>big over reaction on something that is not worth it.
>Don't twist what I say.  Pay careful attention:  If my son killed someone
>an hour ago, then I would treat him as though he might kill someone again.  I
>am simply talking about how someone *posts* here and there.  If they do
>something over there over and over, then when they do it here *one* time that
>is enough to convince me they will do it here over and over.
>IE someone unknown could come here and post something a little off-center
>and could be given a warning, or even two warnings, before being given a
>cease-or-be-kicked-out final warning.  But someone that has already shown
>that he/she is going to misbehave by doing so somewhere else does *not*
>need 2-3 warnings.  One warning and *out* should be the formula...
>>I believe you are innocent till proven guilty, and when you wrote " wouldn't you
>>suspect he/she would do the same over here?" well they might or might not, they
>>have to do the crime first before you can judge them.
>Never said otherwise... but I said they get *one* chance, not several.  To
>a new person, one error might just be a mistake.  To someone that has done
>it several times, one time is not a mistake, it is intentional.
>>Most people who are shitheads in the world when they walk into a church they are
>>good and kind to the people around them, they act differently within a church
>>and never cause trouble, but if they did you would then kick them out.
>>You have to give people a chance Robert. Then kick their sorry ass out into the
>>street once they have been warned and mess up.
>Where have you been?  Sean was here.  He was warned twice.  He *still* chose
>to post abusive stuff.  He was kicked out a while.  He *still* posts abusive
>stuff in r.g.c.c...
>That is the whole point.  No one says to act with no provocation, but once
>someone has done something wrong several times, *one* warning is enough...
>>Maybe it is also got to do with different cultures, Many countries are more
>>strict on how people behave than others. I read some people who gave answers to
>>moderator question, some want to boot people out strait away, some want warnings
>>I think some official policy should be made on what and how to treat people who
>>mess up on here, make a certain crime be punishable a certain way, either it be
>>suspended or banned. Make up some rules on what will happen, so a moderator is
>>not left to judge this on his own as in what to do with that person. And if
>>these were included under the Charter then the members could also see what their
>>actions would get in return.
>>I think it is time to put this to the members in an opinion poll as to what
>>actions deserves what penalty.
>>For example a question could be, If a member personally attacked another member
>>then what should be the penanlty
>>1. Ban (1 week)
>>2. Ban (2 weeks)
>>3. Ban (3 weeks)
>>4. Warning
>>5. Suspend Posting (2 weeks)
>>and so on, or maybe suspend posting where they could read but not post for a
>>period of time. I mean you can make up many type of penalties for actions. I
>>think this would work and once and for all bring some certain order into here
>>for all the members to see what actions bring what penalty.
>You only have to consider the exceptional cases different.  IE in the US, if
>you are convicted of certain types of crimes 3 times, you get an automatic
>life sentence with no parole.  Because the court is *sure* that if you did it
>three times, you will do it 4, or 5, or ....

The thing is if you give a new poster 3 chances then you give another new poster
3 chances if you "know" how he is or not it works here because you dont have to
worry about daughters or cats or kids this is not as threatning as the others so
it is VERY easy to know how to be fair here.

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.