Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: CCC Nominations: A question on the subject of vigilantism.

Author: Jason Kent

Date: 05:27:23 02/05/05

Go up one level in this thread


On February 05, 2005 at 07:29:34, Richard Pijl wrote:

>On February 05, 2005 at 06:55:37, Dan Andersson wrote:
>
>> What are your personal opinions about how to handle if one poster decides that
>>moderation is insufficient and begins a campaign to discredit another user? And
>>as a followup question: Does it matter if the vigilante is correct or not?
>> Subject comes to mind both for recent activities and my own experiences as a
>>former moderator.
>>
>>MvH Dan Andersson
>
>In the first place it is up to the user being discredited to complain to the
>moderators. Two reasons:
>- In many cases users are perfectly capable (or at least want) to handle this
>themselves. I don't want to deny them this opportunity.
>- With 100-200 messages each day I am not willing to read everything. Sometimes
>the bad messages are also a few pages down as they could be responses in old
>threads
>
>However the recent events convinced me that a bit more enforcing by moderators
>could be required when these vigilantes are not easily stopped. Meaning, warning
>them more actively than we have done so far. This could lead to a (temporary)
>ban of these people (after appropriate warnings of course) when they do not
>comply.
>
>Richard.

I agree with Richard on this.  Flaming and/or bad language directed towards
another member shouldn't be allowed.  Deletions and warnings, followed by a
temporary ban seems appropriate.  Hopefully people will listen to the warnings
when they know the consequences. :)

Jason



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.