Author: John Merlino
Date: 19:15:17 02/05/05
Go up one level in this thread
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 My opinion is that it is irrelevant "if the vigilante is correct or not". Assuming that the moderators correctly interpret the charter and make the right decisions, then anybody who continues any activity that is directly in violation of a previous decision by the moderators is likely to have his posts/threads deleted, and to eventually be banned. By voting for moderators we are putting the decision-making power into their hands for a given period of time. The reason there are three moderators is so that there can be a majority vote before any action can (or should) be taken. Simply put, if two out of three moderators believe that you are wrong, then you have very litle (reasonable) choice but to abide by their decision. jm
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.