Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 04:26:44 01/04/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 03, 2006 at 22:22:03, Graham Banks wrote: >Hello Fernando, > >nobody is trying to drive either yourself or Steve B away as far as I'm aware. >You are both extremely valuable members of CCC in my opinion and that of most >others I know. >On the ONE occasion that it was seen fit to trim a repartie between the two of >you that was becoming VERY off topic and receiving numerous complaints, there is >this severe over reaction! (as if moderation isn't difficult enough as it is) > >Your "conversations" with Steve B here are normally well received by most, >including myself, so there should be no reason for either of you to feel that >can't continue. > >As I keep saying and as you well know, moderation is a case of damned if you do >and damned if you don't. Hi Graham! You are one of those who banned ASteen - right?! Following that event let me repeat something which I had expressed in different wording before. There is something you miss and missed - it is very easy for those who can see and it's impossible to see for those who dont. I can see it and I assure you Fernando can see it too. Please read carefully what I write here: There is something beyond your description of the two either-or alternatives. If you do or if you dont. You see only these two levels. But Fern and I (to name just we two) we see a level beyond this. And on that level things become humor and this is a fact almost invisible for you. Because if you could see it you wouldnt react in such earnest mode. The whole messages sent recently by Fern to Steve and backwards has no meaning in itself, it's meant to express something which is in fact happening here without that at least you dont see. And because you dont see you make the wrong decisions. I repeat, you see two variations. Either you react correctly or you make a mistake. But this is wrong. Often there is a third issue where you cant react or shouldnt because it's just humor. And if you come and point at the earnest dogma that everything must be on-topic and technical, the satire is already born for such a misunderstanding. The problem is that you evaluate every nonsense test result message "higher" than such humorous exchange about the satirical importance of certain tournaments that exist only in the heads of one or two Fernandos... Fern is claiming that his nonsense isnt orse than the other nonsense. Point is you cant prove that a) all testing results are not nonsense and b) what Fern is writing is nonsense. IMO the lack of sophistication for such details is the reasons why people with the ability to communicate this way and especislly THIS way, are not attracted by the possibility to write here. Best example ASteen. ASteen had all the levels packed in every single message and it was really fun to read and to learn! The point here we have nobody who says "stop it - this is ok and I take it into my responsibility that I am correct with my judgement" but we have here a climate that says "what is this? I dont understand it completely? Could it be a provokation? Let's see, has the author a profile?" I tell you you wouldnt accept a guy like Short or Kasparov even if they would tell you the numbers of the credit cards or Bank accounts in Switzerland. But I and Fern dont need numbers to get it that the author behind ASteen is writing sophisticated stuff to amuse and enlighten the audience. Insofar David Levy or Ray Keene are good alternatives to think about the identities in question. Everyone of them whould be a top act for this group. But you would just orientate yourself in automatisms like "has he insulted Uri by joking a little bit? if yes, we should follow those who complain and ban ASteen...". The reason why I'm here and not away is that exactly this topic is psychologically interesting me. Of course this is NOT computerchess but it's about the class of CCC as it were possible if someone like Fern or his buddy would moderate. Moderate? - Of course it's a damned job because in certain cases with no inspiration and only insults you must act naturally. I could address many more aspects. Just this last one. People say "Fern, you have extra rights to misbehave while we were already banned". This is a misunderstanding. If Fernando would insult you, Graham then he would be banned like all others. But if he says something nobody else is able to express then a moderation staff should think thrice before it started a new ban or just such a misunderstanding which lies in your actual message here. It is NOT forbidden to ask questions, Graham. Or do you see that from a certain age upwards as a degrading formalism? I wouldnt say so. But you should realise that by stamping or hammering or how the wording is - the odd and vane average without inspiration I would ask if there were a third solution to my deadly two alternatives that begin to make me nervous... In bad English but with the most freindly intentions possible, Rolf >Every decision taken will upset somebody, often even >those that you regard as friends. > >I emailed both yourself and Steve B yesterday, in essence expressing all of the >above. > >I would like nothing more than for Steve B to keep posting here and I am sure >that he will do so as he has a lot to offer and is well respected here. > >Some members have openly stated that they don't like my style of moderating, but >please realise that I'm only doing the job in the way I judge is best. >My term as part of the moderation team does not have too long to go. On the off >chance that I'm nominated again and decide to stand, the CCC faithful will be >able to reject my moderation style with their vote. > >Regards, Graham.
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.