Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 10:54:19 01/04/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 04, 2006 at 07:48:55, Andrew Williams wrote: >On January 04, 2006 at 04:35:51, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On January 04, 2006 at 04:03:59, Andrew Williams wrote: >> >>>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. 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. >>> >>>I think the moderation team is doing fine. >> >>When you are a moderator, every decision will annoy someone. If you leave it, >>then the complainers will be irked. If you remove it, then the posters will be >>irked. And either way, some non-involved posters will like it or hate it. >> >>So I think you have to use the old brain-pan and just do what you think is best. >> If enough people don't like it, eventually they will give you the boot. If all >>goes well, they won't ask you to do it again, and you will have the best of all >>worlds, >>;-) > >I agree with all this, but I also have a problem with members who are constantly >in conflict with moderators, especially if they are new members. I am pig-headed >and opinionated but I have been here since 1998 and have never had a serious >argument with a moderator. People who appear from nowhere and immediately start >whining on about their rights and how they are being oppressed by the moderators >are simply not worth bothering about, in my opinion. > >Andrew I agree. But just for the fun of it. Give me one single example of such a poster with a real identity! Please. :) P.S. My guess is that these seeming complaining experts are all fakes. For what? Oh, I could tell you exactly the motivation and goal of such fakes. Your whole argument has a flaw. Namely that no new member could have such questions at all. But we must face the fact that we have fake identities who want to have their agenda going on. In CTF we have the same phenomenon. Agendas this is the most important topic for many here. After the motto the last days we had Rybka, now we should lance Hiarcs and ok, now we should deal with Smirth a little bit. And tomorow lets not forget to bash ChessBase and then we can remember the fabulous Marty. Perhaps even the Kittingers. But Friedel should be negatively mentioned and then perhaps the new Shredder. Exacta should be praised. A little bit of Arena. A new engine with 3000 Elo called Kokomo. etc pp. If this is posted under always new fake names, moderation should do something for the sake of the credibility of CCC as such. I know that Graham once had decided to search for improvements what identities are concerned but I guess many prefer the fun out of the many pseudos. This is wrong because dozens of pseudos have only two or three, perhaps only a single father! All IMO of course and I am NOT a famous CC experts. Sure.
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.