Author: Joseph Ciarrochi
Date: 14:05:54 01/27/06
Go up one level in this thread
Peter, this is a much needed post. Thank you! it is clear you put alot of time into it, and that you care very much about the CCC. I think this is an exciting place, despite all the, um, harsh treatment some members dish out. Just to second some of your ideas, Peter, I think there are two classes of posting behavior that make life a bit unpleasent for people. 1) personal attacks. I don't need to say much about this, except that i notice that responding to personal attacks makes things worse. Just to give you an anecdote. B.F. Skinner was one of the greatest psychologists of our century, but during the last part of his career, he was regularly and harshly attacked. Yet he always responded politely to the attacks. When someone asked why he didn't attack back or respond with more venom, he said that this would reinforce the attacker. I think this is right. Sometimes the best response is silence. 2) extremely harsh critiques. What is the purpose of this? No-one gains any status or money by brutely criticizing another person's approach, findings, or conclusions. This is a hobby. We are all fellow travelers on this earth, engaged in a fun activity, and i don't see why we can't be mutually supportive. Almost every harsh critique i've seen could have been said in a more polite, and supportive way. If you think someone has not followed the optimal approach, then you can express this sentiment without telling them everything they did was wrong or worthless. By the way, I think the majority of members are quite decent and respectful, and i have really appreciated people like Dann corbitt and others taking the time to explain things to me. best Joseph On January 27, 2006 at 16:24:08, Peter Skinner wrote: >Hello everyone, > >Since beginning my term as a moderator I have seen many things happen here on >the CCC that I have some issues with. > >With any bulletin board on the internet you will find groups of people that >stick together based on similar ideas, friendships, point of origin on our >lovely planet and so on.. > >I have _many_ issues I would like to talk about, but here are the main ones: > >1. General treatment of members. >2. Hijacking threads based on personal agendas. >3. Technical vs. non-technical. > >-General treatment of Membership- > >In my moderation philosophy I made it very clear that there are _many_ different >type of people here with _many_ varying levels of technical expertise, and >_many_ levels of understanding the English language. > >Since becoming a moderator I have removed several posts where users are simply >attacking others for no other reason that a misunderstanding over what ideas are >trying to be conveyed. This is a problem, and a serious one. > >I am very proud to be part of such a diverse group of people trying to show >excitement, interest, and knowledge in one of my favorite areas. I am disgusted >in how some users treat newer members, or members that are trying to convey a >particular message/idea relating to an idea or engine simply based that they are >not looking at the information provided but rather the way it was presented. On >an even worse extreme, people simply attack the person regardless whether the >information is accurate or they have an opinion about the data. > >As a group we have to be more conscious of the fact idea it is ok to attack an >idea, but not the person presenting it or discussing it. This is something I am >hoping this little spiel will help with. Do this.. and this place will become >more interesting than it ever was in the past. > >-Hijacking of threads- > >If you have a personal issue with someone, do not insert it into every thread >they make. This is not going to be tolerated any more. > >If you can not have the maturity level to sustain an intelligent conversation >with someone, do not post in their threads or to anything they say. > >The moderation team get soooo many emails about this person calling this person >names and then because the other person retaliates, we get the reverse emails >stating it has been done. This happened this weekend when I was the only >moderator available for the majority of the time, and I just ignored it. I let >the children play and it died out. And I do mean children. You know who you >are.. > >If you hijack a thread for no other reason than to put your elbow in someone >else's rib, then expect a harsh and quick response from the mod team. We are not >babysitters. They get paid.. we don't. I hope this is understood. > >-Technical vs. Non-Technical- > >Recently I removed a thread of Chandler's that said "Rybka sucks for analysis" >that provided no proof of that. Just the topic, some Shredder output and a SLEW >of complaints. Had he stated "Rybka has issues as an analysis tool" and provided >his proof, there would have been no way his post would have been removed. I >would have probably joined in on the conversation to see where it was going and >what he had to offer. I enjoy a good conversation and Chandler does bring up >good points, but he has.. umm.. topic problems :) > >To often a non-technical person will inject his opinion or ask a question and >the more technical people respond very brashly and harshly. This has to stop. > >Do we need to come up with a glossary of terms that will be allowed and not be >allowed? Have a certain number of people enlisted as the technical help desk? >Hand out cookies when someone answers politely? > >Just because your knowledge in a general area is good or great, it does not mean >everyone around you will understand what you are saying or conveying. The same >goes for the other direction. Less knowledgeable individuals may have to explain >more detail what they are trying to say or raise a question about. > >Topic formation has a great deal to do with how the thread will be received and >the people within the thread interacted with. A good formatted topic will yield >more information and better responses. I.e..: > >"Rybka sucks!" = Troll thread, and probably one I will remove. >"Rybka has an endgame bug - details" = Thread many people will look at,. >Especially if you provide details and evidence. > >Do you see the difference and how they two topics would be viewed? Excellent :) > >If we can work on these three issues, the CCC will become a great place once >again where 4 page threads of useful data will appear. People will get into >great heated arguments, share ideas, and in the end probably still disagree but >they will agree to disagree. > >Sound fun? Well only all of you can make it happen. > >I welcome you all to chime in and give your thoughts as this IS your club. > >Peter
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.