Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 19:16:43 01/30/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 30, 2006 at 21:43:31, Tim George wrote: > > > > A have a contructive proposal: if we want to prevent people from coming back >under a false name why don't we start banning people for really doing something >wrong instead of banning people for idiotic reasons like using slang terms >"sucks" ect,. Or for things such as Argueing. Maybe we should start banning >people for deliberately attacking other members, instead of banning people for >defending themselves after being attacked. If i was going to run for moderator i >would run under the platform that almost anything goes but the use of Foul >Language... I mean serious like the F word, all slang would be tolerated. >Unpopular opinions would also be allowed, for instance if someone wants to >critize hiarcs and be alittle curt in doing so this would be allowed, as long as >the person did not go overboard to where it is obvious they are trying to defame >the program. Also the Rules would be applied to EVERYONE, NO EXCEPTIONS. How >about a little tolerance guys? Is all this so bad? Your suggestions are not connected to the subject. If you ban for the slightest infraction or if you ban for everything under the sun, it has no connection on whether people try to do an end-around. I think that if people want to go cuckoo-for-coacoa-puffs, then they should try it around the corner, where nobody seems to care, or on a usenet forum. I have no complaints against the moderators, and they have done nothing that does not seem sensible to me, as far as I can see.
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.