Author: Ulrich Tuerke
Date: 07:34:20 05/07/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 07, 1999 at 10:08:38, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On May 07, 1999 at 05:07:38, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >> >>On May 07, 1999 at 04:04:44, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >> >>>On May 06, 1999 at 17:36:48, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>On May 06, 1999 at 17:28:48, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 06, 1999 at 17:08:01, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>On May 06, 1999 at 15:28:14, Mike Castañuela wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On May 06, 1999 at 13:51:01, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>To Prof. Hyatt and Mr. Schroeder: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Please reconsider your decision. Sometimes, >>>>>>>tough skin is necessary, but firstly, you both are >>>>>>>part of the 'creme', fundamental part to exists >>>>>>>this type of fourms. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>In effect, the moderators deleted two fulls thread >>>>>>>without apparent cause. This is sad. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>If both you persist in it, good, in 1-2 months, >>>>>>>with new moderators, we will waitng your return. >>>>>> >>>>>>I am leaving until those guys are gone as well, although my post that said so >>>>>>was deleted. >>>>>> >>>>>>bruce >>>>> >>>>>Does the deletion mechanism track who does the deletion? >>>>> >>>>>I will assume that your post was reasonable, my past experience being that you >>>>>are a reasonable poster. :) >>>>> >>>>>Dave >>>> >>>>I re-posted it. >>>> >>>>bruce >>> >>>I protest against the deletion of 2 posts of mine which did not include personal >>>attacks at all; the 1st of these had been just a modest attempt of mediation >>>between Mr. Hayatt and the moderators though also involving some critics against >>>one of the moderator's way to treat this issue. >>> >>>This is not the way I expect moderators to act. >>> >>>Uli >> >>I read your first post. It was a call for reconcilliation. Your second post >>expressed a similar viewpoint. >> >>I don't understand why these posts are against the charter. >> >>bruce > >Will said that the entire thread was removed. In this case I don't think he >decided that each individual post was "against the charter", as you put it. The >general direction of the thread seems to be what is being judged. > >I have had posts in threads that were removed before. It has never bothered me, >or I would have emailed the moderators about it. Typically my message would not >make any sense out of the context in which it was written, so it would be >pointless for it to stick around. > >I'd imagine that if Uli reposted his message, it wouldn't get deleted, but I'm >not sure how much or little sense it would make without having Harald's message >around. Lots, for all I know. You are right, Dave. It doesn't make much sense to post them without the context of the other messages. Neither did I save a copy. I must say that these deletions made me a little bit upset. English is not my native tongue and so it takes a while to formulate and write the sentences. In this case, I also tried to choose my words quite carefully because of the "hot" issue. But it was just a waste of time (except for some exercise in English). Uli > >Dave
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.