Author: KarinsDad
Date: 13:48:00 06/08/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 08, 1999 at 16:26:37, Dave Gomboc wrote:
[snip]
>
>In the case I brought up, Bruce restored the message, not the original poster
>who made it, and said that if it was deleted again that he would repost it
>again. Yes, he was thumbing his nose at the moderation. Assume that you email
>him personally, and he is unwilling to relent. What will you do?
> a) ban him
> b) let the restored post survive
> c) continue deleting it as many times as necessary
> d) other?
>
>Back to the hypothetical, let's say that somebody thumbs their nose at you next
>time? ("Some person who refuses to even tell me who they _are_ decided that my
>message was unworthy and deleted it. I see nothing wrong with it, and I'm
>reposting it, and will continue to do so if it disappears again.") You can
>choose from the same options as above.
CCC is a privilege, not a right. If I get voted in, some subset of the majority
thought that I would perform the job at least as well or better than the other 5
nominees. My authority to delete posts would be no greater nor no lesser than
the other 2 moderators and would be irrelevant to my anomynity (Steve would know
who I am). If someone has a problem with that, it would be their problem and not
one of the majority of voters.
If you have a nuisance person like you describe, I would, in agreement with
Steve and/or the other moderators, (in Bruce's words) send them on a vacation
for a while. It's one thing to have an opinion. It's another to be a flake about
it. Continuous re-posting of a deleted message is the sign of a person who needs
to take a deep breath. I doubt any message is SO important to this forum that it
HAS to be seen. I hope your hypothetical situation never comes up since I do not
wish to see anyone banned, even temporarily.
But the bottom line answer to your question is that unreasonable people should
be handled more severely than reasonable people. I doubt that any of the other
candidates would argue that point.
>
>>I feel that some people shout just to shout. They take up the cause and protect
>>the downtrodden. Quite frankly, I do not think there are that many downtrodden
>>people on this forum. I think that there are people who dislike other people
>>(due to what they have posted in the past) and these people will go out of their
>>way to cause controversy when their "opponent" steps onto the stage. When the
>>person who is disliked is a moderator, then even people with a lot of common
>>sense sometimes make exceptions.
>
>AFAIK, neither Will nor Bruce have any dislike for each other. Moderation is a
>tough job, but when it's all said and done neither of them are going to hold any
>grudges about it.
I was not attempting to imply any animosity between Will and Bruce. I was
answering your hypothetical question. And yes, there are people here who reply
more aggressively or sarcastically when responding to certain moderators (and/or
other members).
KarinsDad :)
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.