Author: Harald Faber
Date: 08:33:47 07/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 24, 1999 at 14:39:18, James Robertson wrote: >Moderators cannot act like kings, but must act like judges, who _interpret_ the >'constitition' (charter in this case). That implies they stick to it. Yes, but INTERPRETATION leaves a lot of space! >Refer to my earlier devil's advocate post. Why oh why must we accept your >tolerance? You think tolerance means acceptance of sexual jokes, but NOT >handicapped jokes. What if Jo Schmo thinks that tolerance means acceptance of >sexual jokes AND handicapped jokes, but thinks that blonde jokes are bad? But >what if Jane Doe likes all three, and thinks tolerance means acceptance of all >jokes? Why is YOUR opinion of tolerance BETTER? Why should we 'tolerate' your >opinions about tolerance and NOBODY ELSE'S? Be honest; being tolerant means >accepting *everything*. No, in this point I disagree. Being tolerant for me means to accept MINOR issues I would disagree with. Example: You write that you push your head onto the wall frequently. Although I don't understand it I wouldn't complain about that. Do what you want without hurting others. BUT I hear people shouting at you that you should leave this strange behaviour because you may be idol for some younger guys or so. And you will ALWAYS find others complaining about anything. There is a large field for a "dirty" joke. As you wrote, for someone a joke about jews is dirty, for another one about handicapped people and another one feels offended by a joke about blondes. So your opinion is, to avoid any complaints, forbid "dirty" jokes. Fine. What comes next? Forbid talking about chess programs? I write FRITZ SUCKS (e.g.), then moderators should come around and say "well Harald, you are not allowed to use that statement/words."? Come on, this can't be true. CCC is still a place with few members actively posting, most of the others reading. Do you want to make this place sterile? Let's start making a list with topics that are not allowed to be talked about: 1) dirty jokes (BTW who decides what is a dirty joke?) 2) politics 3) other hobbies than computer chess 4) CPU speed 5) fascinating moves/games in current HUMAN tournaments 6) ... (to be continued) >My point is we CANNOT agree on what to tolerate. We _must_ have an independent >guidline, right or wrong, that we agree to and will _not_ break. It is the ONLY >way to have peace. >James Who do you want to create that guideline? Won't this guideline make CCC sterile? If we all wouldn't behave that stubborn as I already have seen it, there would be MUCH less problems, less discussions of what is right or wrong (the problem is that everyone thinks he has the only right opinion, me either, but doesn't accept the other side's argument, or even tries to.) and finally a better atmosphere here. I know that is a dream. But sometimes dreams come true.
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.