Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:52:55 11/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 02, 1999 at 12:53:15, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On November 02, 1999 at 06:10:52, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>>Posted by Bruce Moreland on November 02, 1999 at 02:38:38: >>> >>>>I will describe what I see as a big problem in current and all previous >>>>moderation but let's discuss the posting in question first. >>>> >>>>First the word "troll", my dictionary says: "sending an article to an (Internet) >>>>discussion group with a deliberate mistake in the contents with as only goal >>>>to receive as many as possible reactions" >>>> >>>>Thus in the very first sentence the intentions of the poster are questioned and >>>>marked as bad. I call this against the charter of CCC. When I read the original >>>>post I see nothing like that, just some data he found on ICC. The data can be >>>>right or wrong and if wrong it should be said so but why mark it as bad >>>>intentions? >>> >>>It's no worse than the same guy saying in another post that the reason Crafty >>>has a high rating is that it has a huge noplay list. Maybe that made Bob a >>>little angry? Like I said, I think it is possible that a reasonable person >>>could label that post a troll. I'm not saying I would have, but I'm not >>>holding myself up as the archetypical reasonable person, either. >>> >>>So I disagree that what Bob said is against the charter, unless the charter is >>>very tightly invoked. >> >> >> >>>I think that there needs to be room for people to disagree and express and >>>work out some frustration. >> >>Sounds very reasonable, 2 but's: >> >>- You then need to change the charter a bit? >> >>- Where is the limit? And this limit is it equal for everybody? I think it's >>an open door for double standards, hardly to avoid, maybe impossible to avoid? > >It has always been like this, Ed. There are lots of things not covered by the >charter, which aren't all sugary and sweet. We've had people arguing in here >from day one. > >>>I don't want to create a situation where people can pin-prick each other to >>>death, and the only ones who have to pay for it are those who those who can't >>>keep absolute control when defending themselves. >>> >>>In this circumstance, Bob is a clear target. >> >>Yes, and so are a few others. > >Oh, come on. > >[snip] > >>But if ALL are EQUAL you would have one problem less. Just catch the person >>who STARTED the problem whoever he is. In principal ignore all the defence >>follow-ups. > >Nobody is being treated "un-equally". What is going on is that a bunch of >people are mad at Bob, are complaining about Bob's attitude, are threatening >various forms of violence if Bob is not publicly humiliated by us, and are being >told to forget it. > >Bob is not doing anything especially bad, and he's being goaded by a lot of >people. > >bruce > >[snipped the rest, no offense] Define 'bunch'. If it is really a 'bunch' give me a number. I can certainly figure out whether I ought to keep posting here or not. If a more 'sterile' (and certainly less technical) forum is desired, I can accomodate that. I don't answer questions here just because I enjoy it. My daily email provides more than enough to keep me busy... We have multiple groups: (a) some of us actively developing programs, discussing ideas, algorithms, data structures, etc. (b) some of us actively selling commercial programs and answering a few questions here and there, but nothing with any technical 'meat'. (c) some that follow the freeware programs with a lot of interest, and are not so interested in commercial programs. (d) some that follow the commercial programs as though they are all that there is, and are not interested in freeware programs. (e) the rest of CCC (this is the largest group probably). I thought that the crusade to leave r.g.c.c and form CCC was a bit funny, because most of the ones wanting to do so were the very ones that don't want to discuss what they do. I never understood the 'idea' of leaving one place where you don't say anything, to create another place where you won't say anything. I get more turned off by the 'computer chess world' as it exists, day by day. People steal code. People make grossly distorted statements. Etc. Sort of makes me wonder 'why put up with it?' You'd think I must be making a fortune doing this, to stick around. Yet I haven't made one cent yet, and don't intend to do so. But whether I choose to continue to distribute crafty, and participate in technical discussions _is_ a subject for my consideration. I suppose the three days I am going to be off in Denver will give me a chance to decide what I ought to do... but I definitely feel that I have gotten too old to put up with the nonsense...
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.