Author: odell hall
Date: 16:15:03 01/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 12, 2000 at 13:36:34, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On January 12, 2000 at 10:28:01, Jeff Anderson wrote: > >>I thought the point of the moderators was to keep things getting into out of >>control nonsense, but instead the moderators seem to very much enjoy >>contributing to the nerdly CCC soap opera. They start entire new threads about >>a post they have deleted and why they have deleted, and then they reply to that >>thread themselves before anyone else. They announce members that have been >>suspended in long overly-dramatic public letters. They participate in big >>arguments about what dirty word someone has said, or which phrase was >>politically incorrect. They bicker more than anyone else in this entire forum. >>Generally the moderators are the biggest contributor to mammouth off-topic >>threads. >> The moderators are doing a bad job, and actually causing more problems for CCC >>than would occur if they did not exist at all. The moderators should err on the >>side of sins of ommision rather than sins of comission. >>I realize this post itself may contribute to the clutter on the CCC message >>board, but I hope it is a first step in returning things to a state where the >>moderators do not feel it is there duty to post their every thought publicly, >>and create a problem much bigger than if they did not exist at all. > >There has been an excess of response in some recent cases. > >I don't believe we've made any announcements when people have been suspended, >and perhaps we can be criticized for this, although it is the opposite of your >concern. I replied to Odell Hall regarding his, because he made it a public >issue. > Bruce this is completely untrue!! I never brought up my suspension in any of my post and was rather shocked when the moderators brought it up, and selectively displayed the post which makes me look bad. No one here was even aware of my suspension and nothing I said was in reference to my suspension. I was talking about unfairness in moderation and never even remotely used the word suspension nor did I even suggest it. I think it was completely irresponsible for the moderators to dig up all these post from months ago. First of all they selectively brought out the post that would make me look bad. Remember there was month's of negative post and threads that were the cause to me making some of those nasty remarks. It's not like I just suddenly lost my mind and started attacking people for nothing. This is the picture that the moderators would like to portray. There were attacks against my post that began to form an abusive pattern which eventually led up to me using some of the unfortunate language that I did. Everytime I would make a post expressing my opionion on the GM Question for instance, Robert hyatt would make some kind of sarcastic comment attacking my intelligence, calling me foolish or using an insulting metaphor, When i tried to respond to these insults, they were simply ignored or some of his disciples would try and justify his comments. Once i complained to moderation and was told that they would speak to him about it. Over time i knew I was fighting a losing battle and it was clear that nothing was going to be done about it because hyatt had much more support than i could hope to get. Which led to increasing frustration and eventually I reached a limit to where I simply exploded. Ofcourse based on the threads that you displayed it makes me look like a mad raving lunatic who exploded with little provaction. I am sure that any reasonable person if they could see the "complete" picture over months of abuse, certainly would understand how one could lose his cool. >The thread suggesting that two members be banned should have been immediately >deleted, in hindsight. > >This kind of thing goes in cycles, and assuming that my co-moderators are >willing to stop, and various other people are willing to stop, the only traces >of this in a few days will be the archives. > >I don't think there is any easy way to handle moderation. If you decide you >want no moderation, you get an influx of net-stalkers, people who want to repeat >the same rant constantly, off-topic bickering, etc., and we would still get >these incredibly long angry threads, with the added problem that the threads >might never actually end. CCC was founded by people from r.g.c.c., >specificially to avoid the problems evident there. > >It is possible to go the other direction as well, I'm very concerned that we'll >eventually undergo a period where posts will be deleted and people will be >banned for simple disagreement with majority positions. > >bruce
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.