Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 22:51:09 01/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 24, 2000 at 19:36:20, Michael Cummings wrote: >1. >Will you be less tolerant when a new member posts off topic troll related >threads when they first join and continue to post off topic for most of their >posts there-after. Will you ban this new member easier than if a long time >established memeber started doing this. If a person shows up one day that nobody has ever seen, and just starts posting nonsense, and continues to post nothing of any real worth, they will probably be banned pretty quickly. I would guess a warning the first time, just to remind them what this place is all about. If they continue to post this stuff, they probably don't belong here. If an established member starts doing this, it'll be a bit harder. A couple scenarios: 1) If the person starts posting crap, and nothing but crap, there will be at least a couple warnings to knock it off. If it continues, the member will take a vacation. If, upon returning, the crap continues, then perhaps the person doesn't belong here. 2) If someone posts the occasional troll, or off-topic nonsense message, but still makes frequent on-topic posts, there will probably be warnings. If it gets bad enough, some posts/threads may need to be deleted. It's unlikely that such a person will be banned, though. >2. >If a new members post something which starts a fight, which is not computer >chess related and ends up blown into a huge CCC rumble, eg the (bella sexist >threads) what will you do or say to this new member. Hopefully this stuff will be taken care of before it gets out of hand (either by deleting messages/threads, or some other action). However, if a certain person continually incites this stuff, it will be handled like the person from your first question. >3. >If a member is a computer chess related thread say to another member, that their >testing methods are wrong and that there results will have little point or >value, do you regard this as a insult to a fellow member. The short answer: "No". The long answer: If I do something stupid, I expect to be told so, without worrying that the person is calling me stupid. I think when someone makes a statement like this (i.e., "Your test is wrong and the results are worthless."), he should provide some sort of constructive argument explaining why this is so. I don't mean to pick on anyone specifically, but Dann Corbit is a good example. When someone posts a 5-game match between two programs and says something like "Program 'X' is better than 'Y'!", Dann nicely points out that this has no real statistical validity, and that program 'Y' could just as easily beat program 'X' in the next 5-game match. There are always cases that defy the rules, so it will definitely depend on how the statement is made. If someone says, "Your testing is stupid because you're stupid!", that is, of course, a personal attack. >3a. >If one moderater finds that the post is fine and another does not, what will you >do if that person complains to you because you are a moderator that thinks this >is a valid opinion and wants there post bought back. Do you mean if another moderator has already deleted the message? >Will you support his efforts. (note - do not answer that you think the testing What exactly do you mean by 'his efforts'? >method post was wrong and you do not support it, just answer that you are a >moderator that would support it and what you would do) There seems to be a failure of communication somewhere...I'm simply not understanding the question fully. :( If you'd like to rephrase it, I'd be glad to answer. :) >4. >Someone posts a saying or quote which to you is acceptable but you admitt is >strong, and you get moderator emails saying that that it is very offensive, >maybe due to culture or religion. This is a tough one. There are always differences in culture that make miscommunications happen. Someone can make a reference they find perfectly normal, but it will offend everyone in another part of the world. These will definitely have to be handled on a case-by-case basis. >5. >Will you be a moderator who will have less tolerance for new members who have >strange names, eg (ChessGod) and has a free hotmail or email account, and posts >chess releated trolling rubbish. Will you ban these account, knowing that we do >have Sean and other trouble making people constantly creating new accounts. I don't really care what people want to call themselves. Otherwise, this will be handled as #1. >6. >A member complains that he has been reciving emails from another member who is >sending him "how to make a million dollars" and "join this sex site and get a >free video", and that this member is using other members emails to use for >their spam emails. Unfortunately, I don't think there's anything the moderators can do about something like this that any other member can't do (Complaining to the person's ISP or whatever.). If someone is doing this, it's very likely that the person isn't posting much of value, anyway, and would be banned quickly. Banning wouldn't prevent him from continuing to send these emails, though. :( >Well that is all for now, I will think of some others I am sure. :) Jeremiah
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.