Author: David Blackman
Date: 01:51:23 01/26/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 2000 at 02:45:16, Bruce Moreland wrote: >I would like to know how the moderator candidates think they might like to >handle the following situations. > >1) Someone nobody has ever heard of creates an obscene post with an obscene >title, and no other content. It gets deleted. They get a big, not very friendly warning. If the other moderators want them banned, i don't try to stop it. If they re-offend without doing some good posts first, i try to get them banned. >2) Someone complains via moderator email that another member has sent them an >email calling them a "*****". I reply (by email) to the complainer making sympathetic noises and suggest they take it up with their own ISP and the offenders ISP. I don't think it is the moderators job to police private e-mail, and in any case it is usually impossible for a moderator to find out if the alleged abusive email was really sent. >3) Someone writes a short post announcing that they've written a new chess >program, explains that you can get it for $30, and includes a URL to their web >site. I suspect the charter bans blatently commercial posts (BTW, where is the charter?) If this is the case, and i see or am informed of the post, i delete the post. Then i write a friendly email to the poster explaining the problem and suggesting they re-post without mentioning the $30 or other blatantly commercial details. They can include the URL again if they like, and it is ok to mention the $30 on their own web-site :-) >4) Someone consistently posts abusive messages, and it seems to be impossible >to get them to stop doing this. (After trying to get them to stop ...) try to get them banned. >5) Someone complains to you via moderator email about a post that contains >a lot of content but includes the line, "at this point black blundered with >29. ... hxg5 and got the **** kicked out of it." I would ask permission of the original author to edit the text as above, assuming this is technically possible. If that can't be done, i reluctantly delete the post and write an apologetic email to the author suggesting they repost with slightly different wording. I don't find that kind of stuff offensive myself, and if i saw it in a post i would pretend i didn't see it. But if i actually got a complaint in moderator email i would probably have to take action. This is partly about avoiding hassles under Australian and New South Wales law, which i don't completely understand, but it is dangerous stuff, and not completely in line with USA and international law :-) >I would like to ask a couple of other questions: > >1) On a scale of one to ten, where one is super-tolerant, and ten is completely >intolerant, how tolerant are you of off-topic posts? I used to be very intolerant of them. But now i read CCC from a decent net connection and downloading 100K of message index is not so bad, so i am a lot more tolerant. Maybe 3 if i understand the scale right. But i could be persuaded to take a strong stance against off-topic posts if a significant number of the membership told me the off-topic posts were causing them major problems. Technical solutions to the problem, such as splitting CCC into multiple forums, or implementing some kind of kill file mechanism would remove many of the objections to off-topic posts, but these represent a lot of work for ICDChess staff if they try to implement them. >2) Are you capable of getting rid of someone who seems to be here to cause >trouble? Hmm. What are the likely difficulties in doing this? I'm certainly capable of recommending that someone be banned, to whoever it is that actually takes them off the list. Though i'd only do that if things were really bad.
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.