Author: Terry Presgrove
Date: 08:35:49 02/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 12, 2000 at 20:10:24, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On February 12, 2000 at 19:17:42, stuart taylor wrote: > >>On February 12, 2000 at 13:03:17, Bruce Moreland wrote: >> >>>On February 12, 2000 at 10:34:31, Jeff Anderson wrote: >>> >>>>/ >>> >>>Oh baloney. >>> >>>bruce >> >>Why baloney? Isn't this a person who can offer much more to the public >>interest than we can offer him? Why reject it? >> And is it too much off topic to have to reject such a thing? >> Stuart Taylor > >I was responding to the topic of this sub-thread. > >Something started a Fischer thread and the moderators got rid of it. This is >certainly a sane course of action, it's not like the moderators did something >completely bizarre. > >OK. Perhaps some people don't agree with what they did. That's fine, the trend >is toward a free world, so this is allowed in the general case. But there is no >reason for those who happen to disagree to get huffed about it. > >If the moderators do something you don't like, and you think that what they did >was something that a reasonable person *could* do, that should be enough, and >the urge to respond indignantly should be resisted. We voted, some people were >elected, and the rest of us should let them do their jobs rather than insisting >that the moderators be perfect proxies for every member. They can't be. > >Regarding the content of the base post, Bobby Ang might be in a position to tell >us all sorts of things about Bobby Fischer. This is nice of him, but this group >isn't supposed to be about Bobby Fischer. So I can *understand* why the >moderators got rid of the thread. > >bruce I disagree. I don't think the modorators should ever delete a post because it " might " or potentially could cause problems. Every post has the potential to cause division. Looking at a post and trying to predict the outcome by looking at past statistics is also inapropriate IMHO. Either a post is within acceptable cirteria or it isn't. Whether we like it or not Fisher has had a large impact on chess and my understanding by the pre-election statements by moderators was that chess topics where not going to be off topic? If the post goes foul then delete it..... otherwise let it run. Personally I'm not particularly interested in Fisher related topics, but next time it may be a topic I am interested in. It comes down to who's "OX is being gored". The kind of angry responses that occurred as a result of the deletions are to be expected. The moderators must realize that in these cases they are going to get negative feedback one way or the other. Since none claim to be prophetic why not simply judge each post as is rather than looking through some misty probability and statistic Cystal Ball? TP
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.