Let us , programers, express ourselves

[Daniel Shawul]

Great, now we all get to live in fear of the ban hammer. I get it that being a moderator is a horrible chore but there are better ways of expressing that you want out.

You probably don't have to live in fear of the ban hammer if you behave yourself. Repeatedly creating the same new thread after the moderators have locked or deleted it and asked you to stop, is deliberately provocative behavior and the charter specifically says not to do that.

The charter says:

By participating here, [...]

You are further agreeing to abide by the decision of the moderators should a post of yours be deleted and/or if you should lose your membership privileges after due consideration of the moderators, and also agree not to re-enter the forum under an alias or assumed name in this case. You also will be agreeing that the decision of the moderators is final.

Yes I am sure it also says explanations should be offered. Imagine I was a moderator here, and I judge one of your notes to C programers and delete it without explanation, would you abide by my decisions?

Btw you are still evading questions I posed to you. How are you able to reconcile the fact that discussion about human chess is censored, while computer programing is not ?? In your own words this is 'cognitive dissonance', and your refusal to address my questions confirms it.

1) This forum is computer + chess club as you know. I don't know if you follow other sub-forums but discussion of human + chess is frowned up on! This same group of moderators delete those threads. OTOH we have computer + no-chess allowed to roam here. It misses the most important gradient IMO which is chess.

2) Since you seem to really believe in the worth of strcpy() discussions, I request you to go to 'Computer Go' mailinglist and post threads like 'A note to C programers', 'Another note to C++ programers', 'How your stacks and integers OVERFLOW' etc. If it is equally worth to any game programers, they should be interested too. But I highly doubt it.

3) No matter how you bend it, a computer+chess programing forum can not be a computer+programing forum. So if most here are physicsts (I am sure we have a sizable number), should we have a poll for physics+programing, a slippery slope. We might as well name this place the cccOVERFLOW forum, where your OVERFLOW questions are answered in 80 pages. I am sure I can make daily contributions of C/ASM programing questions

[Daniel Shawul]

Really, what is your problem?

How often in the past did such Threads like 'A note for C programmers' or the thread about strcpy() occur? Once in a month? Once in half a year?

At least it was a very entertaining thread. If you are not interested, simply ignore it.

Is that really so difficult?

I did but they can't seem to be able to ignore my post about stackOVERFLOW that seems to press their buttons.

[hgm]

Daniel, please drop it. I am sure there are infinitely more fruitful ways you could spend your time than arguing with moderators. Although your arguments make sense, the poll about this shows that they represent the point-of-view of only a very small minority.

For instance, what do you think of this 'Chess 2' variant, discussed in the main forum section, where after a capture both sides can bid (blindly) for the survival of the capturer? Would it be possible to adapt minimax to handle this game? Would there be an analogy to alpha-beta pruning?

[Daniel Shawul]

Daniel, please drop it. I am sure there are infinitely more fruitful ways you could spend your time than arguing with moderators. Although your arguments make sense, the poll about this shows that they represent the point-of-view of only a very small minority.

For instance, what do you think of this 'Chess 2' variant, discussed in the main forum section, where after a capture both sides can bid (blindly) for the survival of the capturer? Would it be possible to adapt minimax to handle this game? Would there be an analogy to alpha-beta pruning?

HG, I already dropped it, but they can't continually delete a perfectly acceptable post of mine and then ban me.

I haven't looked at that post in detail so can't comment right now.

[michiguel]

Daniel, please drop it. I am sure there are infinitely more fruitful ways you could spend your time than arguing with moderators. Although your arguments make sense, the poll about this shows that they represent the point-of-view of only a very small minority.

For instance, what do you think of this 'Chess 2' variant, discussed in the main forum section, where after a capture both sides can bid (blindly) for the survival of the capturer? Would it be possible to adapt minimax to handle this game? Would there be an analogy to alpha-beta pruning?

HG, I already dropped it, but they can't continually delete a perfectly acceptable post of mine and then ban me.

Yes, and as long as you keep violating the charter we can, and it depends if we choose to do so or not. We were trying hard not to ban you, since you are capable of doing nice contributions, but somehow, you decided to have repeated tantrums and insist in doing something you were told not to do. You were explained why, but you did not listen, and now you deny it. Again: We did not want YET ANOTHER OPEN THREAD about all this, not that the "advice" is technically out of place.

An illustration that we do not want to ban you, is that you were banned only 8 hrs the first time until the mod team could talk about this and the poll, and organize a DECENT ONE, not a joke, just to make sure you did not keep disrupting. It was not a punishment, just a tool to allow us to proceed. The next time, you were banned ONLY 24 hrs, when generally the second time should be for a longer period. But, this is the first time we would ban a programmer, so we really want to avoid it. However, you want to play the victim and challenge us to ban you, as in the message you told me you were giving us the excuse.

Like in other activities, including sports, someone has to call fouls. We can certainly be wrong, but players should agree to play on rather than dwelling on one call for ever disrupting and delaying the game for hours. You do not like that call? just move on. We do not have huge amount of time for this, because we have shit to do during the day.

Now, again, you posted you stackoverflow thread, open yet another one contributing to the noise you are complaining about. What should we do? look the other way and give you special treatment because you are a programmer? or ban you again like you are craving for it? We will see, we do not have the whole day with the other mods.

Bottom line is we have a member:

- he complains about all those c threads spamming the forum
- he decides to add to the spamming by a post that says things all developers know
- we ask him to post this IN the concerned threads, he refuses.
- he repeats, with a direct challenge, plays the fool and the victim.

One of the questions is
What are trying to accomplish by insisting on all this?

And the other is
How much time we should dedicate to only one member?

Mod Team.
PS: Clearly, you and lucas have a problem with us (why bringing the elections? with lies about facts and our intentions?). Is that the reason you are trying to create a mess?

[Daniel Shawul]

HG, I already dropped it, but they can't continually delete a perfectly acceptable post of mine and then ban me.

Yes, and as long as you keep violating the charter we can, and it depends if we choose to do so or not.

There you go in circles. Again which part of the charter does my stackOVERFLOW thread violate?

We were trying hard not to ban you,

LOL

since you are capable of doing nice contributions, but somehow, you decided to have repeated tantrums and insist in doing something you were told not to do. You were explained why, but you did not listen, and now you deny it. Again: We did not want YET ANOTHER OPEN THREAD about all this, not that the "advice" is technically out of place.

That is not an explanation. My stackOVERFLOW thread doesn't have anything to do with complaining, just your interpretation of it. Even the emphasis on OVERFLOW is present in the website. You say programmers KNOW about it already. Ok, I believe they also know about STRCPY() too, no? If that is the case, you should have removed my post as well as strcpy . More so the latter, because it keeps coming by with strcpy-revist, integer-overflow etc... Atleast I only made one post that you repeatdly delete. I guarantee the strcpy-ub discussion will be deleted as duplicate if it was asked in other programing forums.

An illustration that we do not want to ban you, is that you were banned only 8 hrs the first time until the mod team could talk about this and the
poll, and organize a DECENT ONE, not a joke, just to make sure you did not keep disrupting. It was not a punishment, just a tool to allow us to proceed. The next time, you were banned ONLY 24 hrs, when generally the second time should be for a longer period. But, this is the first time we would ban a programmer, so we really want to avoid it. However, you want to play the victim and challenge us to ban you, as in the message you told me you were giving us the excuse.

I tried to log in the morning in both my 24hr bans. Yesterday was successful but today it wasn't, so I had to wait till my prison time is up in both cases.

Bottom line is we have a member:

- he complains about all those c threads spamming the forum

Yes I did.

- he decides to add to the spamming by a post that says things all developers know

Developers KNOW about STRCPY.

- we ask him to post this IN the concerned threads, he refuses.

I already put up a poll, which you deleted, posted your own. The stackOVERFLOW thread is not a complaining, so get over it.

- he repeats, with a direct challenge, plays the fool and the victim.

One of the questions is
What are trying to accomplish by insisting on all this?

And the other is
How much time we should dedicate to only one member?

So you are not trying to play the victim here?? Atleast I got banned twice to complain about, while OTOH a 100 pages off-topic drivel is allowed to go on.

PS: Clearly, you and lucas have a problem with us (why bringing the elections? with lies about facts and our intentions?). Is that the reason you are trying to create a mess?

No, it was not my intention at all. Julien accused me and Lucas of lying and that he has evidence. All I said before that was that indeed you guys said that you won't be running again, which is the truth.

[michiguel]

HG, I already dropped it, but they can't continually delete a perfectly acceptable post of mine and then ban me.

Yes, and as long as you keep violating the charter we can, and it depends if we choose to do so or not.

There you go in circles. Again which part of the charter does my stackOVERFLOW thread violate?

We were trying hard not to ban you,

LOL

since you are capable of doing nice contributions, but somehow, you decided to have repeated tantrums and insist in doing something you were told not to do. You were explained why, but you did not listen, and now you deny it. Again: We did not want YET ANOTHER OPEN THREAD about all this, not that the "advice" is technically out of place.

That is not an explanation. My stackOVERFLOW thread doesn't have anything to do with complaining, just your interpretation of it. Even the emphasis on OVERFLOW is present in the website. You say programmers KNOW about it already. Ok, I believe they also know about STRCPY() too, no? If that is the case, you should have removed my post as well as strcpy . More so the latter, because it keeps coming by with strcpy-revist, integer-overflow etc... Atleast I only made one post that you repeatdly delete. I guarantee the strcpy-ub discussion will be deleted as duplicate if it was asked in other programing forums.

Here you can see that the point of posting your SO is contrasting a decision you did not like, as a complain. But that is not the point.

The main point is that we were trying to control the number of threads related to pure programming + complaints. We were/are not ready to let the forum be flooded with this issue (who knows, me may like to re-address our policy, but that is a digression). In fact, I posted a gentle suggestion to everybody to wrap the issue in a couple of days, and you not to complain. You kept going and even reply to my post despite I said that would cause to hijack the thread. Fine, we split it, rather than deleting it, and an NEW THREAD was created. We wanted to control that. Then, you tried to open a new poll/thread that was a joke. We deleted. immediately, you posted this SO. We warned you, and you did not care.

You can post the SO information here
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=50387

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=50388

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=50449

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=50401

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=50186

You did post it already here
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=50436

How many more threads do we want with the same issue? We made a decision at this point that we need to avoid over-flooding the forum with identical/similar threads, but you insist in opening another one.

We are making certain calls that may or may not be correct, but we have to make some. If every decision we make is going to generate tantrums, this will never end. We were debating if we bend our decision and allow you to get away with this, but it will completely unfair to give you special treatment,

If we allow you, we may need to allow anybody to come with their own tantrums.

Later, we are going to remove the SO, which it seems it may turn into another quarrel at this point (that was not difficult to predict).

Mod Team
EDIT: You are now suggesting to go to SO in form of those threads, so the NEW thread you open is less needed

An illustration that we do not want to ban you, is that you were banned only 8 hrs the first time until the mod team could talk about this and the
poll, and organize a DECENT ONE, not a joke, just to make sure you did not keep disrupting. It was not a punishment, just a tool to allow us to proceed. The next time, you were banned ONLY 24 hrs, when generally the second time should be for a longer period. But, this is the first time we would ban a programmer, so we really want to avoid it. However, you want to play the victim and challenge us to ban you, as in the message you told me you were giving us the excuse.

I tried to log in the morning in both my 24hr bans. Yesterday was successful but today it wasn't, so I had to wait till my prison time is up in both cases.

Bottom line is we have a member:

- he complains about all those c threads spamming the forum

Yes I did.

- he decides to add to the spamming by a post that says things all developers know

Developers KNOW about STRCPY.

- we ask him to post this IN the concerned threads, he refuses.

I already put up a poll, which you deleted, posted your own. The stackOVERFLOW thread is not a complaining, so get over it.

- he repeats, with a direct challenge, plays the fool and the victim.

One of the questions is
What are trying to accomplish by insisting on all this?

And the other is
How much time we should dedicate to only one member?

So you are not trying to play the victim here?? Atleast I got banned twice to complain about, while OTOH a 100 pages off-topic drivel is allowed to go on.

PS: Clearly, you and lucas have a problem with us (why bringing the elections? with lies about facts and our intentions?). Is that the reason you are trying to create a mess?

No, it was not my intention at all. Julien accused me and Lucas of lying and that he has evidence. All I said before that was that indeed you guys said that you won't be running again, which is the truth.

[Daniel Shawul]

Again you locked my stackOVERFLOW thread?? Wylie came in running to get it banned and I told him don't post your answers to me in that thread, because I asked you in a different thread. Then I deleted my post that I stated that. You can ask him if you want, he simply wanted to infest my stackOVERFLOW thread and you are eagerly waiting for an EXCUSE.

[wgarvin]

Again you locked my stackOVERFLOW thread?? Wylie came in running to get it banned and I told him don't post your answers to me in that thread, because I asked you in a different thread. Then I deleted my post that I stated that. You can ask him if you want, he simply wanted to infest my stackOVERFLOW thread and you are eagerly waiting for an EXCUSE.

Moderators, if you want to split/move/delete something and my posts are in the way, please go ahead and move or delete them, that is fine with me.

I don't have any desire to infest the stackOVERFLOW thread. All programmers probably know about StackOverflow. If not, Daniel has informed them of its existence now.

[michiguel]

Again you locked my stackOVERFLOW thread?? Wylie came in running to get it banned and I told him don't post your answers to me in that thread, because I asked you in a different thread. Then I deleted my post that I stated that. You can ask him if you want, he simply wanted to infest my stackOVERFLOW thread and you are eagerly waiting for an EXCUSE.

It was locked temporarily to move contents to the "poll" thread, where WE ASKED to keep the discussion so it won't spread throughout the forum. Now the thread was removed.

Miguel