CoronaVirusChess

[mclane]

Since when are moderators allowed to discuss moderator issues in public ?
What you do is called a Public tribunal, not a „feedback“.

Instead of moderating the forum you create off topic postings.
That’s unprofessional and obviously another attempt to execute people you tried to get rid in your campaign to shut down CTF.
Now the next level of this campaign begins.

[Rebel]

Since when are moderators allowed to discuss moderator issues in public ?
What you do is called a Public tribunal, not a „feedback“.

Instead of moderating the forum you create off topic postings.
That’s unprofessional and obviously another attempt to execute people you tried to get rid in your campaign to shut down CTF.
Now the next level of this campaign begins.

+1

You know what has been said by HGM, get rid of the likes of chrisw, laskos and you.

I won't post till this (word removed by moderation) mod team is gone.

With apologies to Dann, the big exception.

[flok]

Altough I enjoy reading this thread a lot (from a popcorn-eating point of view), but hey aren't we all a bit overreacting? It's only chess! It's a hobby!
There are more important (imho) things in life. Like peace on earth. Maybe we can give that a try?

[hgm]

You know what has been said by HGM, get rid of the likes of chrisw, laskos and you.

Indeed, that is what I said, concerning the possibilities to make CTF a forum that would be acceptable to the majority of decent members. (And the list was quite a bit longer, btw.)

I guess this thread is a very good illustration of why I said that for two of the mentioned people.

It is very funny that some people now are trying to suppress this discussion, screaming 'public tribunal' and 'inquisition'. Surely these people do not think there was any misbehavior in this thread that needs to be tried? Or would they recognize the misbehavior, and want to go at length to hide it, in order to protect the perpetrators, because they consider misbehavior a virtue that should in no way have consequences for the reputation of those displaying it?

[Ras]

There's quite a double-bind here. If the elected CCC mods just go ahead and moderate as they see fit, some people will claim that it's a time limited dictatorship. If on the other hand the CCC mods ask the members for feedback on what exact kind of moderation they want, the very same people will call it a tribunal. These people strive hard for finding fault with everything.

[mclane]

In a computerchess Forum, if there is a breach against the charter, you moderate it.
And not discuss off topic about it,

In an off topic forum (CTF), you can discuss these issues in public.


So you now want to change CCC into CTF ?

[hgm]

Actually my moderation policy has always been to only delete charter-violating postings when they are reported. And although I do see several pretty serious charter violations here, none of those was reported. You did not report any charter violations. You are just whining about off-topic posting. Well, off-topic posting is not a charter violation if it is not preceded by an explicit warning not to do so, (in which case it would be a failure to abide by moderator decisions), and would in most cases just lead to the postings being moved to a more suitable place.

And it is up to the moderators to decide what they consider off-topic, not to a quarrelsome member. And I decided that this is the best place for having the current discussion. I can remind you that it is a charter violation to not abide by the decisions of the moderators. So stop whining, and be an obedient member for a change.

Personally I usually prefer to leave insane personal attacks on me stand, rather than have them deleted. I always felt that readers can be trusted to recognize insanity when they see it, and for the few that cannot, there is no hope anyway. So better just leave it up as an embarrasment for the perpetrators. Put this is just a personal opinion, and other members might very well feel different. I think this should be primarily the choice of the insulted party. So if they report the violation, I delete. If not, I leave it even when I notice it. Especially if they even quote the violating postings themselves!

I don't really like it when they quote that, because the most vile accusations could irritate other readers, and if an offensive posting is quoted umpteen times, it becomes very tedious to remove it when someone else reports it. I cold always remove the entire discussion, of course. But fortunately none of the charter violations here was reported, except for the one by Ed, which was appropriately moderated.

[BrendanJNorman]

Altough I enjoy reading this thread a lot (from a popcorn-eating point of view), but hey aren't we all a bit overreacting? It's only chess! It's a hobby!

Welcome to the world of CTF. Life or death brother...lock and load.

[mclane]

...

So what do you want to discuss ?
Shall we handcuff Chris and throw him into the channel and see if he swims ?
Or do you prefer to burn him on a stake like Giordano Bruno because he is not believing that the earth is the center of our
Sun system,
or do you ask him like Galileo Galilei if he confesses to repeat that the earth is a flat disc.

As a moderator of course who decides what is on or off topic in a computerchess Forum you have plenty of possibilities.

Maybe he shall sing the Dutch Hymne while standing on one foot while downloading winboard.

[hgm]

Should I take that as a sign you think there was something wrong with Chris' behavior?

What I wanted to discuss was this:

What do you think? Should these kind of flame wars be deleted altogether, or should they be left up for amusement value? Please provide some feedback!

What exactly do you not understand about that?

That is not an 'off-topic' subject. It pertains directly to how people want this forum section moderated. The question arises because no violation was reported before I split the thread, and people were actually enthusiastically quoting each other's violations and alleged violations.