rebel777 wrote:bob wrote: No, you just decide what can be discussed.
I think the mod-team did the right thing Bob, deleting a bad rumor without evidence. The mod-team doesn't oppose strong clone discussions as long as it comes with data. It's all about ethics which was one of the main reasons for the foundation of this place, to get rid of harmful noise with the intend to hurt people.
In the hypothetical case Vince would spread the rumor you bought your professor status on the internet without providing data you would gladly be served by mod action. When it comes with evidence that would change the matter, wouldn't it?
And that's the crux of the issue at hand.
Ed
I want to support what Ed says. When the CCC was created I was happy because of the protection moderation would give because I personally was shortly before the creation heavily attacked in rgcc for having faked my academic titles. That affront came from a famous programmer BTW. Of course it was all invented hearsay without any evidence what the programmer had excuded.
So, I am really a bit surprised that here in CCC a topic could be created that insinuated something illegal in case of Rybka, and this repeatedly, when no clear cut evidence could have ever been presented. I thought that this was a method that could be used in rgcc but not in CCC.
BTW at the time when I stood under pressure of the incredible assault, I was in a similar situation like Vasik today. How should I prove that I have everything in order with my status? What must I prove if such famous programmers attack me? Must I prove my innocence or can I trust that nothing could be proven against me if I knew what I had in reali done and never faked? Again, it's beyond everything rational that such a situation could happen here in CCC in difference to rgcc. But as it seems it did. And I support Ed in his message and the mods in their decisions. I must admit that I dont know everything in detail about the actual case here.
If Bob now said that he would rather go back to rgcc because of moderation thought police and that he would rather prefer the disturbing noise on rgcc I can only say that I at least am happier in CCC where moderation prevents that such horrible nightmares couuld happen to me like it did on rgcc.
I repeat. At the time the attacking programmer was at first thinking with the same determination that he was correct with his supposition about my background and my criminal deeds. And he was badly wrong. Also Bob as probably the best expert we have for questions of the illegal that are supposed in this case here in CCC. But, Bob, ask yourself, just for a second, what wouldd be if you were wrong like the otther programmer years ago?? The case cant be compared at all, but the determination and certainty in the opinion of the attackers or critics is comparable. Couldnt you agree here that mods did a good job if they moderated when 100% proof isnt there? What would you comment for my case. Were I in a pressure to tolerate the heavy attacks against my background until I had published my academical and examined titlle papers so that then the famous programmer would have agreed and stopped his campaigfn? That was rgcc, but should CCC not be better moderated also if it looks that you with your expertise are deleted with some messages too? Please reconsider in this case. Please. To the best of CCC. Thanks.