** CCC Moderator Nominee Information **

[TCAdmin]

The following members have been nominated to serve on the moderation team for the Computer Chess Club:

Name and Status (A=accepted, D=declined):


D - Graham Banks
_ - Ryan Benitez
A - Steve B
_ - Pedro Castro
A - Christopher Conkie
A - Dann Corbit
D - Eelco de Groot
A - Robert Hyatt
D - Volker Pittlik
_ - Charles Roberson
D - Ted Summers
D - Swaminathan
A - Rolf Tueschen
_ - Ulysses
D - Fernando Villegas
_ - Zach Wegner
_ - Chris Whittington
_ - Yar

Nominees should PM or e-mail their decision to accept or decline to the admin account (tcadmin@verizon.net) no later than June 14. Nominees who do not respond by the deadline will be assumed to have declined. Those who accept nomination are welcome to post a short self-description and moderation philosophy as a reply to this announcement (no other posts in this thread, please).

Thanks,
-Sam-

[Steve B]

I would like to thank those that nominated me for a second term as moderator
i would also like to thank my fellow mods Zach and Volker for making this CCC mod team a very professional joint effort which responded swiftly to all moderation issues which we were confronted with

when our term began we were confronted with a bit of turbulence on the boards with
long term and well respected members banned(or no longer feeling comfortable to participate here) and other non-computer chess issues which distracted those from enjoying their hobby in peace and quiet

i feel we were able to settle those issues in a favorable way that got the CCC back on track
since then i would hope that many will agree that the board was run smoothly with hardly any extraneous issues to distract us in the pursuit of our hobby

my qualifications to be mod and my moderation philosophy haven't changed since my last candidate statement which was only six months ago so i post a link to that statement here for those interested:
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 18&t=24941

it is always an honor and a privilege to be asked by ones fellow members to moderate our forum and if you feel the current moderation climate on the CCC is a good one then i respectfully ask for your vote

i therefore accept your nomination and i wish all of the other candidates good luck

Best Regards
Steve

[bob]

My moderation philosophy has been, from the inception of CCC, one of "minimal interference.

1. off topic. I generally ignore these unless enough complaints are made to justify some sort of action. I have stepped in on certain topics, such as "Fischer is the greatest" and such that degenerate into arguments with no technical merit.

2. Posts made purely for the purpose of attacking someone will receive action if needed, although again _only_ if someone complains.

3. Posts made purely to generate an argument, such as the "The deep blue guys cheated" or similar topics that have been discussed more than enough, unless something _new_ is introduced.

I do not take direct action without complaints except for those rare explosions of SPAM that are generated by bots, or posts that are mainly obscene in nature, generally produced by a troublemaker that comes out of the blue. I do not _ever_ edit/modify a user's post. It will either be removed with an email explanation on what needs to be done to make it acceptable, or else the user will receive a cautionary statement about the potential problem so that it is not repeated in follow-ups...

[Rolf]

Although short in time I wished to accept that someone had nominated me. After Volker declined I think someone from the NON English speaking Europeans here should be in the new team of mods.

Practically this CCC shouldnt be in need of moderation at all unless for spam, here I agree with the famous person in computerchess, Bob Hyatt. I could also live with him as a sole mod because he has shown in the past that he is able to do this job left-handedly, without too much public noise.

Again, I find it a good idea to be added out of formal democratic reasons. Since I am NOT a pogrammer or computer scientist my job comes down to the sole task to watch that in a scientifical spirit a certain criticism culture for the general sub-forum of CCC should be allowed without discrimination. I want to give the following example:

If in a debate about cheating in computerchess the Deep Blue match against Kasparov is mentioned from 1997, then it belongs to the whole true story that Kasparov felt himself cheated, and believe me one thing as a matter of fact, if you engage a test person in a technical field of research for the examination of the machine's strength, it makes absolutely no rationally sound sense if the human test person is impolitely abused, and that no matter how he might have behaved himself. If this had no impact on the machine itself. But the researchers/operators simply should remain as neutral as possible.

It's a fact that someone famous here had insulted Kasparov s a__hole alone for the fact that he had asked his questions in disbelief. It would be my experience and democratic conviction if I would try to tone down such ad hominems and likewise try to show how trivial the criticism against the team of IBM was out of science reasons. It's also clear that the case could have been closely examined if the IBM machine wouldnt have been quickly deconstructed so that nothing could be researched. That remains the outlandish part of the whole event and it will cause critic now and in future.

I come from chess that I have played for 50 years OTB, not corr or computer assisted. But then I have started to play against the machine for physical reasons since I'm handicapped. Of course on several programs. For that reason it's self understood that I have learned the ethical rules of chessages and therefore I know simply that it's a no no to insult a human player for that what makes him a human being, no matter if he's absolutely right or wrong. He's never a machine. So he must have his doubts and questions. And if the best computerchess people have no understanding for that highest good in a human being totally different to the conscience of a machine, then it's important that this triviality is explained. It requires no rocket science nor programmer qualities.
Of course it's not directly a disadvantage that I'm a professional psychologist in real life.

My moderation practice will be silent and just holding up the basic habits of the members as human beings, namely their critical spirit, but in respect for each other and of course in special respect for the active chess players and the top number one members of the machine side, programmers, testers and business people.

The general subforum in CCC shouldnt be confounded with the serious parts in the programming and tournament subs. It would be in favor of all readers if a certain kind of humor would still be allowed in the messages. People discuss not only in the spirit of technical problems but also in the conscience of knowing how vane all human activities become if the human aspect disappears completely.

In that spirit GENS UNA SUMUS I would like to give something back after a membership of over 10 years here in CCC and now also CTF.

Rolf

[Christopher Conkie]

I believe the CCC is a very important place. The CCC is the largest forum devoted to computer chess and AI in the world. There is a wealth of information and help to be had here by those who seek it. Many educational establishments use this place as a reference point and from that we all benefit when a new author comes along with what they made.

I am sure that you would all agree that if the above scenario continued it would be a good thing.

How do we do that?

By protecting those who provide the content that makes this place what it is.

Many authors have told me (I know a few) that they could not post here (or gave up) because they felt that they would be (were) hounded or barracked. That would be a very unfortunate state of affairs if it were allowed to continue. In my capacity as moderator here I would seek to get those people to post here again and to make them feel comfortable in doing so.

A computer chess forum is not much use if it has no computer chess.

Specifically the general forum here has been responsible for this in the past. To lose people from all fora because of one forum, is to me, unacceptable. I bet it's unacceptable to you all as well.



You may have noticed that recently things have seemed a lot calmer here. That is due in no small part to the methods used by the last moderation team. I wholly approve of the invisible approach to moderation. It is a tried and tested method that works.

I have been a moderator elsewhere for 6 years. In that time I have deleted 4 threads. To be a moderator is to me and those who I work with an impartial service, nothing more.

I can work with with any of the others who have declared in the list of nominees so far. Each of them are involved in computer chess and have that pulsing through their veins as I do.

It is easy to protect what you love.

I ask for your vote as I stand for the continued prosperity, expansion and development of computer chess.

Most importantly of all.....don't forget to have fun....ok?



Christopher

[Dann Corbit]

Here is my response to being nominated:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dann Corbit
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2009 1:25 PM
To: 'tcadmin@verizon.net'
Subject: I accept the nomination for CCC moderator with great reservations

If you are going to eat the dinner, you should be willing to wash the dishes.
Therefore, with enormous reluctance and great reservations, I accept the
nomination.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I read only a fraction of the posts made here. Do not imagine that I will moderate a post without someone using the moderation request form, because it is unlikely to happen.

If I should delete a post and you want to know why, read the charter.

I'm not a very good moderator but I am willing to do it because I make use of this forum and it is only fair that I do my fair share to support it.