Questions regarding the Election and Nomination Process

[gerold]

You have been Nominated to run for moderator.
Would be nice if you would except and help fix
the problems Dr. Hyatt.

Best to you,

Gerold.

[Christopher Conkie]

I do not disagree with anything you have said.

It's a no brainer to me. Either we protect our hobby or we don't.

Protection means cutting off problems at source. It is easy enough to do provided there is the power to do so for whoever moderates.

Real people have sway over non entities.

This should be a place of progress and help not polls about crap and one liner quips that have no real lasting meaning.

You should not go. That is a cop out and you are better than that but I do empathise with you. We have (if you remember) discussed it anyway elsewhere.

A club should encompass new people as well as old but everyone should not forget the purpose of the club.

Anywhere where we are mods we have no problems.

We just get rid of trash and leave the real people to get on with it. That has been the secret of our success and so it should be here.

Regards

Christopher

My main two problems are...

(1) I do not believe _anyone_ has the right to edit someone else's post, above and beyond (perhaps) adding a comment or explanation at the bottom, and clearly indicated as being added. But deleting a line here, a word there, etc, is simply not acceptable. If the post needs to be edited, the original poster should do the editing. Else it should be deleted. I've been here since we started CCC, and have probably been a moderator more than any other person here. And I/We have _NEVER_ edited someone's post, in any form or fashion. I raised this when it first came up a year or two ago, I voiced my displeasure with the concept, but apparently it still continues. I won't deal with that, whether it is my words, or someone elses. I subscribe to the famous quote "I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it..." Editing someone's post puts words into their mouths that they did not say. Not acceptable.

I agree. It is a distortion if one edits. I myself have had many posts removed but i do not complain about it. It is either there...or it is not. We have never ever once edited a post at Exactachess or Arena. We have closed threads and deleted posts only and always with an explaination to those involved.

(2) locking threads, whether temporary or not, is just stupid. I can't count the number of times we have seen the arcane "I locked this thread, it was getting too long..." It makes conversations disjointed and hard to follow, particularly if someone comes in after the lock and picks up at the start of the new thread without having the context of the old one.

Long threads can be continued in new threads. The fora software is to blame in such instances where a thread makes the forum unreadable. Provided that a relevant link is made to the old thread in the new, i cannot see this as an issue. I do however understand and agree with the concept of "threads die naturally when nothing is left to say" so to speak

In short, there's simply too much mucking around that goes on. I've deleted lots of SPAM posts here in the past. I've deleted a very few member posts and then always with a personal email to them explaining what was unacceptable and why. Again, I disagree with that philosophy. Abusive stuff can/should be removed, whether it originates with me or someone else. But no editing. No capricious decisions about when a thread has reached the end of its usefulness. When that happens, the thread dies out. It doesn't require any euthanasia.

Yes, over moderation is as bad as no moderation at all. To be a moderator you must like posts of content and people who give content. It does not matter who those people are so long as it follows the plot.

It would be very draconian to think otherwise. However spam mails and rubbish from people with nothing to offer get deleted and on this point I totally agree with you. It is only logical.

Somehow, things have gone awry, to the point I don't consider it acceptable. The only thing I can control is myself. And I believe I've earned the right to pick and choose what I do, since I am fast approaching 60 years old.

Well yes. I am not sure whether being 60 or being Bob Hyatt entitles you to say that but it is only the truth so lets not get into that. I am sure that you would agree with me that if one is to stop the kind of things that happen currently here, one needs to assess the worth of some things (non content) as opposed to how one protect those who provide content (such as youself). It's quite simple if I am honest with myself. Detachment from those who are moderated by the moderator is important. At the same time the ground rules of the club need to be reitterated and clearly defined.

There are many clever people here but I see them post less and less. That must stop now. Members need to listen to what is being said here.

Computer chess has a bright and rosy future but only if those who provide content still post.

It is unacceptable to me that you feel this way Bob, but you are right in that how this place has become makes you feel.

One can vote with ones feet and I think we both know that many have.

Or......

One can take control of the situation and solve the problem. There should be no elections. The people who know what this place is for should run it (yes i mean you but no i dont mean you should moderate). I mean the original people. The real ones.

I probably could have been a perpetual moderator here, I've been nominated almost every time, but I have for the past few years taken the approach of serving once and sitting out once before coming back, as I think everyone should have the opportunity to try it on for size. The best moderators we have had were nearly invisible. Not so the past year or so, they have become quite obstructionist at times. This was originally "by the programmers, for the programmers" but it's drifted. Non-programmers are welcome for the most part of course, and I've found it easy to skip the stuff I don't want to read. But I find it objectionable when threads are abruptly moved or locked, "just because". I have plenty to do without having to waste mental energy dealing with that...

Well everyone has to learm how to moderate. Its like I said...detachment is best. No one is gonna love a moderator lets's be honest, but they can respect one. It just depends whether the moderator knows why they are there really.

As to the bland stuff you don't want to read I agree again. (shock horror) Threads that get moved although is nanny stateism (is that a word? )

Locked threads should only be locked if allowed to continue elsewhere.

So.....

There are some ground rules....now.....what do you think?

Regards

Christopher

[George Tsavdaris]

(a) This crap of moderators _editing_ posts is going to stop for my posts, because there are not going to be any more posts from me to edit. It is a lousy policy. It is a stupid policy. It is an insane policy. Delete a post? yes. Change it? Not on my watch. Not now, not ever. And while my absence here won't mean a thing, I can guarantee you I will be absent until this practice is completely stopped, and made impossible for future moderators to do.


(b) The silly business of locking threads on a whim, or temporarily moving threads on a whim, is not going to fly.

I have the exact same opinion and i hope moderators will agree to it.

-Delete posts that violate clearly the charter.
-But NEVER edit or modify them in any way.
If they violate it just delete it.

-NEVER lock a thread to clean it.
-NEVER lock a thread because some people may respond badly or because it is dangerous to create insulting posts or because etc.....
-Just delete the posts that violate the charter or ban the persons that cause trouble in that thread. And the job is done!

It is very annoying for me too the current frequent locking of a thread policy that exists now and extremely(in fact i couldn't disagree more) annoying the modification of a post....

The moderator should do a simple thing:
Follow the charter! And if someone's post does not follow the charter the moderator should do anything less or more than delete the post!
So simple.....

Current moderators do a good job of cleaning the forum from any bad posts and keep the forum peaceful, but they do it in a wrong way IMO.

[bigo]

Graham I fully support your nomination to Moderator and would like to see you continue as moderator, you have made this place safe for democracy and unsafe for hypocrisy.

Keep up the good work

[bob]

I think one issue is that sometimes context is overlooked. If a post provides useful information, I can deal with "that's a stupid idea" or "you are dense as a fence post" so long as it goes along with actual content.

With some, the word "jackass" is an automatic deletion. Even should it contain a detailed explanation and proof of Einstein's unified field theory. And a lot of content is lost. Even worse is the idea of editing such a post, which could easily ruin it, or distort the view, or change it in ways not originally intended when it was edited.

I've long taken the approach when dealing with Ph.D. dissertations, that I will say "this section reads poorly, rewrite it..." or similar things. I do not try to rewrite it myself. The student is earning the degree, he/she should do so with their own words, not mine. I might offer an actual punctuation suggestion, or suggest moving something from point A to point B to make it clearer, but I don't do _anything_ to the dissertation myself. I wrote mine, I let them write theirs and then point out what needs improving or additional explanation.

That's my quibble with the editing that goes on here. It just isn't necessary, and, in fact, really should be impossible to do. Otherwise a malicious moderator could make you say anything he wants, where it is recorded for posterity whether you actually wrote it or not. That's unacceptable. As is changing something to remove what someone considers an objectionable word, and thereby changing the meaning of the entire post in a way that was not understood because of the quick-and-dirty editing job.

Heck, I have to edit my own posts often enough when I notice that a single missing/extra "not" completely screwed up a point I was trying to clarify... As a moderator I never would have attempted to change someone else's words. If you don't like the book, ban it from the library. Don't rewrite it until it fits some personal criteria that might not be a one-size-fits-all change.

I can deal with the reduced technical content. Too many have gone by the wayside. I still fondly recall the days of back-and-forthing with Hsu, Thompson, Valvo, Slate, et. al, before they were run off one by one. Occasionally here an interesting thread pops up that reminds me of the old days. Way more chaff than wheat, but still some wheat to be found. But if someone gets pissed because they screwed up badly, and then get their feelings hurt when it is pointed out, I don't see where moderation is needed at all. The way we conduct computer chess tournaments is basic to computer chess in general. If we want to go to computer games with human assistance, I'm game. I have a good GM friend that would be more than willing to help. But it wouldn't exactly be "computer chess" any longer.

BTW, I can only speak for myself, but I've not been any part of any "get xxx" campaign. I've not discussed CCC with a single person over the past two weeks. And don't intend to. If I don't like something I will say so. With me, "what you see is what you get" and I've always played the "tell it like I see it" card all the time.

I'll watch to see what happens, but that's all I will guarantee...

[Graham Banks]

I agree. It is a distortion if one edits. I myself have had many posts removed but i do not complain about it. It is either there...or it is not. We have never ever once edited a post at Exactachess or Arena. We have closed threads and deleted posts only and always with an explaination to those involved.

Christopher

Hi Christopher,

when a member writes a long post full of valuable content, but is silly enough to include one out of line comment such as a personal attack, surely it makes more sense to edit out the offending remark and leave the valuable content?

This whole editing/deleting issue was discussed a while back, but the thread seems to have disappeared.
The great majority of those who voted felt that editing was okay as long as it was done responsibly.

When I temporarily moved a thread to clean it up recently, things had got out of hand and it would have been impossible to sort the whole mess out without taking that action.
A bit like chopping off one head only to see two more appear in the interim.
The thread was only gone a short time.

I can tell you one thing which I feel is most important though. As a moderator, I've always tried to be fair and honest.
As you quite rightly say, moderators are on a hiding to nothing.
The thing is that I'd rather be proactive in trying to keep things respectful rather than remaining invisible and doing little.

Yes - I have made some bad decisions at times (just as all mods both past and present will have), but that's human.
I will look upon the results in the forthcoming election as either vindicating or rebuking my philosophy.

Regards, Graham.

[bigo]

Wow Derek I'm surpised you would use the word Anglo0Saxon this sounds almost racial.

[Christopher Conkie]

I agree. It is a distortion if one edits. I myself have had many posts removed but i do not complain about it. It is either there...or it is not. We have never ever once edited a post at Exactachess or Arena. We have closed threads and deleted posts only and always with an explaination to those involved.

Christopher

Hi Christopher,

when a member writes a long post full of valuable content, but is silly enough to include one out of line comment such as a personal attack, surely it makes more sense to edit out the offending remark and leave the valuable content?

No. I'm afraid not Graham. That would distort what was meant to be said. If I tell you to fuck off...you delete the post....unless you deserve it of course and if that the anger is well founded and fits the context. That is Bob's point and I agree with him. It is a misrepresentation otherwise if you edit. Fuck off should mean fuck off.

This is not Sunday School.

This whole editing/deleting issue was discussed a while back, but the thread seems to have disappeared.
The great majority of those who voted felt that editing was okay as long as it was done responsibly.

I doubt that. If you think that then let me remind you in the past that there have been litigations about who said what to whom. Either leave it there...or delete it. I'm trying to help you.....again.

When I temporarily moved a thread to clean it up recently, things had got out of hand and it would have been impossible to sort the whole mess out without taking that action.
A bit like chopping off one head only to see two more appear in the interim.
The thread was only gone a short time.

Sometimes its better to let people bash themselves to death. I call it "percusive maintanance". Mostly Graham....you delete what is unacceptable. Life is too short.

I can tell you one thing which I feel is most important though. As a moderator, I've always tried to be fair and honest.
As you quite rightly say, moderators are on a hiding to nothing.
The thing is that I'd rather be proactive in trying to keep things respectful rather than remaining invisible and doing little.

I don't doubt this but....and you should listen....it's like riding a bike. Know that the real people are your fans if you keep it clean or let it roll. Don't try to involve yourself. It's not your problem. As soon as you edit...its what you want to say...not the original poster.

Would you have words put into your mouth?

Think about it.

Yes - I have made some bad decisions at times (just as all mods both past and present will have), but that's human.
I will look upon the results in the forthcoming election as either vindicating or rebuking my philosophy.

Regards, Graham.

No. Elections mean nothing. What counts is vindication from peole who can ride the bike and you know who they are.

I have watched you grow in this role. Now you must do what is suggested here. Listen to the bike riders extraordinaire if you want to become one.

No more edits. Delete yes....but only as a last resort.

In general however, remove trolls (this must happen and soon), and remember to protect people who provide content.

OK?

Regards

Christopher

[Graham Banks]

I agree. It is a distortion if one edits. I myself have had many posts removed but i do not complain about it. It is either there...or it is not. We have never ever once edited a post at Exactachess or Arena. We have closed threads and deleted posts only and always with an explaination to those involved.

Christopher

Hi Christopher,

when a member writes a long post full of valuable content, but is silly enough to include one out of line comment such as a personal attack, surely it makes more sense to edit out the offending remark and leave the valuable content?

No. I'm afraid not Graham. That would distort what was meant to be said. If I tell you to fuck off...you delete the post....unless you deserve it of course and if that the anger is well founded and fits the context. That is Bob's point and I agree with him. It is a misrepresentation otherwise if you edit. Fuck off should mean fuck off.

This is not Sunday School.

This whole editing/deleting issue was discussed a while back, but the thread seems to have disappeared.
The great majority of those who voted felt that editing was okay as long as it was done responsibly.

I doubt that. If you think that then let me remind you in the past that there have been litigations about who said what to whom. Either leave it there...or delete it. I'm trying to help you.....again.

When I temporarily moved a thread to clean it up recently, things had got out of hand and it would have been impossible to sort the whole mess out without taking that action.
A bit like chopping off one head only to see two more appear in the interim.
The thread was only gone a short time.

Sometimes its better to let people bash themselves to death. I call it "percusive maintanance". Mostly Graham....you delete what is unacceptable. Life is too short.

I can tell you one thing which I feel is most important though. As a moderator, I've always tried to be fair and honest.
As you quite rightly say, moderators are on a hiding to nothing.
The thing is that I'd rather be proactive in trying to keep things respectful rather than remaining invisible and doing little.

I don't doubt this but....and you should listen....it's like riding a bike. Know that the real people are your fans if you keep it clean or let it roll. Don't try to involve yourself. It's not your problem. As soon as you edit...its what you want to say...not the original poster.

Would you have words put into your mouth?

Think about it.

Yes - I have made some bad decisions at times (just as all mods both past and present will have), but that's human.
I will look upon the results in the forthcoming election as either vindicating or rebuking my philosophy.

Regards, Graham.

No. Elections mean nothing. What counts is vindication from peole who can ride the bike and you know who they are.

I have watched you grow in this role. Now you must do what is suggested here. Listen to the bike riders extraordinaire if you want to become one.

No more edits. Delete yes....but only as a last resort.

In general however, remove trolls (this must happen and soon), and remember to protect people who provide content.

OK?

Regards

Christopher

What would be very valuable to any new team of moderators would be an accompanying referendum gathering the membership views on some of these important issues.
That would certainly let the moderators know where they stand when discussing their modus operandi.
In the absence of such information, looking at the results of an election is the best information one has.
An overwhelming vote is surely an endorsement whereas a greatly reduced number would tell the opposite story.

Regards, Graham.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Yes Graham,a referendum would be nice to gather the members points of view over some main issues.....
Personal one man point of view doesn't count in no way