michiguel wrote: I judge it perfectly on topic of the forum.
It is going to drop to the second page if we restricted the posts to the teams. Later, other people than the team responded, and since most were against DS, I did not want to remove them to keep some balance. Read my original intention.
If you judge it "perfectly on-topic" why would you restrict who can post in it? Your judgment ignores the presence of the moderation philosophy thread in CTF which was stickied there for a week and a half. It is hardly your job to decide how important any given topic is and predetermine its positioning on the page. You arbitrarily skylined this at the top of CCC and it doesn't even belong here.
michiguel wrote:News on the election process belong here. That was my call, and supported later by the team. You have to respect team decisions, which is also in the charter.
I respected your call and did not complain or ask for removal of this thread. I stated that its unprecedented and discourteous presence here accounts for my responses in it. You chose to argue the validity of that opinion.
michiguel wrote:I do not see any blatant attack has been highlighted by me. And it is not up to me to judge the policies of candidate teams.
Making a sticky out of a campaign attack ad highlights it, which is all the more ironic after your team made the removal of off-topic material one of the planks of your policy. When Fern suggested that there be more flexibility for off-topic posts he was vilified for it here.
michiguel wrote: I open a thread about it in the moderator forum.
You presented it as a fait accompli in the mod forum and I responded there first (does "Et tu, Brute" need amplification?). You invited us to respond in this thread and I have done so. You're the one who decided to feature this whole issue in CCC as a public debate, not me. This sort of thing is what CTF was created for in the first place.
-Sam-
All I can say is this. When I first saw "this":
Sticky: [OT] CTF elections I was forced to scratch my head. Seems like a direct contradiction of terms. sticky AND off topic? I think this is just another example of where NO moderator action would have been better. One could remove the thread, lock the thread, or sticky the thread. The last option seems to make the least sense.
Graham Banks wrote:CTF electioneering belongs in CTF.
CCC electioneering belongs in CCC.
Just my opinion of course.
Doesn't make sense. How do you reach out to CCC people by posting only to CTF ??
When people want to reach out to programmers, they post to programming sections even though it is completely off-topic there.
Tournament announcements, Polls about rybka, etc ... Edit: Here is a current thread announcig a tournament http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=51761
I wanted to reach out to the general CCC public, so I posted to CCC general topics forum.
So what is wrong with that?
I am not responsible for the fact that my opponents didn't think of this before.
Anyway, they can still post their own electioneering thread and ask for it to be sticky.
I see nothing wrong with that.
Graham Banks wrote:CTF electioneering belongs in CTF.
CCC electioneering belongs in CCC.
Just my opinion of course.
Doesn't make sense. How do you reach out to CCC people by posting only to CTF ??
When people want to reach out to programmers, they post to programming sections even though it is completely off-topic there.
Tournament announcements, Polls about rybka, etc ... Edit: Here is a current thread announcig a tournament http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=51761
I wanted to reach out to the general CCC public, so I posted to CCC general topics forum.
So what is wrong with that?
I am not responsible for the fact that my opponents didn't think of this before.
Anyway, they can still post their own electioneering thread and ask for it to be sticky.
I see nothing wrong with that.
Hi Daniel,
I suspect that most members of CCC are aware that CTF exists, and that those who are interested in it read and/or post there.
Anyway, I'm not looking to be awkward, so best wishes in the election.
michiguel wrote: I judge it perfectly on topic of the forum.
It is going to drop to the second page if we restricted the posts to the teams. Later, other people than the team responded, and since most were against DS, I did not want to remove them to keep some balance. Read my original intention.
If you judge it "perfectly on-topic" why would you restrict who can post in it? Your judgment ignores the presence of the moderation philosophy thread in CTF which was stickied there for a week and a half. It is hardly your job to decide how important any given topic is and predetermine its positioning on the page. You arbitrarily skylined this at the top of CCC and it doesn't even belong here.
michiguel wrote:News on the election process belong here. That was my call, and supported later by the team. You have to respect team decisions, which is also in the charter.
I respected your call and did not complain or ask for removal of this thread. I stated that its unprecedented and discourteous presence here accounts for my responses in it. You chose to argue the validity of that opinion.
michiguel wrote:I do not see any blatant attack has been highlighted by me. And it is not up to me to judge the policies of candidate teams.
Making a sticky out of a campaign attack ad highlights it, which is all the more ironic after your team made the removal of off-topic material one of the planks of your policy. When Fern suggested that there be more flexibility for off-topic posts he was vilified for it here.
michiguel wrote: I open a thread about it in the moderator forum.
You presented it as a fait accompli in the mod forum and I responded there first (does "Et tu, Brute" need amplification?). You invited us to respond in this thread and I have done so. You're the one who decided to feature this whole issue in CCC as a public debate, not me. This sort of thing is what CTF was created for in the first place.
-Sam-
I clearly implied no discourtesy was meant. But you keep going. Anything else?
Miguel
PS: You did not post "Et tu Brutus" in the mod forum. You posted something cryptic that could be interpreted in many ways. That is not really a good way to establish a communication when the other part is spelling things out.
I hope so because it's "Tu quoque, Brute".
Someone spitting venom is annoying but harmless. He won't achieve anything. The real harm is done by nicely worded venom. (Ronald de Man)
Where do you learn about this latin phrases? I sure didn't learn them in School.
They should come in handy in CCC discussions. I want to learn them so that I give a vibe of intellect when I could express myself in plain english.
"fait accompli", "Eu Tu, Brute", "Tu quoque, Brute" orgasimic!
Just joking around.
Happy to familiarize you with Shakespeare, and if Miguel reads the article other things will become clear.
-Sam-
The Plot
To make his horror complete, Caesar, pressed to the foot of a statue by the impatient daggers of his friends, discovers among the blades and faces the face of Marcus Junius Brutus, his protege, perhaps his son, and ceasing to defend himself he exclaims: “You too, my son!” Shakespeare and Quevedo capture the pathetic cry.
Destiny takes pleasure in repetition, variants, symmetries: nineteen centuries later, in the south of the Province of Buenos Aires, a gaucho is attacked by other gauchos. As he falls he recognizes an adopted son of his and says to him with gentle reproof and slow surprise (these words must be heard, not read), “Pero che!” He is being killed, and he does not know he is dying so that a scene may be repeated.
Happy to familiarize you with Shakespeare, and if Miguel reads the article other things will become clear.
-Sam-
Particularly loved this part:
In some other languages, for example Italian, the best-known version of Caesar's last words is a more literal Latin translation of the Greek phrase reported and dismissed by Suetonius: tu quoque, fili mi. This version is reported, for example, in Charles François Lhomond's De Viris Illustribus,[13] an 18th-century summary of Roman history, which was long used as a standard text by Latin students.
...uno modo ad primum ictum gemitu sine voce edito; etsi tradiderunt quidam Marco Bruto irruenti dixisse "καὶ σύ, τέκνον;": De Vita Caesarum, Liber I, Divus Iulius, LXXXII. Suetonius.
Don't need to familiarize with macaronic latin.
Last edited by sicilianquake87 on Fri Apr 04, 2014 6:27 pm, edited 6 times in total.
Someone spitting venom is annoying but harmless. He won't achieve anything. The real harm is done by nicely worded venom. (Ronald de Man)
Daniel Shawul wrote:Fully agreed
The number of pissed off people in this thread is hilarious.
Don't know why they won't open their own campaigning thread instead of polluting mine ...
It might have something to do with the CCC moderators taking sides and making your off-topic, hostile campaign thread a sticky here in the main forum, which is an unprecedented discourtesy.
WHAT?
Where is this coming from?
First, I cannot delete a post like that in election week, whether I like it or not. That is Freedom of Speech from a candidate team. On the other hand, I thought it was not wise to have many replies to it and flood CCC with it. But it would have meant it'd sunk to the the second page. So, the best way to "allow freedom of speech" from a candidate team and contain a possible mess was to make it a sticky and watch very closely the thread (and make sure it did not propagate to others). The whole idea was also that your team reply to it and made it visible. I invited it in the moderator forum and explained that I made it a sticky. Now, in public, you accused me of taking sides?
In addition, moderation policies are generally made stickies. Yes, this is CCC and the election is in CTF, but CTF is a closed forum, so if one team wants to have advertise their "reasons for running" in the MAIN forum, that would not be off-topic. The main forum is the one that most people see and the most populated. The fact that it is unprecedented does not mean we should not allow it.
Miguel
PS: Yes, I am taking sides with Dan... who I banned twice very recently. I am sure he loves me.
PS2: Oh, Lucas also loves us, who publicly denounced emphatically that he want us OUT.
You failed to post your list of topics that should have been moderated and weren't. Can you back up your claims, or are they just fertilizer?
-Sam-
What on earth are you talking about, "freedom of speech"? Freedom of speech does NOT just apply to campaign statements. You have deleted plenty of posts, violating freedom of speech, under the guise of "this is off topic." Yet here we have a clearly off topic post, and you don't remove it, and use "freedom of speech" as a justification. Don't hide behind "freedom of speech" selectively. If a post is off-topic, either delete it or let it stand. But do the SAME for ALL off topic posts.
look up "hypocritical". I'm personally not against a modicum of off-topic posts. But I would either allow it or not, UNIFORMLY. Not "selectively".
Happy to familiarize you with Shakespeare, and if Miguel reads the article other things will become clear.
-Sam-
The Plot
To make his horror complete, Caesar, pressed to the foot of a statue by the impatient daggers of his friends, discovers among the blades and faces the face of Marcus Junius Brutus, his protege, perhaps his son, and ceasing to defend himself he exclaims: “You too, my son!” Shakespeare and Quevedo capture the pathetic cry.
Destiny takes pleasure in repetition, variants, symmetries: nineteen centuries later, in the south of the Province of Buenos Aires, a gaucho is attacked by other gauchos. As he falls he recognizes an adopted son of his and says to him with gentle reproof and slow surprise (these words must be heard, not read), “Pero che!” He is being killed, and he does not know he is dying so that a scene may be repeated.
"The worst thing that can happen to a forum is a running wild attacking moderator(HGM) who is not corrected by the community." - Ed Schröder
But my words like silent raindrops fell. And echoed in the wells of silence.
I sure didn't learn them in School. 
