Goodbye Talkchess

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Harvey Williamson, bob

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Locked
swami
Posts: 6535
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 3:21 am

Re: Goodbye Talkchess

Post by swami » Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:48 am

I don't think "ICD, Your Move" has threatened to "Shut down the forum" if we don't delete links to Robbolito/Houdini/Ivanhoe.

They just requested us to delete the links but they didn't state the _consequences_ if the request was not fulfilled.
Graham Banks wrote:If it comes to a choice between doing as requested or risking the forum being shut down, I choose to do as requested.
I did post an announcement explaining the situation as I understood it at the time, before taking the actions that I did.
However, I misinterpreted the extent of what was expected and I've since apologised for it.

Cheers,
Graham.

sockmonkey
Posts: 588
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 10:16 pm
Location: Berlin, Germany
Contact:

Re: Goodbye Talkchess

Post by sockmonkey » Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:56 am

Sam Hull wrote:(b) There has been a rather large misunderstanding, and Jeremy has slightly misquoted what I passed along from ICD/Your Move. The guidance is simply to not tolerate anything that looks like a LINK to illegitimate software in CCC. No one said anything about censoring discussions or removing posts that simply make allusions or offer evaluations. Graham misunderstood the intent of the guidance - I have clarified it in detail for him this evening via IM. Where the issue of clones is concerned, and for the board in general, the goal of fair and balanced moderation has not changed, and there is no desire for favoritism in ANY direction.
Although I am glad to hear that there was a misunderstanding, I think that this situation has made quite clear, at least for me, that there is a problematic tension between the commercial needs of the site owners and the discussion freedoms demanded by the site membership. I can't count the number of times that I have received the note: "if you don't change your moderation policies, I will be calling/writing/emailing/knocking on the door of YMC&G and letting them know exactly what's going on here." This commercial "last instance" is in conflict with the needs of the board's members.
(c) I hope Jeremy will reconsider his decision. I have not had a chance to converse with him directly and have received no PMs from him. I posted responses in the moderator forum as soon as I regained internet access, but I am still locked out of e-mail and will be until tomorrow morning. I think Jeremy has been an outstanding moderator and I fully support his philosophy of moderation - always have.
I'm flattered. I did send you a PM, but it sounds like the machines didn't want to cooperate.

Nevertheless, I've committed to starting OpenChess and I'm going to follow through. In the first 12 hours of operation, we've had plenty of signups, discussions are getting underway, the logo looks good, and we're off to a good start.
(d) I don't set moderation policy. I passed along a request to the CCC mods that I received from Quentin, which came as the result of certain members haranguing ICD about real, suspected, and imagined clones. Graham misunderstood the message, performed some moderation on that basis, and Jeremy decided to post a grand exit without waiting to get any clarification about the guidance.
This has been a long time in coming, and I don't think that I've overreacted.
(e) Personally I am surprised that two CCC mods who share an opinion cannot simply outvote and override one mod on those occasions when he has a different view. I got regularly overridden for two whole terms in CTF. I haven't complained, and nobody died. It's a discussion board, folks.
Graham has been outvoted consistently this term. It hasn't changed his readiness to moderate unilaterally and aggressively against posts and members which whom he does not personally agree. When I tried to put on the brakes, I was told (by Graham) to stop playing games, that this was no longer a moderation issue, and that our previous agreements were no longer valid. Essentially, "tough luck, dipshit, I'm doing what I want." This has also been a theme this moderation term, and no amount of voting, discussion or debate has changed the fact that certain moderators (Graham being a paramount example) feel that (or act as if) their personal convictions are more important than the general will of the forum.

Yes, it is only a discussion forum. I promised myself at the beginning of the term to not get emotionally invested. I failed. ;)
(f) If a member runs for moderator and is elected, I think it is fair to expect him to honor his commitment and serve out the term.

-Sam-
You are correct there, and I will honor my commitment and continue to moderate until the end of my term. I never intended to run for a second, so nothing has changed there. However, my focus, and my participation, will be on OpenChess (http://www.open-chess.org).

No hard feelings, Sam, I've appreciated your assistance and support over the last months.

Jeremy

User avatar
Graham Banks
Posts: 30751
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Goodbye Talkchess

Post by Graham Banks » Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:12 am

sockmonkey wrote:Graham has been outvoted consistently this term. It hasn't changed his readiness to moderate unilaterally and aggressively against posts and members which whom he does not personally agree. When I tried to put on the brakes, I was told (by Graham) to stop playing games, that this was no longer a moderation issue, and that our previous agreements were no longer valid. Essentially, "tough luck, dipshit, I'm doing what I want." This has also been a theme this moderation term, and no amount of voting, discussion or debate has changed the fact that certain moderators (Graham being a paramount example) feel that (or act as if) their personal convictions are more important than the general will of the forum.
I think you're being overly harsh Jeremy and I would hope that I've not attacked your integrity publicly in the same manner. I've certainly not let any polls on your moderation ability hang around for more than 24 hours.

I have tried to treat members equally and have always communicated respectfully with them. Personal comments/insults have been removed consistently with no bias on my part. I'm sorry that you perceive it differently.

I have explained why I acted as I did after the message that Sam passed on to us. I believed that I was doing the right thing at the time, but have since apologised to everybody for misunderstanding exactly what was meant.

Anyway, best wishes with your new forum and with married life.

Cheers,
Graham.
My email addresses:
gbanksnz at gmail.com
gbanksnz at yahoo.co.nz

Zagalo
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:20 am

Re: Goodbye Talkchess

Post by Zagalo » Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:16 am

I fully support ICD in whatever they do. I still have Fidelity Electronics "Chess Challenger" and "Prestige" that I bought from ICD decades ago :)

Graham your doing a great job. Perfection is not of human nature :D

User avatar
Graham Banks
Posts: 30751
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Goodbye Talkchess

Post by Graham Banks » Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:18 am

Zagalo wrote:I fully support ICD in whatever they do. I still have Fidelity Electronics "Chess Challenger" and "Prestige" that I bought from ICD decades ago :)

Graham your doing a great job. Perfection is not of human nature :D
Thanks. Perfection would make life boring.
Despite what some say, I've always tried to be honest and impartial despite my strong views over the questionable engines. :)
My email addresses:
gbanksnz at gmail.com
gbanksnz at yahoo.co.nz

BTO7

Re: Goodbye Talkchess

Post by BTO7 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:39 am

Graham Banks wrote:
Sam Hull wrote: (a) Sorry for weighing in late. Our downtown Dallas office building has lost power and shut down my entire network two business days in a row, and I couldn't get back to the board after posting the guidance from Quentin for the CCC mods until now.

(b) There has been a rather large misunderstanding, and Jeremy has slightly misquoted what I passed along from ICD/Your Move. The guidance is simply to not tolerate anything that looks like a LINK to illegitimate software in CCC. No one said anything about censoring discussions or removing posts that simply make allusions or offer evaluations. Graham misunderstood the intent of the guidance - I have clarified it in detail for him this evening via IM. Where the issue of clones is concerned, and for the board in general, the goal of fair and balanced moderation has not changed, and there is no desire for favoritism in ANY direction.

(c) I hope Jeremy will reconsider his decision. I have not had a chance to converse with him directly and have received no PMs from him. I posted responses in the moderator forum as soon as I regained internet access, but I am still locked out of e-mail and will be until tomorrow morning. I think Jeremy has been an outstanding moderator and I fully support his philosophy of moderation - always have.

(d) I don't set moderation policy. I passed along a request to the CCC mods that I received from Quentin, which came as the result of certain members haranguing ICD about real, suspected, and imagined clones. Graham misunderstood the message, performed some moderation on that basis, and Jeremy decided to post a grand exit without waiting to get any clarification about the guidance.

(e) Personally I am surprised that two CCC mods who share an opinion cannot simply outvote and override one mod on those occasions when has a different view. I got regularly overridden for two whole terms in CTF. I haven't complained, and nobody died. It's a discussion board, folks.

(f) If a member runs for moderator and is elected, I think it is fair to expect him to honor his commitment and serve out the term.

-Sam-
In a nutshell, our sponsor would like the CCC mod team to be as aggressive as possible in removing anything that looks like a questionable link, or any other encouragement to acquire software of questionable legitimacy.

This was the part of the message that I misinterpreted. My understanding was that any post praising the strength or qualities of the engines in question was actually encouraging members to acquire them.
Once Jeremy gave me the go ahead to remove some of the threads as long as I left a message (he was going to bed at the time), I went ahead and did so. However, it seems that I was too liberal in my interpretation of what he actually meant.

I therefore apologise to Sam, to my fellow moderators and also to the forum membership for the controversy and unfortunate situation that has occurred due to this genuine misunderstanding.
I am happy to work with Jeremy and Swami to undo as much of the damage as we can, if they're prepared to do so. This would include an amendment of the announcement posted.

Cheers,
Graham. :oops:
NOT ! Your over zealous ....quick to ...can I , can I, can I move them huh huh can I can I stance. You didnt misinterpret nothing. Just the fact you were so ANXIOUS to get them moved ....as you always are says enough. It's your ACTIONS that speak louder then words. The need to so quickly get the clones in your opinion moved as quickly as you could. So so so worried about them threads you didn't even read it right ? LOL thats so funny and ur full of biscuits. Pressuring your fellow moderators to the point they didn't want to fight with you no more because your so obsessed with what you think is RIGHT ....get over yourself.

BT

User avatar
dj
Posts: 8663
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 9:06 am
Location: this sceptred isle

Re: Goodbye Talkchess

Post by dj » Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:43 am

Thomas Mayer wrote:
bob wrote:
Thomas Mayer wrote:
BTO7 wrote:Great move ...we will all support you there. This is crazy around here....obviously biased. We play chess....we love engines ...dont need the hand cuffs on for sure. Short time i have been here it looks to me Banks is the underlying reason too.

Catch you there
BT
That looks great, all the trolls are leaving... well, some collateral damage, but time will heal wounds... ;)

Greets, Thomas
There are more than "trolls" leaving. But I suppose you won't understand that at all...
Well, you didn't get me, Bob. The others are the collateral damage.
I mean if Rolf turns up he might follow as well. ;)
Greets, Thomas
I'll drink to that. :)

User avatar
Graham Banks
Posts: 30751
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Goodbye Talkchess

Post by Graham Banks » Thu Jun 10, 2010 7:48 am

BTO7 wrote:You didnt misinterpret nothing. Just the fact you were so ANXIOUS to get them moved ....as you always are says enough. It's your ACTIONS that speak louder then words
You won't be the only person that thinks that and there's nothing more that I can say that will change that.
My email addresses:
gbanksnz at gmail.com
gbanksnz at yahoo.co.nz

User avatar
Thomas Mayer
Posts: 383
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:45 pm
Location: Nellmersbach, Germany

Re: Goodbye Talkchess

Post by Thomas Mayer » Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:01 am

BTO7 wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:
Sam Hull wrote: (a) Sorry for weighing in late. Our downtown Dallas office building has lost power and shut down my entire network two business days in a row, and I couldn't get back to the board after posting the guidance from Quentin for the CCC mods until now.

(b) There has been a rather large misunderstanding, and Jeremy has slightly misquoted what I passed along from ICD/Your Move. The guidance is simply to not tolerate anything that looks like a LINK to illegitimate software in CCC. No one said anything about censoring discussions or removing posts that simply make allusions or offer evaluations. Graham misunderstood the intent of the guidance - I have clarified it in detail for him this evening via IM. Where the issue of clones is concerned, and for the board in general, the goal of fair and balanced moderation has not changed, and there is no desire for favoritism in ANY direction.

(c) I hope Jeremy will reconsider his decision. I have not had a chance to converse with him directly and have received no PMs from him. I posted responses in the moderator forum as soon as I regained internet access, but I am still locked out of e-mail and will be until tomorrow morning. I think Jeremy has been an outstanding moderator and I fully support his philosophy of moderation - always have.

(d) I don't set moderation policy. I passed along a request to the CCC mods that I received from Quentin, which came as the result of certain members haranguing ICD about real, suspected, and imagined clones. Graham misunderstood the message, performed some moderation on that basis, and Jeremy decided to post a grand exit without waiting to get any clarification about the guidance.

(e) Personally I am surprised that two CCC mods who share an opinion cannot simply outvote and override one mod on those occasions when has a different view. I got regularly overridden for two whole terms in CTF. I haven't complained, and nobody died. It's a discussion board, folks.

(f) If a member runs for moderator and is elected, I think it is fair to expect him to honor his commitment and serve out the term.

-Sam-
In a nutshell, our sponsor would like the CCC mod team to be as aggressive as possible in removing anything that looks like a questionable link, or any other encouragement to acquire software of questionable legitimacy.

This was the part of the message that I misinterpreted. My understanding was that any post praising the strength or qualities of the engines in question was actually encouraging members to acquire them.
Once Jeremy gave me the go ahead to remove some of the threads as long as I left a message (he was going to bed at the time), I went ahead and did so. However, it seems that I was too liberal in my interpretation of what he actually meant.

I therefore apologise to Sam, to my fellow moderators and also to the forum membership for the controversy and unfortunate situation that has occurred due to this genuine misunderstanding.
I am happy to work with Jeremy and Swami to undo as much of the damage as we can, if they're prepared to do so. This would include an amendment of the announcement posted.

Cheers,
Graham. :oops:
NOT ! Your over zealous ....quick to ...can I , can I, can I move them huh huh can I can I stance. You didnt misinterpret nothing. Just the fact you were so ANXIOUS to get them moved ....as you always are says enough. It's your ACTIONS that speak louder then words. The need to so quickly get the clones in your opinion moved as quickly as you could. So so so worried about them threads you didn't even read it right ? LOL thats so funny and ur full of biscuits. Pressuring your fellow moderators to the point they didn't want to fight with you no more because your so obsessed with what you think is RIGHT ....get over yourself.

BT
Bill, I thought you have left this forum... so please don't pollute the air here any longer, do it elsewhere !

Greets, Thomas

Zagalo
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:20 am

Re: Goodbye Talkchess

Post by Zagalo » Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:05 am

I must admit that about a week a go I made a Poll about someone, the poll toke me quite sometime to constructed with my poor english. Graham removed the poll and sent me a polite message that sayd exactly
"Sorry, but polls on individual members are not permitted.
Cheers,
Graham
."

I was a bit pissedoff but the polite "Sorry.." and the naturaly friendly non-aggressive message made me calm down instantly to the point that I sent him a "Sorry.." message too !

Now sometimes ago I made a poll but was removed by another moderator, which I respect too as all moderators. But I got an aggressive warning message that ended with "..ever again or further action will be required" ! Now just compare both moderators reactions !

Again, I have NOTHING against ANY moderator whatsoever, I am giving this example just to show how I was respectfully and friendly treated by graham which I really appreciate and continue enjoying him as a wise friendly moderator

Well, just my 2 cents I guess :)

Locked