Where have the recent posts on this topic been moved to?
I can only find this thread
http://www.talkchess.com/forum3/viewtop ... s&start=20
The latest post in it is from Feb 2012!
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
Where have the recent posts on this topic been moved to?
The hidden nature of Engine Origins forum means that links to informative posts within it will not be available to a wider public via, say, links from the Computer Chess Wiki.BrendanJNorman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:59 amThis is all fair enough, but I have a thought or two.hgm wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:07 am I treat complaints as confidential, and was not planning on changing this policy. People must not feel impaired by fear for petty harrassment in retaliation for flagging wrong-doing. By the nature of things it are the most aggressve and viscious members that violate rules, and have a tendency to bully other people.
Moderators do not 'obey' complaints any more than judges obey district attorneys in criminal court cases. It is their task to independently judge whether postings violate the charter (in which case they are censored or removed alltogether), or disruptive to ordered discussion (in which case they might be locked or moved). The complaints merely act to bring matters to our attention.
1. Without transparency, what is to stop a moderator from inventing an 'anonymous complaint' (or two) to further their own interest on a matter. For example, I know that you and Ed don't always see eye-to-eye and there's some bad blood. Is there a 3rd party mod who verifies that said complaints exist from real established members?
2. This brings to mind the hole in your judge analogy.
Perhaps a moderator is nothing more than a judge, but a plaintiff still has to make their case in open court, right?
If a judge and prosecution team prepared to indict a suspect for say, sexual harrassment, even in this case they'll never say "an unknown, anonymous person has made a complaint against you and we find you guilty"...this is unfair and against the spirit of legal transparency.
Instead, they'll be asked by the prosecuter: "Would you be willing to make your statement in an open court?"
I met HGM many times during tournaments and we are just fine then.BrendanJNorman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:59 amThis is all fair enough, but I have a thought or two.hgm wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:07 am I treat complaints as confidential, and was not planning on changing this policy. People must not feel impaired by fear for petty harrassment in retaliation for flagging wrong-doing. By the nature of things it are the most aggressve and viscious members that violate rules, and have a tendency to bully other people.
Moderators do not 'obey' complaints any more than judges obey district attorneys in criminal court cases. It is their task to independently judge whether postings violate the charter (in which case they are censored or removed alltogether), or disruptive to ordered discussion (in which case they might be locked or moved). The complaints merely act to bring matters to our attention.
1. Without transparency, what is to stop a moderator from inventing an 'anonymous complaint' (or two) to further their own interest on a matter. For example, I know that you and Ed don't always see eye-to-eye and there's some bad blood. Is there a 3rd party mod who verifies that said complaints exist from real established members?
As to (1), I suppose this is the reason why we have three moderators rather than one. If one moderator misbehaves by abusing his powers for personal gain, the others can overrule him.BrendanJNorman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:59 amThis is all fair enough, but I have a thought or two.
1. Without transparency, what is to stop a moderator from inventing an 'anonymous complaint' (or two) to further their own interest on a matter. For example, I know that you and Ed don't always see eye-to-eye and there's some bad blood. Is there a 3rd party mod who verifies that said complaints exist from real established members?
2. This brings to mind the hole in your judge analogy.
Perhaps a moderator is nothing more than a judge, but a plaintiff still has to make their case in open court, right?
If a judge and prosecution team prepared to indict a suspect for say, sexual harrassment, even in this case they'll never say "an unknown, anonymous person has made a complaint against you and we find you guilty"...this is unfair and against the spirit of legal transparency.
Instead, they'll be asked by the prosecuter: "Would you be willing to make your statement in an open court?"
It is not a thread in the General Topics section, but a separate section. Make sure you are logged on, or you cannot see it.Colin-G wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 11:36 amWhere have the recent posts on this topic been moved to?
I can only find this thread
http://www.talkchess.com/forum3/viewtop ... s&start=20
The latest post in it is from Feb 2012!
When this forum was created back in 1997 there was only section, this main section. In 2000 CTF became a sub forum. As volume postings increased people got annoyed by folks posting match results and so the tournament sub forum saw the light, later the programmer sub forum.BrendanJNorman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 4:52 pm To Ed and Harm:
Got it.
Thanks to you both for clarifying.
Yep. A bit of historical background and it makes more sense...Rebel wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 5:12 pmWhen this forum was created back in 1997 there was only section, this main section. In 2000 CTF became a sub forum. As volume postings increased people got annoyed by folks posting match results and so the tournament sub forum saw the light, later the programmer sub forum.BrendanJNorman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 26, 2019 4:52 pm To Ed and Harm:
Got it.
Thanks to you both for clarifying.
The EO sub forum was created because of the massive volume of postings about the Rybka/Fruit controverse which started in 2008-9 and at some point more or less became the main topic.
Nowadays one or two user complaints are enough to make a moderator decide to move a thread to EO, as HGM already explained.