Think about building a moderation team

[gerold]

I think that the elections for moderators are approaching quickly. It could be the end of this month if my memory is correct. So, start thinking about building a/some team/s to be candidate/s. I takes time and if the elections are announced, it may not be feasible to do in a couple of days.

Miguel

Where does it state in the CCC Charter that you need "teams" instead of "individuals" ??

It can be teams or individuals.

[geots]

I think that the elections for moderators are approaching quickly. It could be the end of this month if my memory is correct. So, start thinking about building a/some team/s to be candidate/s. I takes time and if the elections are announced, it may not be feasible to do in a couple of days.

Miguel

Where does it state in the CCC Charter that you need "teams" instead of "individuals" ??

It can be teams or individuals.

Gerold, this is one place we don't agree. No rules are necessarily forever, and nothing wrong with having flexible rules. Some chess forums never change monitors- but I'm not suggesting that. The ones we have now came in and cleaned up one holy hell of a train wreck. And unbelievably did it with almost making no "enemies for life". Normal moderation teams and/or individuals average making one enemy per day. I have seen all the good and all the bad- and this is the best I have ever seen this forum- hands down.

How about a poll to see who thinks we need change and who likes it "as is". But this poll would only be worthwhile if they agreed to stay based on results.

I will certainly defend your right to feel however you do, but I can't figure out what we are using the best moderation team in the history of TalkChess in the same sentence with "engine clones" for. You got me there.



All the best,

george

[carldaman]

I think that the elections for moderators are approaching quickly. It could be the end of this month if my memory is correct. So, start thinking about building a/some team/s to be candidate/s. I takes time and if the elections are announced, it may not be feasible to do in a couple of days.

Miguel

Where does it state in the CCC Charter that you need "teams" instead of "individuals" ??

It can be teams or individuals.

Gerold, this is one place we don't agree. No rules are necessarily forever, and nothing wrong with having flexible rules. Some chess forums never change monitors- but I'm not suggesting that. The ones we have now came in and cleaned up one holy hell of a train wreck. And unbelievably did it with almost making no "enemies for life". Normal moderation teams and/or individuals average making one enemy per day. I have seen all the good and all the bad- and this is the best I have ever seen this forum- hands down.

How about a poll to see who thinks we need change and who likes it "as is". But this poll would only be worthwhile if they agreed to stay based on results.

I will certainly defend your right to feel however you do, but I can't figure out what we are using the best moderation team in the history of TalkChess in the same sentence with "engine clones" for. You got me there.



All the best,

george

+1 We hardly notice the moderators, which in itself is a great thing

[Sean Evans]

I think that the elections for moderators are approaching quickly. It could be the end of this month if my memory is correct. So, start thinking about building a/some team/s to be candidate/s. I takes time and if the elections are announced, it may not be feasible to do in a couple of days.

Miguel

Where does it state in the CCC Charter that you need "teams" instead of "individuals" ??

It can be teams or individuals.

That is *not* what was stated in the OP

[JuLieN]

I think that the elections for moderators are approaching quickly. It could be the end of this month if my memory is correct. So, start thinking about building a/some team/s to be candidate/s. I takes time and if the elections are announced, it may not be feasible to do in a couple of days.

Miguel

Where does it state in the CCC Charter that you need "teams" instead of "individuals" ??

It can be teams or individuals.

That is *not* what was stated in the OP

I'll explain things hopefully simply enough. We are moderators : we don't make the charter. The charter says teams or individual can be candidates for the elections. In this thread, we are inviting people to form teams. This doesn't prevent at all individuals to be candidate. it is just a reminder so people who want to present teams to the votes can organize themselves while they have time. Do you understand, now ?

[lucasart]

How about no moderation team for a while ?

Perhaps the best moderation is no moderation.

I would be curious to see how that goes. So what? there will be some spamming and trolling, but it's already the case, and no moderation can prevent it. Sometimes moderation is even counter productive and spills oil on the fire.

For example, on OpenChess, there is no more spamming and trolling than here. Yet Jeremy Bernstein (almost) never intervenes.

Can "no moderation team" be an option in the vote ? I think this "candidate" has a serious chance at winning the election. People prefer freedom, to censorship.

PS: This is not a joke. I am serious, and would like to see "no moderation team" as a contender in the election.

[lucasart]

People prefer freedom, to censorship.

There are other places for those people. Freedom and anarchy are very close to each other.

To quote Goethe: "Nur das Gesetz kann Freiheit geben."

Yes, it would be anarchy. But anarchy can be a more efficient and self-regulated system. Here's the thought process:

Moderation, means that specific users have power over everyone, and can lock threads, delete or edit posts etc. This in turns tends to fuel the trolling and spamming more than to simply ignore the troll.

The way anarchy is self-regulated is to follow a simple rule: don't feed the troll. When a troll writes obviously stupid and provocative posts, if nobody answers, after a few days, the troll gets bored with this forum, and he goes away and trolls another forum. You cannot get rid of them (and even if you did more would come). And any attempt to restrict or control them makes them more powerful. Feeding a troll is like feeding a gremlin after midnight...

So far, I have never seen any evidence that moderation helps in any way. The best forums are self-moderated ones.

And as for the sissies that get offended by certain posts, and want to call upon the moderator everytime. They need to grow up: it's not a kindergarten. I say it's their problem and they need to grow up and stop crying. And if they can't do that then they should leave the forum and do something else of their time.

[JuLieN]

How about no moderation team for a while ?

Perhaps the best moderation is no moderation.

I would be curious to see how that goes. So what? there will be some spamming and trolling, but it's already the case, and no moderation can prevent it. Sometimes moderation is even counter productive and spills oil on the fire.

For example, on OpenChess, there is no more spamming and trolling than here. Yet Jeremy Bernstein (almost) never intervenes.

Can "no moderation team" be an option in the vote ? I think this "candidate" has a serious chance at winning the election. People prefer freedom, to censorship.

PS: This is not a joke. I am serious, and would like to see "no moderation team" as a contender in the election.

Now that would be against the charter ("Talkchess is a moderated message board"). And OpenChess doesn't have the audience Talkchess has. But if you want to make such an experiment, please go on : create your own unmoderated forum, persuade (or pay) many people to be part of your experiment and observe the result. Or... You could save yourself some troubles by reading Lord of the Flies.

[lucasart]

Moderation, means that specific users have power over everyone, and can lock threads, delete or edit posts etc. This in turns tends to fuel the trolling and spamming more than to simply ignore the troll.

The way anarchy is self-regulated is to follow a simple rule: don't feed the troll. When a troll writes obviously stupid and provocative posts, if nobody answers, after a few days, the troll gets bored with this forum, and he goes away and trolls another forum. You cannot get rid of them (and even if you did more would come). And any attempt to restrict or control them makes them more powerful. Feeding a troll is like feeding a gremlin after midnight...

So far, I have never seen any evidence that moderation helps in any way. The best forums are self-moderated ones.

And as for the sissies that get offended by certain posts, and want to call upon the moderator everytime. They need to grow up: it's not a kindergarten. I say it's their problem and they need to grow up and stop crying. And if they can't do that then they should leave the forum and do something else of their time.

Here's a prime example of trolling in talkchess

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... =&start=20

Jerry Donald [whose is a respected engine author and a very good chess player] was the victim of a Troll [who, OTOH has probably not invented the wheel]
- Jerry simply didn't answer.
- Everyone who read this thread knows who is a moron and who is not (no need to comment, as it just puts oil on the fire and encourages the Troll to continue)
- the Troll got bored and did not continue.

I bet that moderation would have made it worse. Perhaps our dear moderators could try to interviene, and we will see how the Troll reacts. It would be an interesting experiment

[Henk]

There are also trolls that get bored but still continue. They just continue wasting their time. And who needs another chess program when there are hundreds or even more.

By the way games are only helpful if you are lost in the desert when your car got broke and have to wait days or hours for help. For you have to stick to the vehicle in order to be found.