Moderation team quits.

[hgm]

Discussing an act should first take place privately between the mod(s) and the person affected. If the response is not satisfactory, then take it public.

Actually the act in question was already discussed pre-emptively, in the form of the request voiced in the original post, with a an elaborate and clear explanation of the damage it would do to move it.

The moderators decided to discard that request without any comment, thus showing by their action they were not interested in discussing this issue, and would be deaf to any arguments, no matter how reasonable.

And you also overlook this: the persons most affected by this moderator decision would be those who would now never see the moved post, because it was hidden from them in the wrong forum section. So how could they possibly complain in a PM, about things they would not even know about? First you have to tell the affected persons that they actually are affected, and this has to be done in public.

[A Distel]

.+1 - I have not seen one item that impugned the character of the moderators...

Recognise these? Such an evil bunch of people determined to destroy computer chess. Wonderful appreciation for the fantastic job they've done over three terms.

That moderators of TalkChess would feel compelled to severely hurt the computer-chess community is truly insane.

it is also possible to abuse power over the forum content to excessively hinder event organizers, and force them to do tons of unnecessary work, by sabotaging the easy and obvious method of achieving their goal.

Which of the two do you think is harder? Three moderators keeping their hands to themselves 5 times a year, or 50 programmers having to scan through 40 forum posts in a section they would normally never read daily?

Please remind me. When exactly was the charter changed to redefine the job of the moderaters to wreck the forum in order to sabotage major computer-chess events?

Given that the moderator team seems to have decided to take a stance that is highly damaging to computer Chess in general, it has become essential for the future of computer Chess that the moderator team resigns immediately, and new elections are held.

You sound like the bolshevistic party telling the soviets that the zk of the party decided this or that upon this or that golden law.
If you would not have been elected I would guess you are the admin Sam hull telling us that he is doing whatever HE wants to do.

In other words, the moderators are standing on my toes.

Indeed, if the moderators cannot refrain from abusing their powers to vandalize the forum, they should step down. The task of moderators is to guard people's rights to make computer-chess-related topics public without being harassed. Not to harass people themselves.

So the moderators should take openly hostile declarations as those of Lucas as an affirmation that they embarked on the path of destroying computer Chess.

Question for the motherators

Where are the personal insults, impugning character, etc?

Not a one in the list above.

Many of those comments impugn their character and are especially insulting when you consider that two of the moderators were engine authors themselves.

Hey Banks, it is always easier, and usually far more effective, to focus on changing your character than on changing the character of others but, maybe you've eaten too many cats?