Ban of member

[chesskobra]

I do sympathise with chessqueen. I do not have much tolerance for people doing political propaganda in unrelated forums, embedding unrelated videos etc. So such people must be warned. But other than that overall I thought chessqueen to be harmless, and I don't recall chessqueen harassing others publicly. I don't quite agree with people wanting to ban someone because of 'quality of their posts'. How many forums do you know where you only get high quality content, whatever that means? Also, we have others here who go on rambling on and on, often incoherently, or are full of themselves, and some of them comment on the quality of CQ's posts. I usually didn't read CQ's posts due to a lack of overlap in interests, but why not have a live-and-let-live attitude if you don't share others' interests?

[jefk]

CK wrote

don't quite agree with people wanting to ban someone because of 'quality of their posts'

nobody here wrote this.

[CornfedForever]

Chessqueen has been permanently banned for the offence of spamming YouTube videos into his signature, an offence of which he has been previous made aware.

Definitely NOT a fan of Chessqueen, but the job of a moderator is to moderate....not take the easy way out and permanently ban the guy when other options were available. So...

[AndrewGrant]

Chessqueen has been permanently banned for the offence of spamming YouTube videos into his signature, an offence of which he has been previous made aware.

Definitely NOT a fan of Chessqueen, but the job of a moderator is to moderate....not take the easy way out and permanently ban the guy when other options were available. So...

I'm sure the list of moderator actions taken against Chessqueen can fill pages and pages of these forums.

[Harvey Williamson]

permanently ban[/i] the guy

The longest ban is normally for the duration of the moderation term. It’s up to the next set of moderators if they want to lift the ban.

[Alexander Schmidt]

The longest ban is normally for the duration of the moderation term. It’s up to the next set of moderators if they want to lift the ban.

It would be a good idea to gradually tighten the sanctions for violations:

1. warning
2. ban for one week
3. ban for a month
4. permanent ban

It is very frustrating to be permanently banned without being aware of your guilt. A forum like this can be a big part of someone's life.

[Graham Banks]

The longest ban is normally for the duration of the moderation term. It’s up to the next set of moderators if they want to lift the ban.

It would be a good idea to gradually tighten the sanctions for violations:

1. warning
2. ban for one week
3. ban for a month
4. permanent ban

It is very frustrating to be permanently banned without being aware of your guilt. A forum like this can be a big part of someone's life.

Judging by the length of moderation terms lately, he might well be dead one way or the other before that.

[jefk]

cornfed wrote:

the job of a moderator is to moderate

yes, and there are guidelines for that, quoting from
viewtopic.php?t=46462

post new or response messages with the proviso that these new or response messages:
1. Are, within reason, on the topic of computer chess

etc,
and... :

Do not attach a website link to your profile unless it relates to chess or is your personal webpage.

Most likely mr Cq,whatever his 'issues' also imo most likely was well aware of these rules but simply kept on
with a tendency to engage in (imo) a trolling style (*); remembering earlier years on the internet when the troll
phenomenon was more widespread (sometimes a lot worse than CQ btw), and sometimes difficult to prevent, as well.

Overall it may have been a complex situation, and moderator(s) may have a dilemma sometimes, but it's
imo their right to cut through a Gordian knot when feeling the situation requires that (while he didn't
talk with Harm he may have talked with M2, Ed S, don't know); for the rest (while i do understand that
a permanent ban seems a bit harsh (**) no further comment(s).

(*) some characteristics of trolling according to an AI:
- Trolls aim to provoke, offend, and disrupt online conversations and communities. Their primary goal is to elicit negative emotional reactions from others for their own amusement (malicious intent)
- Inflammatory behavior: Trolls post provocative, offensive, or inflammatory comments to disrupt normal discussions and evoke strong emotional responses.
- Perception of trolling as functional: Some trolls believe their behavior serves a purpose in online communities, viewing it as a form of communication that enriches rather than impedes online deliberation.Enjoyment of chaos: Trolls often aim to create chaos in online discussions, particularly around controversial or emotionally charged topics
- Enjoyment of chaos: Trolls often aim to create chaos in online discussions, particularly around controversial or emotionally charged topics
(**) there are other chess forums, you know, and i wish him well

[towforce]

...Tforce, i'm not sure if the comment some time ago by Cq about his memory problems was serious...

1. My party isn't going well

2. To liven things up, at a time when memory is not under discussion and I haven't forgotten anything, I announce, "I have Alzheimer's"

3. I don't then later tell my guests that I wasn't being serious

This would be strange behaviour, wouldn't it? But, to be fair, CQ did say a lot of things that just weren't right.

Edit: this action might actually slow down the rate at which my guests were leaving: I can't say for sure - I haven't tried it.

[jefk]

tf
although it took me some effort in looking up his statement as you only posted a query with alzheimer
he didn't announce 'i have alzheimer', he wrote something as 'i think i'm getting alzheimer' which
imo sounds (and probably is) different(ly), although i can't be sure, i admit; neither can you.
for the rest i leave it to the moderator(s).