2024 Moderation Election ***Update***

[Viz]

Yes, definitely dyslexia.
My dyslexia is nowadays caused me to write that you are a complete fucking idiot, I wanted to type "nice guy" but somehow messed it all up.
Dyslexia, what can I do.

Moderation: the difference between muddling up names with no malintent and your disrespectful, rude, aggressive, gutter language designed to create discord and destroy the well being of this forum is stark. Zero remorse and zero sign of it stopping. Poster has just returned from one banning and is now is banned indefinitely.

[mclane]

What a dirty posting by this guy.
Seems his only intention here was to attack and insult people. Lets hope he is not registering under a different name…

I scrolled through his content over the last days and it was mostly attacking stuff. Insane.

[a_node_uncut]

Well done by the moderators. Hate and insult have no place in Talkchess.

[LazySMP]

Hate and insult have no place on GitHub either.

Code: Select all

 official-stockfish deleted a comment from Vizvezdenec on Apr 7

https://github.com/official-stockfish/S ... ssues/5156

[Ras]

After some thinking, I came up with some idea how to circumvent that issue. I mean, it's obvious that demanding the real name without any verification just doesn't actually work and shows no interest to make it work, hence no legitimate interest either, but pulling a reverse Honest Achmed may not look bad. We could actually spin that even in favour of the GDPR if some TOS, explanation or whatever stated that we refrain from demanding an ID card scan as to avoid collecting even more personal data (privacy by design).

On a side note, I'm not sure where all the recent vile stuff comes from, but I refuse to believe that it's on the actual Stockfish developers.

[ydebilloez]

Real name obligation would change the very nature of the list and invalidate it's historical content. I don't think real names should be an obligation and would raise lot of privacy related complications. Relative weight of votes is not a good thing neither.
1 member = 1 vote
What we could do is ban anyone temporarily from voting (like removing civil rights) after misconduct and only allow new members to vote after having proven they are contributing. We would still have the possibility of someone using multiple id's but that will only be removed after doing full KYC which is not in line with existing memberships.

[Brunetti]

Real name obligation would change the very nature of the list and invalidate it's historical content.

Hello,
the 2006 "Talkchess Registration" post says: "**You must supply your real first and last name** or your registration will NOT BE APPROVED".
Could you clarify what you mean by "historical content"?

Alex

[chrisw]

After some thinking, I came up with some idea how to circumvent that issue. I mean, it's obvious that demanding the real name without any verification just doesn't actually work and shows no interest to make it work, hence no legitimate interest either, but pulling a reverse Honest Achmed may not look bad. We could actually spin that even in favour of the GDPR if some TOS, explanation or whatever stated that we refrain from demanding an ID card scan as to avoid collecting even more personal data (privacy by design).

On a side note, I'm not sure where all the recent vile stuff comes from, but I refuse to believe that it's on the actual Stockfish developers.

Alternatively, we make real name at registration entirely voluntary, making it plain that we use real names as a part validation for voting. Then at voting time we ask users to sign up for voter registration using their real name. Ie two lists.
We’re a small volunteer special interest group with no funding and we can’t be reasonably expected to initiate rigorous id check (we’re not Facebook) but since we’re mostly a known community, real name is useful for integrity of the vote.


On your aside, yes, I doubt actual SF developers find the activities of certain of the SF discord any more tasteful than we do. Cursory reading (if you can bear the gutter language and homoerotic language from some of them) reveals suggestions/incitement to fake sign up here in masses to affect the vote. Suggestion from one prominent organiser to stand as mod candidate, perform some disruption and then resign. Multiple allegations of mal intent and misdemeanours by mods which are based on lies and/or partial/twisted data. One post claiming poster signed up specifically to “ffff with the mods”. And so on and so on. They’re using the SF discord as a platform to try to organise a destruction of talkchess. Doesn’t exactly reflect well on the otherwise brilliant SF project.

[smatovic]

[...]

[...]

Question, can we solve anonymity on a technical level, send verification code via SMS/voice mail to phone number? So phone number serves as ID, as many other platforms do. You can make it step wise, with verification code you grant further rights in forum, e.g. to vote.

To write such a phpBB forum plug in does not look too complicated to me, but you will need an external SMS/voice call provider to deliver the code, which won't be for free. Maybe another donation round? To pay an external freelancer?

--
Srdja

[Brunetti]

Question, can we solve anonymity on a technical level, send verification code via SMS/voice mail to phone number?

You don't solve anonymity by linking a user to a phone number: I use a disposable one and I'm still anonymous. I buy 10 of them and register 10 times...

It would be possible to introduce a category like 'authenticated user' for those who subscribe to a sort of lifetime subscription costing one cent to be paid via bank transfer. Considering factors such as user simplicity, ease of operation for Talckchess, costs, and a sufficient level of authentication, I believe this is one of the best methods.

Alex