Questions regarding the Election and Nomination Process

[Graham Banks]

Yes Graham,a referendum would be nice to gather the members points of view over some main issues.....
Personal one man point of view doesn't count in no way

This could be done via polling beforehand also.
It might well be an idea to do some, bearing in mind that the options should be clear in representing views..

Regards, Graham.

[dj]

Wow Derek I'm surpised you would use the word Anglo0Saxon this sounds almost racial.

No. Cultural. I was simply trying to say that elections are regarded as the norm in all sorts of activities in English-speaking countries. Anyway, it is certainly the case that many people seem to be interested in having elections on CCC. However, only four pople have been nominated on CTF and only one has accepted - perhaps reflecting the greater difficulties involved in moderating CTF.

[Steve B]

IF we are both elected i think there will be several things that will have to change
Steve

I'm sure that the voters would love to know what you mean with this statement Steve.

Also the votes in the forthcoming election could well tell you a different story. Perhaps the great majority of members are happy with the way things are.

Besides, a moderation team discusses their policies and modus operandi after the election to decide how things are going to be.
It is not up to one mod to dictate to the others how things are going to happen.

Regards, Graham.

yes of course the team must decide together
and if you and i are elected on the same team i think the members will wonder how we can get along together for the good of the board and i think to do that we are going to have to agree to do things as a team a bit differently then they are done now
thats what i meant by a change

i am surprised Graham you thought i meant i would dictate terms

you are going to have to be more trusting then that if we are both elected

i will be making my moderation policy quite clear in my statement in Turners thread

you could be right that many would be happy with seeing the same moderator for what would be 3 terms if you are reelected and what would amount to more then 4 years of moderation from the same person

its a pity that the Founding fathers of the CCC did not foresee this would happen or they would have imposed term limits on mods i think

personally i think its good for the board to have new mods certainly after close to 3 years with the same mod and the possibility of another 2 more years

Hyatt and Skinner and myself on the ballot certainly does not look like a very strong vote of confidence for you and Swami

and i can assure you....i certainly did not nominate myself and i doubt either Hyatt or Skinner would either.. like it appears you and Swami did

Steve

Someone sent me an email suggesting that I at least respond here, so I will.

(1) I really don't care whether you (SteveB) become a moderator or not. So far as I know, you would probably be a good one. I don't follow your CC posts, and I doubt if you follow my programming-related posts. So what?

(2) I do have a big problem with CCC as it exists, and it is my intention to simply go elsewhere unless at least two things change significantly...

(a) This crap of moderators _editing_ posts is going to stop for my posts, because there are not going to be any more posts from me to edit. It is a lousy policy. It is a stupid policy. It is an insane policy. Delete a post? yes. Change it? Not on my watch. Not now, not ever. And while my absence here won't mean a thing, I can guarantee you I will be absent until this practice is completely stopped, and made impossible for future moderators to do.

(b) The silly business of locking threads on a whim, or temporarily moving threads on a whim, is not going to fly. I _was_ one of the founding fathers of CCC. And we _never_ intended nor even discussed such things happening. The thread that was the final straw for me was the Hiarcs operator fiasco in the last CCT event. That idea is so very basic to all computer chess events, that saying "Oh, he didn't know, or didn't mean to hurt anything" just simply does not cut it. If a guy lives by himself deep in the jungle somewhere, and then makes his way to civilization at age 30 and immediately kills someone to take their food, does he get a "free ride" because he didn't know any better, or is he going to jail? In this case, the 30 years with no human contact didn't happen. Rules for the CCT/ICGA tournaments have been published over and over for years. They have been discussed over and over for years. We had a year-long thread about the DB match and how these rules were applied even there.

And then the moderators have to step in and quash the discussion for a period of time while they "clean up the thread".

I'm simply done with that nonsense. If everyone else is happy with it, so be it. But I'm not, and I'm not going to be involved if that is going to be the way things are done.

Hope that makes my position clear. I don't have a problem with you, and suspect you might be an excellent moderator. Thorsten and I have locked horns many times in the past, yet I feel the same way about him. But the way things are going at present, is not for me. And I'm old enough and experienced enough to have the right to make whatever decisions I choose to make about where I post and where I don't...I'm not willing to just tolerate a place, either I enjoy it or I move on...

hi Bob
i appreciate the kinds words about your expectations should i be elected moderator
hopefully i can live up to them

i have to say i agree completely with you on the "editing/locking/moving" issue

of course these" newly acquired "moderator powers came along with the change over to the new software

i have objected to this here and in the CTF many times in the past

as far as i know the old board operated fairly smoothly for 8 long years with the moderators simply deleting posts or leaving them be as is. there was no compelling urgent desire by mods then to have the ability to edit/or lock or move

just because one HAS the ability to exert more control over a fellow members posts ,does not necessarily mean they ought to USE that control

i also agree that the mark of a good moderator is when you have a smoothly running board and one does not even notice the mods existence lurking in the background

i think it is akin to watching a game such as baseball or basketball or soccer(for our European members)
the best officiated games are the ones where you did not notice the officials were even in attendance

finally i agree as well that no matter whose post is deleted ..a pm should be sent to that member informing him of it
just seems to me that it is the humane civilized thing to do

Best Regards
Steve

[Daniel Mehrmann]

(2) I do have a big problem with CCC as it exists, and it is my intention to simply go elsewhere unless at least two things change significantly...

(a) This crap of moderators _editing_ posts is going to stop for my posts, because there are not going to be any more posts from me to edit. It is a lousy policy. It is a stupid policy. It is an insane policy. Delete a post? yes. Change it? Not on my watch. Not now, not ever. And while my absence here won't mean a thing, I can guarantee you I will be absent until this practice is completely stopped, and made impossible for future moderators to do.

I disagree here. It's not so easy just say good or bad posting, delete it or not. There is a lot of much more differ in the most cases.

I think you're talking about the classic insult messages. In this case you're right, such things should be deleted anyway.

But my experince, as moderator, shows me another view of the most "difficult postings". Mostly they include usefull informations or a plaint view of the poster. I don't like deleting such messages, because it might help other users and you never know it exactly (a moderator must include all views of users instead of his own once).

Just for example i had a case today where a user was asking for help with his engine and posted register keys, which is illegal of course. Should do i delete this posting ? No, it won't be a good idea. I just deleted the lines of register key stuff in the message.

In fact, over90% of all "critical" postings are this "class" and it's no good idea to delete them completly.

It's not easy for an moderator to decides in such cases anyway, but i think a more dynamic solution is much better, where we look first of the completly content of the message and not simply deleting it.

Best,
Daniel

[Guetti]

(2) I do have a big problem with CCC as it exists, and it is my intention to simply go elsewhere unless at least two things change significantly...

(a) This crap of moderators _editing_ posts is going to stop for my posts, because there are not going to be any more posts from me to edit. It is a lousy policy. It is a stupid policy. It is an insane policy. Delete a post? yes. Change it? Not on my watch. Not now, not ever. And while my absence here won't mean a thing, I can guarantee you I will be absent until this practice is completely stopped, and made impossible for future moderators to do.

I disagree here. It's not so easy just say good or bad posting, delete it or not. There is a lot of much more differ in the most cases.

I think you're talking about the classic insult messages. In this case you're right, such things should be deleted anyway.

But my experince, as moderator, shows me another view of the most "difficult postings". Mostly they include usefull informations or a plaint view of the poster. I don't like deleting such messages, because it might help other users and you never know it exactly (a moderator must include all views of users instead of his own once).

Just for example i had a case today where a user was asking for help with his engine and posted register keys, which is illegal of course. Should do i delete this posting ? No, it won't be a good idea. I just deleted the lines of register key stuff in the message.

In fact, over90% of all "critical" postings are this "class" and it's no good idea to delete them completly.

It's not easy for an moderator to decides in such cases anyway, but i think a more dynamic solution is much better, where we look first of the completly content of the message and not simply deleting it.

Best,
Daniel

You are right about that, illegal URLs and stuff can be removed quite easily and also have been in the past, as far a I know.
The problem are posts that contain personal attacks, they should always be removed, independant of what useful information the post contains, because
(a) the meaning of the post is altered if a "fuck you" is edited away and
(b) We are grown up people and one can expect that we treat others in a respectful way. We don't need nannies that watch our words.

But this is exactly what the current moderators do again and again.

[MikeB]

Hello all !

3.) My english skill level is to low to do this job.

Best,
Daniel

I think your English is fine, but I respect your decision.

Across the Big Pond regards,

Mike B

[Daniel Mehrmann]

(2) I do have a big problem with CCC as it exists, and it is my intention to simply go elsewhere unless at least two things change significantly...

(a) This crap of moderators _editing_ posts is going to stop for my posts, because there are not going to be any more posts from me to edit. It is a lousy policy. It is a stupid policy. It is an insane policy. Delete a post? yes. Change it? Not on my watch. Not now, not ever. And while my absence here won't mean a thing, I can guarantee you I will be absent until this practice is completely stopped, and made impossible for future moderators to do.

I disagree here. It's not so easy just say good or bad posting, delete it or not. There is a lot of much more differ in the most cases.

I think you're talking about the classic insult messages. In this case you're right, such things should be deleted anyway.

But my experince, as moderator, shows me another view of the most "difficult postings". Mostly they include usefull informations or a plaint view of the poster. I don't like deleting such messages, because it might help other users and you never know it exactly (a moderator must include all views of users instead of his own once).

Just for example i had a case today where a user was asking for help with his engine and posted register keys, which is illegal of course. Should do i delete this posting ? No, it won't be a good idea. I just deleted the lines of register key stuff in the message.

In fact, over90% of all "critical" postings are this "class" and it's no good idea to delete them completly.

It's not easy for an moderator to decides in such cases anyway, but i think a more dynamic solution is much better, where we look first of the completly content of the message and not simply deleting it.

Best,
Daniel

You are right about that, illegal URLs and stuff can be removed quite easily and also have been in the past, as far a I know.
The problem are posts that contain personal attacks, they should always be removed, independant of what useful information the post contains, because
(a) the meaning of the post is altered if a "fuck you" is edited away and
(b) We are grown up people and one can expect that we treat others in a respectful way. We don't need nannies that watch our words.

But this is exactly what the current moderators do again and again.

Well, i would look first of the complete content of the message. If it's just a personal attack it should be deleted, but if it provide usefull information for other users the message should be edited.

I think it really depends on the message in this case. You can't say in a global view just delete all messages which includes insults or personal attacks.

Basicly i think informations or plaint views of users having a higher weight.

But it's really depends on the case. For example if you have a real big thread where you see users positing in fast times you might have no time to edit all stuff, it's been better delete such messages easly to prevent any locking and moving of threads, which is mostly not effective on CCC.

I think we shouldn't use a static rule here, a moderator must be smart enought to detect if its better to delete such messages or editing it.
A moderator must notice also if his handling is no longer supported by the most users and must change his view or better retired if he can't accept it.

Best,
Daniel

[bob]

(2) I do have a big problem with CCC as it exists, and it is my intention to simply go elsewhere unless at least two things change significantly...

(a) This crap of moderators _editing_ posts is going to stop for my posts, because there are not going to be any more posts from me to edit. It is a lousy policy. It is a stupid policy. It is an insane policy. Delete a post? yes. Change it? Not on my watch. Not now, not ever. And while my absence here won't mean a thing, I can guarantee you I will be absent until this practice is completely stopped, and made impossible for future moderators to do.

I disagree here. It's not so easy just say good or bad posting, delete it or not. There is a lot of much more differ in the most cases.

I think you're talking about the classic insult messages. In this case you're right, such things should be deleted anyway.

But my experince, as moderator, shows me another view of the most "difficult postings". Mostly they include usefull informations or a plaint view of the poster. I don't like deleting such messages, because it might help other users and you never know it exactly (a moderator must include all views of users instead of his own once).

Just for example i had a case today where a user was asking for help with his engine and posted register keys, which is illegal of course. Should do i delete this posting ? No, it won't be a good idea. I just deleted the lines of register key stuff in the message.

In fact, over90% of all "critical" postings are this "class" and it's no good idea to delete them completly.

It's not easy for an moderator to decides in such cases anyway, but i think a more dynamic solution is much better, where we look first of the completly content of the message and not simply deleting it.

Best,
Daniel

But here's the rub:

when you can edit a post, what do you edit? Just remove the curse words? Just remove things that are directly personal in nature? Remove things that might be personal depending on how you interpret the post?

It's a slippery post.

I have a problem with someone changing my words in any form. I'm less disagreeable to the moderators removing the entire post if they think it is disagreeable. Because then it just disappears. But censorship by deletion is one thing. Censorship by selective redacting is something else. Censorship by changine words selectively is even worse.

I don't want to have to deal with "what level of editing is acceptable?" It's just easier to say "the post stands or it gets deleted in its entirety." That's fairer, and it really avoids a potential problem. Not all moderators have pure motives. Giving them the power to change the words of others is simply not acceptable. I don't know how to explain it even further. I stand by what I write. I can't possibly stand by what I wrote and then someone else modified it whenever and however they wanted.

[Daniel Mehrmann]

(2) I do have a big problem with CCC as it exists, and it is my intention to simply go elsewhere unless at least two things change significantly...

(a) This crap of moderators _editing_ posts is going to stop for my posts, because there are not going to be any more posts from me to edit. It is a lousy policy. It is a stupid policy. It is an insane policy. Delete a post? yes. Change it? Not on my watch. Not now, not ever. And while my absence here won't mean a thing, I can guarantee you I will be absent until this practice is completely stopped, and made impossible for future moderators to do.

I disagree here. It's not so easy just say good or bad posting, delete it or not. There is a lot of much more differ in the most cases.

I think you're talking about the classic insult messages. In this case you're right, such things should be deleted anyway.

But my experince, as moderator, shows me another view of the most "difficult postings". Mostly they include usefull informations or a plaint view of the poster. I don't like deleting such messages, because it might help other users and you never know it exactly (a moderator must include all views of users instead of his own once).

Just for example i had a case today where a user was asking for help with his engine and posted register keys, which is illegal of course. Should do i delete this posting ? No, it won't be a good idea. I just deleted the lines of register key stuff in the message.

In fact, over90% of all "critical" postings are this "class" and it's no good idea to delete them completly.

It's not easy for an moderator to decides in such cases anyway, but i think a more dynamic solution is much better, where we look first of the completly content of the message and not simply deleting it.

Best,
Daniel

But here's the rub:

when you can edit a post, what do you edit? Just remove the curse words? Just remove things that are directly personal in nature? Remove things that might be personal depending on how you interpret the post?

Ok, i understand your view.
First, there is no rule which tells you what is te best way like a chessprogram would do.

Well, in this case, i can tell you experince is all what you need.
First you're starting by deleting the lines/sets, not words, what do you think is the best for all users.
The users are not stupid and will tell you if its ok or not. You start to noticed if the most of them don't accept it and you need to change your way of editing (or deleting) messages in this case so long the most them accept it.

This takes time of course, but i'm sure you'll get your time you need to find your best way.

Of course it's not possible to do it right for all users, you'll find always a user which don't accept your way, but i think its better to accept it rather then deleting maybe usefull informations.

Best,
Daniel
[/u][/i]

[swami]

I will nominate:

Kaustubh
Frohlick
Swaminathan

Guenther

And i will nominate you.

Me too, I nominated Swaminathan, now will you quit already?

Or How about this nominations,Tony.

Dr.Jaochim Wolfram,Ph.d
Rolf
Dana Turnmire
Guenther Simon


Apart from me, Kaustubh from his nominee list seems to be better guy than any of these members.

Guenther seems to think that it would be a cheap attempt to advertise it to voters in order to have me get me less votes,I don't care one bit.

If you want to know why I accept the nomination, check your pm, the main point is I don't care about winning or losing.

Guenther and me don't get along, this is nasty attempt from him, I didn't start this.Every member in this forum has atleast one other member who criticises them and don't get along well.

Regards.