2024 Moderation Election ***Update***

[Rebel]

True. What I would like and what can be reasonably achieved is unfortunately not always the same.

And the carrot often works better than the stick. So why not offering those who exhibit the desired behavior some extra perks, rather than kicking out those who don't? Like the opportunity to have a say in who will be moderator. Call it a reward for good behavior. People with bad behavior might relate more to moderator candidates with similar behavior, so from that POV it also makes sense.

Note that moderator elections are basically a favor granted by the FG to the members. The charter does not specify that moderators have to be elected. There doesn't exist any right to vote.

Yes, well, on sticks and carrots, we're not subjects and they're not objects and they're going to resent being on the receiving end of such a culture.

I concur on elections. They are desirable but not mandatory. I think our new founder job is not yet done, we made progress but there are still way too many people here with opening gambits of aggression, hostility, rudeness and general goodwill lack - not to mention those hell bent on forum destruction via out-group cleansing. Maybe something to do with being of the Covid generation where their essential socialisation got disrupted/stopped. The notion of impending elections just make matters worse as they extend their political war of trying to get their own way into attacks on moderators. God help us if the cleansing crowd managed to get into control. So, I'ld vote to hold on elections until the cleansers got bored and found something else to do.

Why does the forum not has a like button.

[noobpwnftw]

hold on elections until the cleansers got bored and found something else to do.

I'm under the impression that elections were called for to get rid of those 'cleansers' and I have all the time in this world to wait for it.
Not exactly sure whether holding on to elections is going to work in your favor.

[a_node_uncut]

I don't understand... Why such an urge to replace the current moderators? Have they done anything wrong?

[noobpwnftw]

We'll find out after the vote, I guess? Don't they have nothing to hide from?

[chrisw]

hold on elections until the cleansers got bored and found something else to do.

I'm under the impression that elections were called for to get rid of those 'cleansers' and I have all the time in this world to wait for it.
Not exactly sure whether holding on to elections is going to work in your favor.

Note I wrote that I would vote for .....
eg it's my personal view, not moderation policy. I'm also continuing with the logistics of making an election happen, the electoral list and so on, intending to go with majority FG decision (which at the moment is to hold an election, I believe).

[noobpwnftw]

So, I'ld vote to hold on elections until the cleansers got bored and found something else to do.

Note I wrote that I would vote for .....
eg it's my personal view, not moderation policy. I'm also continuing with the logistics of making an election happen, the electoral list and so on, intending to go with majority FG decision (which at the moment is to hold an election, I believe).

So any English major cares to explain this to me, that is this hold or not hold, I'm confused before you try to throw slander on me again.

From what I understand, you are against holding elections now, and the rest(Rebel, hgm) may out vote you to proceed.

If this is the case then my opinion in above comment was correctly expressed.

[chrisw]

So, I'ld vote to hold on elections until the cleansers got bored and found something else to do.

Note I wrote that I would vote for .....
eg it's my personal view, not moderation policy. I'm also continuing with the logistics of making an election happen, the electoral list and so on, intending to go with majority FG decision (which at the moment is to hold an election, I believe).

So any English major cares to explain this to me, that is this hold or not hold, I'm confused before you try to throw slander on me again.

From what I read, you are against holding elections now, and the rest may proceed.

It's called thinking out loud.

Not aware of throwing slander on you. I usually avoid doing that.

[noobpwnftw]

Well, the definitions of almost anything are subject to vote. Somehow there is a good amount of disgreements and therefore elections are called for.

[Ras]

I would like to prevent we have anonymous users period. Like the charter stipulates, BTW.

Given that TC is operated from the EU and concerns members that are EU citizens, the GDPR clearly applies. Especially Art. Art. 7.4, aka forbidden bundling. That means in Art. 6.1, point a) goes right out of the window. Points b), c), d), and e) are obviously not applicable. You'd be hard pressed to seriously argue for point f) - given that the given data aren't verifiable and hence can be false without any consequence, they cannot be necessary to begin with.

The charter does not prevail over applicable law. Technically, that was already in contradiction with the GDPR when TC was hosted by ChessUSA, but US companies with no ties to the EU can ignore the GDPR because there is no enforcement. However, now that TC is operated from the EU, and the N in CSVN stands for Nederland, EU law is not only applicable, but also enforceable.

[towforce]

Why does the forum not has a like button.

+1