Originally posted by richjohnsonHard for me to say. I've not read the posts in quesiton (as they were moderated and hidden from view -- irony?). Even if I had, I wouldn't really be able to divine the poster's motives. Some people like to be famous, even if it is in a negative way (infamous), or like to see their names in public places (graffiti tags?). Regardless, the poster seems to still be infamous even though the posts were deleted!
Do you think tuco would have given up as quickly if all of those offensive posts were not deleted?
I concede that superficially hiding the posts would do nothing to protect curious youngsters from digging up inappropriate ideas. But to what end are we trying to do that anyway, and how could we ever hope to account for our differences in morals, tastes, and cultures? Impossible.
Presumably, the posts in question would still have been moderated and hidden (unless explicit action was taken by the user to unlock the posts). Explicit action implies intent. If kids intend to find inappropriate material on the Internet, they are going to find it elsewhere, where it is wide open and plentiful.
Originally posted by geniusHow about this: If the site admins are breaking the law by hosting a post on their servers, then the post should be removed. Though I agree with free speech across the board, I think abiding by the law is a reasonable policy for a discussion forum. Any lawyers out there know whether it is unlawful to host certain types of content in a public forum?
yes-it would be my fault, but it's still a risk that Chris and Russ probubly won't take as they would still be hosting the offensive content and could thus be sued for it. i think 😛
How would one qualify whether any given post could reasonably generate a lawsuit, though?
A few comments on several recent posts:
It is true that I do not post often; when I do it is normally in the "Chess Only" forum. It is equally true that I read all the forums pretty often; though, with a predilection toward those other than "General". All moderators cover the forums in different fashions and with different patterns of "participation".
WRT the list of moderators. Someone states that they do not know who they are every few months and a list is posted every time. I presume this pattern will iterate - it is not a secret.
WRT how moderators are/were chosen: they were originally volunteers who were willing to give up some time to moderate the forums. Some months ago Chris and Russ decided to reduce the number and chose a subset based upon some criteria which they have not defined to us. I presume the judgement illustrated by those chosen reflected how they wanted forums to be moderated. It is not clear to me if this list will be changed or added to any time in the future.
The method chosen to implement moderation is to hide posts that have been "moderated" from public view. Other methods are certainly implementable and feel free to discuss them. If you feel serious about them, then feel free to make a suggestion in the appropriate forum (Help & Site Ideas). Personally, I do not believe that it will be changed, but you are welcome to present ideas.
Concerning the ability of moderators to effectively moderate: It is judgement entrusted to us by the owners. Mistakes can & will be made and they will be corrected as quickly as we can tell that they have occurred. The best process, IMHO, is to discuss with a moderator if a poster feels that their post has been incorrectly hidden. This is encouraged and, as stated previously, we often get no response though we are proactive about contacting individuals WRT their posts or their reasons for alerting a post. Futher, we monitor ourselves to avoid poor judgements and even the suggestion of abuse.
Just thought inserting a few facts into the conversation might be useful.
End of comments.
-ww-
Originally posted by wWarriornice post. Remember, just because you can't see them it doesn't mean that they're not there - hold on, that makes mods sound like mysterious figures again. Do guys get issued masks with the job? 😉
A few comments on several recent posts:
It is true that I do not post often; when I do it is normally in the "Chess Only" forum. It is equally true that I read all the forums pretty often; though, with a predilection toward those other than "General". All moderators cover the forums in different fashions and with different patterns of "participation ...[text shortened]... thought inserting a few facts into the conversation might be useful.
End of comments.
-ww-
Originally posted by belgianfreakNo but RedHotTed is on hand on take on any 'contracts' that we might need to take out 😉
nice post. Remember, just because you can't see them it doesn't mean that they're not there - hold on, that makes mods sound like mysterious figures again. Do guys get issued masks with the job? 😉
Rhymester the Mysterious 😀
Originally posted by mwmillerMarc.This is the way to go.
We know that Chris and Russ do not have the time to work on changes and improvements to the RHP site continuously. It's impossible for them to even review and respond to every idea or suggestion posted in the various forums.
I have not discussed any of the following with them, and do not know if this idea would be acceptable to them or not, but.... Ma ...[text shortened]... be established for tournaments, site functions, site help, etc.
Just my thought,
Marc
I put myself forward,but it must be an election.
The problems we had were due to lack of money.
Vote for me.
Your voice will always be heared.
Linda
Originally posted by RhymesterOut of here.
LOL I've been called all sorts of things but never a 'mysterious figure'.
I don't know where this idea has come from.. we just look at posts that have been alerted and use common sense to decide if it should be removed or accepted. If we are not sure we discuss it with each other. Where's the mystery in that?
Rhymester
LoL I have been called all sorts of things too