RHP Moderators

SUGGESTIONS:

1. The Moderators should be able to remove Clan or Club names which are abusive.

2. We should be able to have a Mod we can PM, if we have any questions. All it would take is to know who is on at any given time.

3. In warnings from Mods there is no way to reply and discuss anything. I believe a reply button would have many benefits, and solve mis-understandings, which now can take quite some time to resolve.

4. For the most part I believe the Moderators do a good job, even if I don't always agree with them. 😉 On a personal note, I really have seen improvements, since I arrived much to the delight of many in Oct, 2006. I believe like in the work place in the real world, there is always room for improvements.

Originally posted by Very Rusty
...since I arrived much to the delight of many in Oct, 2006.

And there I was, thinking you didn't have a sense of humour. 😏

Originally posted by Very Rusty
since I arrived much to the delight of many in Oct, 2006.

The Silent Many 🙄

Originally posted by Very Rusty
SUGGESTIONS:

1. The Moderators should be able to remove Clan or Club names which are abusive.

2. We should be able to have a Mod we can PM, if we have any questions. All it would take is to know who is on at any given time.

3. In warnings from Mods there is no way to reply and discuss anything. I believe a reply button would have many benefits, a ...[text shortened]... 006. I believe like in the work place in the real world, there is always room for improvements.

1. The Moderators should be able to remove Clan or Club names which are abusive.

to whom? if i renamed my clan to 'micheal flatly' is retarded would that be any less or more abusive that calling it 'very rusty is retarded'? where is the line drawn? it just opens it up for more predigest and debate. if you have a problem with a club or clan name send feedback. simples.

2. We should be able to have a Mod we can PM, if we have any questions. All it would take is to know who is on at any given time.

under site map you can see who the mods are, pick one and send them an pm. easy, no?

i'm sure each one of them will put their moderators hat on just for you rusty.

3. In warnings from Mods there is no way to reply and discuss anything. I believe a reply button would have many benefits, and solve mis-understandings, which now can take quite some time to resolve.

again with the pm feature. or just the alert mod button on some random post. where would a message go to the forum mod? all of their in boxes? or to where alerts get sent to?

4. For the most part I believe the Moderators do a good job, even if I don't always agree with them. 😉 On a personal note, I really have seen improvements, since I arrived much to the delight of many in Oct, 2006. I believe like in the work place in the real world, there is always room for improvements.

one mans crap is another mans gold. personally i don't think there has been any improvement in the last few years, it was better before. i blame rn and pals for that, if you want to post in a police state forum go to an under 9's forum where you belong. this is adult time and i want to be able to use language that adults (and children) use each day as normal conversation. the general forum is so overly moderated it's not funny.

Originally posted by trev33


this is adult time and i want to be able to use language that adults (and children) use each day as normal conversation. the general forum is so overly moderated it's not funny.[/b]

This is not "ADULT TIME", as you said. It is a 13+ chess site.

God forbid what the forums would look like if YOU and OTHERS had your way.

Other than that, you are entitled to you opinion, as I am to mine.

Originally posted by Very Rusty
This is not "ADULT TIME", as you said. It is a 13+ chess site.

God forbid what the forums would look like if YOU and OTHERS had your way.

Other than that, you are entitled to you opinion, as I am to mine.

I've pointed this out before, but the TOS expressly states that:

In consideration of your use of the Service, you represent that you are of legal age to form a binding contract

"Legal age to form a binding contract" is at least 18 in the US and everywhere I know of. So, why exactly should the moderation policies take into account the perceived tender sensibilities of 13-17 year olds (though anyone who's been to a mall lately knows that's laughable) when, if they are using the site, they are in violation of the TOS?

Originally posted by Very Rusty
This is not "ADULT TIME", as you said. It is a 13+ chess site.

God forbid what the forums would look like if YOU and OTHERS had your way.

Other than that, you are entitled to you opinion, as I am to mine.

in many cultures 13 is old enough to get married, who are you to judge? i can tell you that i've met some 13 year old that are much more mature than some of the people that use these forums, i'm not naming names but you know what i'm talking about.

i would keep automod, i will say that. even expand it a little. words like 'bitch', 'bastard' and 'dickhead' should be added as no no's.

btw what do you think 13 year old talk about and in what manner? rhp is tame compared to this, i can assure you. in general of course. i know i've contradicted myself here a little but people are different as you know.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I've pointed this out before, but the TOS expressly states that:

In consideration of your use of the Service, you represent that you are of legal age to form a binding contract

"Legal age to form a binding contract" is at least 18 in the US and everywhere I know of. So, why exactly should the moderation policies take into acc ...[text shortened]... knows that's laughable) when, if they are using the site, they are in violation of the TOS?

Hmmm...Interesting and appears according to the TOS you are correct.

I am sure I was told that when saying things in the forums I take into account that it was a 13+ site.

If it is an 18+ site as you said, then that would certainly change my way of thinking, as far as some language is concerned. I also still believe there is certain language that should not be used, especially if it intended to be abusive.

at least the c word is automoded, but you can still swear in the thread title, something which got me banned a while bad, that should be automoded.

Originally posted by trev33
at least the c word is automoded, but you can still swear in the thread title, something which got me banned a while bad, that should be automoded.

I really don't see the need to swear? Is it me, is it the generation gap?

EDIT: Not to say I haven't in anger in the real world, and once or twice in the Private Forum, but it really just makes you, me, whoever look bad in my opinion.

Originally posted by Very Rusty
3. In warnings from Mods there is no way to reply and discuss anything. I believe a reply button would have many benefits, and solve mis-understandings, which now can take quite some time to resolve.

Absolutely.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I've pointed this out before, but the TOS expressly states that:

In consideration of your use of the Service, you represent that you are of legal age to form a binding contract

"Legal age to form a binding contract" is at least 18 in the US and everywhere I know of. So, why exactly should the moderation policies take into acc ...[text shortened]... knows that's laughable) when, if they are using the site, they are in violation of the TOS?

You're missing a big consideration: Work Safe.

Many corporate servers will block sites that serve up too many 'naughty words', and Russ wants this site to be Work Safe.
This means no swear words, racist or bigoted phrases and definitely no porn and minimal sexual terms.

End of discussion.