No mention of MCC events on CV calendar! - Page 2 - OzChess

**Grant Szuveges** · 07-10-2011, 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by MOZ

Thanks Jaydon with deleting the post (header only remaining between posts #4 and #5).

By your action Ozchess has maintain a sense of respecting the privacy of an e-mail message.
PMs and private mails are only off-limits for publication if
as a chatboard community we agree they are off limits

we have quick alert moderators who detect publication of an e-mail has been made without approval from the sender.

You have set the standard higher than chesschat who still display.

How anyone can consider the information in the email between myself and Trevor to be of a private nature is absolutely beyond me... That email was an email between 2 chess administrators about our respective chess organisations (MCC and CV). It was not about our private lives or anything personal. It was purely a chess matter and is relevant to this thread. I dont see any reason to take it down or censor it.... Fortunately chesschat left it on diplay - because they respect accountable free speech. I used to think that this forum did too... Unfortunately both forums also respect unaccountable free speech... Maybe moderators should get rid of all the comments on these forums by people who choose not to identify themselves and leave relevant accountable comments there for people to read instead of censoring them in the name of privacy...

Id like to officially ask all the Ozchess admins and moderators to have a look at my post that Jayden took down and vote on whether it should go back up again because I truly believe that it is relevant to this thread... If Ozchess is an institution which respects accountable free speech, then there should be a right of appeal for people whose posts have been censored or taken down. Consider this post an official letter of appeal...

**Jaydon** · 07-11-2011, 12:07 AM

Originally Posted by Grant Szuveges

How anyone can consider the information in the email between myself and Trevor to be of a private nature is absolutely beyond me... That email was an email between 2 chess administrators about our respective chess organisations (MCC and CV). It was not about our private lives or anything personal. It was purely a chess matter and is relevant to this thread. I dont see any reason to take it down or censor it.... Fortunately chesschat left it on diplay - because they respect accountable free speech. I used to think that this forum did too... Unfortunately both forums also respect unaccountable free speech... Maybe moderators should get rid of all the comments on these forums by people who choose not to identify themselves and leave relevant accountable comments there for people to read instead of censoring them in the name of privacy...

Id like to officially ask all the Ozchess admins and moderators to have a look at my post that Jayden took down and vote on whether it should go back up again because I truly believe that it is relevant to this thread... If Ozchess is an institution which respects accountable free speech, then there should be a right of appeal for people whose posts have been censored or taken down. Consider this post an official letter of appeal...

Well firstly and perhaps irrelevantly I know it's not the most common spelling but my name is Jaydon.

Now......

This is not a matter of freedom of speech it's simply a matter of respecting privacy. This also has nothing to do with people who choose not to identify themselves and I'm not entirely sure why you're going down that line of thought. If a conversation is held in a private domain then it shouldn't be reproduced on a public forum unless the sender is consenting. If something has been said in private it should be considered that there is probably a reason for that.

As for the people asking if the post was suggested for moderation I think a simple glance at post-deletion reactions should do the trick

**Grant Szuveges** · 07-11-2011, 12:42 AM

Originally Posted by Jaydon

Well firstly and perhaps irrelevantly I know it's not the most common spelling but my name is Jaydon.

Now......

This is not a matter of freedom of speech it's simply a matter of respecting privacy. This also has nothing to do with people who choose not to identify themselves and I'm not entirely sure why you're going down that line of thought. If a conversation is held in a private domain then it shouldn't be reproduced on a public forum unless the sender is consenting. If something has been said in private it should be considered that there is probably a reason for that.

As for the people asking if the post was suggested for moderation I think a simple glance at post-deletion reactions should do the trick

Jaydon, if this was an email between Trevor and Grant (wearing their civilian hats), then I would agree with you. But this was an email between a CV official and an MCC official. Its a totally different scenario. In my opinion, an email between a CV official and an MCC official about a CV/MCC matter should be open for ANY MEMBER of ANY CV AFFILIATED CHESS CLUB to read. This is what transparancy and accountability is.

**Just2Good** · 07-11-2011, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by MOZ

But whatever the standard is to be called, Grant's post failed inspection under Jaydon's standard but is still on display on the weaker chesschat standard.

The bottom line is that you are better advised trading private mails on Ozchess than elsewhere. Young Jaydon is commendably strict; as he showed in the Gold Coast case too.

Yes!

Jaydon continues to do an outstanding job as an elected moderator. Perhaps he is doing such a good job so he is handily re-elected at the next election?

For that matter, perhaps it can be said that elections for moderators enhance the job performance of moderators?

Conversely, perhaps it can be said that not having elections for moderators would lead to diminished job performance.

**antichrist** · 07-12-2011, 12:43 PM

No wonder no mention when they leave the feedlot like Indonesian abbattoirs

**Just2Good** · 07-12-2011, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by antichrist

No wonder no mention when they leave the feedlot like Indonesian abbattoirs

What do you mean?

**- V -** · 07-12-2011, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by Just2Good

What do you mean?

I think it probably means he should do an extra week .

07-10-2011, 11:04 PM	#16 (permalink)
Grant Szuveges Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,003	Originally Posted by MOZ Thanks Jaydon with deleting the post (header only remaining between posts #4 and #5). By your action Ozchess has maintain a sense of respecting the privacy of an e-mail message. PMs and private mails are only off-limits for publication if as a chatboard community we agree they are off limits we have quick alert moderators who detect publication of an e-mail has been made without approval from the sender. You have set the standard higher than chesschat who still display. How anyone can consider the information in the email between myself and Trevor to be of a private nature is absolutely beyond me... That email was an email between 2 chess administrators about our respective chess organisations (MCC and CV). It was not about our private lives or anything personal. It was purely a chess matter and is relevant to this thread. I dont see any reason to take it down or censor it.... Fortunately chesschat left it on diplay - because they respect accountable free speech. I used to think that this forum did too... Unfortunately both forums also respect unaccountable free speech... Maybe moderators should get rid of all the comments on these forums by people who choose not to identify themselves and leave relevant accountable comments there for people to read instead of censoring them in the name of privacy... Id like to officially ask all the Ozchess admins and moderators to have a look at my post that Jayden took down and vote on whether it should go back up again because I truly believe that it is relevant to this thread... If Ozchess is an institution which respects accountable free speech, then there should be a right of appeal for people whose posts have been censored or taken down. Consider this post an official letter of appeal... __________________ People who have nothing to hide post using their real names...

07-11-2011, 12:07 AM	#17 (permalink)
Jaydon SCTC Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Queensland, Gold Coast Posts: 1,101 ICC Handle: Aussieboy007 FICS Handle: Bermusia	Originally Posted by Grant Szuveges How anyone can consider the information in the email between myself and Trevor to be of a private nature is absolutely beyond me... That email was an email between 2 chess administrators about our respective chess organisations (MCC and CV). It was not about our private lives or anything personal. It was purely a chess matter and is relevant to this thread. I dont see any reason to take it down or censor it.... Fortunately chesschat left it on diplay - because they respect accountable free speech. I used to think that this forum did too... Unfortunately both forums also respect unaccountable free speech... Maybe moderators should get rid of all the comments on these forums by people who choose not to identify themselves and leave relevant accountable comments there for people to read instead of censoring them in the name of privacy... Id like to officially ask all the Ozchess admins and moderators to have a look at my post that Jayden took down and vote on whether it should go back up again because I truly believe that it is relevant to this thread... If Ozchess is an institution which respects accountable free speech, then there should be a right of appeal for people whose posts have been censored or taken down. Consider this post an official letter of appeal... Well firstly and perhaps irrelevantly I know it's not the most common spelling but my name is Jaydon. Now...... This is not a matter of freedom of speech it's simply a matter of respecting privacy. This also has nothing to do with people who choose not to identify themselves and I'm not entirely sure why you're going down that line of thought. If a conversation is held in a private domain then it shouldn't be reproduced on a public forum unless the sender is consenting. If something has been said in private it should be considered that there is probably a reason for that. As for the people asking if the post was suggested for moderation I think a simple glance at post-deletion reactions should do the trick

07-11-2011, 12:42 AM	#18 (permalink)
Grant Szuveges Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,003	Originally Posted by Jaydon Well firstly and perhaps irrelevantly I know it's not the most common spelling but my name is Jaydon. Now...... This is not a matter of freedom of speech it's simply a matter of respecting privacy. This also has nothing to do with people who choose not to identify themselves and I'm not entirely sure why you're going down that line of thought. If a conversation is held in a private domain then it shouldn't be reproduced on a public forum unless the sender is consenting. If something has been said in private it should be considered that there is probably a reason for that. As for the people asking if the post was suggested for moderation I think a simple glance at post-deletion reactions should do the trick Jaydon, if this was an email between Trevor and Grant (wearing their civilian hats), then I would agree with you. But this was an email between a CV official and an MCC official. Its a totally different scenario. In my opinion, an email between a CV official and an MCC official about a CV/MCC matter should be open for ANY MEMBER of ANY CV AFFILIATED CHESS CLUB to read. This is what transparancy and accountability is. __________________ People who have nothing to hide post using their real names...

07-11-2011, 02:17 PM	#19 (permalink)
Just2Good Tin Cup Champ 2004 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Cairns Posts: 6,233 ICC Handle: Advantage FICS Handle: Advantage	Originally Posted by MOZ But whatever the standard is to be called, Grant's post failed inspection under Jaydon's standard but is still on display on the weaker chesschat standard. The bottom line is that you are better advised trading private mails on Ozchess than elsewhere. Young Jaydon is commendably strict; as he showed in the Gold Coast case too. Yes! Jaydon continues to do an outstanding job as an elected moderator. Perhaps he is doing such a good job so he is handily re-elected at the next election? For that matter, perhaps it can be said that elections for moderators enhance the job performance of moderators? Conversely, perhaps it can be said that not having elections for moderators would lead to diminished job performance. __________________ . "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." ~ Isaiah Berlin ~

07-12-2011, 04:38 PM	#21 (permalink)
Just2Good Tin Cup Champ 2004 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Cairns Posts: 6,233 ICC Handle: Advantage FICS Handle: Advantage	Originally Posted by antichrist No wonder no mention when they leave the feedlot like Indonesian abbattoirs What do you mean? __________________ . "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." ~ Isaiah Berlin ~

07-12-2011, 12:43 PM	#20 (permalink)
antichrist Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Byron Bay, NSW Posts: 2,821	No wonder no mention when they leave the feedlot like Indonesian abbattoirs

07-12-2011, 04:48 PM	#22 (permalink)
- V - De-Programmer Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 492	Originally Posted by Just2Good What do you mean? I think it probably means he should do an extra week . __________________ "Few have the stomach to pursue truth , yet most know in their gut something is wrong" V *"But everyone knows the media doesn't inform. Duhhhhhh !! "*

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread: