Moderation Decisions and Discussion

[Arrogant-One]

This thread will be to keep members updated on things like:

• Members who will be taking a Time Out (A polite way of saying someone got banned);
• Complaint Forms Lodged by X against Y;
• Result of Complaint Forms; and
• The number of warning points awarded.

Once again I remind people to try and solve their differences with other posters themselves via PM before getting OzChess staff involved. The ethos of this forum is not about condemnation or punishing people. Its about maintaining an atmosphere of civilness and politeness, respecting the opinions of others while still being able to freely voice your own views without fear of retaliation or being unreasonably assailed, gagged or repressed (by moderators or other posters).

As such, discussion of moderation decisions is welcome in this thread.

Best

AO

[Arrogant-One]

Bill Gletsos is banned for 24 hours for making a deliberately false and misleading statement.

I never agreed not to run.
Lyons just assumed that was the case.

Having spoken with Peter Parr in the past on multiple occasions, I know Bill's statement to be completely untrue.

The deception was further compounded when Bill then used a technicality at the AGM to preclude both Peter and Jason from acquiring NSWCA membership in time to run, thus allowing Bill to run a Zimbabwe style one man presidential election - which of course he won.

[Arrogant-One]

I regret to advise that Kevin Bonham has been given a 48 hour time out for putting words into other peoples mouths and for not accepting the cordial undertaking offered to him by another member to desist in doing so in the future.

Best

AO

[Iconoclast]

Originally Posted by Arrogant-One

[font="Georgia"]Bill Gletsos is banned for 24 hours for making a deliberately false and misleading statement.

I will register an objection to the banning of Bill Gletsos for presenting his case. While I do not think that the episode being referred to is infamous, BG should be allowed to defend himself. FREE SPEECH RULES!

[Iconoclast]

Originally Posted by Arrogant-One

[font="Georgia"]
I regret to advise that Kevin Bonham has been given a 48 hour time out for putting words into other peoples mouths and for not accepting the cordial undertaking offered to him by another member to desist in doing so in the future.

I will register an objection to the banning of Kevin Bonham. The current fashion of claiming a "words-in-my-mouth" infraction is, in my mind not a serious faux pas. The squawks that defend and condemn the practise must be accepted as part of the exercising of FREE SPEECH.

[Iconoclast]

Originally Posted by Firegoat7

Ozchess is trialling an open complaint registration process. Instead of moderating posters, we aim to foster on this site, democratic expression within the guidelines of social accountability. We wish to actively encourage all posters to regulate each other. Please remember- This civil process is available for everybody. [bold by icono]

I am not comfortable with banning. Lets keep regulation at the personal level.

[Arrogant-One]

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

I will register an objection to the banning of Kevin Bonham.

I left his fate in the hands of Phil. Keep in mind that Dave recently posted that he wanted to ask me to ban Kevin Bonham permanently, a view I now share by the way.

I think, after your vacation, that you are coming back to OzChess - seeing the baker, the butcher, the black smith, and the barber chasing the local mischievious boy, not understanding their reasons, and simply drawing the conclusion that its unwarranted. Dave, Phil, and myself are of another view. A view you once shared if I recall correctly (please see below).

Originally Posted by Matt

Perhaps you should reconsider whether or not you should stay here at OZC. No, nobody is going to ban you, but you might find that people will not be willing to seek clarifications or advice from you since your answers tend to contain barbs.

I think we are rapidly reaching the point where we need to ask ourselves what KB and BG bring to OzChess to make this site a better place (besides cambativeness, hostility, unwarranted defamatory remarks about others, etc). But its not my heart that's bleeding. You objected, so you tell me what they are bringing to the table that makes OzChess a better place.

Also, keep in mind that once Bill Gletsos banned me from CC for a month for 'being insincere'.

Originally Posted by Bill Gletsos

Arrogant-One banned for a month for making a declaration to the mods to have his June 2006/July 2006 ban lifted that he has since admitted was insincere.

So I hardly think he is in a position to lecture anyone, especially with him being caught red handed lying. His comment also implied that Peter Parr and Jason Lyons are liars by the way, which is certainly a matter that needs to be taken seriously.

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

I am not comfortable with banning. Lets keep regulation at the personal level.

Well, guess what? I am not comfortable with it either. But simply bringing social pressure on those who act uncivily was achieving nothing (even though this method has worked with everyone else when they went a bit astray). If you have some great answer concerning how to get KB and BG to clean up their act without resorting to bannings, then I am all ears. But I suspect you will need one of these and a book of spells.

Its a little like chess where you get into an unfortunate situation where you need to sac your Bishop so your Queen can escape. You'd rather not, you're uncomfortable with it, but your options are limited.



Best

AO

[Iconoclast]

Originally Posted by Arrogant-One

[font="Georgia"]You objected, so you tell me what they are bringing to the table that makes OzChess a better place.

Not much. But they do bring a challenge. The challenge is to the rectitude of OzChess governance. Every time KB and BG get banned, They have successfully brought OzChess down a rung. I am dead set against adopting the modus operandi that makes ChessChat a leaking colostomy bag that spreads infective invective thoughout Australian chess.

[phild707]

Originally Posted by Iconoclast

I will register an objection to the banning of Kevin Bonham. The current fashion of claiming a "words-in-my-mouth" infraction is, in my mind not a serious faux pas. The squawks that defend and condemn the practise must be accepted as part of the exercising of FREE SPEECH.

I disagree!
You don't have free speech if what you say is misrepresented and an untruthful version of what you said is presented as fact.
In Bonham's case he twisted the meaning of what i said in an attempt to add weight to his argument.
It's one of many dreary old inflammatory tactics brought over from chesschat that serve no purpose other than to escaslate a discussion into a "flamewar" as quickly as possible.

I know that the abuse of the practice of banning as it was used on chess chat is loathesome to many here (me included!) however in the special case that is KB and BG i don't see any other choice.
If they have come here purely to rework old vendettas and this was to be tolerated on this board then quite frankly I would not want to be a member of OZChess.
One of the good things about being banned from ChessChat was not having to wade through all that crap anymore and i certainly don't want to go back to that again on OZChess.

Lastly on one of my very rare visits to CC a couple of days ago I discovered that entire discussions that have occurred on this board are being ported over there (copy and paste) by Kevin. He then proceeds to ridicule OZChess and it's members for the benefit of the general CC membership.
In this way he is USING OZChess to feed interest in his board with scandalaous goings-on here.
Maybe that is the only or prime reason that he began posting here in the first place.
I think that this is despicable practice. For a start there is no right of response by any of the members here when their names are taken in vain over there.
It is a practice that further emphsises to me that there is no place for him here and one that reminds me yet again how far superior moderation is on this board.

Phil.
.

[Arrogant-One]

Originally Posted by phild707

I disagree!

I concur.

Originally Posted by phild707

You don't have free speech if what you say is misrepresented and an untruthful version of what you said is presented as fact.

I concur.

Originally Posted by phild707

In Bonham's case he twisted the meaning of what i said in an attempt to add weight to his argument. It's one of many dreary old inflammatory tactics brought over from chesschat that serve no purpose other than to escaslate a discussion into a "flamewar" as quickly as possible.

I concur.

Originally Posted by phild707

I know that the abuse of the practice of banning as it was used on chess chat is loathesome to many here (me included!) however in the special case that is KB and BG i don't see any other choice.

I concur, but will add that I have seen some mild improvement in civilness from Bill since he was first banned.

Originally Posted by phild707

If they have come here purely to rework old vendettas and this was to be tolerated on this board then quite frankly I would not want to be a member of OZChess.

I concur and feel the same way.

Originally Posted by phild707

One of the good things about being banned from ChessChat was not having to wade through all that crap anymore and i certainly don't want to go back to that again on OZChess.

I concur.

Originally Posted by phild707

Lastly on one of my very rare visits to CC a couple of days ago I discovered that entire discussions that have occurred on this board are being ported over there (copy and paste) by Kevin. He then proceeds to ridicule OZChess and it's members for the benefit of the general CC membership.

Well, on the plus side, I suspect people have stopped paying attention to him even in the swamp. Even antichrist recently advised him to get a life. I think we may be seeing the first stirrings of a revolution in the swamp! A revolution to change swamp leadership - it will be interesting to see if it goes anywhere.

Originally Posted by phild707

In this way he is USING OZChess to feed interest in his board with scandalaous goings-on here.

I concur.

Originally Posted by phild707

Maybe that is the only or prime reason that he began posting here in the first place.

I cannot concur. Kevin and Bill first started posting here because they were attracted to OzChess' friendly and civil environment. By contrast to the swamp, OzChess is an idylic paradise. On a world scale it is tantamount to being the USA whereas the swamp is more like Sudan.

Originally Posted by phild707

I think that this is despicable practice.

I concur.

Originally Posted by phild707

For a start there is no right of response by any of the members here when their names are taken in vain over there. It is a practice that further emphsises to me that there is no place for him here and one that reminds me yet again how far superior moderation is on this board.

I concur, and will say you seem to have hit the nail on the head Phil. Good synopsis!

Best

AO

[Iconoclast]

Originally Posted by phild707

I disagree!
You don't have free speech if what you say is misrepresented and an untruthful version of what you said is presented as fact.

Not true. You still have free speech to correct the wrong.

however in the special case that is KB and BG i don't see any other choice.

They are NOT a special case. They are just another very ordinary troll problem.

If they have come here purely to rework old vendettas and this was to be tolerated on this board then quite frankly I would not want to be a member of OZChess.

Don't tolerate it.
Fix it.
Stay civil and "Don't feed the trolls."

...entire discussions that have occurred on this board are being ported over there (copy and paste) by Kevin. He then proceeds to ridicule OZChess and it's members for the benefit of the general CC membership.
...
I think that this is despicable practice.

Archetypical KB behaviour.

[Bill Gletsos]

Originally Posted by phild707

Lastly on one of my very rare visits to CC a couple of days ago I discovered that entire discussions that have occurred on this board are being ported over there (copy and paste) by Kevin. He then proceeds to ridicule OZChess and it's members for the benefit of the general CC membership.

This complaint is rich.
Before carrying on about it you really should have had a look closer to home and checked out the Bullying on Chess Chat thread which is full of posts consisting of original posts made elsewhere and dragged over.

[Firegoat7]

Hi Everyone,


This is a sticky ya? Alex could you do your business again? or Do u want me to give it an attempt?

cheers Fg7
P.S Thanks for the split last time Alex
P.P.S Everyone will have to cross their fingers if I make an attempt at the split..lol

[Bill Gletsos]

Originally Posted by Firegoat7

Hi Everyone,


This is a sticky ya? Alex could you do your business again? or Do u want me to give it an attempt?

cheers Fg7
P.S Thanks for the split last time Alex
P.P.S Everyone will have to cross their fingers if I make an attempt at the split..lol

This is listed as a discussion thread, so why do you believe it needs to be split as the discussions appear to be on topic.

[Arrogant-One]

Originally Posted by Firegoat7

Hi Everyone,


This is a sticky ya? Alex could you do your business again? or Do u want me to give it an attempt?

cheers Fg7
P.S Thanks for the split last time Alex
P.P.S Everyone will have to cross their fingers if I make an attempt at the split..lol

Hi Dave,

I am a little unsure what exactly you want me to do. I need a question like this:

(ie) Alex, can you please take post 17, 18, and 20 and make a separate thread for them?

Best

AO