Moderation: questions, discussion and completely pointless whinging

[Patrick Byrom]

Before there is yet more thread splitting ('Tribal Societies' seems on the verge of doing so), should there be a special 'Michael Baron' thread containing all the various threads started/dominated by Michael on 'Politics'? Because there does seem to be some overlap between these threads - apart from the presence of Michael Baron, of course

[Kevin Bonham]

Before there is yet more thread splitting ('Tribal Societies' seems on the verge of doing so), should there be a special 'Michael Baron' thread containing all the various threads started/dominated by Michael on 'Politics'? Because there does seem to be some overlap between these threads - apart from the presence of Michael Baron, of course

We could even have a subforum!

I've noticed the above from time to time with other posters or sets of posters - that there are certain slush points that threads tend to get steered into and frequently bogged in more or less no matter what their starting matter. If I set up enough of these things I suspect I'll eventually cover all known strands of Baronism (there probably aren't all that many) and eventually wherever the discussion goes it can be shunted into a thread that already exists.

So long as posters are not blatantly threadjacking into irrelevant subjects it's OK if discussions drift off topic. One of the problems is that sometimes when posters post excerpts of media op-eds they try too hard to fit them into an existing thread they are not really relevant to instead of just starting a new one. From time to time I've closed or merged new threads because they were unnecessary duplicates but this hasn't been that common (antichrist excepted).

I'm not sure yet if I'm going to split the Western-superiority strand from the tribal societies thread. They are sort-of related. They may well drift apart and get split though.

[Patrick Byrom]

Idledim's last two posts in the "Same-sex marriage" forum seem to be in violation of this decision:

Some posters are reminded that the "no illegal material" on this site includes material that breaches copyright, and also that many posters find the posting of long cut-and-pasted articles irritating and boring, especially if they are at a tangent to the main subject of the thread.

Posters are therefore requested not to lift copyrighted material in full from other sources. Quoting a reasonable portion of an article for comment purposes is OK. Material cut and pasted from other sites will be assumed copyright unless the mods have reason to believe otherwise.

The moderators reserve the right to delete, in full and without notice, any cut-and-paste jobs that are suspected of breaching copyright. Very long cut and pastes may also be deleted even if they do not breach copyright.

I don't think The Australian would appreciate us destroying their business model, especially given their recent financial problems.

[Kevin Bonham]

Yes. Full site policies on copy-and-pastes of copyright material may be found in the sticky thread here:

http://www.chesschat.org/showthread....on-please-read

[Agent Smith]

I have just edited a sigfile that was in breach of the following rule

Don't have second thoughts. I'm not sure who you are referring to, but JS's siglines are as a rule quite offensive imho. I mean, he's on my ignore list, but offensive sig lines don't create a nice experience for casual visitors. People come here looking for info and feedback and chess related topics and tournaments, and they are instantly abused by the sigs of some people, who occasionally post in such forums of course.

And on a simliar note, would it be possible to make the "New Posts" search give less priority to non-chess threads? The titles of these are often deliberately provocative and in some ways offensive, sadly, even when posted in an accurate way. This would also give a better impression for the common Chess-related visitor.

Just My 2 cents for making the site more friendly.

[Kevin Bonham]

Don't have second thoughts. I'm not sure who you are referring to, but JS's siglines are as a rule quite offensive imho. I mean, he's on my ignore list, but offensive sig lines don't create a nice experience for casual visitors. People come here looking for info and feedback and chess related topics and tournaments, and they are instantly abused by the sigs of some people, who occasionally post in such forums of course.

This has been a tricky matter in the past. The current rule is:

* The moderators/admins reserve the right to delete any sig files they deem to be inflammatory or controversial. This includes but is not limited to criticism of other members, this site or its moderation/administration.

We could certainly ban political/religious sigfiles but there should probably in that case be something close to consensus among members with an interest in the subject that all such sigfiles be disallowed (whether left/right/Christian/atheist/whatever). As I use my own sigfile to link to my politics site - which is mostly harmless but now and then provocative - I would probably want the other moderator(s) to make the primary decision on that one.

And on a simliar note, would it be possible to make the "New Posts" search give less priority to non-chess threads? The titles of these are often deliberately provocative and in some ways offensive, sadly, even when posted in an accurate way. This would also give a better impression for the common Chess-related visitor.

Good suggestion. As far as I'm aware there is no way within the vB software to change the display of New Posts in this manner. I think however that a poster can stop non-chess threads showing in their New Posts search manually each time they check New Posts if they first go to Non-Chess and mark that forum as read. Other mods may be aware of something.

[Rincewind]

My understanding is that the New Posts functionality could be changed to not display posts from certain forums but that would be annoying to people posting in those forums and would also require changing code with is problematic since those sorts of changes are typically lost when upgrading the vBulletin software.

[Patrick Byrom]

...Good suggestion. As far as I'm aware there is no way within the vB software to change the display of New Posts in this manner. I think however that a poster can stop non-chess threads showing in their New Posts search manually each time they check New Posts if they first go to Non-Chess and mark that forum as read. Other mods may be aware of something.

What about if the Politics and Religion and Science threads were restricted, as the Coffee Lounge is?

[Kevin Bonham]

What about if the Politics and Religion and Science threads were restricted, as the Coffee Lounge is?

I'm pretty sure that would work but then those sections would no longer be Google-able. Sometimes Google is actually better for finding old content on the forum than the forum's own search engine.

[Agent Smith]

Good suggestion. As far as I'm aware there is no way within the vB software to change the display of New Posts in this manner.

Ok - I'm no web programmer. I was just thinking of how Talkchess split up their forums into a few sections, and it is very easy to go to the "Computer Chess Club: General Topics" new posts and ignore the other sections (if desired of course).

[Capablanca-Fan]

The thread Money Matters seems to have been started to discuss money management, saving, investment, etc. But a lot of the latest posts seem to belong on Welfare spending (sf various threads).

[Patrick Byrom]

Now that one kudzu thread created by (ER and) Michael has been cleaned up, can we move the posts relating to this:

Another amazing milestone for your company and yourself Michael! It's up to you to post details here ...

to the "In recognition" thread - started by ER for this very purpose!

[antichrist]

I just noticed this link that you posted about Axiom https://www.facebook.com/Exposing-Ax...7180810295840/, on that page it contains this link [link deleted - KB] - that defines and outlaws anti-semitism in the UK. As not agreeing with this their definition of anti-semitism I would like to create a thread to discuss it, it is important because that law could be copied in Australia one day.

[Kevin Bonham]

I just noticed this link that you posted about Axiom https://www.facebook.com/Exposing-Ax...7180810295840/, on that page it contains this link [link deleted - KB] - that defines and outlaws anti-semitism in the UK. As not agreeing with this their definition of anti-semitism I would like to create a thread to discuss it, it is important because that law could be copied in Australia one day.

I am considering the request but I have deleted the link as it was posted by "Axiom Seer" (ie Axiom).

[Kevin Bonham]

I am not allowing any linking to that video posted by Axiom, as while the first few minutes consist of media reporting of an issue it then moves into paranoid hate material. I am also not allowing creation of a new thread about the issue. You can use the existing Israel/Palestine thread to comment about the issue of defining anti-semitism and the proposed UK definition if you like but extremist, hateful or stupid material may be deleted.