Moderation: questions, discussion and completely pointless whinging

[PHAT]

That would make people think that ACF is running this BB.

Well, MATE, the licksplittles you have moderating this BB are all affiliated by proxy to the ACF. So, I guess it is a de facto ACF BB.

[skip to my lou]

If you haven't realised, ACF has ABANDONED this BB. And yes, there will be a new set of rules which the admins and moderators will create together. This basically means you can forget your current way of posting. Better hide the screen from the kids. Wouldn't want them to see the previous few messages eh?

[ursogr8]

.

hi J/K

I wish to report a serious problem.
Matthew's post count was 1952 yesterday, and is 1949 today.
How can this be?
Accuracy and reliability of these figures is paramount.
There are people out here betting on this data, mate.

starter

[Garvinator]

hi J/K

I wish to report a serious problem.
Matthew's post count was 1952 yesterday, and is 1949 today.
How can this be?
Accuracy and reliability of these figures is paramount.
There are people out here betting on this data, mate.

starter

during kevins moving of the matt v bill olympiad selection garbage to the non chess section, he deleted a few posts, so i would guess 3 of them were Matts.

[skip to my lou]

I was just about to say that.

[ursogr8]

during kevins moving of the matt v bill olympiad selection garbage to the non chess section, he deleted a few posts, so i would guess 3 of them were Matts.

KB
Can this allegation be true? Are you removing garbage that smells a bit? But leaving garbage than has no intrinsic value except that it pushes up the post-count by +1?
starter

[Bill Gletsos]

during kevins moving of the matt v bill olympiad selection garbage to the non chess section, he deleted a few posts, so i would guess 3 of them were Matts.

Are you certain he deleted 3 of Matt's post or just speculating ( ) due to the difference in post count.
The reason I ask is that he moved 3 of Matt's posts from the Olympiad thread to the non chess section.

[Garvinator]

Are you certain he deleted 3 of Matt's post or just speculating ( ) due to the difference in post count.
The reason I ask is that he moved 3 of Matt's posts from the Olympiad thread to the non chess section.

ABSOLUTE SPECULATION

[ursogr8]

Are you certain he deleted 3 of Matt's post or just speculating ( ) due to the difference in post count.
The reason I ask is that he moved 3 of Matt's posts from the Olympiad thread to the non chess section.

Thanks Bill for bringing a bit of sanity here.
Moderators are not what they used to be.
In view of the new policy to move Matt's posts because they are classed as clutter (rather than what the speculator thought was unclean), can we hope for even-handedness here and see the moderators move other posters clutter from the chess threads. I can give hints.

starter

[Kevin Bonham]

An off-topic exchange involving several posters was moved. No posts were deleted but several were edited, some heavily.

[arosar]

We should just set thresholds so that once the 'off-topic exchange' gets past 'n' number of posts - then you move them. Sometimes, it's pointless creating a whole new thread when it could only be 1 or 2 posts; or it could just be a temporary detour and not intended at all to generate any lengthy discussion.

AR

[ursogr8]

An off-topic exchange involving several posters was moved. No posts were deleted but several were edited, some heavily.

Nicely phrased statement Kevin.
Could you be equally as eloquent addressing the question I raised in post #138.

starter

[Kevin Bonham]

Could you be equally as eloquent addressing the question I raised in post #138.

If people want a series of posts moved that they feel has gone off-topic, they should click the report post button on the first post that was completely off topic, and say something like "please move the off-topic exchange starting with this post". This action should be reserved for cases where off-topic excursions are especially severe or prolonged. Only one post report should be made per exchange. Thread may be locked while the matter is investigated.

There is no policy to move any specific poster's posts, although AR may have earned a bit of special treatment with his recent displays of laziness. Rather this was a situation where a whole bunch of posters had become embroiled in an off-topic exchange. In this case it was arguably Matt's fault that it ended up there but the action was not directed at him.

[PHAT]

In this case it was arguably Matt's fault that it ended up there but the action was not directed at him.

MY FAULT ? FMD! It takes two to tango.

[Kevin Bonham]

MY FAULT ? FMD! It takes two to tango.

I did say "arguably". While there was a fair amount of to-and-fro as usually occurs in a debate between you and Bill, it had maintained at least some on-topic content until you made it otherwise.