Moderation Rules and Decisions

[Kevin Bonham]

Some minor changes have been made to the rules regarding posting of material by banned users in the top post in the thread. The effect of these changes is:

* to more completely block any attempt by banned posters to participate indirectly while banned.
* to relax rules regarding the quoting of banned posters so that quoting old public-domain material by them that predates their ban is now permitted.

[Kevin Bonham]

Use and abuse of the post report function

Most posters who use the post report function (the ! button) to report posts to the mods and admins have been doing so responsibly and usefully and I wish to thank all those who have helped us clean stuff up from time to time.

A very small number of posters have been abusing the function.

The post report function is to be used for:

* Reporting material that you honestly think violates or may violate the forum rules. If it's not obvious, you may wish to say which rule.

* Reporting cases where re-organisation of material is desired; for instance, when a discussion has gone off-topic and you wish to suggest a post from which it should be split. It can also be used to make other technical requests (rename thread, merge threads, add/amend polls etc) although if it's not urgent it may be better to just PM a single mod.

* In very unusual cases, making the mods aware of something that is not explicitly against the forum rules but you think deserves moderator attention anyway ("No list of rules will be complete and the mods reserve the right to moderate anything at any stage for any reason.")

Recently some regular posters with a long history of antagonism towards other posters have reported those posters' posts, citing disagreements that have nothing to do with the forum rules and making spurious claims of "harassment".

Such post reports are a total waste of time. Remember that post-report sends an email to all mods and admins, so unwarranted post reports are effectively spam (as well as the time it takes to investigate the complaint.)

The mods are not interested in modding someone just because you have a history of conflict with them and find their arguing tactics disagreeable. Most likely your opponent feels much the same way about you.

The mods will deal with genuine harassment (especially unprovoked baiting of new posters) but the typical cut-and-thrust between regular posters is not such.

The mods will clean up obvious cases of illegal harassment, such as sexual harassment, but if you want to claim that another poster's debating tactics are illegal harassment, you must supply a legal opinion from a qualified source having reference to the posts in question and based on a full consideration of the relevant history between the two posters.

Please have consideration for the moderators' time and use the post report function sensibly. Thankyou.

[Trent Parker]

User prozac7674 Permanently banned for Spamming the Chess Australia section

[Kevin Bonham]

It's a long time since I deleted a thread here just for being total rubbish but "best insults" was gouging holes in the bottom of the barrel and most of the posts on it were attempts to evade the swearing filter. Please find some other way to boost your postcounts.

[Rincewind]

Howard Duggan suspended from CL access until he is deemed to have posted 200 non-spamming posts and then some.

The suspension has been lifted.

[Kevin Bonham]

I've deleted the exchanges between Arrogant-One, Howard and others that were initially split off Howard's Tromp thread.

All getting a little bit too personal and sensitive and Arrogant-One's initial go at Howard was a rather blatant piece of off-topic trolling.

[Kevin Bonham]

A number of posts from the Gormally-Aronian thread have been moved offline.

These posts started with a post by Comrade Zukovsky making various comments about Arianne Caoili. The remaining posts that have been removed (including mine) were mostly responses criticising Zukovsky's post. All these posts were in order but the initial post which was probably very defamatory was not. The other posts have been removed solely because they don't make sense without the original.

Having seen Arianne's published comment that the dancing between her and Aronian was innocent, no further posts alleging otherwise will be permitted without exhaustive proof. However it is permitted to quote such comments from the mass media for the purpose of discussing the evident failings of the mass media in its coverage of the story.

[Kevin Bonham]

Entire Gormally-Aronian thread moved offline temporarily due to legal issues, most of them involving an irrelevant incident. Once thread has been carefully checked and all potentially defamatory material removed it will be restored - this may happen later tonight, or otherwise tomorrow.

Please do not discuss the matter in the meantime.

This matter is sensitive due to the interest of the mass media in the issue so please be patient until I have had time to deal with it.

[Bill Gletsos]

Arrogant_One banned for 24 hours for interferring in the Boris V Duggan game.

[Kevin Bonham]

Coffee Lounge

Bill and I have had discussions with STML and are hopeful the Coffee Lounge will soon be re-opened. However because of blatant abuse of the freedom offered within the Coffee Lounge in the past, the Coffee Lounge will now be moderated by moderators, although less so than the main forum.

The CL will continue to be a place where experienced posters can post material that may be a little more adult and risque than is appropriate for a forum visited by many juniors with little experience of forum life. However the following changes will be made:

* crude abuse (including the use of swearing, sexual innuendo and/or accusations, gross or disgusting imagery etc) to attack other posters, including by implication, will be banned in the same manner as on the main site. Repeat offenders can expect to be banned from the board altogether.

* swearing that is considered to be gratuitous (eg swearing in the Coffee Lounge just because you "can") or extreme will not be allowed.

* any material that is considered likely to revolt or disgust adult posters in general will not be permitted.

Several past threads that breach these standards extensively have been removed from the Lounge entirely and others have been retrospectively moderated to bring them into line with the above. This retrospective removal and moderation of old threads will continue as required.

It is up to all posters to ensure the Lounge is not misused if they wish to see it continue.

[Kevin Bonham]

I deleted a post by PHAT (Matthew Sweeney) that blatantly contradicted the site policy on responsibility for posts. I have also added a mention of that policy to the moderation rules list at the top of this thread just so that it can be seen with the rest of the rules. Although Matthew is on a zero-tolerance policy I did not ban him because I was the only party affected by his comments and I do not impose (or generally recommend) bans in such cases.

[Kevin Bonham]

User PHAT (Matthew Sweeney) made a post yesterday that included vulgar abuse towards another poster and also (with a degree of euphemism but nonetheless using the term) accused that poster of lying. As I have previously noted terms denoting lying are not to be used without very strong evidence. It is typically defamatory to call someone a liar unless you provide absolute proof.

As Matthew is on a zero-tolerance policy because of his numerous past breaches he is now banned for two months. Matthew's suspension will, however, be significantly reduced should he contact me respectfully and agreeing to post clearly within the rules from now on.

If Matthew does not agree to post clearly within the rules then he will be on his final chance should he return to the forum. Any further clearcut breach in the three months after his return would then lead to him being banned permanently unless he could show valid cause for readmission. If, on the other hand, he managed to go three months without breaching the rules, his zero-tolerance policy would be reviewed.

Again, I strongly suggest that those who value Matt's participation on the BB contact him and encourage him to clean up his act.

[Kevin Bonham]

Victorian Open thread - removed one post containing accusations of cheating. While it is quite evident from what various posters have said that there was something odd going on in a particular game, claims based on hearsay from a nameless witness aren't really strong enough evidence to back public claims of outright cheating.

[Kevin Bonham]

antichrist has been suspended for three days after making derogatory comments about female posters on the board and also a racist comment about a non-poster. He has also been warned to cut out all sleazy/dodgy/sexual language concerning female posters or players. While this is a relatively short suspension in recognition of his fairly clean moderation record, if there are any more racist or sexist remarks he can expect a very long ban. I felt that the derogatory comment about female posters was too severe to let him off with a warning.

(Another complaint against antichrist about him threadjacking Israel-Palestine stuff onto irrelevant threads didn't contribute to the ban since I believe I only warned him he would be banned if he did this on chess threads. However the irrelevant material has still been deleted.)

Arrogant-One has been suspended for a week after making a false statement about a chess administrator that defamed that person by carrying the implication that he abused his power to obtain free advertising. AO was severely warned after defaming chess administrators early on in his posting career and has also been suspended very recently for a different offence.

[Kevin Bonham]

Arrogant-One ban doubled for signing up another account and posting while suspended.