PDA

View Full Version : should we stay or should we go?



Garvinator
04-01-2004, 04:43 PM
following some comments about having a poll, he is it. Have your say!

chesslover
04-01-2004, 05:22 PM
following some comments about having a poll, he is it. Have your say!

Ithink we should stay here. Now that kartick (and hopefully so too will gandalf) has agreed to Kevin's moderating moderation requests, there should be no impedimanets to us staying here and using this far more functional chesskit BB

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 05:23 PM
Please understand that ACF is legally responsible for the content aswell.

Garvinator
04-01-2004, 05:29 PM
there is a poll above, that is why i created this. If you feel we should stay, click on stay here.

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 05:52 PM
Of course if there are people who have not bothered posting here based on the first days and todays fracas then a poll here wont count their votes.

ursogr8
04-01-2004, 05:56 PM
there is a poll above, that is why i created this. If you feel we should stay, click on stay here.

Thanks g'a'a'y for setting up the poll. In your usual style; succint and to the point.


So what could the future hold for us? We now know that some BBs can be feature rich and very beneficial to the display of chess information. So let us use one of these. Do we have to have it today or can we search around to find one under less corrupted control conditions? The answer is obvious. We should wait.

Thus Paul B, the Barry scorecard needs to be updated. The new product you found to host our BB discussions is a definite improvement. We now know what a nice one looks like. But back to the drawing board as to who is going to manage. Take your time. We will wait while another host is found. And next time we will all help you with the transition strategy.

starter

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 05:59 PM
You talk like you are representing everyone.

So you sir, have decided to definitely move?

I can then immediately delete the forums if you wish. No loss on my side.

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 06:08 PM
You talk like you are representing everyone.

So you sir, have decided to definitely move?

I can then immediately delete the forums if you wish. No loss on my side.
This just seems antagonistic to me.

Starter is just espousing his opinion.

He is entitled to one.

peanbrain
04-01-2004, 06:11 PM
I can then immediately delete the forums if you wish. No loss on my side.

this is one other major reason I have no confidence with chesskit hosting ACF BB - their constant threat of suspending users, delete threads as they like without any reference, and now even talk of "immediately delete the forums".

Who is to say these power hungry kids not going to do just that two months down the track?! And without warning?!

Office holders from chesskit keep saying no loss to them if we all go away, but the point is they offered PaulB to host us here and their offer was accepted and rest is now history. We didn't want to darg our sorry backsides here but now that we are here we are told to go away if we don't like it.

Fine, just reactivate our old BB and I'll get out of your hair.

ursogr8
04-01-2004, 06:11 PM
You talk like you are representing everyone.

So you sir, have decided to definitely move?

I can then immediately delete the forums if you wish. No loss on my side.

hi Jeo
Thanks for re-engaging, after your earlier claim that your 'dog' sometimes types your posts.

You ask about me moving. As I understand it the old BB is in read-only mode. So I don't think I have an option at the moment. Can anyone tell me if the old BB has been resurrected?
Or Jeo are you just itchy to close threads again. Hard to give up bad habits, eh?

starter

ps My screen does contain the full width of the new BB and I have to left-scroll right-scroll to read every line on every post. Can anyone advise a setting that would overcome my problem?

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 06:15 PM
Starter,

The original old ACF BB is still on the ACF web site as I understand it, except it is inaccessible to all of us.

A copy of that old ACF BB is I believe being hosted on the chesskit site and it is in read only mode.

I would think all Paul B would need to do would be to simply point the main Acf web page back to the old BB.

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 06:18 PM
there is a poll above, that is why i created this. If you feel we should stay, click on stay here.

Thanks g'a'a'y for setting up the poll. In your usual style; succint and to the point.


So what could the future hold for us? We now know that some BBs can be feature rich and very beneficial to the display of chess information. So let us use one of these. Do we have to have it today or can we search around to find one under less corrupted control conditions? The answer is obvious. We should wait.

Thus Paul B, the Barry scorecard needs to be updated. The new product you found to host our BB discussions is a definite improvement. We now know what a nice one looks like. But back to the drawing board as to who is going to manage. Take your time. We will wait while another host is found. And next time we will all help you with the transition strategy.

starter

starter,
Just a quick point.

I would think we could switch to this new style of BB but host it on the ACF web site. This board is based on the phpBB software while the old board was based on Yabb software.

Now in its standard form I assume phpbb does not support the fen/pgn style tags but surely a way could be found for this to be implemented.

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 06:26 PM
Well I dont know, im not the moderator of this forum any more, and Im not responsible for any defamation etc on it.

ursogr8
04-01-2004, 06:27 PM
Starter,

The original old ACF BB is still on the ACF web site as I understand it, except it is inaccessible to all of us.

A copy of that old ACF BB is I believe being hosted on the chesskit site and it is in read only mode.

I would think all Paul B would need to do would be to simply point the main Acf web page back to the old BB.

Thanks Bill
I think you just paraphrased what I said. I can't move, until...

And if it was a simple a solution as you describe then Paul B probably just has to flick a switch.


In the mean-time, we can be sure that the agent provocateur will continue to provoke. Asking G***** not to is like us BBs asking you and Matt not to 'debate'. And how much success did we have on that.

starter

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 06:31 PM
Kevin I suggest you post an announcement on the changes made.

chesslover
04-01-2004, 06:35 PM
In the mean-time, we can be sure that the agent provocateur will continue to provoke. Asking G***** not to is like us BBs asking you and Matt not to 'debate'. And how much success did we have on that.

starter

True. While I think that Jeo will be fair, and abide with the agreement on moderation he has made with Kevin and Paul, the limited posts that I have seen Gandalf post, gives me no such confidence.

Maybe I am mistaken but gandalf was more upset with the views and opinions expressed that were critical of him, rather than the amount of swear words. If every views he disagrees with, and I can assure you that there will be many more in the future, are going to be met with threats of suspension, then there are going to be some problems indeed

ursogr8
04-01-2004, 06:37 PM
there is a poll above, that is why i created this. If you feel we should stay, click on stay here.

Thanks g'a'a'y for setting up the poll. In your usual style; succint and to the point.


So what could the future hold for us? We now know that some BBs can be feature rich and very beneficial to the display of chess information. So let us use one of these. Do we have to have it today or can we search around to find one under less corrupted control conditions? The answer is obvious. We should wait.

Thus Paul B, the Barry scorecard needs to be updated. The new product you found to host our BB discussions is a definite improvement. We now know what a nice one looks like. But back to the drawing board as to who is going to manage. Take your time. We will wait while another host is found. And next time we will all help you with the transition strategy.

starter

starter,
Just a quick point.

I would think we could switch to this new style of BB but host it on the ACF web site. This board is based on the phpBB software while the old board was based on Yabb software.

Now in its standard form I assume phpbb does not support the fen/pgn style tags but surely a way could be found for this to be implemented.

Bill
This sounds like the perfect solution, and we don't have a long wait by the way you describe it.

The old moderation.
The new phpBB software.
We can get on with life without the need to normalise G*****.

Paul B, can you make it happen?

starter

ursogr8
04-01-2004, 06:42 PM
Kevin I suggest you post an announcement on the changes made.

Kevin

I notice that you post late in the evening (and even early in the a.m.) As a last task could you type a summary of the number of moderation actions that you have taken during the day. Just a count of how many posts and how many people have been
altered
deleted
counselled
de-threaded
locked
threatened.

starter

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 07:20 PM
The poll is currently at 6 all.

I will check this poll in the morning, and if "go back to the previous bulletin board" has more votes than "stay here", I will restore the old BB, and you can all shut the [deleted] up.

4 to go. (until I am suspended for 30 minutes)

jenni
04-01-2004, 07:25 PM
and you can all shut the fu.ck up.



Hasn't taken long for them to corrupt you..... :)

peanbrain
04-01-2004, 07:28 PM
and you can all shut the fu.ck up.



Hasn't taken long for them to corrupt you..... :)

Now what did they say about absolute power .....?!?!

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 07:33 PM
Actually, Let this be the last day that I waste my time with ACF or Australian Chess.

Decision can be made a few people: Paul, George, whoever else has authority in ACF, and also YOU.

I will check the poll results at 11PM Tonight.

chesslover
04-01-2004, 07:40 PM
The poll is currently at 6 all.

I will check this poll in the morning, and if "go back to the previous bulletin board" has more votes than "stay here", I will restore the old BB, and you can all shut the fu.ck up.

4 to go. (until I am suspended for 30 minutes)

Hold on, I thought that you could not restore the old ACF BB? :?

Also would it not be a good idea for any decision on the future of the ACF areas, to be decided sensibly between you, Paul, Kevin, George and teh ACF - rather than on the basis of a poll like this?

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 07:44 PM
Actually, Let this be the last day that I waste my time with ACF or Australian Chess.

Decision can be made a few people: Paul, George, whoever else has authority in ACF, and also YOU.

I will check the poll results at 11PM Tonight.
Personally I doubt a poll like this is representative.

There may be people who would nirmally post to the ACF BB who wont post here. That could be for various reasons.

1) They wont post here.
2) They are away on hols and have better things to do
3) They only post on weekdays.
4) They dont give a toss.

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 07:44 PM
I can restore, if paul allows.

Firstly, I was sensible for 3 days, trying to get things back on track, to no avail.

Whoever wants to stay here are welcome to stay here. The poll will decide what happens atleast in this forum at 11pm.

arosar
04-01-2004, 07:45 PM
The poll is currently at 6 all.

I will check this poll in the morning, and if "go back to the previous bulletin board" has more votes than "stay here", I will restore the old BB, and you can all shut the fu.ck up.

4 to go. (until I am suspended for 30 minutes)

Hold on, I thought that you could not restore the old ACF BB? :?

Also would it not be a good idea for any decision on the future of the ACF areas, to be decided sensibly between you, Paul, Kevin, George and teh ACF - rather than on the basis of a poll like this?C'mon CL - think. If it can be turned off, it can be turned on. The thing was working fine til they butted in. Apparently their ulterior motive was to acquire a captive audience for their business.

Also, why in the world would people who have nothing to do with the ACF be part of the decision making? I don't even know who these blokes are.

AR

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 07:47 PM
I can restore, if paul allows.

Firstly, I was sensible for 3 days, trying to get things back on track, to no avail.
Actually thats not entirely correct.
I thought you had things back on track.
In fact things were working till Gandalf decided to get involved.

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 07:47 PM
Actually, Let this be the last day that I waste my time with ACF or Australian Chess.

Decision can be made a few people: Paul, George, whoever else has authority in ACF, and also YOU.

I will check the poll results at 11PM Tonight.
Personally I doubt a poll like this is representative.

There may be people who would nirmally post to the ACF BB who wont post here. That could be for various reasons.

1) They wont post here.
2) They are away on hols and have better things to do
3) They only post on weekdays.
4) They dont give a toss.

:D They just use it as an excuse to escape from you :D

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 07:48 PM
[quote="Jeo"]I can restore, if paul allows.

Firstly, I was sensible for 3 days, trying to get things back on track, to no avail.[quote]
Actually thats not entirely correct.
I thought you had things back on track.
In fact things were working till Gandalf decided to get involved.

Tell me, what the hell do you want me to do?

peanbrain
04-01-2004, 07:51 PM
Actually, Let this be the last day that I waste my time with ACF or Australian Chess.

Decision can be made a few people: Paul, George, whoever else has authority in ACF, and also YOU.

I will check the poll results at 11PM Tonight.

I don't see why this poll has any big deal given it is a snap poll and many users are not aware you as administrators of this BB is going to use the result as indication of support or otherwise.

The fact is if the old BB is restored so people who rather elsewhere but here has the choice to move - then they will. People who like this BB can stay. Personally I enjoy the lively debate on the old BB so that's where I'll go.

It is not reasonable to threaten the BB community with a shut down just because you don't get the result you wished for by 11pm tonight. Why can't all users be given the options between two BBs?

Jeo you are right to say you have stuck to your promise not to moderate this forum - but unfoutunatly Gandalf went a step further and actually banned Matt today - a decision not supported by Kevin B. That is a fact. What is also a fact is Matt was not suspended for his language, but for voicing his disagreement with gandalf.

We are like guests staying at your house on your invitation. We try to behave in a reasonable manner and not to cause too much problem for you, but you and Gandalf should understand it is no way to treat your guest by contant threat of eviction just because our opinions differ.

We do have major clash in culture and there is no need for you to blame the rest of Australian chess community. I don't know anyone going into a marriage with intention to seek divorce, but things sometimes don't work out - no blame is necessary.

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 07:52 PM
My personal opinion is as follows:

I'm prepared to stay on this board.

My concern however is that I have no way of judging if you and your associates will decide in a week, 2 weeks or a month if you really dont want us here. After all it seems obvious that you could acre one way or the other.

In which case you pull the plug and we have to reestablish a BB elsewhere at a time when restablishing the old board may no longer be an option.

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 07:56 PM
I am not blaming anyone but myself. I am sorry that I even thought of this idea, or the several other ideas that were proposed to ACF. I take them all back.

If you behave in a way that I dont like in my house, I will try and adjust, I will give it consideration, time and effort to let it go, forget it. I have done that, and there still is no progress.

If Gandalf decides to ban after there have been 9 offences, thats a good decision. If I were moderating, it would be 3. Im not going to live on this forum just to delete your crap.

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 07:58 PM
My personal opinion is as follows:

I'm prepared to stay on this board.

My concern however is that I have no way of judging if you and your associates will decide in a week, 2 weeks or a month if you really dont want us here. After all it seems obvious that you could acre one way or the other.

In which case you pull the plug and we have to reestablish a BB elsewhere at a time when restablishing the old board may no longer be an option.

Re establishing the old board is always an option.

arosar
04-01-2004, 07:59 PM
This BB is clearly technically superior. Problem is, we have to defer to the hosts' commercial interests. My view is that we have to completely sever ties.

Given that we, the old BBers, often resort to some particularly robust exchange - there will always be occassions when events on our patch will not be in keeping with CK's goals.

AR

chesslover
04-01-2004, 08:00 PM
If Gandalf decides to ban after there have been 9 offences, thats a good decision. If I were moderating, it would be 3. Im not going to live on this forum just to delete your crap.

Does a user know when they have commited a offense? When the moderator deletes a post, is there somethibg that states to the user that they have commited an offense?

Also are users able to look at how many offenses they have commited, or is that fucntion just limited to the admin and moderators?

chesslover
04-01-2004, 08:02 PM
Given that we, the old BBers, often resort to some particularly robust exchange - there will always be occassions when events on our patch will not be in keeping with CK's goals.

AR

esp if there is a 3 strikes and you are out policy

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 08:02 PM
Its limited to Admins only.

And you should know when you are being a pest. Sweeney is the only one that was a pest, I dont see why everyone has supported him.

Anyway, I want decisions made, I dont want to argue this topic further.

peanbrain
04-01-2004, 08:05 PM
I am not blaming anyone but myself. I am sorry that I even thought of this idea, or the several other ideas that were proposed to ACF. I take them all back.

If you behave in a way that I dont like in my house, I will try and adjust, I will give it consideration, time and effort to let it go, forget it. I have done that, and there still is no progress.

If Gandalf decides to ban after there have been 9 offences, thats a good decision. If I were moderating, it would be 3. Im not going to live on this forum just to delete your crap.

Progress was made and agreement was reached - until Gandalf went a step further.

It disappoint me to see you still support Gandalf's poor decision even now. Point is Kevin B has rule Gandalf's decision to be out of order.

As for your last comment, I can't recall any statement policy that this BB is now adopting 9 offences and you are suspended clause. In fact Kevin B must be having tea at the moment for not moderated your repeated use of bad language.

chesslover
04-01-2004, 08:05 PM
Its limited to Admins only.

And you should know when you are being a pest. Sweeney is the only one that was a pest, I dont see why everyone has supported him.

Anyway, I want decisions made, I dont want to argue this topic further.

Yes Sweeney is a pest, and mos peopledo nto agree with most of the things he says. But I guess even so, most of us are very concious of teh right to free speech and robust debate, and hence defend his right to not be expelled.

As for decisions made in a thread :D Most of the old ACF threads went on and on, with few decisions being made as a result of the posts

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 08:06 PM
There is no rule like that. But ofcourse he did it 9 times, and I believe a 10th, when Gandalf decided to take the action.

I seriously dont want to talk about it anymore. Its ruined my holidays enough.

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 08:10 PM
What was amazing though is that I still said gandalf and I will not moderate after TODAYS argument, yet people want to keep complaining and going on about nonsense.

Great, well done.

shaun
04-01-2004, 08:10 PM
Its limited to Admins only.

And you should know when you are being a pest. Sweeney is the only one that was a pest, I dont see why everyone has supported him.


In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me -
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

(Attributed to Niemoller)

chesslover
04-01-2004, 08:11 PM
Jeo,

so at 11pm you will decide on the fate of the ACF sections in your BB?

Given that there were about 160 memebers in the old ACF board, and your BB has about 200 other members, how representative would a vote of 13 people be - just 4% of total members have voted.

Like I stated earlier, I think that rather than base it on this poll, you together with paul, kevin, george and the ACF should come to a mutually accepatable decision.

But, if you really want to base your decision on whether to continue on the basis of this poll, then why not state that - so that other will all have a chance to realise the implications of their votes, and maybe give it a week so that people who want to have a say can vote? Maybe even have a qualifier that a vote to be binding musyt have 50% of members voting? (as is done is some presidential elections worldwide)

peanbrain
04-01-2004, 08:11 PM
I seriously dont want to talk about it anymore. Its ruined my holidays enough.

who can blame you! Have a good holiday and enjoy the cricket!
Sorry to differ (again!!) but I rather watch paint dry than spent days following cricket!

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 08:13 PM
What was amazing though is that I still said gandalf and I will not moderate after TODAYS argument, yet people want to keep complaining and going on about nonsense.

Great, well done.
I think a number of the posters are unsure whether they can trust that the issue wont blow up again in the future.

That makes them uneasy.

Thats what you fail to grasp.

ToRnaDo
04-01-2004, 08:15 PM
okay you guys....just make CK visitor angry. What's the purpose of your posting??? You are NOT concern the development of CK...juse demanding people do this do that??? The Admin, moderator should, shoudnt do this do that???

If you r whoever care abt CK...what should u question yourself to do???

The decision will be made at 11PM. Lets start voting!!

1) If "Should we go" win...thing will come back normal with CK

2) If "Should you stay" win...Forget about everything happend in the past 3 or 4 days.

I am just a new member and reading CK forum everyday but not posting very much

I also have no idea abt old ACF

Jeo wont decide anthing...just my vote and your vote will decide what should Jeo will do at 11PM

Im off CK now and wait untill 11PM

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 08:16 PM
Jeo,

so at 11pm you will decide on the fate of the ACF sections in your BB?

Given that there were about 160 memebers in the old ACF board, and your BB has about 200 other members, how representative would a vote of 13 people be - just 4% of total members have voted.

Like I stated earlier, I think that rather than base it on this poll, you together with paul, kevin, george and the ACF should come to a mutually accepatable decision.

But, if you really want to base your decision on whether to continue on the basis of this poll, then why not state that - so that other will all have a chance to realise the implications of their votes, and maybe give it a week so that people who want to have a say can vote? Maybe even have a qualifier that a vote to be binding musyt have 50% of members voting? (as is done is some presidential elections worldwide)

I really do not know what to do.

Im just sick of it.

chesslover
04-01-2004, 08:19 PM
What was amazing though is that I still said gandalf and I will not moderate after TODAYS argument, yet people want to keep complaining and going on about nonsense.

Great, well done.
I think a number of the posters are unsure whether they can trust that the issue wont blow up again in the future.

That makes them uneasy.

Thats what you fail to grasp.

especially as there are still 2 more admins that we have not encountered yet :D . Jeo however stated that we have scared them away so gandalf should be the last BB war we need to fight

when BB war 1 started with kartick, and was ended amicability with common sense and moderation, we thought that it was a "BB war to end all BB war" , and things would get back to normal

However "BB war 2" has been more bitter and more voluminous than BB war 1. Hopefully the peace treaty that is being hammered out by Kevin "Winston Chrchill" B and Paul"FDR" B and Bill "stalin" G, will lead to a lasting peace between the ACF posters and the Chesskit administrators.

shaun
04-01-2004, 08:19 PM
I really do not know what to do.



Do what you should have done before this whole thing started. Ask for advice.

peanbrain
04-01-2004, 08:20 PM
Maybe even have a qualifier that a vote to be binding musyt have 50% of members voting? (as is done is some presidential elections worldwide)

the North Korean President Kim was voted in with something like 98%+ of votes - so what?!

shaun
04-01-2004, 08:22 PM
I also have no idea abt old ACF

:D

chesslover
04-01-2004, 08:22 PM
Maybe even have a qualifier that a vote to be binding musyt have 50% of members voting? (as is done is some presidential elections worldwide)

the North Korean President Kim was voted in with something like 98%+ of votes - so what?!

and saddam got 99.94%

Yet bush just got in, as did Latham

chesslover
04-01-2004, 08:26 PM
I really do not know what to do.

Im just sick of it.

dont be discouraged

i think that the new BB is so much mnore technically superior to ours..

However the postings and discussion in the old ACF BB was so robust, with no decisions made and criticisms, that the "culture" of our old BB is so much more different to your culture.

Hopefully with Kevin and Paul moderating the ACF sections, and banning people themselves this will now be resolved.

Dont take criticisms personally, even though they may seem very unfair

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 08:26 PM
I asked for advice. Everyones advice.

These are the advices that I got.

1) Dont moderate, which I upheld. Gandalf moderated, and I made sure he will not, also stating that ACF is responsible for ACF forums. Still, people are not happy.

2) Switch back to the old board, which ofcourse george and paul dont want.

3) Run both boards side by side. Which is a ridiculous idea after I think about it for a moment, and seems like a good idea the next. But ofcourse, george and paul wouldn't be too happy.

I tried nearly everything I can try. Its now up to you guys to do whatever. Quite frankly I dont really care anymore, and am not willing to waste time with ACF BB members debating this topic. Do as you wish, Paul has full control of the old board, and can bring it back in an instant.

At 11 PM I will make a decision, after thinking about it for couple of hours, from 9-11. I hope its the right decision.

Oh wait, everything is a wrong decision with you guys. #-o

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 08:28 PM
Let me give you some advice. ;)

You can only be arrogant when you are in the right. :!:

Speaking from experience provided you are in the right you can get away with arrogance. 8)

However this carries a burden. :-s

If you are arrogant and in the right the one thing you cannot do is back down. :rolleyes:

If you back down this makes people believe that you dont really, really believe in the principle or argument you are trying to defend. After all if you are in the right why back down. :-k

Now if you make the fateful mistake of backing down, then all you can do is chalk this up to experience and move on. :-''

So endeth the lesson. :)

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 08:30 PM
I asked for advice. Everyones advice.

These are the advices that I got.

1) Dont moderate, which I upheld. Gandalf moderated, and I made sure he will not, also stating that ACF is responsible for ACF forums. Still, people are not happy.

2) Switch back to the old board, which ofcourse george and paul dont want.

3) Run both boards side by side. Which is a ridiculous idea after I think about it for a moment, and seems like a good idea the next. But ofcourse, george and paul wouldn't be too happy.

I tried nearly everything I can try. Its now up to you guys to do whatever. Quite frankly I dont really care anymore, and am not willing to waste time with ACF BB members debating this topic. Do as you wish, Paul has full control of the old board, and can bring it back in an instant.

At 11 PM I will make a decision, after thinking about it for couple of hours, from 9-11. I hope its the right decision.

Oh wait, everything is a wrong decision with you guys. #-o

With regards 2 and 3 what is important is what the members want not what Paul and george want.

In fact thats true overall.

Garvinator
04-01-2004, 08:30 PM
as the person who created this thread and poll, i think i can speak about why i created it.

I DID NOT INTEND FOR IT TO BE USED AS A INDICATOR TO CLOSE CHESSKIT FORUM OR WHATEVER AT 11PM TONIGHT.

That is way too short of time for any poll. Kevin has not been on as far as i know and same with Paul B.

I was hoping a week would be a good time period.

I have also not voted yet, so if it stays 6-6 i could have the casting vote ;) , let the lobbying start now :-''

chesslover
04-01-2004, 08:31 PM
At 11 PM I will make a decision, after thinking about it for couple of hours, from 9-11. I hope its the right decision.

Oh wait, everything is a wrong decision with you guys. #-o
you are getting to be quite witty here :D

see, we old ACF BB posters are an acquired taste, and you seem to be getting the hang of this now. Some of us will probably be mentioning you and gandalf's actions (which you have rectified) for some time now, no matter what.

When I first posted in the old ACF BB, I too did not get some of the things stated as I am a migrant from the Baltics, and some of the ironies and sarcasms escaped me. But now gradually I too am getting some of these jokes

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 08:33 PM
as the person who created this thread and poll, i think i can speak about why i created it.

I DID NOT INTEND FOR IT TO BE USED AS A INDICATOR TO CLOSE CHESSKIT FORUM OR WHATEVER AT 11PM TONIGHT.

That is way too short of time for any poll. Kevin has not been on as far as i know and same with Paul B.

I was hoping a week would be a good time period.

I have also not voted yet, so if it stays 6-6 i could have the casting vote ;) , let the lobbying start now :-''
Or given that its 7-6 lock it up again at 7 all. :D

peanbrain
04-01-2004, 08:34 PM
Yes Sweeney is a pest, and mos peopledo nto agree with most of the things he says.

That's a rather sweeping statement there CL! [-X

I disagree with Matt on a few issues but that doesn't mean he is a pest or he contributed any less than the next person.

Another example - we all know your views about president Bush - and few of us can't be bothered to debate with you on that, however, even you should accept not everything this man did is beyond question?!

chesslover
04-01-2004, 08:34 PM
as the person who created this thread and poll, i think i can speak about why i created it.

I DID NOT INTEND FOR IT TO BE USED AS A INDICATOR TO CLOSE CHESSKIT FORUM OR WHATEVER AT 11PM TONIGHT.

That is way too short of time for any poll. Kevin has not been on as far as i know and same with Paul B.

I was hoping a week would be a good time period.

I have also not voted yet, so if it stays 6-6 i could have the casting vote ;) , let the lobbying start now :-''

1. it is 7-6 now, so you do not have the casting vote.

2. Yes, I too stated that 11 pm is too short, and if Jeo wants it to be binding, then a week plus a minimum percentage of voter participation would be a good idea

chesslover
04-01-2004, 08:41 PM
Yes Sweeney is a pest, and mos peopledo nto agree with most of the things he says.

That's a rather sweeping statement there CL! [-X

I disagree with Matt on a few issues but that doesn't mean he is a pest or he contributed any less than the next person.

Another example - we all know your views about president Bush - and few of us can't be bothered to debate with you on that, however, even you should accept not everything this man did is beyond question?!

1. Dd you or did you not, like me think that matt running for NSWCA president and his unwashed urine stained hand policy were all moronic?

2. Yes I do nto agree with all that President Bush does. I admire him, as I admire all people who become elected to the most powerful office on this planet. I especiually like it that he is a sinner, who became a born again christian and like Lt.Gen Boykin believe that he is a man sent by God to fight against the islamic terrorists who want to destroy us all.

Also whilst I agree with President Bush's foreign policy. his war on terror, his crackdown on terrorist supporters and helpers, his anti environmental polic, his faith based initiatoves where he lets religious organisations help the poor rather than the government help the power, the missile defense, and his drilling in Alaska policies, I definitely do not agree with some of President Bush's other policies - his anti abortion stance, his pro gun stance, his tax cuts and reduction in welfare spending etc

3. In the non chess thread there is a website link that takes you to a website that asks you some questions that take about 3 miniutes to complete. Once you do that the website will tellyou which US presidential candidate shares your political, economic, social, religious views and gives a compatiability rating between you and the US presidential candidates - including President Bush

Garvinator
04-01-2004, 08:44 PM
and that will be enough of that about anything other than changing boards and voting thanks. :evil:

chesslover
04-01-2004, 08:46 PM
and that will be enough of that about anything other than changing boards and voting thanks. :evil:

who dies and made you admin?

You have no right to tell me what I should or should not do :evil:

It was peabrain who asked me something, and I responded

peanbrain
04-01-2004, 08:48 PM
Thanks for your response on Bush there CL. It confirmed my point that while I still do not agree with Matt on not washing hands etc that does not make him a pest. Equally I have not called bush a pest because even you have questions over some of his actions/policies.

That's democracy for you. You have as much right to call matt a pest as I do you or your president bush.

Rincewind
04-01-2004, 08:54 PM
I would think we could switch to this new style of BB but host it on the ACF web site. This board is based on the phpBB software while the old board was based on Yabb software.

It would depend on the facilities provided by the web service provider.

YaBB is based on Perl with no underlying database. phpBB requires a database of some kind (most people use MySQL but I think others may be supported) and (of course) PHP.

If you have those two things, phpBB can probably be made to work. If Paul needs a hand getting it going I can help out.

The pgn/fen stuff is not standard pgpBB and I think it was developed by Jeo. We could ask him for a copy but the way things have gone, he might be reticent in providing it.

chesslover
04-01-2004, 08:55 PM
Thanks for your response on Bush there CL. It confirmed my point that while I still do not agree with Matt on not washing hands etc that does not make him a pest. Equally I have not called bush a pest because even you have questions over some of his actions/policies.

That's democracy for you. You have as much right to call matt a pest as I do you or your president bush.

and i do not disagree with you

Many people do not see things in black or white - the stance depends on the issue in most cases. Thus a person like Peter Costelo can be very right on economic issues, yet be "left" on some social issues such as reconciliation., and the republic.

And yes I agree with the democracy and freedom of speech. Shaun's posting the poem is a good reason, why we shoudl all speak up,even if it does not affect us

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 08:56 PM
Posted a proposal. You lot online atm can decide if you want it or not. I will make a decision at 11pm using the feedback I get from the thread.

Thunk
04-01-2004, 08:59 PM
I asked for advice. Everyones advice.

These are the advices that I got.

1) Dont moderate, which I upheld. Gandalf moderated, and I made sure he will not, also stating that ACF is responsible for ACF forums. Still, people are not happy.

2) Switch back to the old board, which ofcourse george and paul dont want.

3) Run both boards side by side. Which is a ridiculous idea after I think about it for a moment, and seems like a good idea the next. But ofcourse, george and paul wouldn't be too happy.

I tried nearly everything I can try. Its now up to you guys to do whatever. Quite frankly I dont really care anymore, and am not willing to waste time with ACF BB members debating this topic. Do as you wish, Paul has full control of the old board, and can bring it back in an instant.

At 11 PM I will make a decision, after thinking about it for couple of hours, from 9-11. I hope its the right decision.

Oh wait, everything is a wrong decision with you guys. #-o
kart hick

thE purposE of a bullEtin board is to hold a mirror up to thE usErs so that thEy may sEE thEmsElvEs in thE mirror and lEarn from what thEy sEE and how othErs rEact to thEm.

your post shows that you havE lEarnt somEthing.

mr glEtsos has kindly offErEd somE morE lEarning for you.



can I havE a turn too?
havE you noticEd that whEn thE hEat is on an issuE you want it to all End. And whEn it doEs not End you considEr locking it, banning it, votE dEad-linE, Etc.

thE solution to your anguish may bE to lEarn to lovE tEnsion.
Just a thought

thE HUNK

by-thE-way
thE E's problEm is back

jenni
04-01-2004, 09:24 PM
I too did not get some of the things stated as I am a migrant from the Baltics,

Ah! So that is why you didn't understand that "tea" meant "dinner" - that got me too when I first came to Australia - particularly a "baked tea" , where I had visions of a cup of tea roasting in the oven. :D

Garvinator
04-01-2004, 09:26 PM
[quote="chesslover"]
Ah! So that is why you didn't understand that "tea" meant "dinner" - that got me too when I first came to Australia - particularly a "baked tea" , where I had visions of a cup of tea roasting in the oven. :D

some people do that too 8)

Rincewind
04-01-2004, 09:28 PM
My wife is still amused by my mum making a baked "dinner" for Sunday lunch. :D

Kevin Bonham
04-01-2004, 09:30 PM
Kevin I suggest you post an announcement on the changes made.

Kevin

I notice that you post late in the evening (and even early in the a.m.) As a last task could you type a summary of the number of moderation actions that you have taken during the day. Just a count of how many posts and how many people have been
altered
deleted
counselled
de-threaded
locked
threatened.

starter

:)

A good idea in principle, in practice an extra commitment I would prefer to avoid. A lot of the minor things I would be more comfortable just whacking delete then forgetting about.

Interestingly, on another forum I moderate I have a moderator's log. This forum is full of swearing testosterone-(and oestrogen)-pumped alternative-rock teenagers who aren't backwards about speaking their mind. It is very liberal but people do have some understanding of the limits - and I only need to use the moderator's log about once or twice a week on average.

If I had one here it would do wonders for my post count.

Kevin Bonham
04-01-2004, 09:46 PM
I should point out that one of the things George was happiest about with the new site was the reduction in legal risk. However, it appears that there will be no reduction in legal risk if the ACF still has legal responsibility over parts of the board. Will be interesting to see what his view is now.

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 09:48 PM
I know that. But I cannot be held responsible for something that I do not moderate.

chesslover
04-01-2004, 10:02 PM
I know that. But I cannot be held responsible for something that I do not moderate.

That is a very fair point as you have stated.

However like Kevin, the grand Poobah from Tasmania, has stated one of the things that I think the ACF liked with the new BB was that the risk of litigation was reduced.

Now that this is not the case, or seems to be not the case, I guess there are 3 choices open to us

1. Have the ACF moderate the ACF sections of this new BB, but this will mean that the legal risk will not be reduced. However we get to use the superior features of this new BB

2. have Jeo and gandalf moderate the ACF fourms as well, and accept the fact that we cannot have the same degree of freedom in posting as the price we have to pay for the reduction in legal risk. ANother advantage is that we get to use the superior features of this new BB

3. go back to the old ACF BB where we still have the same legal risk as we have by having the ACF moderate the ACF sections of the new BB, but this time even do not get the advantage of using the new BB features

I would prefer option 1. However if the ACF wants to reduce legal risk, then we have to accept option 2, or get another more liberal minded new BB to host us

chesslover
04-01-2004, 10:08 PM
A good idea in principle, in practice an extra commitment I would prefer to avoid. A lot of the minor things I would be more comfortable just whacking delete then forgetting about.

Interestingly, on another forum I moderate I have a moderator's log. This forum is full of swearing testosterone-(and oestrogen)-pumped alternative-rock teenagers who aren't backwards about speaking their mind. It is very liberal but people do have some understanding of the limits - and I only need to use the moderator's log about once or twice a week on average.

If I had one here it would do wonders for my post count.

Yes, you work very hard to moderate this BB, and anything that will ease your heavy burden should be undertaken. So if this is extra work, then please do not do this, for already you are doing alot for tassie chess, and far far more importantly for Australian chess

As for post count, you are currently fourth, so if you want to all you have to do is delete Bill, Matt and my posts and you will be the King of the Posts, as well as the Grand Poobah of the ACF sectiosn of the BB :D

chesslover
04-01-2004, 10:33 PM
since is wellpast 2300, I assume that Jeo will continue on with having the ACF forums in this new BB of his?

After all only 17 people out of a total of almost 360 members of this BB voted - just about 5% of the votes.

Jeo has formulated an eminently sensible solution in the top of this ACF section, and I do think that in the spirit of reconciliation, compromise and common sense we should let bygones be bygones, and start afresh.

peanbrain
04-01-2004, 10:48 PM
Jeo has formulated an eminently sensible solution in the top of this ACF section, and I do think that in the spirit of reconciliation, compromise and common sense we should let bygones be bygones, and start afresh.

A solution was reached 3 days ago and Gandalf broke it by suspending matt using foul language as an excuse - this is since confirmed by Kevin.

According to you we should let bygones be bygones until the next time you have disagreement of opinion with Gandalf or the other two unknown admins and they may then decide to ban YOU.

Jeo is still maintaining the fact that Gandalf exercised extraordinary powers today to suspend matt is not a form of moderation, so what is?!

CL - time to wake up and read in between the lines! :shock:

chesslover
04-01-2004, 10:59 PM
Jeo has formulated an eminently sensible solution in the top of this ACF section, and I do think that in the spirit of reconciliation, compromise and common sense we should let bygones be bygones, and start afresh.

A solution was reached 3 days ago and Gandalf broke it by suspending matt using foul language as an excuse - this is since confirmed by Kevin.

According to you we should let bygones be bygones until the next time you have disagreement of opinion with Gandalf or the other two unknown admins and they may then decide to ban YOU.

Jeo is still maintaining the fact that Gandalf exercised extraordinary powers today to suspend matt is not a form of moderation, so what is?!

CL - time to wake up and read in between the lines! :shock:

I thought that Jeo's solution in the thread, stated that from now Gandalf and he will not be involved in any moderation and suspension/deletion of users, and that they would only suspend if Kevin/ Paul asks?

The Chess Kit admins will only use these powers if we post something on one of the non ACF sections

SO this means that the gandalf incident, and the drama on the first hours of the migration will not be repeated

Kevin Bonham
04-01-2004, 11:09 PM
I had discussions with Jeo in which he was very close to giving the thing up but has decided to leave it a week and check back and see how it goes.

I think what he proposed is reasonable provided the ACF accepts it. Some relevant ACF staff/personnel are now discussing this matter confidentially.

However I won't be using moderator powers outside of those forums for which I am a designated moderator, because I don't want someone who may be innocent of one of the charges to get banned under the three strikes and you're out rule.

Also as I said before I hope this is the last time there's a problem.

My view is that we should reactivate the old BB, and start discussions about whether to stay here afresh in a relaxed manner over a period of several weeks knowing what has transpired. Possibly it would be better to have those discussions back there rather than over here.

Otherwise, you know what they say about the road to hell. Not that the underworld's as bad a place as chesslover might believe, but it could do with a smoother highway for its growing population. :P :P :P

peanbrain
04-01-2004, 11:09 PM
I thought that Jeo's solution in the thread, stated that from now Gandalf and he will not be involved in any moderation and suspension/deletion of users, and that they would only suspend if Kevin/ Paul asks?

The Chess Kit admins will only use these powers if we post something on one of the non ACF sections

SO this means that the gandalf incident, and the drama on the first hours of the migration will not be repeated

Did you see Gandalf (and the other 2 unknow admins) agree to this anywhere on this BB?

Refer back to Gandalf's posts this morning where he said he's waiting for the new rules governing this BB to come out in a few weeks time. Who is to say even the latest offer made by Jeo is not going to change??

As a chess player you should know there are so many possibilities you can never taken anything for granted and assume the outcome. So far the administrators on this BB have played several gambits with us by going from one extreme to the other, within very short amount of time.

The question is are you going to accept or decline?

chesslover
04-01-2004, 11:22 PM
I had discussions with Jeo in which he was very close to giving the thing up but has decided to leave it a week and check back and see how it goes.

I think what he proposed is reasonable provided the ACF accepts it. Some relevant ACF staff/personnel are now discussing this matter confidentially.

Also as I said before I hope this is the last time there's a problem.

My view is that we should reactivate the old BB, and start discussions about whether to stay here afresh in a relaxed manner over a period of several weeks knowing what has transpired. Possibly it would be better to have those discussions back there rather than over here.

Otherwise, you know what they say about the road to hell. Not that the underworld's as bad a place as chesslover might believe, but it could do with a smoother highway for its growing population. :P :P :P

I really do not think having 2 boards is the answer. There will be 2 ACF forums, and going back will be a retrograde step if we then decide to come here again to this new BB.

As Jeo and others have stated we can always go back to the old BB if we have to.

We can have our debate here on whether we want to stay or go. If we have a debate here or in the old ACF BB makes no difference, as Jeo and others from chess kit can always if they want to finmd out what the majority of ACF BB people are saying.

I think you stated it best, when you said on Jan 01 that the main impediment to this new BB succeeding was the moderator policy.

Jeo has accepted the 2 conditions that you asked for after the entire Matt Sweeney suspension fiasco. (It was very very well articulated too by the way Kevin, and kudos for you for that).

He agreed that Chess Kit admins will not moderate on any of the 4 ACF forums in this new BB, and that he will only delete/suspend ACF users if you or Paul ask them to be deleted.

If Gandalf and the other 2 Admin agree, or if Jeo has the authority to speak on their behalf, then as far as I can see the issue is resolved.

It will be like the old ACF BB, only that we have a BB with far superior features, and where the day to day BB hosting is not done by thehardworking paul

PHAT
04-01-2004, 11:34 PM
Hello all :D

It has been a rather odd and unproductive yet interesting day of my holidays today. There is little left for me to say, as nerely everything has been said. So justy a few observations and statements from me.

1. I have been reading the whole broo-haha off and on today and have seen remarkable progress. Very good work from all of you.

2. Today we proved to our selves that there IS a real BB chess community and that we ALL care about it.

3. I bear no grudge for my recent sin-binning. I am an obvious target but I don't mind at all - we all make our own bed and have to lie in it.

4. Jeo and Gandalf have taken a terrible beating. They have more than my sympathy, they have my empathy too. I hope that they do not pack it in. The proposals now in place was a result of what was a full on turf war.

5. I voted in the pole to leave here, but let it be known, that I wish to changhe that vote to stay until we see if the proposals work out. If they do, it is a win-win. If it does not work out, it will be a draw.

6. The new BB seams to be a techological improvement over the old one.

7. I hate Shaun Press for finding/remembering and posting the "First they took the Jews" quote. I was trying to remember all arvo, where I had read it so I could post it. It is a beauty.

8. I cannot think of one now, but I am sure it will surface later.

Cop you later

:D

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 11:34 PM
I really do not think having 2 boards is the answer. There will be 2 ACF forums, and going back will be a retrograde step if we then decide to come here again to this new BB.
I have to disagree with you.
Shaun suggested we run both boards back before it was deleted on new years day. His idea still seems sensible to me.


As Jeo and others have stated we can always go back to the old BB if we have to.
In 2 weeks a month it may be too hard to accomplish.


We can have our debate here on whether we want to stay or go. If we have a debate here or in the old ACF BB makes no difference, as Jeo and others from chess kit can always if they want to finmd out what the majority of ACF BB people are saying.

I think you stated it best, when you said on Jan 01 that the main impediment to this new BB succeeding was the moderator policy.

Jeo has accepted the 2 conditions that you asked for after the entire Matt Sweeney suspension fiasco. (It was very very well articulated too by the way Kevin, and kudos for you for that).

He agreed that Chess Kit admins will not moderate on any of the 4 ACF forums in this new BB, and that he will only delete/suspend ACF users if you or Paul ask them to be deleted.

If Gandalf and the other 2 Admin agree, or if Jeo has the authority to speak on their behalf, then as far as I can see the issue is resolved.
Or until they get upset again.



It will be like the old ACF BB, only that we have a BB with far superior features, and where the day to day BB hosting is not done by thehardworking paul
Get real there is no hard work involved in hosting per se. Its in moderating.

All being here means is that we no have the hard working Kevin.

skip to my lou
04-01-2004, 11:36 PM
Gandalf's powers are at rest for now, as are mine. The other two have just as much influence as admins, if not greater, though they do not have real admin features. I was about to give up, as you could detect from my posts, when one of them told me to give it another chance.

chesslover
04-01-2004, 11:39 PM
Hello all :D

It has been a rather odd and unproductive yet interesting day of my holidays today.

Noticed that you were not posting in the BB since the afternoon.

What happened today Matt? anything interesting that caused you to miss posting? :P :P :P

chesslover
04-01-2004, 11:43 PM
We can have our debate here on whether we want to stay or go. If we have a debate here or in the old ACF BB makes no difference, as Jeo and others from chess kit can always if they want to finmd out what the majority of ACF BB people are saying.

I think you stated it best, when you said on Jan 01 that the main impediment to this new BB succeeding was the moderator policy.

Jeo has accepted the 2 conditions that you asked for after the entire Matt Sweeney suspension fiasco. (It was very very well articulated too by the way Kevin, and kudos for you for that).

He agreed that Chess Kit admins will not moderate on any of the 4 ACF forums in this new BB, and that he will only delete/suspend ACF users if you or Paul ask them to be deleted.

If Gandalf and the other 2 Admin agree, or if Jeo has the authority to speak on their behalf, then as far as I can see the issue is resolved.
Or until they get upset again.


I think that we should give it a go for the next week. If we still have problems, then we can run 2 boards, or even go back en masse to the old ACF BB.

Provided gandalf and teh other 2 admins of chesskit, agree to the decision by Jeo, we should be fine.

The only problem which you stated, and which peabrain also stated, is what if they arbiterily change their mind again?

But let us give it a go, and then make a decision. Call it a "high class waiting move" :)

Kevin Bonham
04-01-2004, 11:46 PM
I really do not think having 2 boards is the answer. There will be 2 ACF forums, and going back will be a retrograde step if we then decide to come here again to this new BB.

It may be. What I'm concerned about is the worst possible case scenario where after a few weeks or months here we get evicted, and then all the posts we've made here could be lost for good, it would be the Brazilian thing all over again but with a lot more tensions within the Aus community as a result of it. Also while the moderation problems can be individually resolved I fear that the culture clash aspect could be permanent. At the moment it feels like we're engaged in a hostile corporate takeover more than a smooth transition to a new environment. I don't know about Gandalf but it's obvious that Jeo wasn't prepared for it and isn't taking all this well. He has shown that he will listen to criticism, which is very commendable, but he's obviously had a rough time of it.

However if we do stay here I'm more than prepared to give it a go. The posting volume presents serious challenges for me at the moment though, I'm not sure how long the attempt to crackdown on swearing can continue while there are so many posts to dredge through many of which I'd normally just skim. Hopefully we'll reach a happy balance somewhere along the line. I left a lot of the "s***" stuff up, I mean if even Jeo's going to use the word while at the same time defending Gandalf counting "p*****" as a strike against Matt then there hardly seems much point deleting it. May sort out some revised standards with Paul, but needlessly crude material will continue to be nuked.


If Gandalf and the other 2 Admin agree, or if Jeo has the authority to speak on their behalf, then as far as I can see the issue is resolved.

I hope so. I do feel that one more of these types of situations will be the absolute end for many ACF BB posters, but we'll give it a go and see what happens.

I've been online for a total of five hours now today just wading through and replying to all this stuff - and in the meantime no-one has been discussing or analysing the games + results from the Aus Champs. That's a real shame, but hopefully I've just about got to the end of it now.

I leave you for now with this chilling thought.

Just imagine if firegoat had been here.

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 11:51 PM
Hello all :D

It has been a rather odd and unproductive yet interesting day of my holidays today.

Noticed that you were not posting in the BB since the afternoon.

What happened today Matt? anything interesting that caused you to miss posting? :P :P :P

I'll save Matt the trouble of replying to this, because he is likely to get himself into trouble.

There was no need for this post.

Let me say this simply and succinctly.

Sometimes CL you are a complete and utter moron. =;

peanbrain
04-01-2004, 11:54 PM
The only problem which you stated, and which peabrain also stated, is what if they arbiterily change their mind again?

But let us give it a go, and then make a decision. Call it a "high class waiting move" :)

CL - ever played a game where you thought 90 minutes plus 30 seconds per move is plenty - and then lost on time?!

Host of ACF BB here or not has nothing to do with the imporve functionality of chesskit - point is you are such good buddy with Jeo I'm sure he will welcome you with open arms - that is when you need to use all these nice functions that you can't do on our old BB.

Why take votes when we can just reactivate the old BB and see how many users prefer to discuss/debate matters over there? There is nothing wrong having two BBs and they do not have to be mutually exclusive.

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 11:54 PM
I leave you for now with this chilling thought.

Just imagine if firegoat had been here.

Yes he quite likely would have beaten Matt to a suspension. :D

Bill Gletsos
04-01-2004, 11:56 PM
Why take votes when we can just reactivate the old BB and see how many users prefer to discuss/debate matters over there? There is nothing wrong having two BBs and they do not have to be mutually exclusive.

Good observation peanbrain.

I better stop praisng you before someone accuses me of ....

Well you know what. :D :D

chesslover
04-01-2004, 11:59 PM
The posting volume presents serious challenges for me at the moment though, I'm not sure how long the attempt to crackdown on swearing can continue while there are so many posts to dredge through many of which I'd normally just skim. Hopefully we'll reach a happy balance somewhere along the line. I left a lot of the "s***" stuff up, I mean if even Jeo's going to use the word while at the same time defending Gandalf counting "p*****" as a strike against Matt then there hardly seems much point deleting it. May sort out some revised standards with Paul, but needlessly crude material will continue to be nuked.
I leave you for now with this chilling thought.

Just imagine if firegoat had been here.

1. Maybe firegoat's reputation may have scared off Gandalf :D

2. Why not have, like yahoo, any posters who think a post if offensive to pm you directly with the offesnive post. That will reduce the need tfor you to trawl through posts.

If someone keeps making vexacious claims, then you can impose sanctions on them

chesslover
05-01-2004, 12:02 AM
Hello all :D

It has been a rather odd and unproductive yet interesting day of my holidays today.

Noticed that you were not posting in the BB since the afternoon.

What happened today Matt? anything interesting that caused you to miss posting? :P :P :P

I'll save Matt the trouble of replying to this, because he is likely to get himself into trouble.

There was no need for this post.

Let me say this simply and succinctly.

Sometimes CL you are a complete and utter moron. =;

I note that you edited your post after the initial post.

I personally thought my post was very funny, and witty, although i realise humour is in the mind of teh beholder.

However you calling me a complete and utter moron and defending Matt, should lay to rest the theory that I am you/ you are me

skip to my lou
05-01-2004, 12:04 AM
Just thought I might make the 2000th post ;) ;)

chesslover
05-01-2004, 12:05 AM
Why take votes when we can just reactivate the old BB and see how many users prefer to discuss/debate matters over there? There is nothing wrong having two BBs and they do not have to be mutually exclusive.

Good observation peanbrain.

I better stop praisng you before someone accuses me of ....

Well you know what. :D :D

may i kindly point out thateven matt agrees with me and thinks t we shoudl stay here, and give it a go for teh next week. As so does the Grand Poobah from tassie as well...

peanbrain
05-01-2004, 12:07 AM
However you calling me a complete and utter moron and defending Matt, should lay to rest the theory that I am you/ you are me

Actually matt corrected that view and said he now thinks Bill is your da.

peanbrain
05-01-2004, 12:09 AM
Just thought I might make the 2000th post ;) ;)

Wait a minute - I thought you have yourself suspended?!
Silly me - obviously that was an attack and not a formal threat! :oops:

Garvinator
05-01-2004, 12:10 AM
However you calling me a complete and utter moron and defending Matt, should lay to rest the theory that I am you/ you are me

Please dont start this again #-o .

umm why is Jeo's status set to suspended?

Bill Gletsos
05-01-2004, 12:11 AM
Actually now Matt is agreeing with CL. Maybe they are related and Matt suggesting CL and I were related was just a diversionary tactic on his part.

Bill Gletsos
05-01-2004, 12:14 AM
However you calling me a complete and utter moron and defending Matt, should lay to rest the theory that I am you/ you are me

Please dont start this again #-o .

umm why is Jeo's status set to suspended?

As an admin he can set that field to whatever he likes, just like Kevins says Arbiter.

It appears however that the custom title function that cut in at 1400+ posts has been removed for some reason.

chesslover
05-01-2004, 12:17 AM
However you calling me a complete and utter moron and defending Matt, should lay to rest the theory that I am you/ you are me

Please dont start this again #-o .

umm why is Jeo's status set to suspended?

As an admin he can set that field to whatever he likes, just like Kevins says Arbiter.

It appears however that the custom title function that cut in at 1400+ posts has been removed for some reason.

and not y that, but I went from Super Grandmaster to a IM?

Has teh number of posts field been reset, and the number of posts required to get to teh stages been increased?

chesslover
05-01-2004, 12:21 AM
Actually now Matt is agreeing with CL. Maybe they are related and Matt suggesting CL and I were related was just a diversionary tactic on his part.

that cannot be.

when Matt was suspended for his misdeeds, any multiple user ids that he had could also not be used for postings. The fact that I was able to post whle Matt was suspended shows that I am not Matt.

The Grand Poobah seems to have the access to knwo if a user has multiple id's and what these id's are.

Maybe the Grand Poonbah can conlusively state that I am not you, nor you me, and that I am not Matt, nor Matt me, or for that matter you are not Matt, nor Matt you

Bill Gletsos
05-01-2004, 12:22 AM
Well I went from custom to CK Super GM back to GM The latter in the last 30 mins.

Perhaps whoever is doing this will inform us what is going on. Or is that too much to expect.

chesslover
05-01-2004, 12:26 AM
Well I went from custom to CK Super GM back to GM The latter in the last 30 mins.

Perhaps whoever is doing this will inform us what is going on. Or is that too much to expect.

I just do not like the way the rules for the titles are being changed ona whim. If 1400 was custom, then it should be custom, irrespective of how many people reach that post number.

To change it arbiterailly is not good I think

Bill Gletsos
05-01-2004, 12:32 AM
Yes I thought we worked out all these levels the other day and came to an understanding.

Kevin Bonham
05-01-2004, 02:33 AM
Possibly my fault - I suggested that custom status for posters generally might be a bad idea because it would be too easily abused. I guess you could always take it away from someone who abused it and give them a permanent status of "Naughty Little Boy".

If this board lasts I will seriously consider changing mine to "Grand Poobah" though. ;)

Kevin Bonham
05-01-2004, 04:01 AM
Maybe the Grand Poonbah can conlusively state that I am not you, nor you me, and that I am not Matt, nor Matt me, or for that matter you are not Matt, nor Matt you

I do have access to the IPs. I should point out though:

(*) In most cases I believe that IP-based info should be kept confidential.

(*) In this case it is beyond obvious that no regular on this board is another regular on this board - there is no need to clarify it.

(*) I have a lot of experience with hydras (people registered under multiple names) on another forum I moderate. Because a lot of users are on dialup IPs their IP may rotate within a range, and if two posters have the same ISP their IP numbers may be the same at times.

Basically the usefulness of IP numbers in tracking whether two user names are the same or not varies from complete certainty to being reasonably sure to not really having a clue.

I am sure however that this board has already seen at least two cases of posting under duplicate names - possibly more.

arosar
05-01-2004, 08:25 AM
I'm already here at the airport you blokes. If this situation isn't resolved by the time I land in ADElaide, I'm gonna go ballistic. Anyway, I'll see GH down there and I'll if I can sort him out.

See youse.

AR

Rincewind
05-01-2004, 10:51 AM
(*) I have a lot of experience with hydras (people registered under multiple names) on another forum I moderate. Because a lot of users are on dialup IPs their IP may rotate within a range, and if two posters have the same ISP their IP numbers may be the same at times.

Also two different users on the same private network which bridged onto the internet may simultaneously appear to have the same IP! (IE the IP of the bridge).

The private network may have 2 nodes or it may have thousands.

So basically, the IP information can nenver be conclusive but it might help confirm suspicions formed on other evidence. (Post timing patterns, content, idiom, etc)

Also I agree that the IP address of a poster should be considered confidential and not, as a rule, disclosed. phpBB does this quite neatlly.

Trent Parker
05-01-2004, 12:00 PM
I Currently do not have enough time to read all entries in this thread, but it sounds to me that Jeo may need to loosen up a bit, destress.

Question: How many lawsuits did the ACF receive because of what the ACF BB'ers said? The evidence will determine whether Jeo has a valid ground fo be stressed.

Matt can have radical ideas sometimes. But on the other hand he has some excellent points to make - They are just not expressed correctly. For example trought the old bb he brought up discussion about looking into a sydney chess centre. The proposal needed some fine tuning by bill, but is ended up being a valid proposal.

Kevin Bonham
05-01-2004, 01:24 PM
Question: How many lawsuits did the ACF receive because of what the ACF BB'ers said?

Never been actually sued over it as far as I know but there were some close calls and credible threats of legal action during the junior selections debacle, which resulted in two threads being deleted. Paul would know exactly how bad it was, I don't. The previous ACF BBs also had to be shut down over defamation issues for a while a few times. It is a significant risk, but if it's managed by deleting any defamatory material as soon as it appears it can be minimised.

PHAT
05-01-2004, 03:53 PM
My information is that the Junior Selection thread on the last BB was a clear case of "remove it or there will be an injunction". What might have happened after the injunction is anyones guess. Often there is bluffing and brinkmanship, but equally some idiot barstard will follow through.

My feeling is that the ACF is a pi.ssant entity with no money so let them try and get blood out of a stone. The suit wouldn't pay their legal bills. One small matter of concern is, have the ACF members (the state bodies) got there money securely safe guarded from such suits.

(BTW, I have not been involved in any of the legal problems.)

antichrist
05-01-2004, 04:18 PM
What will the new admins think when we get into full-blown blasphemy, will we be banned, censored??

CL
Name your church and I will take a host along and gut it.

PHAT
05-01-2004, 04:33 PM
What will the new admins think when we get into full-blown blasphemy, will we be banned, censored??


God will do it for him with a computer age bolt, ie. a power surge to fry your boards.

Kevin Bonham
05-01-2004, 04:59 PM
My feeling is that the ACF is a pi.ssant entity with no money so let them try and get blood out of a stone. The suit wouldn't pay their legal bills.

Probably not but some people sue out of revenge just for the hell of it.

Bill Gletsos
05-01-2004, 05:36 PM
What will the new admins think when we get into full-blown blasphemy, will we be banned, censored??

CL
Name your church and I will take a host along and gut it.
Some might construe that as an arson threat.

chesslover
05-01-2004, 06:28 PM
What will the new admins think when we get into full-blown blasphemy, will we be banned, censored??

CL
Name your church and I will take a host along and gut it.

1. I do hope that anyone who blasphemes and attacks God is censored and banned

2. That to me is a DEATH THREAT to the AOG that I go to (name your chirch...I will take a host along and gut it) :x :evil:

I hope that Kevin/ Paul deal with you, and delete your post or suspend you :x

chesslover
05-01-2004, 06:29 PM
My feeling is that the ACF is a pi.ssant entity with no money so let them try and get blood out of a stone. The suit wouldn't pay their legal bills.

Probably not but some people sue out of revenge just for the hell of it.

I thought people deleiberatly misspeling to avoid the censor get their posts banned? :?

chesslover
05-01-2004, 06:31 PM
What will the new admins think when we get into full-blown blasphemy, will we be banned, censored??

CL
Name your church and I will take a host along and gut it.
Some might construe that as an arson threat.

Exactly

This satan worshipping mad man's hatred of Jesus and christian churches is bewildering and amazing

Where is gandalf when you need him?

PHAT
05-01-2004, 06:47 PM
My feeling is that the ACF is a pi.ssant entity with no money so let them try and get blood out of a stone. The suit wouldn't pay their legal bills.

Probably not but some people sue out of revenge just for the hell of it.

I thought people deleiberatly misspeling to avoid the censor get their posts banned? :?

"piss.ant" is a 7 letter word. I wanted to see if the auto-censorer would pick this up.

Kevin Bonham
05-01-2004, 08:38 PM
I thought people deleiberatly misspeling to avoid the censor get their posts banned? :?

You missed my post where I said that due to the huge volume of stuff, and due to Jeo not being interested in maintaining these standards himself, I wasn't going to bother censoring all of this low level stuff. Especially not where the word's just a little bit crude but the context is harmless. It is difficult to know what standards to apply when I don't even know if this board has a long-term future as our home, but severely crude material will still get deleted.

antichrist: please clarify what you mean by "gut it" or I will have to remove your post, anything that could be taken as a threat of violence against property isn't on.

antichrist
12-01-2004, 01:13 PM
I thought people deleiberatly misspeling to avoid the censor get their posts banned? :?


antichrist: please clarify what you mean by "gut it" or I will have to remove your post, anything that could be taken as a threat of violence against property isn't on.

Gawd - all of you are snailish

Communion host -- body & blood of Christ -- stab the host, i.e. gut Christ, get it??

You are all rudy Prodos, no wonder you don't get it. Get the real thing -- the RCC. The Anglicans are like Pepsi compared to Coke, the rest are the local brands, cheap and nasty.

AOG preachers are a dime a dozen, you can pick them up at the supermarket. I debated one years ago, he only lasted one round or even one punch, he never wrote his article in the local rag again

CL
At RCC you get beautiful cathedrals, statues, icons, rituals, age-old traditions, Roman costumes, incense, monstrances, chalises etc -- the AOG has been neutered in comparison. It's worth while going to RCC just for the show, you don't have to believe anything.

antichrist
12-01-2004, 01:39 PM
CL
Name your church and I will take a host along and gut it.[/quote]
Some might construe that as an arson threat.[/quote]

Exactly

This satan worshipping mad man's hatred of Jesus and christian churches is bewildering and amazing

Where is gandalf when you need him?[/quote]

CL
I can't hate someone who doesn't/didn/t exist!

In Tacitus there are about 5 Jesus', but according to my reading of them is that none of them are Jesus of Nazareth. His mention in Josephus is ridiculous and this admitted by the RCC as an interpolation.

ursogr8
12-01-2004, 01:54 PM
CL
At RCC you get beautiful cathedrals, statues, icons, rituals, age-old traditions, Roman costumes, incense, monstrances, chalises etc -- the AOG has been neutered in comparison. It's worth while going to RCC just for the show, you don't have to believe anything.


Odd that you write such a list. I attended a wedding yesterday in the Scared Heart church in Rathsdowne St carlton melbourne; now specialising in Lebanese community RC services.
As I looked at the magnificant physicality of all the things you listed I came to the conclusion that the most striking aspect was the community involvement of 300 people in the service. Apart from the wonderous echo, the service would have been equally as uplifting in a barn, IMHO.
I was very impresssed, but you cannot eat the decor in a restruant you know.

starter

antichrist
12-01-2004, 02:58 PM
Apart from the wonderous echo, the service would have been equally as uplifting in a barn, IMHO.
I was very impresssed, but you cannot eat the decor in a restruant you know.

starter[/quote]

No but one certainly pays for it. The Vatican invented selling of indulgences to fund building it so enjoy it. They also corrupted all western art in the process. They took nature out of it, the Chinese stuck to nature. Then in the humanist period they found humanity and nature again, represented by Ancient Greek bronze musle-bound heroes.

Bill Gletsos
12-01-2004, 03:18 PM
Whats all this religious stuff got to do with the topic.

If you want to continue take it to the non Chess area.

Commentator
12-01-2004, 05:59 PM
Whats all this religious stuff got to do with the topic.

If you want to continue take it to the non Chess area.

Uh oh
Matt's away and Bill's looking for something to do.
Thread policeman? Well I suppose you did start the thread so you have some rights.

Kevin published a definitive discourse on where threads eventually end-up; I think that included a diversion through things religious before ending up with Nazi accusations. Can you refresh our memory Kevin.

C

Bill Gletsos
12-01-2004, 06:09 PM
Whats all this religious stuff got to do with the topic.

If you want to continue take it to the non Chess area.

Uh oh
Matt's away and Bill's looking for something to do.
Thread policeman? Well I suppose you did start the thread so you have some rights.

Kevin published a definitive discourse on where threads eventually end-up; I think that included a diversion through things religious before ending up with Nazi accusations. Can you refresh our memory Kevin.

C
Actually I'm not particularly worried about thread drift when a chess topic strays over to another chess topic, however when chess threads stray/are hijacked into non chess areas then I think its better they be continued over in the non chess area.

Kevin Bonham
12-01-2004, 06:22 PM
Kevin published a definitive discourse on where threads eventually end-up; I think that included a diversion through things religious before ending up with Nazi accusations. Can you refresh our memory Kevin.

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/usenet/legends/godwin/

I agree with Bill - if you want a protracted debate on religion put it in the offtopic area - I just wanted antichrist to clarify what he was referring to.

chesslover
13-01-2004, 07:29 PM
[quote="chesslover"]I thought people deleiberatly misspeling to avoid the censor get their posts banned? :?

Gawd - all of you are snailish

Communion host -- body & blood of Christ -- stab the host, i.e. gut Christ, get it??

You are all rudy Prodos, no wonder you don't get it. Get the real thing -- the RCC. The Anglicans are like Pepsi compared to Coke, the rest are the local brands, cheap and nasty.

CL
At RCC you get beautiful cathedrals, statues, icons, rituals, age-old traditions, Roman costumes, incense, monstrances, chalises etc -- the AOG has been neutered in comparison. It's worth while going to RCC just for the show, you don't have to believe anything.

I'lldebate this in the offchess section if you want to, but you surely know that most of the protestent churches, do not believe that Jesus is present in the bread and wine, but that holy communion is a symbolic rememberence of Jesus?

Also RCC is wrong with it's emphasis on mary, the saints, confession to the priest and the infalliability of a 80 year old sick man in rome. It does not matter how impressive the churches are as well

antichrist
14-02-2004, 03:13 PM
I would guess that recently the BB has been much quieter than ever under the old ACF site. But probably too late now anyway. Look how small those poll results are. Posts are staying up for days as last post.

chesslover
15-02-2004, 05:47 PM
I would guess that recently the BB has been much quieter than ever under the old ACF site. But probably too late now anyway. Look how small those poll results are. Posts are staying up for days as last post.

You need Matt involved in posting if you want to see move,ments in threads.

Matt is a free spirit, and has ideas that cause others to reexamine their views. Also matt is not intimidated by authoritarian establishment types, and gives as good as he gets. He stands up for his views - despite all attempts to silence him

skip to my lou
15-02-2004, 06:08 PM
No, actually you need people with alot of free time.

PHAT
15-02-2004, 07:25 PM
No, actually you need people with alot of free time.

There is no such thingas "free time" - it is just time reallocated from something else. Those minutes stolen here and there by me to scan-read-write-post are those taken from my reading time.

(Reading time is the subset that is not: worktime, housework, children, sleep, voluteering or recreation. The sum of these is 25 hours per day.)

chesslover
15-02-2004, 08:33 PM
Matt,

I actually divide my life into 4 parts - work time, family time (the time that I spend with my partner and her daughter), sleep time and personal time. It is from the latter that I spend time on chess, or by getting more personal time by sleeping less. In addition on Suindays I have God time, which is seperate from work/family/sleep/personal time