Stopping the Hyattian-Triumvirate

[Chris Whittington]

Real Computer Chess (for what it is worth), not controlled by unsackable admins, shops and dysfunctionals happens here at OpenChess

Beg to differ, please explain how the one and only admin "Jeremy" is sackable? The main problem with Open-Chess is it is controlled by one person "Jeremy" he owns and decides what will or will not be posted. So how are we going to extinguish this issue?? Wait for Jeremy to decide or is the Open-Chess membership going to decide for themselves?

Cordially,

Sean

Should I apologize that I donate my time and money to keep this board up and running? On principle, we don't delete posts or ban users. I just checked the moderator forum. The last posts which were split off were in August 2010, the result of a stupid flame war begun by, well, by you, Sean. You were also sent a warning at the time.

Apart from that, there's been zero, zip, null, nada moderation action which wasn't the simple deletion of pirate links or anonymous spam (if you're interested in Viagra or need new shoes, we can leave those posts, too). If anything, we've become extremely lax with forum rule enforcement, and the board actually runs itself amazingly well. As a relevant aside, when I was at CCC, the number 1 source of user strife was moderator activity. OpenChess runs differently, and we manage pretty well.

You are simply complaining because you may. Which is fine. You may. But I defy you to find a single abuse of moderator or administrator power on OpenChess. There hasn't been one.

That CCC has a vaguely democratic conceit is super for CCC. But it doesn't work, IMO, and I would rather have a small circle of trusted, do-little moderators than a bunch of nutty moralists who think they know better than you. Better an enlightened monarchy than an elected Orwellian council of Klugscheißers [1].

Yes, I retain control of the keys to my web server. I think that's reasonable. No, I don't give assholes moderator permissions. I think that's reasonable, too. But no one here bans people for being jerks or for disagreement with "our" way of thinking. And certainly not for "interfering with commercial interests". I think Chris said it pretty well -- if OpenChess is a nice place to "be", to discuss chess and computer chess matters with intelligent people in an intelligent fashion, people will come, stay and use. If we screw up, people will leave. I don't think we're screwing up.

[1] I googled Klugscheißer to ensure that a non-german speaker could easily find out what it means. The graphic associated with the first link I found was so resonant and darkly amusing, evoking a disturbingly similar image posted on CCC in the past, that I just had to add it to this post. I think you'll enjoy it, too.

180px-Klugscheis.jpg

Yup, the history of the last century is that when the uneducated masses get hold of democratic power, they replace it with their own brand of totalitarian fascism, whether communist or nazi or americano warfare state. Enlightened monarchy, provided they've been steeped in liberal philosophy and education works better. Bottom up self government using leaderless organisations is best of all however.

[thorstenczub]

you mean the monarchy that leads to ww1 ?
or the monarchy of the russian zar ?
the monarchy of franco ?

where is the difference between stalin, hitler or an monarchistic asshole dictator ?

[Jeremy Bernstein]

you mean the monarchy that leads to ww1 ?
or the monarchy of the russian zar ?
the monarchy of franco ?

where is the difference between stalin, hitler or an monarchistic asshole dictator ?

For crying out loud, it was a metaphor.

jb

[Chris Whittington]

you mean the monarchy that leads to ww1 ?
or the monarchy of the russian zar ?
the monarchy of franco ?

where is the difference between stalin, hitler or an monarchistic asshole dictator ?

the king has some education in liberal values and is massively constrained in what he can do by a historical tradition of checks and balances that prevent him going nuts and can take action if he does, the other two had absolute and total power, enough power to waste six million germans and twenty plus million russians in what was actually a fight to the death between the two of them by proxy. No comparison. And you are stuck in pre WW1, possibly pre-Napoleonic ideas of how the world works. Now is 2000 and something, not 1850's Marx time.

btw the English monarch has no power at all, it's all ceremonial.

Better than "democracy" as we're allowed it, but best of all is small scale self-government, leaderless.

[Uly]

The individual control would be to unfollow or filter out the offending users posts.

If a "bottom-up" system is just about adding a User Ignore function it seems as something very easy to implement.

Doesn't phpBB have such a module?

[Jeremy Bernstein]

The individual control would be to unfollow or filter out the offending users posts.

If a "bottom-up" system is just about adding a User Ignore function it seems as something very easy to implement.

Doesn't phpBB have such a module?

Hell, I ignore all of you and I couldn't be happier.

But seriously folks, I believe you have a "foes" list in your User Control Panel. Enter a nick and they are gone, gone, gone like central european monarchy.

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/news/140584.html

Jeremy

[Uly]

Thanks, I see, so we've had the technology implemented since the start of the board.

http://www.open-chess.org/ucp.php?i=zebra&mode=foes