OpenChess

The bad thing is, he also spammed this "system" via emails, something I had NEVER requested or even shown interest in...

I agree that there must be limits. But banish not be the first option.

BB+ wrote:Was Angels 77 banned, or just timed-out for multiple weeks and never came back?

Neither. Angels 77 had some ranty posts moderated, was unhappy about that and asked for her account (and that of her sister, IIRC) to be deleted. We obliged.

Jeremy

EDIT: We did NOT oblige, in fact. Angel still has an active account, but has never returned to OpenChess.

Carlos Ylich wrote:I agree that there must be limits. But banish not be the first option.

In this case, it wasn't.

First action, one of ARB's posts was locked (by me) with a publicly posted warning about the insulting contents. Per PM ARB disagreed with the decision, complained about the treatment he was receiving at TalkChess and ultimately requested that the thread be deleted, which we did a week or so later.
Second action, in response to an exchange of insults which ARB flagged, we had a PM discussion in which I made some clarifying comments re: the forum rules, and also attempted to bring the frequency and tone of his postings up for discussion. I refused to take action on the flagged posts and asked him to tone it down, as his posting style was becoming increasingly disruptive. He saw nothing wrong with the frequency and tone of his posts ("Because I Am a Fighter!") and made absolutely clear that he would not change anything there.
Third action, several of ARB's posts were locked (by kingliveson) with publicly posted warnings about the contents.
Fourth action, following the mass spamming of multiple old forum threads, ARB's account was disabled (by me).

One could argue that special personalities like ARB deserve at least 5 or 10 or 20 chances to demonstrate their unbending will to disrupt before being asked to leave. But I guess I simply don't agree. I've gotten Hausverbot in Berlin bars for far, far less.

This is real life here, with real people, nearly all of whom want to have the opportunity to discuss, argue, battle, etc. in a friendly and open atmosphere. This isn't possible when the forum is dominated by a creep with a megaphone.

Jeremy

Carlos Ylich wrote:Chat, exchange ideas, disagree, that's what makes us move forward to become better. Ban, avoid discussion and others want to delete, this is pretty bad.
I like this discussion with you and congratulate Jeremy, only the discussion with men of good will allow the improvement.

No one is moderated (or banned -- but again, bans are extremely rare here) on OC based solely on content, unless the content involves hate speech, personal attacks, etc. and even then, we're really lenient.

ARB was not removed because we found his ideas problematic. ARB was removed for spamming. The proof? All of his posts are still there. Read them and enrich your life, feel free to continue the discussions he began. If you believe in the ARB system, continue his good work.

But spammers are not welcome on this forum, whether the spammer is filling the forum with shoe advertisements or with angry "why are you spamming this forum??" posts. That is abuse of the technology we've set up to permit discussion and won't be tolerated. As we do with every spammer, ARB's account was summarily disabled. Exceptionally, we left his posts in place, because ARB was not only a spammer, but also a chess-topical contributor before he violated that basic tenet and was shown the door.

Jeremy

Jeremy,
Thank you for exposing their reasons. I understand you. His position is difficult but necessary.

Carlos Ylich

I'm against banning too (this doesn't refer to the bot-spam-accounts); proposal:

-tell $User...
-that his post will end in /dev/null (realiter he can compose a text-with colors/attachements and so on-which will end up in the digital Nirvana; there must be some sort of banner/sign: "Told you so!")

Please implement this.


greetings

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:After his last outburst, Anthony R. Brown has been permanently banned from OpenChess. We are determining whether his posts should be eliminated or saved for posterity.

Jeremy

This person seems to have got himself a ban for all the chess forums...in the main because of his rude behaviour/comments to anyone who does not agree with his views on any aspect of chess, which he seems to think he has exceptional ability for, unfortunately he does not have as much ability as he thinks he has in his own mind.