[inquiry]

 Vampyr, on 2011-June-30, 19:33, said:

Why do you always leave out the juicy details?

Because the content was inappropriate. In addition, in general, I am against mentioning names of people who are thus sanctioned.

[Antrax]

 JLOGIC, on 2011-June-23, 11:00, said:

Believe it or not, Lurpoa brought the harrassment upon herself! She got negative voted and effectively ostracized, because she continuously negative voted people for no reason. This was before we were able to see who was downvoting anyone, so I'm sure she felt like she could get away with it (and indeed she could, see why enabling being able to see who was downvoting people was a positive thing?).

If ostracizing a member is a good outcome, indeed seeing who downvoted whom was a positive thing.

 JLOGIC, on 2011-June-23, 11:00, said:

She got a single downvote for that. Who is harassing who in this thread?
Keep in mind, Antrax is a far newer poster than her with less posts, who posts mainly in the beginner/int section.

For completeness' sake, the downvote was mine. I also replied in-thread explaining why I thought her reply was uncalled for.

You seem like a smart person, JLOGIC, I honestly don't understand why you think the Lurpoa crusade is/was worth your time.

RAIN said:

Finally, it doesn't look like we can trust voting as a main determinant in the logic of what posts are particularly good (for the purpose of automatically putting into news or homepage) if votes are not being used in the spirit intended.

In the future, outright stating what the intended purpose of the voting system is could go a long way towards achieving its goal. When voting was implemented, some vague comment about "votes could mean more than you think..." was made, which led every poster to vote according to whatever agenda he thought is best. Personally I thought downvotes would be used to track offensive posters that may be unaware of how they're perceived (very common on the internet). Apparently the intent was to filter quality bridge content, yet no mention of this was made until after half the system was pulled.
And generally, while we're giving feedback about forum moderation, transparency is often a really good idea. Don't think it could limit you in any way if you publicize your set of policies, there's always the #1 rule "don't be an ass" which tends to cover all the bases.

[Rain]

Removed a thread that alleges UI.

To report UI, please email abuse@bridgebase.com. You probably want to include at least 10 suspicious hands, not just 1 or 2. Your email will be read. Posting and naming names on BBF for this purpose is not allowed. Thanks for reporting this thread.

[inquiry]

Two post moderated today.


One asking what a jump raise meant was moved from Interesting Bridge Hands to Beginner/Intermediate forum

The other was a 100% duplicated new thread in the GIB forum dealing with the playing ability of the robots. Thanks to the people pointing out thees issues.

[inquiry]

A thread on "Masterpoint listing" questioning why a software decision was made was moved from the "full disclosure/dealer" forum (which deals with those BBO-affiliated programs to "suggestion for software forum.

[inquiry]

About a dozen or so post by richard in the climate control thread in the water cooler were deleted. These were "cut-and-paste" from Karl Marks writing on capitalism or something like that. The reason it was that many was this was a many, many page thing. It was so long, it seems like it had to be cut and pasted in multiple post to get it to fit in space allowed in the forum. These were removed because:

1) They might have violated some copyright stuff (although probably old enough not too

2) They were way-way off topic (purpose was might be to point out cut-and-paste of others in the same thread, but that is just a guess)

3) The others seem to cut-and-paste small sections to support whatever their view was, Richard cut and pate the entire thing complete with 100 referenences or so that were in the original.

4) If it is necessary to show the words of Karl Mark's a link to the original source on the internet at another website would have been just effective.

[Vampyr]

 inquiry, on 2011-July-07, 08:37, said:

Karl Marks writing on capitalism or something like that.

Any relation to Karl Marx?

[inquiry]

 Vampyr, on 2011-July-07, 08:43, said:

Any relation to Karl Marx?

[hrothgar]

 inquiry, on 2011-July-07, 08:37, said:

About a dozen or so post by richard in the climate control thread in the water cooler were deleted. These were "cut-and-paste" from Karl Marks writing on capitalism or something like that. The reason it was that many was this was a many, many page thing. It was so long, it seems like it had to be cut and pasted in multiple post to get it to fit in space allowed in the forum. These were removed because:

1) They might have violated some copyright stuff (although probably old enough not too

2) They were way-way off topic (purpose was might be to point out cut-and-paste of others in the same thread, but that is just a guess)

3) The others seem to cut-and-paste small sections to support whatever their view was, Richard cut and pate the entire thing complete with 100 referenences or so that were in the original.

4) If it is necessary to show the words of Karl Mark's a link to the original source on the internet at another website would have been just effective.

I'm sorry if Das Kapital was considered off topic.
I will make sure that I only cut and paste from climate change related web sites.
Please look forward to a LOT of stimulating content tomorrow evening

[inquiry]

 hrothgar, on 2011-July-07, 09:32, said:

I'm sorry if Das Kapital was considered off topic.
I will make sure that I only cut and paste from climate change related web sites.
Please look forward to a LOT of stimulating content tomorrow evening

Normally I would not respond to this, after all I was 1) against the water cooler forum being created (I wanted the site to stick to just bridge), and 2) against Uday's decision to allow climate control thread back in (several have been deleted).

There is no doubt that some people post in that thread and not about bridge on this site. There is no doubt that feelings run strong on both sides of the issue. I have my own thoughts on that issue, but I am not going to get into whatever is passing off as a debate in that thread. I am sure that 99.9% of the forum members are not reading it, and I am not reading it (I do however get more "reports" about that thread than any other, so I occassional have to take some form of action, despite not wanting to be a moderator of that forum---- notice my name is not on it as a moderator, but the software sends me reports when the button is pushed anyway).

Since I don't want to have to deal with whatever this childish problem is that you are threatening, and since A :LOT of cut-and-paste from other websites violates our fair use rules when a hyperlink would do, I am not going to allow it. To make sure this DOES not occur, your post are going to have to be reviewed by a board moderator until you decide to tell us you are not going to continue in this childish behavior.

Since I am enforcing a no large cut-and-paste on your post, the same rule will apply to others. Feel free to point out where large secions are cut and paste from other sources (as opposed to original content). These will be reviewed on a case-by-case for each post unless a violator either goes overboard or threatens to go overboard (as you did), in which case the same moderation of his or her post will be in effect until they also stop their childish behavior.

If I had my way, we would all get back to just posting about bridge here, and go somewhere else for these climate control postings, but since we have a water cooler forum and since uday has allowed it back in, let's keep the discussion and posting mature. The good news is the 99.9% of forum members can ignore the flame war in that thread and the childish behavior of a few of our members on this hot-button topic. Sure wish I could too, but I only read post in that thread reported to me, no other ones.

[matmat]

 inquiry, on 2011-July-07, 10:20, said:

Since I am enforcing a no large cut-and-paste on your post, the same rule will apply to others.

Ben, if you are going to go this way (which I feel is probably the right direction), I'd also urge you to encourage people to cite where they cut and paste the shorter snippets from as well, otherwise it really is stealing.

[inquiry]

 matmat, on 2011-July-07, 10:35, said:

inquiry said:

Since I am enforcing a no large cut-and-paste on your post, the same rule will apply to others.

Ben, if you are going to go this way (which I feel is probably the right direction), I'd also urge you to encourage people to cite where they cut and paste the shorter snippets from as well, otherwise it really is stealing.

You are of course correct. Fair use rules require citation when copying part of the text (or illustrations) from another source. We should fully require a correct citation in any cut-and-paste activity from another website, and we need to limit the amount of material copied to meet the fair use requirements.

I have no intention of routinely patroling for copyright violations, but when pointed out to me, I will delete the material if it does not conform to fair use rules. Since we have just made it clear today that citatation will be needed, I am not going back through the forums to 2003 to zap old post, but any post dated as of 1:30 pm EST July 7 2011 (or later) will have to conform or be deleted without further notice.

[Foxx]

 inquiry, on 2011-July-07, 10:20, said:

Since I am enforcing a no large cut-and-paste on your post, the same rule will apply to others. Feel free to point out where large secions are cut and paste from other sources (as opposed to original content). These will be reviewed on a case-by-case for each post unless a violator either goes overboard or threatens to go overboard (as you did), in which case the same moderation of his or her post will be in effect until they also stop their childish behavior.

Dang! This foiled my evil and nefarious plan.

I was just about to go on a cut-and-pasting spree, steal from a whole ton of science and technology articles . . . . . . and then make the grandiose claim that I INVENTED THE CYBERNETIC RABBIT!!!!!!!!!!!

[barmar]

 inquiry, on 2011-July-07, 08:37, said:

1) They might have violated some copyright stuff (although probably old enough not too

Would Marx really have believed in copyright protection?

[aguahombre]

Groucho believed in a lot of things.

[inquiry]

Post with a very large picture of a highway kill of a cat (ie, a dead cat) and no words was deleted. I am sure the sentiment was that of road kill applied to an earlier post in the thread, but such a graphic picture seems inappropriate and generated complaints that I happened to agree with.

[inquiry]

I deleted a thread and two replies say that the thread would not last long. The thread named a several bbo members by name (a site violation) in a very negative light. This was the poster's first post on the forum. I have sent him a private message explaining the rules and how to report the action he claims is happening to abuse. Since one allegation was quite startling, I will forward that information from his post to abuse myself, as abuse can check the validity of that claim.


Yesterday, another post, by another new member claimed someone on BBO was cheating (#1 BBO cheater). That post was deleted as well (but was deleted yesterday).

[Bbradley62]

btw: That same poster was accused of cheating in a thread that was deleted yesterday.

[inquiry]

A post in the how to become an expert thread was heavily edited. The gist of the post was to simply come to this forum, and call yourself an expert, naming a forum member by name and suggesting this player is doing that. Many would have agreed with the post, and found humor in it (I did), but of course, it violated the rules of the site, so I had to take it down. Sometimes I hate this job.

[Free]

 inquiry, on 2011-July-24, 13:58, said:

A post in the how to become an expert thread was heavily edited. The gist of the post was to simply come to this forum, and call yourself an expert, naming a forum member by name and suggesting this player is doing that. Many would have agreed with the post, and found humor in it (I did), but of course, it violated the rules of the site, so I had to take it down. Sometimes I hate this job.

Sorry Ben, but I'm glad you liked it. Can you explain why the last part was removed as well?