[uday]

Closed a long thread in watercooler, was originally about climate or some such, but veered off track into something else

[inquiry]

A political joke that was either very funny or very insulting, depending on your political background was removed from a post when i logged into my email and found three complaints about it. If it had been in the watercooler, i would have never touched it (truth is I am not the moderator of the water cooler, so wouldn't have gotten the complaints via report to moderator button)..

[inquiry]

A thread with a broken link was deleted. In addition, there has been reports that the poster is not the same person who plays with the name used to post that thread.

[inquiry]

The I feel like dying thread, started by the same knucklehead who didthe one right above this (but with a new username) was deleted. Got six emails about this one.../

[uday]

Deleted a post in a thread about the polish president.


U

[uday]

Deleted a long thread that prompted some obscenities by hrothgar

[Gerardo]

Wank asked why banned in the General BBO Discussion forum.

Closed th thread saying that is not the right place to ask, left it there.

[inquiry]

Two more post in the "good bid!" thread. One post was deleted -- it was short and to the point post but impossible to edit to meet the standards of the forum and still convey the message (well, I could have edited it to "leave me alone", but that would not express the full sentiment correctly).

Another post had some words changed (new words are spit and screw) and one word deleted (indicated where it is missing).

Now for a plea, let's calm down a bit. I had a psychotrist tell a group of us today to learn a new phrase... it was "so what". It was to apply to a different situation, but it applies here too.

Some says I am not the biggest card in the deck? So what?
Someone says I made a personal attack of another person? So what?
Someone thinks a certain play is or is not evidence of UI? So what?

In the long run none of this small stuff makes a difference. It really doesn't. But one think we can't have is a lot of "F-bombs" in the forum. Well, maybe in the water cooler or the law forum, I don't moderate those...

[gwnn]

I hope it's not a problem if I ask for clarification: is this thread supposed to contain all moderator actions or just those actions that the moderators see fit to talk about?

[uday]

Ask w/o fear

The former. Sometimes we forget to mention things but we try to avoid that.

[inquiry]

I deleted one post in the "Piltch revisited" thread which was uncalled for, and deleted the text in a post that quoted the deleted post.

You may have noticed the appearance of ***** in one of more post in that thread as well. We have started using some "nasty word" filters that will change certain words to a group of stars. This is done automatically by the software. Obviously we haven't got all the words in, so bullshit slipped in (whoops there it is again), so I expect some editing of the filtering file.

While I am at it, the real problem with that thread and the earlier thread is that it sinks down to personal attacks, along the lines of "if you don't agree with me you are full of ***** " (see the filters work). It is going that way again. It even has gotten to the point that my characterization that the 6D bid was "reckless" is being heckled. Anytime you pay as much money to play in the Springfield and have team-mates who want to win and you risk an all in bid poker bid like that rather than play bridge, I think reckless is a fine characterization. However, to the point, it seems some attack others in the hope of getting the thread closed. Well, it worked before, and it might work again. But there must be a way to EXPRESS YOUR OPINIONS, without attacking the opinions of others.

[inquiry]

Yet another thread in the Piltch revisted thread was edited.

I knew it wouldn't be long before creative use of words would bypass the very weak word filters we have in place. That is the main purpose of that edit. However, I owe author of that post an apology for not editing the post he was responding too earlier. I probably would have responded the same way if it was posted about me instead of him. It is too late now, as the cow is of the barn.

But the personal attack for disagreements is what I was talking about in the post before this one in this thread. I used my example (reckless) to point out how the attacks can start. Of course, it is PERFECTLY withiin the rules to disagree with an opinion (the poster disagreed with my view that it was reckless). No violation. If I had been called stupid for that view, that would be. Some might think I should not have used that example in my post, but I wanted to illustrate that we need to stop personal attacks.

[inquiry]

A thread started with the purpose of seeing if some law or other could apply to Spingold 6♦ bid. Even though the author suggest that it was not to be taken as a vote on rather or not the voters thought the 6D bidder was guilty of cheating or not, I thought this one crossed the line regarding our rules for use on this forum.

The post has been moved to a private holding area where others (I mean the owners of BBO -- not general forum members) can decide if I was too hasty in removing it.

FAIR WARNING: Similiar polls on this topic will be grounds to have your account suspended until such a decision is made which says they are ok to post.

This post has been edited by inquiry: 2010-August-15, 22:39

[qwery_hi]

inquiry, on Aug 15 2010, 07:32 PM, said:

A thread started with the purpose of seeing if some law or other could apply to Spingold 6♦ bid. Even though the author suggest that it was not to be taken as a vote on rather or not the voters thought the 6D bidder was guilty of cheating or not, I thought this one crossed the line regarding our rules for use on this forum.

The post has been moved to a private holding area where others (I mean paid BBO members -- nor general forum members) can decide if I was too hasty in removing it.

FAIR WARNING: Similiar polls on this topic will be grounds to have your account suspended until such a decision is made which says they are ok to post.

Paid BBO members - Is there a subscription to BBO that I am unaware of?

[inquiry]

qwery_hi, on Aug 15 2010, 11:36 PM, said:

inquiry, on Aug 15 2010, 07:32 PM, said:

A thread started with the purpose of seeing if some law or other could apply to Spingold 6♦ bid.  Even though the author suggest that it was not to be taken as a vote on rather or not the voters thought the 6D bidder was guilty of cheating or not, I thought this one crossed the line regarding our rules for use on this forum.

The post has been moved to a private holding area where others (I mean paid BBO members -- nor general forum members) can decide if I was too hasty in removing it. 

FAIR WARNING: Similiar polls on this topic will be grounds to have your account suspended until such a decision is made which says they are ok to post.

Paid BBO members - Is there a subscription to BBO that I am unaware of?

No, poor choice of words...

I meant the fellows who own the site... let me change it to "owners"...

[mrdct]

inquiry, on Aug 16 2010, 01:32 PM, said:

A thread started with the purpose of seeing if some law or other could apply to Spingold 6♦ bid.  Even though the author suggest that it was not to be taken as a vote on rather or not the voters thought the 6D bidder was guilty of cheating or not, I thought this one crossed the line regarding our rules for use on this forum.

The post has been moved to a private holding area where others (I mean the owners of BBO -- not general forum members) can decide if I was too hasty in removing it. 

FAIR WARNING: Similiar polls on this topic will be grounds to have your account suspended until such a decision is made which says they are ok to post.

Well I must say, as the offending thread starter, that I'm quite surprised by this action. I made the poll quite clear that I was solely looking at the 85A1 issue which, ironically, was where Justin started the original topic claiming that the laws need to be changed. So many posts are going on about the potential cheating issue, and are seriously confused about the standard of proof required under the laws, where the first point that needs to be resolved is whether it's an adjustment for UI hand.

Fred himself has gone on record saying:

Quote

I have personally witnessed several "top experts" express "6D not possible without UI" when they were told about this hand. I have not witnessed any "top experts" express a contrary view.

All I was trying to do was examine whether this view on the UI is shared amongst the BBO forum posters.

Anyway, I'll defer to the BBO owners but please don't suspend me. As far as I'm aware this is first time I have ever had a post on any forum (including pinball, health, accounting, cricket and bridge) moderated!

[inquiry]

Deleted an entire post in the rate this decision thread. The post was one sentence fragment long, and used a spelling of the F-word that bypassed the spell checker. Since it was a direct F-word "you" to a quoted person, even bypassing the spell checker would have gotten the post deleted.

As there was nothing left of the post after editing, the entire post was deleted.

[uday]

Deleted a series of cloned posts (single perp).

[inquiry]

Edited out the TD name in the "Fairly ridiculous TD ruling on BBO..." thread, despite the fact that it was way more than "fairly", I would say that it was amazingly ridiculous.

We do not, however, allow the "attack" of people not here to defend their position (yes, I saw the footnote that it was "ok" to post it with the director, but still, I am going to call this as against the rules).

[inquiry]

A post was moved to a more approriate forum, and a post in reply to that thread was edited to remove content that was no longer relative since the post had been moved to the appropriate place.