ECF Code of Conduct

[Carl Hibbard]

Whether such a thing could be done as a subforum of this forum, maybe, but it should really be independent and separate, ideally under the ECF domain name. If they have the resources for that, great. If not, then they don't.

You end up with a no comments Giddins blog just with an ECF banner on it

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Whether such a thing could be done as a subforum of this forum, maybe, but it should really be independent and separate, ideally under the ECF domain name. If they have the resources for that, great. If not, then they don't.

You end up with a no comments Giddins blog just with an ECF banner on it

If they (the ECF) don't have the resources to moderate such a forum, yes, that is what you get, but if you moderate before posts appear (you would have to, really), then the workload can be less. One of the tricky things about this forum is that moderation is done after the fact. That is why it would never be suitable as an official site. Out of interest, is it possible to set up a subforum of this site so that it can have posts appear with an "awaiting moderation" tag and the body of the message not visible? (Psychologically, some people are far less likely to fire off an intemperate response if they know it will take hours to become visible).

[IanDavis]

The problem is that if you moderate before people post, the moderator(s) get(s) bored.

If people would just censor or ignore the idiots/people who annoy them, then we wouldn't have problems. Sadly though, people don't like doing that. They like to tell people exactly what they think of them, to prove that they are right, to thrust their Elo in the opponent's face. Well, that's human nature, isn't it?

Is Steve Giddins still posting?

[Roger de Coverly]

Is Steve Giddins still posting?

Steve Giddins doesn't post here, although he did to the atticus forum which preceded it. To judge from the insulting name he uses for the forum owner, he fears, perhaps rightly, that any words of wisdom or "satire" would be censored by Carl or Jack.

[Roger de Coverly]

If they (the ECF) don't have the resources to moderate such a forum, yes, that is what you get, but if you moderate before posts appear (you would have to, really), then the workload can be less.

I don't know what workload moderating the Streatham blog causes to that writers' collective, but the several dozen posts typical of a day here would exceed it. That's why you know who doesn't allow comments, the workload of deleting opinions by everyone who disagreed with him was too onerous.

[Carl Hibbard]

Whether such a thing could be done as a subforum of this forum, maybe, but it should really be independent and separate, ideally under the ECF domain name. If they have the resources for that, great. If not, then they don't.

You end up with a no comments Giddins blog just with an ECF banner on it

If they (the ECF) don't have the resources to moderate such a forum, yes, that is what you get, but if you moderate before posts appear (you would have to, really), then the workload can be less. One of the tricky things about this forum is that moderation is done after the fact. That is why it would never be suitable as an official site. Out of interest, is it possible to set up a subforum of this site so that it can have posts appear with an "awaiting moderation" tag and the body of the message not visible? (Psychologically, some people are far less likely to fire off an intemperate response if they know it will take hours to become visible).

It might be possible to setup but would be too much hassle to run

[JustinHorton]

I have been officially asked by the ECF in the past to close this forum

Good Lord.

I don't know what workload moderating the Streatham blog causes to that writers' collective

It's not a huge workload, but of course the problem is that none of us are connected to the internet all day and so sometimes it takes hours (or occasionally more) for us to approve comments. Clearly in that situation you can't usually have a busy discussion.

[Chris Rice]

I don't think its the moderator's job to sanitise forum posts unless its obvious what is being posted is going to cause offence or lead to legal problems etc. The moderator's job should be to come in when things get heated, something akin to a boxing referee pulling opponent's apart and telling them to "Calm down, calm down" in a thick Scouse accent. Especially when there is a bout of name calling. In this regard I therefore applaud Carl's decision to take down Martin Regan's post for making fun of Mr Burke's name but believe he should refrain from calling Steve Giddins a "pipsqueak". Its obvious that most people on the forum think that Carl does a good job despite tremendous pressure at times and one wouldn't want to see him lose credibility by indulging in this kind of behaviour.

[JustinHorton]

This was the Code which was set up to deal with any future CJs, as para 2.5 surely makes abundantly clear.

Although, if so, it's a somewhat wrong-end.of.the-telescope approach, since among the problems with CJ was that he was manifestly unwilling to adhere to rules and guidelines and by and large it was not insisted that he do so.

You know, I can see the point of some kind of a Code of Conduct relating to ECF officials when they are actually carrying out official business (which is not to say I necessarily agree with it) but really, we are talking about an organisation staffed by amateurs and run on goodwill. Is it not excessive to try and bind those officials when they are not actually carrying out official business? People really ought to familiarise themselves with the concept of people speaking or writing in a personal capacity.

[Roger de Coverly]

Is it not excessive to try and bind those officials when they are not actually carrying out official business?

The postings complained about were arguably at least semi official. The ECF directors made what was viewed by a number of posters as an ill thought decision to introduce charges for ungraded events to appear on the ECF calendar. In his role as acting Director of Marketing, Sean was attempting to defend this and the subsequent division of the calendar into three parts, the point being that the ECF website falls under Marketing on content decisions.

There had already been a clash with the complainant as to whether events principally in Yorkshire should be graded on a members only basis.

The ECF has a choice really. If it refuses to respond when offered a right of reply, whatever message it wishes to convey will not be presented.

[Roger de Coverly]

but believe he should refrain from calling Steve Giddins a "pipsqueak".

There's an issue of symmetry. The blogger in question regards Carl as a censor, because perhaps rightly, he realises that the level of insulting writing that he indulges himself on his exclusive blog would not be tolerated on this forum. Perhaps we should ask that Malcolm Pein applies an ECF style Code of Conduct to writers on his magazine.

[Chris Rice]

I can see why you would say that being one of his favourite targets but there is no issue of symmetry. Steve Giddins posts a blog outside this forum and is not a member of the ECF so cannot be held to account by the ECF. Its the behaviour and conduct of individuals within the ECF forum that's in question here and name calling can't be condoned, like you seem to be suggesting, even if it is provoked, because at the end of the day it accomplishes nothing and just inflames the situation. I hope you can appreciate that.
Although IMO clearly irrelevant whether Steve can be held to account by Malcolm Pein is up to Malcolm Pein I guess. Can't think why Malcolm would do anything though as Steve's articles are always entertaining, interesting, often controversial, well sourced and researched which is why so many people read them and flock to his blog on a daily basis in the first place.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

I can see why you would say that being one of his favourite targets but there is no issue of symmetry. Steve Giddins posts a blog outside this forum and is not a member of the ECF so cannot be held to account by the ECF. Its the behaviour and conduct of individuals within the ECF forum that's in question here and name calling can't be condoned, like you seem to be suggesting, even if it is provoked, because at the end of the day it accomplishes nothing and just inflames the situation. I hope you can appreciate that.

I agree absolutely that name-calling is not justified even if provoked, but part of what you say appears to be a misunderstanding, even if a common one. This is not the ECF Forum. It used to be (I think, not sure what the exact name was) but became the English Chess Forum and separate from the ECF. There are links somewhere to the history behind all that. One is here:

http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4589

There will be some other threads as well.

[Roger de Coverly]

Its the behaviour and conduct of individuals within the ECF forum that's in question here and name calling can't be condoned, like you seem to be suggesting, even if it is provoked, because at the end of the day it accomplishes nothing and just inflames the situation.

I hope you are aware this forum has as much to do with the ECF as the blog in question. In its inception it was an official ECF forum, but was disowned and set free by the ECF several years ago. So the applicable rules are those imposed by Carl, the forum owner, and those such as Jack who assist with moderation.

[Chris Rice]

Of course ECForum rather than ECF Forum. Clearly this is a more significant issue than name calling and ECF Codes of Conduct, what was I thinking?