Somebody get the popcorn!
Don't Criticize the chess.com Columnists... or else.
Sort:
davidegpc wrote:
However, growth has been shown in countries and institutions where people can have opinions.
This isn't really true, how fast is China growing? how fast is the US growing? the UK? France?
This just keeps getting better. Along with the 1st Amendment you have now dragged into your argument:
The Americans With Disibilities Act; the
Equal Employment Opportunity Act; and the
Civil Rights Act.
None of which are deemed "Inalienable Rights" - all of which are codified law.
More popcorn! I need more popcorn!
alright, as an example of what can get moderated, the following two comments are on the borderline:
Now, if you are not a troll, just give the opinion on the topic, not writing infantile comments which just show how you will never reach adulthood.
(more so)
If you want to live in that kind of world, hey England still has king/queen, go back there, since maybe it is not clear, historically to you, why someone came to America.
(less so)
in both cases the person being spoken to was just contributing to the discussion, not out to [verbally] "hurt" other forum users. there was no need to attack them instead of their arguments. both comments are aggressive and unkind; to both writers, i'm asking you *not* to continue in this vein. thanks.
I've always found the censorship fairly transparent here. Erik, David, et al. have never tried to hide the fact that they moderate to maintain a certain environment.
From what I understand, this is supposed to be a family-safe and friendly community, and furthermore, if you click on the legal link at the bottom of the page(http://www.chess.com/legal.html#termsofservice) and scroll down to Member Conduct, they very clearly define what is and is not acceptable within the judgement of moderators and staff.
I don't think this even begins to qualify as impairment on freedom of speech, as you must agree to their TOS(Terms of Service) to create your account, and there is no true constraint on one's ability to express themselves.
I question how many people in this thread that talk about being from the US and fighting for freedom/liberty/etc have done so personally. I served in the military recently and it's constantly a shock to me how much leeway is given in ordinary life vs. the expectations and restrictions imposed when serving. Perhaps voluntarily giving up one's liberty for some (arguably) greater good would provide enough perspective to make this entire discussion as preposterous as it seems to me.
Finally, I think there are better ways for both parties to handle this situation. I realize that time does not permit messaging every single person who has a post removed, however, it should be a priority because it will either help the member correct any offensive behavior or it will start a basis for justifying more severe action on repeated offenses. As far as members go, I would think it is prudent to start a dialogue with IM Silman, if that is who removed the post, to see why he did, and try to resolve the issue or come to a mutual understanding.
Perhaps I'm just wasting my time, but I'm both amused and outraged that a comment in an article on a chess website has parallels being drawn with things like Soviet state censorship.
@ dpruess (David) - Are you referring to me?
@ Gambitking - Are you asking for a discussion on morality?
@ trysts - It's better with popcorn (a little early for Ketel One)
@ ReasonableDoubt - +1
@ Enlamar - +1
The entire argument given by those who support the OP's position (including the OP) is beyond specious - it's ludicrous. It's just begging to be derided. And whom amongst us can forego that sort of fun.
(this will probably get me a warning)
Benkobaby wrote:
@ dpruess (David) - Are you referring to me?
no, i wasn't. you weren't the author of either of the two snippets i quoted.
@ dpruess - Doh! I misread your post.
davidegpc wrote:
Silman has been shown wrong by more than a user, and he deleted their comments, instead of accepting the criticism, and growing.
If you want to live in that kind of world, hey England still has king/queen, go back there, since maybe it is not clear, historically to you, why someone came to America.
Well, we do still have a Queen, but in terms of civil liberties, I am happy to report that considerable progress has been made since 1620. It’s safe to come back.
David: here is a simple question. Why you are not consistent? Look, it is impossible to discuss some serious chess in the forums. Any thread dealing with chess is quickly filled up with personal attacks and trolling posts. Just compare with chesspub to see the difference.
To be clear: I have absolutely no objection that Silman or you or erik or someone else deleted a comment. I don't even have to read that comment, I know it must have been silly. And unrelated to chess. I would only love to see this policy implemented consistently. Those who want to discuss childish things can do so in the "off-topic" category.
daud2012 wrote:
DxN wrote:
Well, seems like a lot of people overreact and misinterpret the acid humor of Mr.Silman. For me, he is one of the best columnists I ever read.
Exccelent posts by Mr.David Pruess.
@Benko, I agree with you about #40
It seems you have problems to identify what the topic is. Likely you are a troll who doesn't really care about freedom of speech or censorship, and that is evident from the country in which you live.
But let's see if you are not a troll:
Here selfmate wrote because Silman, who cannot accept an honest criticism, censored his posts without taking the responsibility for it or say why.
Of course, if we would live in Romania, or other former communist countries, we wouldn't understand what Freedom of speech is, but since Silman is American, I am and fought against Communism and totalitarian regimes, and other who commented are also belonging to democracies, it is not acceptable to be censored for an OPINION. While of course it is understandable to censor those who offend uselessly, scream fire in a theater, and all the other forms of misuse of freedom of speech which have been dealt with by the Supreme Court over the years.
Now, if you are not a troll, just give the opinion on the topic, not writing infantile comments which just show how you will never reach adulthood.
Well, judging someone after the country he lives in and speaking after, in the same post, about infantile comments seems so funny 
BTW, taken into consideration your age, I can hardly see how you fought against communism from Europe ... were you acting as a disguised CIA agent or something from kindergarten to high school ? [
please do not ban me or I will invoke daud2012's freedom of speech ]
"[please do not ban me or I will invoke the freedom of speach ]"
It would help if you could spell speech
corrected, thanks
Silman wrote:
He deleted your post? How dare he!? I say we flay him ... flay him alive!! Or, you could write a letter to him and ask him what's up with his happy trigger (delete) finger.
Don't you filleted?
The Respondents rest you Honour ... and ask that the matter be summarily dismissed "with prejudice". We also humbly submit that the Applicant be required to pay costs.
Benkobaby wrote:
Somebody get the popcorn!
Indeed!
Let him eat cake!
Well, seems like a lot of people overreact and misinterpret the acid humor of Mr.Silman. For me, he is one of the best columnists I ever read.
Exccelent posts by Mr.David Pruess.
@Benko, I agree with you about #40