From: Pieter Stouten <pieter.stouten <at> DUPONTMERCK <dot> COM>
Date: 24 may 1998
Subject: Non-shogi-related postings revisited once more

Dear SHOGI-L members,

This mail is not about shogi per se, but I ask that you bear with me for a
moment. On several occasions I have indicated that SHOGI-L postings should
meet two criteria: they must not be ad-hominem attacks and they must be
shogi-related. This can be stretched quite a bit, but in my opinion many of
Sam Sloan's posting either partially or completely violate these operating
principles.

Nobody can deny Sam his right to express his opinions and his very popular
web pages prove that he reaches a large audience. I myself particularly
enjoyed his adventures in Afghanistan. However, SHOGI-L is a forum for
discussing shogi and not a place for Sam to blow off steam or air his
frustrations.

Deciding when a posting is non-shogi-related or contains ad-hominem attacks
is subjective. I apparently have failed to make clear to Sam where the
dividing line between violating and non-violating contributions lies
(although I have not had that problem with anybody else in the 8 years I
run SHOGI-L). It is also possible that Sam does not care what the rules of
SHOGI-L stipulate. Either way, I don't think his most recent postings
belong on SHOGI-L and if he continues to ignore the rules (that, indeed, I
have set), I will remove him from the subscribers list. This is not a
thread, I am merely indicating the consequences of continued violation of
the rules. Losing Sam would be a pity, because he adds colour to the list
and (parts of) some of his postings are relevant to shogi fans.

I will not defend myself to the allegations in Sam's posting. I believe
(and can demonstrate) that most of them are factually untrue, but everybody
on SHOGI-L is free to form their own opinion. As pointed out by Sam, I once
did cut a discussion about the rules of shogi off. Ensuing e-mails from
several SHOGI-L members showed that that was an error in judgement, which I
frankly admitted. Apart from that one incident, I have only objected to
postings that (in my opinion) clearly violated one of the two SHOGI-L rules.

Sam mentions that I have often said that my opinions "are merely advisory
only." My opinion is not advisory. I decide when a posting violates one of
the two SHOGI-L rules. I can sollicit other opinions, and have done so in
the past, but I am responsible for the final decision. Typically, violating
the rules has no consequences for the perpetrator because usually they
adhere to the rules when I point the violations out to them. In Sam's case
that is unfortunately not true. I don't want to be moderator, but I will
remove from SHOGI-L people who time and time again violate the (few and
lenient) rules. Probably a superfluous remark, but this entire issue is not
about censorship. I have no problems with dissenting opinions on SHOGI-L or
anywhere else. SHOGI-L, however, is a list devoted to shogi. It has two
rules. If these rules are broken, action may be taken by the person running
the list, regardless of who that person is.

Having said all of that, if the majority of SHOGI-L disagrees with the way
SHOGI-L is run, I would be more than happy to let someone else be in charge
of the day-to-day operation of SHOGI-L. Volunteers are welcome.

Sorry for the lengthy posting and thanks for listening.

All the best,

Pieter Stouten
pieter.stouten <at> dupontmerck <dot> com