Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 EVIL INC wrote:
As noted, Not a single person here cares if they are disagreed with. Differences of opinion are not even art of the equation. what IS being discussed is the behavior of the people who are disagreeing.
A poster can disagree with someone by just making a post that shows their opinion. Anyone who reads both posts will plainly be able to see the difference of opinion and the 2 separate people whose opinions differ do not need to even interact at all.
What we are talking about is the impolite and rude confrontations and baiting, sniping and so forth which break rule #1 of the site itself (or combinations f the rules including spam by posting insulting pictures and other non-topic posts). THIS is what needs to be addressed. Just because the one breaking the rules shares the same opinion as the mod on whatever gaming issue is being "discussed" should not mean that the person breaking rule #1 should get away with the behavior. Nor should it mean that when the person who holds the differing opinion on the gaming issue and is actually following the rules mentions that he thinks the behavior breaks rule #1 have action taken against him for politely posting his opinion on that separate topic while the instigator gets off scott free chalking up another successful campaign.

Examples?

With links?

Forgive me, but you've saddled yourself with an extraordinary burden of proof in these matters for me since you accused someone of posting sexually explicit language because they said something sucked (as in "not very good")

 Azreal13 wrote:

 EVIL INC wrote:
As noted, Not a single person here cares if they are disagreed with. Differences of opinion are not even art of the equation. what IS being discussed is the behavior of the people who are disagreeing.
A poster can disagree with someone by just making a post that shows their opinion. Anyone who reads both posts will plainly be able to see the difference of opinion and the 2 separate people whose opinions differ do not need to even interact at all.
What we are talking about is the impolite and rude confrontations and baiting, sniping and so forth which break rule #1 of the site itself (or combinations f the rules including spam by posting insulting pictures and other non-topic posts). THIS is what needs to be addressed. Just because the one breaking the rules shares the same opinion as the mod on whatever gaming issue is being "discussed" should not mean that the person breaking rule #1 should get away with the behavior. Nor should it mean that when the person who holds the differing opinion on the gaming issue and is actually following the rules mentions that he thinks the behavior breaks rule #1 have action taken against him for politely posting his opinion on that separate topic while the instigator gets off scott free chalking up another successful campaign.

Examples?

With links?

Forgive me, but you've saddled yourself with an extraordinary burden of proof in these matters for me since you accused someone of posting sexually explicit language because they said something sucked (as in "not very good")

Agreed. What few bad examples I've seen were quickly dealt with by the mods.

 EVIL INC wrote:
A quote from someone else earlier that is relevant.

 RunicFIN wrote:
( for reasons someone will surely want me to list after this post while simultaneously being completely aware of them. )

if you want listings of links to threads where poor behavior has been exhibited or where people have broken rules over say, for the last five years, you are simply going to have to search through them yourself. I am simply not going to do that sort of work and sifting. Your fully aware of it and if by some miricle you have not seen it or are unaware of it and honestly do not believe it has occurred (lol), then dont believe it.
We are discussing this as a general topic, not listing details and naming names. Besides thread necromancy is against the rules and I have gone this many years without breaking them. I'm not going to start now.

You don't need to post in a thread to do a link to it. Its as simple as Copy-paste the URL.

And yes, you are the one claiming that these threads and posts exist. You'll need to provide a link to them, burden of proof is on you.

You claim he is "fully aware" of these threads. Again, what proof do you have of this?

 EVIL INC wrote:
As noted, Not a single person here cares if they are disagreed with. Differences of opinion are not even art of the equation. what IS being discussed is the behavior of the people who are disagreeing.
A poster can disagree with someone by just making a post that shows their opinion. Anyone who reads both posts will plainly be able to see the difference of opinion and the 2 separate people whose opinions differ do not need to even interact at all.
What we are talking about is the impolite and rude confrontations and baiting, sniping and so forth which break rule #1 of the site itself (or combinations f the rules including spam by posting insulting pictures and other non-topic posts). THIS is what needs to be addressed. Just because the one breaking the rules shares the same opinion as the mod on whatever gaming issue is being "discussed" should not mean that the person breaking rule #1 should get away with the behavior. Nor should it mean that when the person who holds the differing opinion on the gaming issue and is actually following the rules mentions that he thinks the behavior breaks rule #1 have action taken against him for politely posting his opinion on that separate topic while the instigator gets off scott free chalking up another successful campaign.

 EVIL INC wrote:
A quote from someone else earlier that is relevant.

 RunicFIN wrote:
( for reasons someone will surely want me to list after this post while simultaneously being completely aware of them. )

if you want listings of links to threads where poor behavior has been exhibited or where people have broken rules over say, for the last five years, you are simply going to have to search through them yourself. I am simply not going to do that sort of work and sifting. Your fully aware of it and if by some miricle you have not seen it or are unaware of it and honestly do not believe it has occurred (lol), then dont believe it.
We are discussing this as a general topic, not listing details and naming names. Besides thread necromancy is against the rules and I have gone this many years without breaking them. I'm not going to start now.

Oh, this old gem again, and once more wrapped in the ludicrous idea that by providing evidence, you'll be breaking rules.

This is the second thread where I've personally (I'm not sure how many time's it's happened in total) seen you called upon to back up your claims, and you fail to deliver, the first being because it'd be "impolite to call them [the posters asking for proof] stupid" and "[I'm] Not going to break the rules by being so impolite as to treat them like they are unable to do so [find the evidence themselves] and [I'm] not going to spam the thread with hundreds (or even thousands) of links"--these are direct quotes, and unlike EVIL I am more than happy to provide links to the posts they came from on request, as well as the thread they were in, to provide context (that I believe unnecessary, as the subject EVIL was refusing to back-up his views on doesn't particularly matter, only the fact that he is consistent with his behaviour of dodging the burden of proof). Your repeated lack of willingness to back up your claims ended in a public warning (as above, proof available on request). Are you absolutely sure that you willingly want to repeat this? Because you really cannot complain if it happens again.

Not sure if it's been brought up OP, but there is an ignore button on Dakka.

You can put people you don't think you'll be able to have a civil discussion with on ignore.

To be fair, it has gotten better lately and Alpharius, I give you guys props on that. I have hit the yellow triangle more so and seen discreet action taken. of course, being "outside", i have only seen posts disappear or red letter editing without know what was done to prevent further behavior but That is not my concern. I have been glad to see something was done.
I think it is on the right track but these things take time and as you said, you cant be everywhere all the time.

For the OP, I think this is likely part of the issue with the larger forums. The mods /admins are so outnumbered by members that stuff falls through the cracks. It could be that a smaller "fireside chat" community would be preferable for your wife. If she doesnt want to "participate" in the larger ones, she may still want to occasionally lurk though. Even if just to pick up competative tips through reading or rules clarifications. She wouldnt need to post or interact to do those things and they are things she might not get as well in the smaller communities.

Oh, and jreilly89, I have provided proof with a link earlier in the thread. This tip is not directed at you but for anyone who misses something in a thread. It helps to actually read the entirety of the posts within a thread instead of just skimming the high points to pick out the parts you want to see.

 EVIL INC wrote:
To be fair, it has gotten better lately and Alpharius, I give you guys props on that. I have hit the yellow triangle more so and seen discreet action taken. of course, being "outside", i have only seen posts disappear or red letter editing without know what was done to prevent further behavior but That is not my concern. I have been glad to see something was done.
I think it is on the right track but these things take time and as you said, you cant be everywhere all the time.

For the OP, I think this is likely part of the issue with the larger forums. The mods /admins are so outnumbered by members that stuff falls through the cracks. It could be that a smaller "fireside chat" community would be preferable for your wife. If she doesnt want to "participate" in the larger ones, she may still want to occasionally lurk though. Even if just to pick up competative tips through reading or rules clarifications. She wouldnt need to post or interact to do those things and they are things she might not get as well in the smaller communities.

So yet again, you fail to provide proof.

 SilverDevilfish wrote:
Not sure if it's been brought up OP, but there is an ignore button on Dakka.

You can put people you don't think you'll be able to have a civil discussion with on ignore.

This is, of course, excellent advice as well!

Sadly, I forgot to mention it - but thank you SilverDevilfish for bringing it up!

office_waaagh wrote:
"what if they think I'm a poser or a 'fake geek girl'?"

But this does not exists. There are no “real geek girl” and “fake geek girl”. There are women that know and loves geeky stuff, women that are interested in geeky stuff but do not already knows them well (which, incidentally, is a great occasion to help them discover what we are passionate about, so this is a great thing) and everything in-between.

office_waaagh wrote:
"what if this is where they come to get away from their wives/girlfriends and I'm spoiling their safe place for them?"

Wives? Girlfriends? Tell her we are all virgins that live in their parents basement !
…
Okay, maybe there is no need to tell her .

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

office_waaagh wrote:
"what if they think I'm a poser or a 'fake geek girl'?"

But this does not exists. There are no “real geek girl” and “fake geek girl”. There are women that know and loves geeky stuff, women that are interested in geeky stuff but do not already knows them well (which, incidentally, is a great occasion to help them discover what we are passionate about, so this is a great thing) and everything in-between.

office_waaagh wrote:
"what if this is where they come to get away from their wives/girlfriends and I'm spoiling their safe place for them?"

Wives? Girlfriends? Tell her we are all virgins that live in their parents basement !
…
Okay, maybe there is no need to tell her .

That French banner you have makes me automatically assume you are an amazing painter since all of the GD France stuff used to blow everything else out of the water!

So you've got that going for you, which is nice.

I actually do not live in my parents' basement, and I am kind of not really completely virgin anymore, if that was what you meant .
I am an okay/average painter.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I actually do not live in my parents' basement, and I am kind of not really completely virgin anymore, if that was what you meant .
I am an okay/average painter.

Only the French would feel the need to specify a partial loss of virginity :p

What do you mean partial?
[edit]Actually, I think this is a discussion best kept to PM.[/edit]

The thread has held for 6 pages before ending up with partial virginity. Not bad, Dakka, not bad. We're pretty nice people in here.

At which point, it's probably about time for us all to move on. At least partially.