Recently, the privilege of discussing religious and political topics has been called into question by this site's owner. Regardless of the debate, or lack of debate, people who're voting in that thread seem pretty evenly split on the issue. It is my belief that shutting down the political and religious threads is a bad idea for the reasons I have already posted in the aforementioned thread. But I also believe that if discussions about religion and politics are banned, or rather if the mods attempt to ban them, the rest of OT is not that far behind.
As things stand, there is no way for non-Mods to know why Yakface posted that thread. Whether he intends to act or whether the response to the thread will affect his decision in case he does act are question marks. But I urge you, as regular posters in OT, to make your voices heard regardless. If you support OT as a place to discuss damn near anything--while respecting Dakka's rather lenient rules--then please vote to keep discussions of religion and politics possible and PLEASE post why you think we need to be able to discuss what we want. If you find this thread and want to vote in favor of the prospective ban on discussions involving religion or politics, I can't stop you. But I would ask that you read the arguments for keeping them before you click the 'No' button. I would also ask, if you ultimately support a prospective ban, to post why that is the case.
In the meantime--especially if such a ban is on Yakface's and the mods' minds--I hope we can keep things civil here and actually ratchet up the civility a bit. Let's avoid the kind of immaturity that we are being accused of by over one quarter of the people who have voted in Yakface's thread at this point. (And if you read that thread, you will see that it is no coincidence that insaniak locked the Obama thread.) Let's keep in mind that Russ's version of Dakka did not have an OT and that being able to discuss non-wargaming topics on Dakka is indeed a privilege and not a right. I'm not advocating that we stop posting about controversial topics, just that we give each other the benefit of the doubt in the discussion. Read what other people have posted in the thread before weighing in yourself. Re-read your posts before submitting and try to consider how others involved in the discussion will read them. Consider that you may not convince other people to think as you do and instead aspire to clearly explain your ideas. When you get pissed, give yourself time to cool down before responding. Never forget Dakka's number one rule. I'm just as guilty as anyone of not doing these things but it's time to turn it around and prove that
(1) OT is a useful part of Dakka,
(2) OT is an important part of Dakka, and
(3) OT is NOT a necessarily disruptive part of Dakka.
Don't ban areas of discussion. Ban specific people from discussing them. Some wargamers here like to discuss politics and current events while thinking that the repeated black metal and "Boy howdy doesn't twilight suck" threads are vacuous and annoying. Hence the even split.
Just get rid of the people that can't keep their composure, getting rid of the discussions themselves is just a draconian and frankly confusing idea that I've never seen attempted in a forum before. Not to name names, but if posters who act similar to fateweaver and the green git were simply disallowed from discussing politics the threads themselves would be conducted far more civilly.
Thanks, Shadowbrand. But to be fair to those who I disagree with on this subject, the poll is only about banning political and religious threads. Theoretically, you would still be able to post on Black Metal. Now the political messages of its greatest and most controversial exponents would be banned. And any discussion of Odinism or church burning would also be banned. But you could start a thread asking people to list their favorite Black Metal bands or songs. Again, in the interest of fairness, let me emphasize that the current poll/discussion (whatever it may result in) is not about chucking OT altogether. I know that at least one Mod seems to favor that idea but I only hypothesize that the ultimate result of a ban on political and religious discussions will ultimately lead to the end of OT or its totally uselessness, which amounts to the same thing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
ShumaGorath wrote:Just get rid of the people that can't keep their composure, getting rid of the discussions themselves is just a draconian and frankly confusing idea that I've never seen attempted in a forum before.
Agreed that the measure is draconian. If not draconian on its face then assuredly necessarily draconian in its practice. Hence my belief that such a ban would climax in the demise of OT overall one way or another. I agree wholeheartedly that we need to deal with the people and not with the topics. But the counterargument is that some mods, who knows if its a majority or only one person, think that this is a waste of time.
Agreed that the measure is draconian. If not draconian on its face then assuredly necessarily draconian in its practice. Hence my belief that such a ban would climax in the demise of OT overall one way or another. I agree wholeheartedly that we need to deal with the people and not with the topics. But the counterargument is that some mods, who knows if its a majority or only one person, think that this is a waste of time.
Then whats the point of this discussion at all? If it's just debate before the gods come down from heaven, then so be it. In all honesty I like the off topic section because it allows me specifically to discuss current events and politics. It keeps me sharp. Without those threads this will just be a painful waste of space on the forum.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nurglitch wrote:I was about to say, what if you're in favour of burning the Off-Topic Forum so that Dakka Dakka can escape its black hole of suck?
That won't happen until you ban the threads about games workshops codex creep and model overpowering to boost sales. Then kick away half the posters on the list discussion areas. Lets be real here, dakka kind of has the reputation as a whiners club, killing the anything forum isn't going to solve it's issues.
Shadowbrand wrote:Yea, but isn't the plan to take the whole OT away? Or am I missing something here. -scratches head-
As I said, I have no idea what the plan is or whether there is any plan at all. But I think it is important to take Yakface's thread seriously, especially as so many people are not committed to having OT one way or the other.
Nurglitch wrote:I was about to say, what if you're in favour of burning the Off-Topic Forum so that Dakka Dakka can escape its black hole of suck?
Do you mean OT's "black hole of suck" or do you think OT is really a burden on the rest of Dakka?
ShumaGorath wrote:Then whats the point of this discussion at all? If it's just debate before the gods come down from heaven, then so be it. In all honesty I like the off topic section because it allows me specifically to discuss current events and politics. It keeps me sharp. Without those threads this will just be a painful waste of space on the forum.
I'm not totally sure what you mean. If you mean that Yakface and the Mods will decide whatever they decide, well I can't do much about that except to try and show them that these kind of discussions serve a purpose here--like, to paraphrase you, keeping OT worthwhile. Could you extrapolate a bit?
Manchu wrote: Let's avoid the kind of immaturity that we are being accused of by over one quarter of the people who have voted in Yakface's thread at this point. (And if you read that thread, you will see that it is no coincidence that insaniak locked the Obama thread.)
There is no conspiracy here. The thread generated a bucketload of alerts, and I was the mod who was online at the time.
But yes, people behaving in a civil fashion would do far more to secure these discussions' future than any number of votes in a poll.
I'm not totally sure what you mean. If you mean that Yakface and the Mods will decide whatever they decide, well I can't do much about that except to try and show them that these kind of discussions serve a purpose here--like, to paraphrase you, keeping OT worthwhile. Could you extrapolate a bit?
Sure. I enjoy discussing current events, politics, and the odd science article. I also enjoy the news and rumors forum and the P&M blogs. During light spells of the news cycle though I likely wouldn't even go to this site if the OT forum wasn't here. I can get the whiny reactionary rhetoric you get in news on BOLS (and all the same news) and you can get modeling blogs in essentially every competitors website. The OT community is one I'm currently comfortable in, even if I wish the banhammer was thrown around a bit more often.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
insaniak wrote:
Manchu wrote: Let's avoid the kind of immaturity that we are being accused of by over one quarter of the people who have voted in Yakface's thread at this point. (And if you read that thread, you will see that it is no coincidence that insaniak locked the Obama thread.)
There is no conspiracy here. The thread generated a bucketload of alerts, and I was the mod who was online at the time.
But yes, people behaving in a civil fashion would do far more to secure these discussions' future than any number of votes in a poll.
I would question than why fateweaver is still allowed to post here. You could say that this is the pot calling the kettle black, but in all seriousness, why are the forum rules not enforced more heavily on a user by user basis?
You overestimate the effect of OT. It doesn't cause hate any more than News & Rumors and the reactions some people have to anything GW/Privateer/Rackham do.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Mine was @ Cheese by the by.
ShumaGorath wrote:You could say that this is the pot calling the kettle black, but in all seriousness, why are the forum rules not enforced more heavily on a user by user basis?
I would bet that everyone on Dakka thinks at least one other user gets away with everything. But you seem to have answered your own question. If there is one thing that I am convinced of concerning Dakka Mods--and this might draw some strong criticism--it's that they do not actually play favorites. It seems to be part of the light-touch philosophy considering the rules generally. The prospective ban--what this thread is about--is a major exception to that philosophy and one more reason why it should not be put into effect.
ShumaGorath wrote: You could say that this is the pot calling the kettle black, but in all seriousness, why are the forum rules not enforced more heavily on a user by user basis?
Dakka has a set policy for dealing with users who break the rules. This focuses on pointing out where people are going wrong, and giving them the opportunity to change their ways. Permanent suspension is always an absolute last resort.
So the fact that someone has broken the rules and is still allowed to post doesn't necessarily mean that nothing has happened.
On the other hand, when a thread just goes terminally stupid and people are flinging nonsense from both sides, it's quite common for the thread to just be locked, to save the bother of having to suspend everybody. That only goes so far, however... and posters who continue to cause problems will sooner or later be dealt with.
It's worth a reminder too that breaking the rules is breaking the rules. It takes two to brawl... and 'he started it' rarely works as a defence.
Nurglitch wrote:I think that the Off-Topic forum is both a burden to the limited resources of the site, and drags the tone of the site down with it.
Do you mean that OT affects other parts of Dakka or that OT is the worst part of Dakka? I don't think that what happens in OT really has much of an effect on Dakka at large except to insulate the rest of the forum from political and religious debates.
Cheese Elemental wrote:Just kill off the OT forum, and Dakka will be a friendlier place.
That's disheartening and I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, except by zero-sum argument: there's bad faith in OT, which is part of Dakka, thus there is bad faith on Dakka; eliminate OT and you will eliminate some of the bad faith on Dakka. That's true but not very meaningful as to whether OT serves an important, useful, and/or desired function. You may mean something else entirely (I hope so) and if so, please explain.
Kanluwen wrote:You overestimate the effect of OT. It doesn't cause hate any more than News & Rumors and the reactions some people have to anything GW/Privateer/Rackham do.
Agreed. There are other spots of tension here on Dakka. Other topics are just as sore--and perennial. Eliminating OT will probably not positively affect those problems. One could argue that Mods who didn't need to bother with OT would have more time to address the latest "should your minis be painted" thread. But my counterargument has been let's get some Mods who want to keep things on an even keel here in OT or at least who don't mind doing so while the other Mods who think it's a waste of time can have more time for other parts of the site.
I...I...I...can't let you do this....please... (hon'in...hon'in...hon'in...kirenai dearou omaesan kono...nanitozo!!!....ToT)
[sorry if I called someone a woman]
Yeah, if you ban topics, do it across the board. Nothing we say here is worse than a Doom rules rant or Deff rolla rant. Do we get heated here, sure but thats why it's the off topic place. Nobody shoud go to off topic, click a Republicans suck thread then get upset at what they read. Ideas get tossed around people get pissed and then learn a thing or two. Political threads have nothing on "I came up with a new Lash list that uses plague marines and Oblits" We don't bother anyone outside of off topic. The Mods do thier jobs fine. Keep all topics open.
Its not the topics that stems the problems , rather ,
its the people that chose to make problems out of the topics.
Also , its true that OT sees problems more often , that is because the trolls / douches / jerks
know OT is more lax compared to other parts of the forum.
ShumaGorath wrote: You could say that this is the pot calling the kettle black, but in all seriousness, why are the forum rules not enforced more heavily on a user by user basis?
Dakka has a set policy for dealing with users who break the rules. This focuses on pointing out where people are going wrong, and giving them the opportunity to change their ways. Permanent suspension is always an absolute last resort.
So the fact that someone has broken the rules and is still allowed to post doesn't necessarily mean that nothing has happened.
On the other hand, when a thread just goes terminally stupid and people are flinging nonsense from both sides, it's quite common for the thread to just be locked, to save the bother of having to suspend everybody. That only goes so far, however... and posters who continue to cause problems will sooner or later be dealt with.
It's worth a reminder too that breaking the rules is breaking the rules. It takes two to brawl... and 'he started it' rarely works as a defence.
Yes, but the light touch employed by the mods in dealing with problem posters is exactly why they are now considering such a harsh response. Threads don't go awry alone, people make them do such, and it is typically the same people every time. There are a half dozen posters on this forum that probably shouldn't be allowed to post in certain topics and threads, actual use of the stated rules would decrease incidences such as the one you site, which keep in mind, basically devolved because fateweaver is an unrepentant troll and I argue with him a lot.
ShumaGorath wrote:which keep in mind, basically devolved because fateweaver is an unrepentant troll and I argue with him a lot.
I have asked the same question before , and was always given the same answer.
It takes two to tango.
To be honest if they upheld the rules more strongly I would probably get at least a month ban for being rather confrontational, but I would prefer that and come back to a forum with polite discussion to the trollfest it is now. The rules need to be upheld better. This is one of the most lax moderated public forums I've ever been on.
ShumaGorath wrote:which keep in mind, basically devolved because fateweaver is an unrepentant troll and I argue with him a lot.
I have asked the same question before , and was always given the same answer.
It takes two to tango.
To be honest if they upheld the rules more strongly I would probably get at least a month ban for being rather confrontational, but I would prefer that and come back to a forum with polite discussion to the trollfest it is now. The rules need to be upheld better. This is one of the most lax moderated public forums I've ever been on.
Yes , i told the mod before a person can feel compelled to follow a rule even if they think is stupid as long as they deem its fair if its applied to everyone with consistency.
I also told them if today you let a bad person go free due to leniency , it will show example to countless others should be able to do similar things and expect to get away with it.
And say ok , they dont get the same lenient treatment , then people would ask why? whats with the blatant biased treatment?
Manchu wrote:
LunaHound wrote:Removing OT will not change anything , period.
Its not the topics that stems the problems , rather ,
its the people that chose to make problems out of the topics.
I've been looking for a worthy sig for sometime . . .
And it does take two to tango. That's not a brush-off argument (not implying that Luna is saying it is one) but actually a very good point.
Yes , and again i must point out , it takes patience and long investigation to determine what is the root or the stem that raised the problem.
LunaHound wrote:Yes , and again i must point out , it takes patience and long investigation to determine what is the root or the stem that raised the problem.
Which, mods simply dont have the time to do.
You know that my feeling is to offer the olive branch. You can't make someone take it. But you will improve your own lot by offering it. Speaking in terms of tango: if you refuse to dance, then it's clear that only the other person is dancing.
LunaHound wrote:Yes , and again i must point out , it takes patience and long investigation to determine what is the root or the stem that raised the problem.
Which, mods simply dont have the time to do.
You know that my feeling is to offer the olive branch. You can't make someone take it. But you will improve your own lot by offering it. Speaking in terms of tango: if you refuse to dance, then it's clear that only the other person is dancing.
But what if , a gentleman came to me , politely bow and asked to take my hand , and i agreed to the dance.
5 minutes later the gentleman goes bat **** insane and start stomping on my feet?
Do i not have a say in complaining at all? Or is it like you said , too bad it takes 2 to tango and you agreed to it?
Some of us have no issue with tango , we just dont appreciate having our feet stomped on for no apparent reason.
Manchu wrote:Speaking in terms of tango: if you refuse to dance, then it's clear that only the other person is dancing.
Problem is there are some people who won't stop posting in threads or are overtly sensitive about every little thing, and then they drag the whole thread down with them. There comes a time where ignoring someone does more harm than good, or where the mods need to really step in and start really swinging the bansticks at those people.
Manchu wrote:Speaking in terms of tango: if you refuse to dance, then it's clear that only the other person is dancing.
Problem is there are some people who won't stop posting in threads or are overtly sensitive about every little thing, and then they drag the whole thread down with them. There comes a time where ignoring someone does more harm than good, or where the mods need to really step in and start really swinging the bansticks at those people.
Then i think there is one obvious solution if banning both isnt an option , and ignoring isnt working either.
Have them sit down and have a mature discussion on how to compromise to peace.
Manchu wrote:Speaking in terms of tango: if you refuse to dance, then it's clear that only the other person is dancing.
Problem is there are some people who won't stop posting in threads or are overtly sensitive about every little thing, and then they drag the whole thread down with them. There comes a time where ignoring someone does more harm than good, or where the mods need to really step in and start really swinging the bansticks at those people.
Then i think there is one obvious solution if banning both isnt an option , and ignoring isnt working either.
Have them sit down and have a mature discussion on how to compromise to peace.
Manchu wrote:Speaking in terms of tango: if you refuse to dance, then it's clear that only the other person is dancing.
Problem is there are some people who won't stop posting in threads or are overtly sensitive about every little thing, and then they drag the whole thread down with them. There comes a time where ignoring someone does more harm than good, or where the mods need to really step in and start really swinging the bansticks at those people.
Then i think there is one obvious solution if banning both isnt an option , and ignoring isnt working either.
Have them sit down and have a mature discussion on how to compromise to peace.
When is banning logically not an option?
Because banning is a last option. Whats wrong with a peaceful compromise before that last option?
Manchu wrote:Speaking in terms of tango: if you refuse to dance, then it's clear that only the other person is dancing.
Problem is there are some people who won't stop posting in threads or are overtly sensitive about every little thing, and then they drag the whole thread down with them. There comes a time where ignoring someone does more harm than good, or where the mods need to really step in and start really swinging the bansticks at those people.
Then i think there is one obvious solution if banning both isnt an option , and ignoring isnt working either.
Have them sit down and have a mature discussion on how to compromise to peace.
When is banning logically not an option?
Because banning is a last option. Whats wrong with a peaceful compromise before that last option?
And thus we're back to the problem of the soft touch.
Then... get straight to it i guess?
Tell the 2 sides , work it out , or face perma ban.
I mean if you think about it , its abit silly no? Its a forum , what have the 2 sides done to each other that is so god awful,
that they cant even attempt to compromise?
And thus we're back to the problem of the soft touch.
Then... get straight to it i guess?
Tell the 2 sides , work it out , or face perma ban.
Or just take a clear look at the culprits and judge according to situation, useless and lengthy deliberation in forum moderation is akin to lax enforcement of the rules.
And thus we're back to the problem of the soft touch.
Then... get straight to it i guess?
Tell the 2 sides , work it out , or face perma ban.
Or just take a clear look at the culprits and judge according to situation, useless and lengthy deliberation in forum moderation is akin to lax enforcement of the rules.
But no one have the sanity or vigor for such investigation.
If two people genuinely reconcile it is a better option than temporarily banning them both, which is simply pausing their fight. Permanently banning anyone, especially regulars, is not a good idea because most of the regulars contribute as much if not more good than bad to the site. Actually, IMO, they contribute about one hundred times more good than bad in most cases.
To keep up Luna's dance example: he may ask you dance, he may sweep you off your feet, but as soon as its clear he just wants to stomp your toes, you stop dancing. You do not give him the benefit of another song or two. If you do this, it will be apparent to everyone else who is in the wrong. Then let the banhammers crash. But it simply is not necessary before that point.
I don't think that OT is particularly bad lately or that it's particularly worse than YMDC on any given day. Frankly, the problem is not that OT is more lax. The problem is that while Mods are willing to trawl YMDC--because it is wargamin on-topic--they are less willing to trawl OT.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
LunaHound wrote:But no one have the sanity or vigor for such investigation.
Some people do. And you can help them by disengaging with the person you feel is flaming or trolling you as soon as you think they are doing so.
But no one have the sanity or vigor for such investigation.
I don't see why not. If a mod has read enough of a thread to determine that it needs to be locked than that same mod should have read enough of that thread to understand why. It's not had to see the point at which an argument derails into something that isn't acceptable and it's easy to tell who caused it because we all have little names attached to our posts. It's not a difficult process at all.
I'm with Manchu on this one. The OT forum and, by extension, the religeous and political threads are core to ensuring a healthy Dakka community. I heartily disagree with any notion that it should be done away with, it's one of the reasons that I joined Dakka in the first place. After browsing for a week or so I read a certain thread in the OT forum and joined up right away, because I saw what a bunch of characters you were here. I have yet to regret that decision.
Perhaps more stringent OT supervision is in order, requireing the recruitment of more Mods. I understand that you have offered yourself as a possible candidate for this. While I view myself as far too inexperienced (nay, bigoted!) for such a posistion, I have always veiwed you as a reasonable, likeable and honorable individual and think you would make a great OT Mod.
Emperors Faithful wrote:The OT forum and, by extension, the religeous and political threads are core to ensuring a healthy Dakka community.
I disagree with this statement. I'd be perfectly happy with Dakka if OT it disappeared tomorrow.
I mean, I'd have loved to post about celebrating Holocaust Day, along with reminding Polish pilots to turn on their fog lights, but we can't do that kind of thing, not even OT, because that's not how Dakka works. If you can't post snarky religious / political stuff in OT, why bother with having OT?
Emperors Faithful wrote:The OT forum and, by extension, the religeous and political threads are core to ensuring a healthy Dakka community.
I disagree with this statement. I'd be perfectly happy with Dakka if OT it disappeared tomorrow.
I mean, I'd have loved to post about celebrating Holocaust Day, along with reminding Polish pilots to turn on their fog lights, but we can't do that kind of thing, not even OT, because that's not how Dakka works. If you can't post snarky religious / political stuff in OT, why bother with having OT?
Just let it die.
This statement confuses me because you post things like that all the time in off topic.
I'm only speaking from my own personal experience here Jonno, mate. All the best discussion I've observed, if not taken part in, have been on the OT forum. It's where I see the best, and sometimes worst, of Dakka's character on topics other than constant Wargamming. I like this site so much becuase Wargamming does not dominate every single bloody aspect of it, which is enough to encourage me to come here even when I'm not doing much in regard to Wargamming.
Emperors Faithful wrote:The OT forum and, by extension, the religeous and political threads are core to ensuring a healthy Dakka community.
I disagree with this statement. I'd be perfectly happy with Dakka if OT it disappeared tomorrow.
I mean, I'd have loved to post about celebrating Holocaust Day, along with reminding Polish pilots to turn on their fog lights, but we can't do that kind of thing, not even OT, because that's not how Dakka works. If you can't post snarky religious / political stuff in OT, why bother with having OT?
Just let it die.
But snarky comments doesnt only exist in OT.
I see same people chew others throat out every day , even in the normal proper parts of dakka. Nothing is ever done because they add a " " behind what they type.
IF OT doesnt exist , the forum wont be able to easier dilute the stains of that type behavior and action.
*edit because i really should proof read before i press submit :3
And , we all know , i cant stand the ork emocons. You know how much disadvantage im at that i cant use the god mode icon of ???
LunaHound wrote:*edit because i really should proof read before i press submit :3
THIS is how we save OT!
@John: Snark is not confined to OT nor is it even most problematic in OT. As someone pointed out in Yaface's thread, bad attitudes are even worse outside of OT because that's where people go for wargaming help. If they're treated poorly in YMDC or Army Lists, that's how Dakka actually gets a bad reputation. Again, less moderation of OT might equal more moderation of YMDCIF Mods are unwilling/unable to do both. If they are indeed unwilling/unable to do both, then there are people who could take on the burden on OT leaving YMDC, et al., to them. Personally, I don't buy that not enough gets done elsewhere because of OT. I don't have any numbers to back that up but I really do think it's less a logistical problem and more a "we should never have had OT so let's just can it" situation.
JohnHwangDD wrote:I disagree with this statement. I'd be perfectly happy with Dakka if OT it disappeared tomorrow.
I mean, I'd have loved to post about celebrating Holocaust Day, along with reminding Polish pilots to turn on their fog lights, but we can't do that kind of thing, not even OT, because that's not how Dakka works. If you can't post snarky religious / political stuff in OT, why bother with having OT?
Just let it die.
The rules for the off topic forum does not let me post how I want to, therefore it should not be there. That's quite narcissistic of you, dude.
Meanwhile, I read the wargaming posts a lot more than post there. There's a lot of dudes who get in first with better answers than mine, so I'm typically happy to just read. But I will tell you you can talk about wargaming all day and never really learn anything about the person. You need to see people talk about a range of topics to really build a community, and I for one and am always much more attentive of the posts of off-topic regulars when I see them in other parts of the board.
I've also got a problem with the idea certain topics are to blame for the behaviour of members. People should be responsible for their posts, and if they can't debate an issue without getting pissy then they're at fault, not the issue.
I thought the previous discussion was to ban political threads and not OT in general.
Another forum I frequent took the decision to stop the politicing and is much better for it. The problem is that Manchu's request for mature debate ain't going to happen.
Manchu, iirc you recently had a thread which criticised the paltry lack of journalistic rigour in the media. This may itself be part of the problem, as it is what gets regurgitated on the forum, without irony or questioning the quality of the pap that has been spoonfed.
In all honesty I like the off topic section because it allows me specifically to discuss current events and politics. It keeps me sharp. Without those threads this will just be a painful waste of space on the forum.
If you want to stay sharp I cannot see how it is going to happen on a gaming forum with not much more than a lot of uninformed opining and prejudicial platitudes. There must be other places to go for well informed discussion about the state of affairs and the affairs of state.
Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:The problem is that Manchu's request for mature debate ain't going to happen.
This is simply a self-fulfilling prophecy. Everyone says, "it won't change so why should I bother to try?" and then it doesn't change so people feel validated in their bad behavior.
Manchu, iirc you recently had a thread which criticised the paltry lack of journalistic rigour in the media. This may itself be part of the problem, as it is what gets regurgitated on the forum, without irony or questioning the quality of the pap that has been spoonfed.
You'll have to remind me which one . . . But I disagree in general. I often find that OT regulars will not accept the "facts" of a news story posted here. Well, the people who agree with the news story will but those who do not will generally attack its veracity with other citations. Unless no one case, in which case the thread doesn't get posts and we have no flame problem at all.
. . . a gaming forum with not much more than a lot of uninformed opining and prejudicial platitudes . . .
C'mon Chibi, that's just bad faith. You know, I wasn't that nice to you at first but you respectfully explained yourself in spite of this and I admitted to being wrong and tried to help you out thereafter. Is it so hard to believe that other people could act this way, too?
Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:
If you want to stay sharp I cannot see how it is going to happen on a gaming forum with not much more than a lot of uninformed opining and prejudicial platitudes. There must be other places to go for well informed discussion about the state of affairs and the affairs of state.
"Affairs of state must take place before affairs of state!"
Anyway.
I think it's like going to the game store and wanting to talk about Stuff That Matters. You
want to do it there because you have some kind of bond with the people there. It's a
community, and it's nice to be able to talk about Stuff That Matters with that community.
I'm voting for Manchu...twice. It isn't the topics, it's the personalities. I noticed earlier in the POLL section that a lot of people who didn't dig the OT hardly ever post in it.
malfred wrote:I think it's like going to the game store and wanting to talk about Stuff That Matters. You
want to do it there because you have some kind of bond with the people there. It's a
community, and it's nice to be able to talk about Stuff That Matters with that community.
This is exactly the point I was trying to make in Yakface's thread, although stated here with greater eloquence. OT isn't a collective blog for flamers. People actually do care what each other think. I'm not saying every single user cares what every other single user thinks. As I have said in a previous thread, the community should learn how to deal with its own problems. That is a long term solution rather than the sweeping under the rug that this prospective ban on politics and religion would accomplish or even a closing of OT in general.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Khornholio wrote:It isn't the topics, it's the personalities.
JohnHwangDD wrote:If you can't post snarky religious / political stuff in OT, why bother with having OT?
So you're saying you'd be more than happy to see Dakka filled with aspiring-Hitlers?
Everyone loves an arguement, because fighting is human nature, but there is definately a healthly limit with which we must stick to. And right now, I see two sides; the side who thinks OT is a place for a healthly argument, and the side who wants it gone because they can't get everything. Right now I'm with the people who want it to stay. Those who want it gone, fine, you're allowed your opinion, but don't bring us down just because you can.
Since posting I reflected on what I had written.
It occured to me that there are political posts that I have not looked at, usually concerning the American Constitution. Mainly because I know diddly about it and feel there is not any more than squit that I can say. These threads for all I know are well reasoned and informative.
Secondly and sadly my experience with some other Dakka members has not been as positive as that to which you refer regarding yourself. Hence my prognosis being as gloomy as an English Summer.
I have to disagree about the self fulfilling prophecy based on the previous comment. There is a tendency for some less than mature thinking in the posts I have seen. Which may be in part at least to the personalities involved.
The thread I mentioned was the one with a poll asking if people got depressed watching the news.
For the record. I voted to remove politics from the forum, and NOT the OT forum. If Politics remains I won't be losing any sleep. I have no qualms about frank and open ebate and hearing other points of view. As I too am interested in those things that matter and would like to engage and be informed. But as indicated above there seems too little of the sort of discussion and too much uninformed comment.
Anyway sorry for the pessimistic tone Manchu. If there have been well informed and rational discussions that I have missed I apologise.
Khornholio, the reason may simply be that, like me, they try to avoid certain types of thread because of the nonsense that can take place.
Apart from which I transmogrify into a GOM! Old I can cope with, but being grumpy, no thanks!
Cheese Elemental wrote:Just kill off the OT forum, and Dakka will be a friendlier place.
That's disheartening and I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, except by zero-sum argument: there's bad faith in OT, which is part of Dakka, thus there is bad faith on Dakka; eliminate OT and you will eliminate some of the bad faith on Dakka. That's true but not very meaningful as to whether OT serves an important, useful, and/or desired function. You may mean something else entirely (I hope so) and if so, please explain.
Bah, I'm just being bitter. I've had unhappy times in the OT forum. Sure, there are plenty of good threads, but there are plenty of others that quickly dissolve into two-way trolling and heated arguments.
sebster wrote:Meanwhile, I read the wargaming posts a lot more than post there. There's a lot of dudes who get in first with better answers than mine, so I'm typically happy to just read. But I will tell you you can talk about wargaming all day and never really learn anything about the person. You need to see people talk about a range of topics to really build a community, and I for one and am always much more attentive of the posts of off-topic regulars when I see them in other parts of the board.
This is basically how I end up using Dakka, as someone else will usually have a better answer than me elsewhere in the forums. I can chime in occasionally, but of the forums I frequent, there are usually complete discussions without need of my input.
I've also got a problem with the idea certain topics are to blame for the behaviour of members. People should be responsible for their posts, and if they can't debate an issue without getting pissy then they're at fault, not the issue.
It does seem the logical option to simply avoid subjects that bring the worst of you into the forums, but I have a feeling many people simply don't spend much time thinking about that type of approach.
If the OT was scrapped I wouldn't post here anymore, in all likelihood. Like several other users, I read the other sections of the site but don't feel the need to contribute that often, although I will get around to posting pics of my Bloodaxe army at some point, honest! I would just come here to read the articles if the OT was scrapped, which I hope it isn't - the community here is the main thing that attracted me to the site, and definitely the thing which keeps me coming back. I like finding out what most of you think about random topics, and I think the OT offers a compelling insight into the minds and lives of the average wargamer.
In my personal opinion, all the MODs need to do to sort out the OT is permanently ban certain people who have no idea of how to conduct themselves in polite society, and many of the OT's problems would disappear overnight. It's that simple.
The OT is great (even though I don't read a lot of the threads in there as I am not particularly interested). I like to read varied topics when I am at work, and enjoy the fact that I can get random interest threads and some more serious debate threads in the same place as I get tips and tricks for painting and modelling.
If Dakka was models and rules only - I don't know how long I would stay or how much I would frequent it. As much as Dakka has a big modelling and painting community, part of that community is the extra formus where people can socalise "outside" of painting and modelling.
If you take that away, I am not sure how many people would stick around anything like as much as they currently do, or even at all.
And as has been said, there are a number of people who seem to get threads into trouble almost constantly. Restricting them from accessing any kind of "debate" forum will almost certainly lead to a better place for everyone else.
let me get this right- you guys won't stick around a gaming forum if it is just about gaming?
lol
Can someone please clarify - as far as I was aware the politics/religion was voted on being scrapped and not the OT furum as a whole. Yet it seems to be cropping up here that the forum is threatened.
Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:let me get this right- you guys won't stick around a gaming forum if it is just about gaming?
I would be far less inclined to spend my time here. I joined Dakka over a number of other wargaming sites because of how I saw the community and the general positive way it acted. I stayed in part because of that, and also because there was more to the community than wargaming. I joined several other wargaming sites too, but have not even visited them for ages. In part because of the community, but also in part to the fact that I have now invested myself in Dakka and don't particularly want to go anywhere else for my wargaming and social forum interaction.
I would say that about 70% of my time is spent on this forum in non-modelling sections, even if my post breakdown does not reveal this (I tend to post a fair bit in PLogs and so on, but browse and post in OT all day while I am at work). I do look at a lot of the PLogs and suchlike at work, but only because I look at them in between OT's - my work often blocks the images in the threads, so I have to wait until I am at home to look at people's stuff).
I rather infrequently look in YMDC when a topic flashes up that I am interested in. I will even more rarely post a reply in there.
If you removed part of the OT which I am interested in (the political and religous debates), you would be left with all the other threads in OT which I find rather boring for the most part. If that were the case, I would be less inclined to sit in Dakka all day, and move on somewhere else.
Eventually, something else will be banned from discussion in the OT forum; it so happens that religion and politics are two of the most heatedly debated subjects, especially when it comes to the distancing of opposite spectrum pundits and beliefs. These extreme opposites clash.
Banning the ability to post political and religious content in OT means that a bar is set. Anything reaching the fervor or venom that people can display for a subject such as politics and religion will likewise be scrutinized for ostracism from this forum.
Keep in mind that we did not get this far without the support of those who could not moderate their passions to the point of civility, but choose to step further into barbaric attacks upon one another and what they believed.
Like the analogy of a person's home; that person who owns the home can kick out offensive guests. As guests, we must respect the rules of that person's house. If not, we are not allowed back in.
That the P/R debates have now made us question the wisdom of having such debates is a testament to our own constraint.
Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:Can someone please clarify - as far as I was aware the politics/religion was voted on being scrapped and not the OT furum as a whole. Yet it seems to be cropping up here that the forum is threatened.
Which is it please?
Ah, yes. There was the poll to remove religion/political from OT discussions, and then some people feared that the rest of the OT forum would be sent with it sometime in the future.
The OT forum is for two things in my eyes; firstly it is for having a laugh with my fellow Dakkites as friends do and secondly it is for discussing things that matter (read as P&R) with my fellow Dakkites, because I feel we are a community and a community without laughter or talking about what matters is just hollow.
We are a community of enthusiasts first and foremost, wargaming is just the thing that brings us together.
To be perfectly honest with you, I come to Dakka to actually read and post about gaming. To ban politics and religion would be perfectly fine with me. If you want the site to be game themed then maybe an emphasis on gaming is not a bad thing.
I never come here looking for a discussion on Obama, abortion, the war on terrorism, or offshore drilling. It just pops up in the Recent Threads list, I get sucked in and then end up reading some rant (by a snot nosed kid that barely has the gak scraped out of his ears let alone has a firm grasp on history) and then I lose an hour because I can't let nonsense go unchallenged.
Politics and Religion have as much a place on a gaming forum as they do at a dinner party. Only boorish people bring up the topics and they are sure to incite heated discussions because most folks have their minds made up on such things already.
I rarely if EVER see the usual suspects in OT out in the gaming areas of Dakka. If P/R does get banned that will impact the gaming discussions zero and if it makes it easier on the mods it's a net gain.
I've been offline for a while, but OT is one of my favourite fora on Dakka, though in the past I've taken breaks from it.
I'm actually shocked that it upsets people enough that they want it removed! I definitely feel that I "know" the OT regulars better than posters on other fora, and to be honest, the variance in post quality is pretty much the same as the tactics and modelling threads (which I also enjoy reading).
The fact that Dakka has such a vigorous OT section is a good thing to me.
That said, if Yakface were to decide to remove OT or ban certain types of discussions, I wouldn't throw a strop. His playpen, he gets to make the rules.
ShumaGorath wrote: Not to name names, but if posters who act similar to fateweaver and the green git were simply disallowed from discussing politics the threads themselves would be conducted far more civilly.
Eventually, something else will be banned from discussion in the OT forum; it so happens that religion and politics are two of the most heatedly debated subjects, especially when it comes to the distancing of opposite spectrum pundits and beliefs. These extreme opposites clash.
Banning the ability to post political and religious content in OT means that a bar is set. Anything reaching the fervor or venom that people can display for a subject such as politics and religion will likewise be scrutinized for ostracism from this forum.
Keep in mind that we did not get this far without the support of those who could not moderate their passions to the point of civility, but choose to step further into barbaric attacks upon one another and what they believed.
Like the analogy of a person's home; that person who owns the home can kick out offensive guests. As guests, we must respect the rules of that person's house. If not, we are not allowed back in.
That the P/R debates have now made us question the wisdom of having such debates is a testament to our own constraint.
The difficulty of course is that you may view the "discussions" on Dakka about religion as debates. With a verry very very few exceptions, I view them as attacks.
Oh yeah on topic if they ban the OT forum im leaving as well. I can read tactics on any number of websites, ive gotten rather fond of the debates on the OT, even with the people i frequently disagree with.
If you dont like a wee bit of verbal mudslinging, then dont look at the OT. Its simple isnt it?
But banning it.. thats a big no no no Ayatollah. If that happens i will vote with my feet and delete my account.
I say leave it be. Put on a helmet, cinch up your waders, and grow a thicker skin. If you don't like it, don't bother looking at it, if you choose to look at then that's your own personal problem. If you get your delicate little feelings hurt just remember, you clicked the link.
Tyyr wrote:I say leave it be. Put on a helmet, cinch up your waders, and grow a thicker skin. If you don't like it, don't bother looking at it, if you choose to look at then that's your own personal problem. If you get your delicate little feelings hurt just remember, you clicked the link.
Amen brother. Most of the complaints tend to come from the people who wade in determined to "defend" their friends without having any form of facts or insight on the issues.
Tyyr wrote:I say leave it be. Put on a helmet, cinch up your waders, and grow a thicker skin. If you don't like it, don't bother looking at it, if you choose to look at then that's your own personal problem. If you get your delicate little feelings hurt just remember, you clicked the link.
OFT, its like all the slack jawed pansies who write angry letters in to channel 4. Isnt it easier just to change channel? I HATE the way everyone has to play the hurt feelings card all the time.
If you dont like OT, dont go near it. Its your bloody mouse, i dont see the big deal...
But if you like the verbal warfare then polish your boots up and wade into the fray! Chocks away!
When the rows happen, we generally all know whodunnit.
Some people lack tact and manners, I've been guilty myself after a bad day. I think through getting to know people here I've gotten a lot milder (though possibly more boring too ).
No offence kanluwen but im pretty sure Red (who is a mod) has a better idea of the complaints, reports and alerts made than you do.
Hence the "opinion" statement?
I've noticed that the political threads tend to get reports when certain individuals begin posting in there and trying to white knight it up. I can't say regarding reports since y'know...I'm not a mod.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Bah! Just realized I was using the wrong word.
Not "reports", but we get posts from mods telling us that there are reports once the white knights start showing up.
When an alert is made we see who made it and, hopefully, their reasoning behind it ( seriously add that, it makes it much easier to prioritise when there's multiple ones or things going on ). Not every alert triggers "action" ( which sounds rather grandiose when one puts it like that eh ? ) automatically and we do bear things like context and the like when we decided what, if anything, to do.
When an alert is made we see who made it and, hopefully, their reasoning behind it ( seriously add that, it makes it much easier to prioritise when there's multiple ones or things going on ). Not every alert triggers "action" ( which sounds rather grandiose when one puts it like that eh ? ) automatically and we do bear things like context and the like when we decided what, if anything, to do.
Oh you guys must love me my reports are either "spambot" or "thread necro" with nothing else said
I very much enjoy the OT forum, and have found more than one of the threads enlightening, even when it gets a bit abrasive. That being said, I've certainly never been offended by a thread I didn't walk into. A little responsible browsing ought to allow you to avoid anything that's too close to home.
Are there that many more personal attacks in the OT forum than in YMTC? I've seen some bitter, bitter fights break out over there, and had my hackles raised many more times in that forum. There may be more substance to the arguments in the OT forum, but I don't think it gets more vicious in here.
I think it keeps all of the political and religious content focused- if it weren't here, it might get spilled over into other forums. I can see the trolls now- 'This army list is more ineffective than (political figure or event)!'. We don't see that because there is an outlet for it.
Perhaps you need a nastier section for explosive topics- 'The Minefield', or 'The Trenches'. Where threads go when the bulets start flying, or we start playing fire in a dynamite factory. That would be extreme, but preferable to destroying the entire section.
That is great Mr. Corpsesarefun let's us know what's going on and all that.
It's just every now and again we get these alerts and you click on the offending post .... and then spend 10 minutes or so trying to work out what is supposedly wrong with the flagged post. Sure sometimes it's obvious but every now and again...
Lord-Loss wrote:Heck, whats the point of the Off-Topic being the dungean if you ban the torture machines.
You have to respect that.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
reds8n wrote: That is great Mr. Corpsesarefun let's us know what's going on and all that.
It's just every now and again we get these alerts and you click on the offending post .... and then spend 10 minutes or so trying to work out what is supposedly wrong with the flagged post. Sure sometimes it's obvious but every now and again...
anyway [/hijack]
reddy's still young and caring. When you're old and bitter like me, you don't care enough to spend 10 minutes, you just start randomly banning people...
I think that OT should just be turned into a soapbox for me to post my highly refined and researched opinions. There will be no discussion, just me posting and everyone basking in the opulence of my honeyed words.
Ahtman wrote:I think that OT should just be turned into a soapbox for me to post my highly refined and researched opinions. There will be no discussion, just me posting and everyone basking in the opulence of my honeyed words.
Ahtman wrote:I think that OT should just be turned into a soapbox for me to post my highly refined and researched opinions. There will be no discussion, just me posting and everyone basking in the opulence of my honeyed words.
Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:let me get this right- you guys won't stick around a gaming forum if it is just about gaming?
I can imagine a wargaming club where everyone is sitting about talking about their recent purchases, when one fellow says he was finally able to start on a new Eldar army thanks to his tax refund. Another poster comments that he also likes the new discount for families, before someone tells them to be quiet because they're not allowed to talk politics. The hell with that place.
The idea that a community is too childish to be able to discuss a subject is a community I'm not sure I'd bother with, to be honest. The thing is you get plenty of obnoxious posts and nonsense of the rest of the forum, and while people can quite rightly that that stuff is at least related to the board's focus, the issue is poor posting habits, not the subject of the posts.
Seriously, the concept of banning areas of discussion because the mods are too limp wristed to apparently enforce the rules that would guide those discussions is flabbergasting to me. Since we have a few more mods in here now I'd like to ask again, maybe to Red or Fraz. Why has fateweaver, or the green git, or green bow fly, or hell even myself not been banned? Permanently. I don't mean the little week long or 3 day affairs. I mean why are they still allowed to post here when they have repeatedly shown a relative incapability to post civilly time and time again.
Do people ever get banned here at all? I mean, I know stelek got thrown out, and thats the one and only high profile troll banning I'm aware of at all in this forum. Is it simply because people that troll off topic are of a lower priority than those in army lists or news? There is a serious gap in the severity of moderation between off topic and the other forums, and if thats because of the areas of discussion than I simply don't understand the reasoning.
ShumaGorath wrote: Not to name names, but if posters who act similar to fateweaver and the green git were simply disallowed from discussing politics the threads themselves would be conducted far more civilly.
Lol.
See... now I've long since plonked the indoctrinated young skulls full of mush and there you go quoting one.
It is flattering to know Shuma still has a hard on for me. Love you too Shuma.
Ahtman wrote:I think that OT should just be turned into a soapbox for me to post my highly refined and researched opinions. There will be no discussion, just me posting and everyone basking in the opulence of my honeyed words.
I'd sig this, but it loses some of it power when not coupled with the look of Mudd's face.
ShumaGorath wrote: Not to name names, but if posters who act similar to fateweaver and the green git were simply disallowed from discussing politics the threads themselves would be conducted far more civilly.
Lol.
See... now I've long since plonked the indoctrinated young skulls full of mush and there you go quoting one.
It is flattering to know Shuma still has a hard on for me. Love you too Shuma.
Ahtman wrote:I think that OT should just be turned into a soapbox for me to post my highly refined and researched opinions. There will be no discussion, just me posting and everyone basking in the opulence of my honeyed words.
Oh? Maybe you need a LiveJournal?
Or a Blog.
Something with a catchy name like YesTheTruthHurts.com...
ShumaGorath wrote: Not to name names, but if posters who act similar to fateweaver and the green git were simply disallowed from discussing politics the threads themselves would be conducted far more civilly.
Lol.
See... now I've long since plonked the indoctrinated young skulls full of mush and there you go quoting one.
It is flattering to know Shuma still has a hard on for me. Love you too Shuma.
Huggles!
I did that one for ya too GG so you could see it.
And me and Shuma arent exactly buds, but you know.. credit where its due, that was pretty funny.
To be honest I've started to post less and less in the OT(relating to religion). This is largely due to the mere fact that I view most of it as a complete waste of time. I have learned a few things there and I hope I have educated a few as well. But there are inevetably the people that enjoy using inflammatory language and insults, especially when targetting religious people. If it was about having a reasoned discussion than I would be all for it, but people just cannot seem to control themselves.
Not to mention that it seems that every 5th post is from someone on my ignore list. Sometimes I'll get 4 or 5 in row where the ignorees are having a conversation among themselves. :-)
As others have stated before, I just want to say that I like to think that the OT board (and its P&R topics) is great as an outlet for trolls. Take away the P&R boards, and they just might start filtering into other boards. I wasn't there for it, but a similar thing happened before - too many people were asking rules questions in 40k Discussions, so YMDC was created. Take away the OT board, and the trolls will find another place to post.
Now, obviously this isn't about taking away the OT board, but some people think that it's the next logical step if things keep getting bad. Personally, I love the OT board. Sure, I've noticed that the same threads pop up every couple of weeks (Metalhead threads seem to be constantly coming back for more) but it definitely has provoked some great discussions in the Music threads, and I know that all the threads out there are helping people become more diverse in music choice.
My point is, the OT board isn't all bad. I stated in the discussion for the poll that I want to see a stronger fist in moderating the OT boards. Some threads start out good, but turn into flame wars. Don't ban all P&R discussions because of a few flamers and trolls out there, just be a bit harder on the trolls. I'm not saying you should start swinging the Banhammer, but at least some warning PMs or a one-day suspension should be instituted, with harsher penalties if the behavior continues.
ShumaGorath wrote:Is it simply because people that troll off topic are of a lower priority than those in army lists or news? There is a serious gap in the severity of moderation between off topic and the other forums, and if thats because of the areas of discussion than I simply don't understand the reasoning.
Frazz has noted before that Off Topic is generally given more leeway than other forums. I have no problem with having different sets of rules for different forums. Heck, the DCM forum has different rules than the public ones. And I'm sure the MOD forum has different than DCM. It's a privately owned product, Yakface can do what he likes.
My opinion is still that, if you don't like Bed, Bath, and Beyond, don't go there. You don't need to picket it. If you don't like the OT forum, or certain topics, don't go there. Don't read them. Trolls lose their power if no one takes the bait. I used to read the OT a lot, and now I don't. And other DCMs have commented that their blood pressure went down after they stopped reading the OT forum.
Dietrich is correct. Some subforums have different leeway than other subforums. Get half as snarky in the modelling forums as is done in the YMDC, for example, and you'll find yourself permanently out on your butt very very quickly.
Safety tip. The Mods guard the modeling forum jealously and some of us are draconian in keeping it free of the trolling/flamewars/nonsense that occurs in other subforums.
dietrich wrote:If you don't like the OT forum, or certain topics, don't go there. Don't read them. Trolls lose their power if no one takes the bait. I used to read the OT a lot, and now I don't. And other DCMs have commented that their blood pressure went down after they stopped reading the OT forum.
But... But... how can you do that when someone on the internet is WRONG!?
Yea but see this is the internet. And people just love to go into topics they don't care for and flame them just cause.
Why I don't know and my proof is Youtube and 4chan.
I however find it very disturbing how much drama wargaming in itself causes both online and off.
Breaks my balls man, breaks my balls.
Shadowbrand wrote:Yea but see this is the internet. And people just love to go into topics they don't care for and flame them just cause.
Why I don't know and my proof is Youtube and 4chan.
I however find it very disturbing how much drama wargaming in itself causes both online and off.
Breaks my balls man, breaks my balls.
Shadowbrand wrote:Yea but see this is the internet. And people just love to go into topics they don't care for and flame them just cause.
Why I don't know and my proof is Youtube and 4chan.
I however find it very disturbing how much drama wargaming in itself causes both online and off.
Breaks my balls man, breaks my balls.
This forum should never have people behaving like the imbeciles trolling on 4chan/Youtube.
Simply put:
If you don't bother to put any thought into your posts or arguments, this isn't the place for you.
Banning political and religious discussion might get rid of the freeloaders who don't contribute anything to the part of the site which makes dakkadakka a wargaming website (someone that I sometimes am but try not to be, I certainly don't think I'm as bad as some) and don't do much besides use up bandwidth. Then again they are always going to exist if you wish to allow an online community to better act as a community, by allowing them to talk about something other than one subject. And I think that is important too.
Either way, no I wont quit if the off topic forum ceased to exist but I do think it would take more away from dakadaka than it would add.
whatwhat wrote:Either way, no I wont quit if the off topic forum ceased to exist but I do think it would take more away from dakadaka than it would add.
+1. The off topic forum makes it more of a community and less like Advanced Tau tactica, Bolter and Chainsword, etc. I don't mean to bash those sites, I have accounts on both. But, I don't go to either one as much as I go to Dakka!
Shadowbrand wrote:I did put some thought into my post, not ALOT but enough to get the point across.
That wasn't aimed at you, Shadowbrand. I was making a generalized statement. Off and on we get the 4chan styled posts/threads(the "Secret Messages from XXXX Army" ones come to mind right off the bat), and we really shouldn't have those. 4chan crap should stay in that waste of bandwidth of a site.
I come to Dakka first and foremost for the awesome OT forum, either because people and their arguments here crack me up, or to behave like of said people myself.
In all seriousness though, a big forum without OT becomes all business like and loses most community aspects pretty darn fast.
On the positive we are watching the evolution of a Mod. While I can't swear it, I think thats Redy's first pic posting to go along with closing a thread.
Its like watching your elementary school tyke graduate to Jr. High.
Hmm. Another attack on me by Shuma and I hadn't even posted to give him any ammo.
Why doesn't that shock me? Shuma, if mods were as hard on me as you say they should you'd be permabanned too so careful what you wish for.
As for P/R I really could care less if those discussions are banned. I very rarely get into religious debate. I'm a Christian but not to the point of beating the Bible into peoples heads. I'll only dip into a religion topic if it piques my interest (and most don't).
I only take real interest in anything to do with guns or music or movies. On the other hand if OT died I'm not sure I'd visit Dakka much. As far as actual war gaming discussion I find Warseer a better place (lest we forget most of the rumors in here are copy/pasted from there). The P&M sections I find are better, the 40k rumor threads are more in depth and the batreps are more enjoyable to read. Dakka has a lot better OT forum than any other site I'm a member of (B&C being the other one since BA threads are so much easier to find being in their own subforum.
So if I want to read/participate in discussions about 40k I don't normally look here. I'd say 10% of my time spent about actual 40k discussion is spent here. If I want a good laugh from people with overinflated ego and small epeens (like a certain poster who's name I won't mention but it rhymes with lumagorath) I come to the OT forum.
So ban P/R, and hopefully leave the rest of OT land.
Fateweaver wrote:On the other hand if OT died I'm not sure I'd visit Dakka much. As far as actual war gaming discussion I find Warseer a better place (lest we forget most of the rumors in here are copy/pasted from there). The P&M sections I find are better, the 40k rumor threads are more in depth and the batreps are more enjoyable to read. Dakka has a lot better OT forum than any other site I'm a member of (B&C being the other one since BA threads are so much easier to find being in their own subforum.
fail. you're the type of freeloader I was referring to in my post above. Perhaps if some of the people who fails to contribute anything besides a passing glance at the painting and modelling section on their way to the off topic forum, it might actually be better than warseer's?.
See? It's possible to be unnecessarily rude WITHOUT talking about politics or religion. Whatwhat's post shows that even if you ban those topics, people will still flame each other.
Hell, you only have to read YMDC to know how pointless it would be to ban p/r topics.
Fateweaver wrote:On the other hand if OT died I'm not sure I'd visit Dakka much. As far as actual war gaming discussion I find Warseer a better place (lest we forget most of the rumors in here are copy/pasted from there). The P&M sections I find are better, the 40k rumor threads are more in depth and the batreps are more enjoyable to read. Dakka has a lot better OT forum than any other site I'm a member of (B&C being the other one since BA threads are so much easier to find being in their own subforum.
fail. you're the type of freeloader I was referring to in my post above. Perhaps if some of the people who fails to contribute anything besides a passing glance at the painting and modelling section on their way to the off topic forum, it might actually be better than warseer's?.
My highest post count stems from OT, my 2nd highest stems from P&M. Think before you hit the reply button.
I wasn't dissing on Dakka. I was stating why I come to dakka and why I think OT should stay and what I would do if it left (which is not even the issue but P/R being the issue at hand).
Albatross wrote:See? It's possible to be unnecessarily rude WITHOUT talking about politics or religion. Whatwhat's post shows that even if you ban those topics, people will still flame each other.
Hell, you only have to read YMDC to know how pointless it would be to ban p/r topics.
How exactly am I flaming? He posts saying he only comes to dakkadakka for the off topic forum claiming warseer is better for everything else. I bring him up on it saying it's a failed attitude and doesn't contribute anything to the wargaming aspect aka main aspect of this site. That's not a flaming. That's a perfectly valid point.
Albatross wrote:See? It's possible to be unnecessarily rude WITHOUT talking about politics or religion. Whatwhat's post shows that even if you ban those topics, people will still flame each other.
Hell, you only have to read YMDC to know how pointless it would be to ban p/r topics.
How exactly am I flaming? He posts saying he only comes to dakkadakka for the off topic forum claiming warseer is better for everything else. I bring him up on it saying it's a failed attitude and doesn't contribute anything to the wargaming aspect aka main aspect of this site. That's not a flaming. That's a perfectly valid point.
I didn't see anything while signing up stating that I MUST contribute to the wargaming part of this site. It's just that most people do.
@whatwhat - You called him a freeloader for primarily using the OT. I wasn't under the impression that contributing material to the website was a requirement for using it.
Again, my P&M count is second to my OT count, my news and rumors posts being like 3rd or 4th (I post in 40k discussions too).
Trust me, Shuma isn't the only poster on Dakka I've been insulted by or insulted and the other one that I don't get very rarely sets foot in OT land so apparently I don't JUST post in OT.
Fateweaver wrote:Again, my P&M count is second to my OT count, my news and rumors posts being like 3rd or 4th (I post in 40k discussions too).
Well that's believable. I guess at the ratio of 9 to 1 as you've already stated in the post I was replying to..
Fateweaver wrote:So if I want to read/participate in discussions about 40k I don't normally look here. I'd say 10% of my time spent about actual 40k discussion is spent here
Soladrin wrote:I didn't see anything while signing up stating that I MUST contribute to the wargaming part of this site. It's just that most people do.
Albatross wrote:@whatwhat - You called him a freeloader for primarily using the OT. I wasn't under the impression that contributing material to the website was a requirement for using it.
EDIT:Ninja'd by Soladrin!
I never said you "must" contribute to the wargaming aspect of this site. Me calling you a freeloader for not doing so isn't implying that.
Frazzled wrote:Dietrich is correct. Some subforums have different leeway than other subforums. Get half as snarky in the modelling forums as is done in the YMDC, for example, and you'll find yourself permanently out on your butt very very quickly.
Safety tip. The Mods guard the modeling forum jealously and some of us are draconian in keeping it free of the trolling/flamewars/nonsense that occurs in other subforums.
So let me get this straight. You give off topic leeway because of it's content and are now considering banning specific topics specifically because of trolling posts that you refuse to moderate because of the content within off topic makes you give it more leeway? Thats idiotic. Thats a snake eating itself.
JohnHwangDD wrote:@whatwhat & pals: is the above exchange an example of the sort of "saving" that you're hoping for?
It seems like you've decided to venture down the rabbit hole together to show everybody why Dakka is better off without the OT forum.
Bravo.
Games workshop doesn't overpower models to sell miniatures DD. It doesn't make any sense. Also the blood lance requires line of site and land raiders benefit from descent of the angels. Non metallic metals are a fake way of painting and dipping is for lazy powergamers. The space marines are overdone, the tau are overly anime, and the dark eldar are clearly coming out this year.
whatwhat wrote:fail. you're the type of freeloader I was referring to in my post above. Perhaps if some of the people who fails to contribute anything besides a passing glance at the painting and modelling section on their way to the off topic forum, it might actually be better than warseer's?.
Well i do not know if dakka dakka charges for advertisments. But usually the amount of traffic on a site corrosponds to the price the site can charge for ad space. More traffic higher price for ads. And even if someone does only looks at the Off-Topic Forum, they still generate traffic.
On topic.
I fail to see the point in p/r topics as they are at the moment. They try to start a good dicussion. But after 10 post they transform in a flame/troll war. Their are 3 options as i see it
1. People become civil
2. Harsher penalty's for flaming/trolling
3. Banning p/r alltogether
Option 1.
Not likely since this is the internet and if you act like a douchebag here it will have no repercussion on your real life. So no reason to clean up your act
Option 2.
Only happening if the mods feel up to it. Maybe time to unleash frazzled so he can live up to his full potential?
Option 3.
More likely but it might cause members to stop coming here. Though regulars might give themself more credit then they are due. DakkaDakka will survive. some regulars go then the next generation steps in.
Option 2 and 3 are most likely to happen. The question now is. Will the mods accept more work or will they risk losing some members?
Frazzled wrote:Dietrich is correct. Some subforums have different leeway than other subforums. Get half as snarky in the modelling forums as is done in the YMDC, for example, and you'll find yourself permanently out on your butt very very quickly.
Safety tip. The Mods guard the modeling forum jealously and some of us are draconian in keeping it free of the trolling/flamewars/nonsense that occurs in other subforums.
So let me get this straight. You give off topic leeway because of it's content and are now considering banning specific topics specifically because of trolling posts that you refuse to moderate because of the content within off topic makes you give it more leeway? Thats idiotic. Thats a snake eating itself.
If I could understand what you just said, I'd reply more gooder.
Frazzled wrote:Dietrich is correct. Some subforums have different leeway than other subforums. Get half as snarky in the modelling forums as is done in the YMDC, for example, and you'll find yourself permanently out on your butt very very quickly.
Safety tip. The Mods guard the modeling forum jealously and some of us are draconian in keeping it free of the trolling/flamewars/nonsense that occurs in other subforums.
So let me get this straight. You give off topic leeway because of it's content and are now considering banning specific topics specifically because of trolling posts that you refuse to moderate because of the content within off topic makes you give it more leeway? Thats idiotic. Thats a snake eating itself.
If I could understand what you just said, I'd reply more gooder.
Considering you're one of the users that consistently drags topics down into flamewars I think I would rather have a different mod respond to that post anyway.
Fateweaver wrote:LOL @ a thread discussing why P/R is being considered dropped due to flaming, itself being drug into a flame war.
Only on Dakka could it happen.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Why has he not been banned? he's specifically trolling a thread about the value of off topic vs the amount of trolling in it. He alone pulls down half the threads that get locked.
I didn't read all the replies... but why not just keep off topic for posts like "omg i hate twilight", and then make an off topic subforum for "omg politics & religion" and let people yell at each other in there..?
Necros wrote:I didn't read all the replies... but why not just keep off topic for posts like "omg i hate twilight", and then make an off topic subforum for "omg politics & religion" and let people yell at each other in there..?
That would be a site all on itzelf. With high firewalls and eguards. And the CIA keeping a constant lookout
whatwhat wrote:fail. you're the type of freeloader I was referring to in my post above. Perhaps if some of the people who fails to contribute anything besides a passing glance at the painting and modelling section on their way to the off topic forum, it might actually be better than warseer's?.
Well i do not know if dakka dakka charges for advertisments. But usually the amount of traffic on a site corrosponds to the price the site can charge for ad space. More traffic higher price for ads. And even if someone does only looks at the Off-Topic Forum, they still generate traffic.
Again, i was responding to fateweavers post which implied he came to dakkadakka simply for the OT forum then complained it's other forums weren't very good, inferior to warseers. Which is ironic, since what makes warseers forum's good is people actually contributing to them. I'm not saying everyone on here MUST contribute. I'm just saying it's failed to not do so then say the wargaming part of this forum is no good.
Of course what with some people falling on the negative side of that argument it was inevitable I was going to get called troll/flamer etc.
but why not just keep off topic for posts like "omg i hate twilight", and then make an off topic subforum for "omg politics & religion" and let people yell at each other in there..?
Don't worry, you didn't miss much.
Those are good suggestions. Tho I think we're really talking about an OMG sub-forum:
- "OMG, Dark Eldars!"
- "OMG, recasting!"
- "OMG, soft scores!"
etc.
Fateweaver wrote:LOL @ a thread discussing why P/R is being considered dropped due to flaming, itself being drug into a flame war.
Only on Dakka could it happen.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Why has he not been banned? he's specifically trolling a thread about the value of off topic vs the amount of trolling in it. He alone pulls down half the threads that get locked.
And your doing the other half while trying to blame someone else. Good one.
Necros wrote:I didn't read all the replies... but why not just keep off topic for posts like "omg i hate twilight", and then make an off topic subforum for "omg politics & religion" and let people yell at each other in there..?
DING! DING! DING! we have a winner! I completely agree with that.
but why not just keep off topic for posts like "omg i hate twilight", and then make an off topic subforum for "omg politics & religion" and let people yell at each other in there..?
Don't worry, you didn't miss much.
Those are good suggestions. Tho I think we're really talking about an OMG sub-forum:
- "OMG, Dark Eldars!"
- "OMG, recasting!"
- "OMG, soft scores!"
etc.
Fateweaver wrote:LOL @ a thread discussing why P/R is being considered dropped due to flaming, itself being drug into a flame war.
Only on Dakka could it happen.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Why has he not been banned? he's specifically trolling a thread about the value of off topic vs the amount of trolling in it. He alone pulls down half the threads that get locked.
Give it a goddamn rest Shuma.
If you consider my post a troll post than so is your response to this post a troll post.
I was laughing at the irony of the situation. It's only a troll post because you felt the need to respond with an attack on my post, so obviously it did attract one troll.
I've had enough.
I don't want to see OT disappear. I like the leeway that we seem to have in OT (even with a few warnings and one 3 day vacation). I also laugh at the irony of certain people wanting others banned for being trolls when they themselves should be permabanned.
whatwhat wrote:fail. you're the type of freeloader I was referring to in my post above.
You sure it shouldn't be deleted?
Or is this an example of the extra leeway in the subforums?
Yep. if this were the mod forum, that post would get you a suspension. most anything Shuma/fatweaver/myself says would get him banned. At least he wouldn't have to defend his statements on the witness stand.
whatwhat wrote:
Again, i was responding to fateweavers post which implied he came to dakkadakka simply for the OT forum then complained it's other forums weren't very good, inferior to warseers. Which is ironic, since what makes warseers forum's good is people actually contributing to them. I'm not saying everyone on here MUST contribute. I'm just saying it's failed to not do so then say the wargaming part of this forum is no good.
Of course what with some people falling on the negative side of that argument it was inevitable I was going to get called troll/flamer etc.
Ah i see. And i agree it is ironic. But maybe you should have put it differently. Otherwise i agree. I only wanted to explain even traffic in the OT forum is good traffic
whatwhat wrote:
Again, i was responding to fateweavers post which implied he came to dakkadakka simply for the OT forum then complained it's other forums weren't very good, inferior to warseers. Which is ironic, since what makes warseers forum's good is people actually contributing to them. I'm not saying everyone on here MUST contribute. I'm just saying it's failed to not do so then say the wargaming part of this forum is no good.
Of course what with some people falling on the negative side of that argument it was inevitable I was going to get called troll/flamer etc.
Ah i see. And i agree it is ironic. But maybe you should have put it differently. Otherwise i agree. I only wanted to explain even traffic in the OT forum is good traffic
Lord Demon wrote:
Option 2.
........ Maybe time to unleash frazzled so he can live up to his full potential?
I can only wish for that day when they loose Frazz's chain. Lets loose the Dakka Kraken!!!!(A.K.A. Frazz)
GG
I wish, but let me down load the slew of new TBone pics I have first. Nothing's more funny walkwise than a real dog on point, and two wiener dog flankers dragging GC.
When ever the moderator is a troll, you have to wonder about the value of a forum. I'll put it out there that I would subscribe to Dakka Dakka but for knowing that my money would go towards supporting the OT forum, and moderators like Frazzled.
Nurglitch wrote:When ever the moderator is a troll, you have to wonder about the value of a forum. I'll put it out there that I would subscribe to Dakka Dakka but for knowing that my money would go towards supporting the OT forum, and moderators like Frazzled.
POW!
My supposed flame has just been superseeded, I will now therefore drift into the background and all going well everyone will forget.
Nurglitch wrote:When ever the moderator is a troll, you have to wonder about the value of a forum. I'll put it out there that I would subscribe to Dakka Dakka but for knowing that my money would go towards supporting the OT forum, and moderators like Frazzled.
Nurglitch wrote:When ever the moderator is a troll, you have to wonder about the value of a forum. I'll put it out there that I would subscribe to Dakka Dakka but for knowing that my money would go towards supporting the OT forum, and moderators like Frazzled.
Nurglitch wrote:When ever the moderator is a troll, you have to wonder about the value of a forum. I'll put it out there that I would subscribe to Dakka Dakka but for knowing that my money would go towards supporting the OT forum, and moderators like Frazzled.
Oh yeah i remember, i have never used it because im not a pansy.
Seriously, isnt ANY form of censorship a bad thing? If you recall I was even cool with the friendly neighbourhood Muslims marching through Woolton Basset.
Ill never shut anyone up, ill just reserve the right to argue with them. Thats the way it should be.
Americans especially love to crow on about "Freedom", if it wasnt for people loving to crow on equally about being "offended" then the world would be a better place.
If someone ticks you off, tell the fether. If they offend you, switch the radio/internet/TV off. I dont see why the majority should pay for it because a few people get all teary eyed from a bit of harsh language.
The minority make all the rules in 2010 cos they whinge the loudest. Why would dakka by any different?
Nurglitch wrote:When ever the moderator is a troll, you have to wonder about the value of a forum. I'll put it out there that I would subscribe to Dakka Dakka but for knowing that my money would go towards supporting the OT forum, and moderators like Frazzled.
Wait...you mean that you don't find the whole OT forum as well as Fraz hilarious
Commissar Molotov wrote:I find I regularly disagree with Frazzled (often VEHEMENTLY!) but I would hardly accuse him of "trolling..."
Being a stinky old fart who hikes his pants up under his arm-pits and yells at kids to get off his *&%$*^# lawn? Sure! But trolling? NEV-AH!!!
You probably should, he trolls constantly and is one of the primary mods of a forum that is now going to be censured specifically because of it's high volumes of trolls. The fish rots from the head.
Missed the point then whatwhat? Read what i wrote before you start slinging again. Ive never clicked the "report" button once, i just tell you what i think of you. Thats the point.
Now, how many times have you bothered the mods?
Whatwhat you arent a troll.
Trolling is one thing, but needlessly insulting people and then PMing the mods when they retort is lower than a snakes belly. Your like some sort of... stealth-troll.
See. Easy.
Ive not reported you to a mod, im merely retorting, like your supposed to do.
How many angry letters have you written to Channel 4?
I think this particular thread is going to die a horrible, ugly death.
Apparently if you don't agree with certain posters you are a troll, if you agree with certain others you are a troll.
It is why the P/R threads will NEVER stay civil. Nobody, ladies excluded, have a large enough pair to suck up criticism, reply to said criticism and then sit back and enjoy life.
Look at the Obama thread as an example. Saying the wrong thing about our Pres gets the mods on your ass because certain posters who defend him get an itchy trigger finger and hit "report" whenever their Savior gets attacked.
This thread should die and from what I'm seeing in this thread my stance changes. The whole OT should die.
Commissar Molotov wrote:I find I regularly disagree with Frazzled (often VEHEMENTLY!) but I would hardly accuse him of "trolling..."
Being a stinky old fart who hikes his pants up under his arm-pits and yells at kids to get off his *&%$*^# lawn? Sure! But trolling? NEV-AH!!!
You probably should, he trolls constantly and is one of the primary mods of a forum that is now going to be censured specifically because of it's high volumes of trolls. The fish rots from the head.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Soladrin wrote:Yea, this ones beyond saving :(
You did your duty to make it so.
I think you forgot in your sig.
mattyrm wrote:PMing the mods when they retort is lower than a snakes belly. Your like some sort of... stealth-troll.
When do I PM the mods?
I think we've established your belief that I start whinging everytime someone retorts comes down to your inability to read what I'm actually saying more than anything else.
In the end it is out of the users hands. Either Yakface/Mods decide that discussion about p/r are important enough to warrant extra mod attention. Or they think it is just not worth it and ban them alltogether. It is not something that we can do about. Besides has everything not been said about the subject in the first couple of pages of this thread?
Soladrin wrote:Isn't this the good thing about OT? Cause IMO it is... This is one of the few places that can put a big fat smile on my face after a crappy day.
Ding ding ding! Winner! I don't know about the rest of you, but I love OT because it makes me
When I get tired of it I go and hang out with like minded individuals. We clean our guns, declare the current administration to be a load of gak, drink our beers and discuss paintball strategies and 40k.
More people should stop taking what's said on Dakka less seriously. Leads to lower chances for stroke and high blood pressure that way.
mattyrm wrote:I dont think i like almost anything Fateweaver says, but i still like to read it..
Does that make sense?
Completely, definitely read this and pay no attention to whatever mistake may have been made while writing the scentence.
Fateweaver wrote:More people should stop taking what's said on Dakka less seriously. Leads to lower chances for stroke and high blood pressure that way.
Offcourse it does. I enjoy the whole Fate vs Shuma feud. And i like to think one of them wil have son someday and the other a daughter en those 2 will have a secret romance.
That or they end up as 2 grumpy old grandpa's sitting on a bench in the park yelling at eachother, pausing only to look at a hot girl.
Sure. It's like a train wreck or an auto wreck. You don't want to be "that" onlooker but you will. Oh you will.
Its okay Matty. I'm not here to make friends. I got plenty of friends in the real world.
Certain posters should grow a pair before reading what I have to say or ignore me. If I make your skin crawl and I don't like you than that makes me happy. If I do and I have nothing against you, oh well. I don't lose sleep over it.
Oddly Matty, I agree with some of the things you say in other threads. Hell, if I can sometimes agree with Shuma (shudder) I guess I can occasionally agree with you.
Offcourse it does. I enjoy the whole Fate vs Shuma feud. And i like to think one of them wil have son someday and the other a daughter en those 2 will have a secret romance.
That or they end up as 2 grumpy old grandpa's sitting on a bench in the park yelling at eachother, pausing only to look at a hot girl.
My son or daughter ever dates Shuma's son or daughter I'll disavow all knowledge of their existence.
I don't hate Shuma. I don't know him outside of dakka so maybe he's a swell guy IRL (although I doubt we could agree on anything long enough for me to find that out).
I wouldn't kill Shuma just to kill him. He'd have to do something like break into my house or try to mug me for my iPod and what little money I have in my wallet.
I like shumagorath. I mean. I LIKE him. He's sorta dreamy you know? Sometimes I think I'll touch him, just softly. But I'm always too scared. Someday I'll have the courage.
Until then, I'll just watch.
I don't hate Shuma. I don't know him outside of dakka so maybe he's a swell guy IRL (although I doubt we could agree on anything long enough for me to find that out).
I wouldn't kill Shuma just to kill him. He'd have to do something like break into my house or try to mug me for my iPod and what little money I have in my wallet.
mattyrm wrote:Seriously, isnt ANY form of censorship a bad thing?
To return to the actual topic for a moment, this is nothing to do with censorship.
Think of it this way:
You're visiting someone's house. They know that you and one of their other guests have wildly opposing views on a given topic, and that both of you tend to flame on whenever that topic arises. So they ask you to not discuss that topic.
That's not censorship. It's simply keeping the peace, by removing something that has been shown comprehensively to cause trouble every time it rears its head.
Sure, they could just kick you out when you start making trouble... but then you've been kicked out, and the party is that much smaller, and has one less person (who, on just about any other topic is much more restrained) contributing to the conversation. Nobody wins.
mattyrm wrote:Seriously, isnt ANY form of censorship a bad thing?
To return to the actual topic for a moment, this is nothing to do with censorship.
Think of it this way:
You're visiting someone's house. They know that you and one of their other guests have wildly opposing views on a given topic, and that both of you tend to flame on whenever that topic arises. So they ask you to not discuss that topic.
That's not censorship. It's simply keeping the peace, by removing something that has been shown comprehensively to cause trouble every time it rears its head.
Sure, they could just kick you out when you start making trouble... but then you've been kicked out, and the party is that much smaller, and has one less person (who, on just about any other topic is much more restrained) contributing to the conversation. Nobody wins.
That's a good analogy. Although as we have already found out from this thread that people have said they would leave if they can't talk about politics and religion. So just as you had kicked said person out, on the other hand someone would just leave.
@insaniak.
So basically it boils down to either more work for the mods and allowing it. Or banning it. Seeing the level of discussion in p/r topics i would understand banning it. Tough enforcing the rules a bit more might also make people behave a bit more
@Frazzled. I am surprised TBone lets you call him that
Good grief Charlie Brown
Sorry Manchu 5 pages appeared since my last visit here so will just say good luck
Life's far too short- and mine by dint of age is shorter than most on Dakka - to wade through it all
Da Boss wrote:I like shumagorath. I mean. I LIKE him. He's sorta dreamy you know? Sometimes I think I'll touch him, just softly. But I'm always too scared. Someday I'll have the courage.
Until then, I'll just watch.
This. Is exactly why I love OT. (That and the Daschunds of Death)
mattyrm wrote:Seriously, isnt ANY form of censorship a bad thing?
To return to the actual topic for a moment, this is nothing to do with censorship.
Think of it this way:
You're visiting someone's house. They know that you and one of their other guests have wildly opposing views on a given topic, and that both of you tend to flame on whenever that topic arises. So they ask you to not discuss that topic.
That's not censorship. It's simply keeping the peace, by removing something that has been shown comprehensively to cause trouble every time it rears its head.
Sure, they could just kick you out when you start making trouble... but then you've been kicked out, and the party is that much smaller, and has one less person (who, on just about any other topic is much more restrained) contributing to the conversation. Nobody wins.
AHH! You stole my house guest analogy!
Let me think of another one...
...
...
...
...
...
Building on whatwhat commented about people leaving...well that is their choice. Just like it is the forums' choice whether it will allow the kind of back and forth bickering that started the consideration that r/p be left out and/or the OT forum being closed down.
Luckily the ot forum is not under threat of beeing closed down. Then a lot less people would drop by. Then it would not be a couple of people leaving it would be like more then half of the people leaving to party next door.
I just want to bring something up. EVERYONE have a subject they are sensitive about , trust me.
Because everyone value things differently , there are going to be issues when people are rubbed the wrong way , all it takes are
people disrespecting what others find important.
For example: "Religion? i dont care about religion , i really dont! if you get worked up over it , you are causing drama"
or " What? GW? GW is god send miniature company of godly status , who ever doesnt appreciate what they do can feel my wrath "
But you see , the 2nd sentence can be viewed as drama too.
In other words , DRAMA and WHITE KNIGHTS will always co-exist. They will ALWAYS appear to defend what the individual is sensitive about. No exceptions.
There are white knights to defend people that they find important. And there are white knight to defend a company they find important.
More blatantly put:
"You make fun of what i find important? You need to be put down on the spot."
"You guys fight and argue over issues what i personally dont care about? shush and stop making drama. "
Thus drama are always there , its just what frequency people are picking them up at. Hence "No Bobby, You are the dramas."
If anyone is serious about wanting to save OT , then they need to realize , it needs to start with respecting what others find important.
NO MATTER WHAT SUBJECT IT IS , No exceptions.
Remember this folks , we dont need to "like or care" about something in order to show it the basic common level of respect.
So if you find yourself been worked up when others are expressing something they experienced that is different then your personal experience , or value something differently,
Dont get worked up. Take a deep breath and think / consider what they have gone through. RESPECT the reality of the incidents they have experienced and why they "weigh" it like they do.
Dont dismiss what others have claimed purely based on something yourself have not encountered yet. Dont dismiss what others find important just because you dont.
"I" am NOT the world. "I" maybe everything in my own world , but thats as far as it goes.
And for mods , yes i get you , you guys are busy. But remember this as well.
To you guys , we are just one among the tens of thousands of member.
But to us , you are the only few examples we think we should follow. So dont be lenient , dont be biased , i know its hard we are all humans.
But isnt that why we respect mods so much? NOT just for the works you do , but because you are supposed to be the brighter examples on how we should try to be?
So just posting that of an idea I just had (if it didn't come up already). Would you think filtering p/r discussions through mods so they can post it would be a better idea than closing down such debate?
So just posting that of an idea I just had (if it didn't come up already). Would you think filtering p/r discussions through mods so they can post it would be a better idea than closing down such debate?
So just posting that of an idea I just had (if it didn't come up already). Would you think filtering p/r discussions through mods so they can post it would be a better idea than closing down such debate?
No , we need to follow what is allowed and not allowed. Its pointless having holding our hands for everything.
So just posting that of an idea I just had (if it didn't come up already). Would you think filtering p/r discussions through mods so they can post it would be a better idea than closing down such debate?
No , we need to know what is allowed and not allowed. Its pointless having holding our hands for everything.
In particular that means you still need to be polite and friendly, even when discussing such hot topics as politics and religion.
That being the Off-Topic Forum's rules, and with specific mention to religion and politics posted last year back in April, and with that warning not heeded, I would have to say we would need our hands held in order to keep the ability to debate, specifically politics and religion.
There is a difference between polite + friendly and actually been respectful. Read the long post i made on top of this page.
Ppl are too easily dancing back and forth on the fine line , and getting away with it. Been lenient , while thats merciful , is not effective and produce more opening for future problems.
OT can exist , mods dont have to hold our hands. But the real question is how adamant are the rules to be enforced.
Yakface need to decide , how lax should Dakka be. Because these are the after effects.
Big forums like warseer and such are strict , but not because they are anal about stuff. It because they want to play it safe.
whatwhat wrote:That's a good analogy. Although as we have already found out from this thread that people have said they would leave if they can't talk about politics and religion. So just as you had kicked said person out, on the other hand someone would just leave.
That's their choice. If they feel that not being able to discuss that particular topic gives them no reason to be there, or that they are unable to abide by a request to behave themselves, that's entirely up to them.
LunaHound wrote:If anyone is serious about wanting to save OT , then they need to realize , it needs to start with respecting what others find important.
It's probably worth pointing out yet again that closing down the OT forum entirely is not currently on the table.
And yes, showing a little respect for others' beliefs goes a long way. But so does learning to respond in an appropriate fashion to something you perceive as trolling. As we've pointed out numerous times in the past, responding in kind to an insulting post just drops you to the same level as the original poster.
So far as increasing moderation goes, here's the thing: OT gets a little more leeway than most of the other areas of the board. That's deliberate, to allow people a little more freedom to discuss non-gaming related topics, because the discussion doesn't need to be kept as strictly focussed. So a large part of the problem is that we don't want to have to increase the strictness of moderation here. You get more freedom to discuss real-world stuff.
But the forum isn't the United States. You don't have a constitutional right to say whatever you want with no consequences. It's a private domain, set up to serve a specific purpose, and everyone is allowed in provided they agree to abide by the rules laid out by the site's owner.
In that setting, being allowed the freedom to say what you want is reliant on you taking responsibility for your own actions and behaving yourself.
Or, to quote an old truism: Having the right to say something doesn't automatically mean that you should.
Where OT is concerned, people have been allowed that freedom... and have abused it, time and time again. So that gives the site admin a choice... they can let things go on as they are, they can increase moderation and cut down on everybody's freedom to discuss what they want... or they can simply remove the topics that cause the most problems, and leave people the freedom to discuss the topics that they've shown they can act a little more responsibly over.
This is not a problem caused by lax moderation. This is a problem caused by some posters' complete inability to take some personal responsibility for their own behaviour.
Nothing (so far as I'm aware) has been decided at this point. The poll, I believe, is just Yakface's way of gauging the opinion of the masses. What actually winds up happening is entirely up to him.
But if you want to be able to continue to discuss these topics, I would suggest that it's more likely to be allowed to continue if people take a bit of a look at their own posting habits, and make more of an effort to behave in a way that doesn't require moderation. And as I said, that doesn't just involve not making the troll post in the first place... it's also down to how you respond to such posts.
While I agree with what you mention about any subject becoming sensitive, the issue at forth here was the fact political discussion and religious debate have become so derogatory and inflammatory that we are devoting special focus on the matter at hand: has the rhetoric and mud-slinging gotten so bad on these two topics that we should preclude them henceforth from any debate whatsoever on either subject?
Respect is the name of the game:
But again, we are here because respect was not given on the subjects were are debating to excise from the forums.
We can have the moderators enforce draconian moderation on this forum if we request it, but all we are doing is trying to separate religion and government...from this forum (wow, never would of thought that both would be on the same side).
Respect can be enforced, but first we must contend with the issue of banning certain subjects from this forum.
insaniak wrote:And as I said, that doesn't just involve not making the troll post in the first place... it's also down to how you respond to such posts.
And as many people also stated , they feel if the troll doesnt exist in the first place there is no possible follow up of such responses.
After all , its weird to enforce something as strict as a zero tolerance policy on both parties while not cutting the problem off from its original starting root.
I was wondering when this thread would arise. After wading through 8 and a half pages of heavy thread, I made it here. I see Manchu left around page 4. Good on you.
I'm entirely for keeping P/R on OT.
While every now and then you get REALLY inflammatory posts such as:
"You have to have no feelings or be *insert religious/political viewpoint here* to not care about child molestation"
Most of us are able to keep our religious and political differences out front in the open without hurting others and discuss the matter clearly.
LunaHound wrote:After all , its weird to enforce something as strict as a zero tolerance policy on both parties while not cutting the problem off from its original starting root.
We don't have a zero tolerance policy unless someone is a continual troublemaker... and if the person we're zero tolerancing on is a troublemaker, then the zero tolerance policy is cutting the problem off at the root.
The problem threads (from my prespective) fall into one of 2 categories.
1: The Troll Thread: Deliberatly provocative subjects that are placed purely to get a negative reaction from other users and split the forum in to opposing groups who have views that will never be reconciled. These are primarily the poitical and religious threads. Please note that there have been many fruitful religious and political discussions, but the ones that go bad tend to either start that way or get turned into a trollfest in the first handful of posts.
2: The pointles 'blather' threads. Pure stupidity rolled into a forum post. Has been stamped out at Yakface's request so almost never seen anymore.
The OT forum allows a useful outlet for OT on dakka and stops it springing up elsewhere on the site.
There have been arguements for and against it by the moderation and admin team over the last 3 years, but Yakface has always been on the side of keeping it (why it is still here).
Currently I'm in the camp that thinks it should stay, but due to the stupidity of several users, that has not always been the case.
The thing to remember is that dakka is a wargaming site that has an OT forum, not an OT forum that has a wargaming site. If people ONLY come for the OT, they really, really need to get a move on in life.
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Currently I'm in the camp that thinks it should stay, but due to the stupidity of several users, that has not always been the case.
Then surely the OT should stay and the problem users should be perma-banned? After all, Forums don't post, people do.
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Currently I'm in the camp that thinks it should stay, but due to the stupidity of several users, that has not always been the case.
Then surely the OT should stay and the problem users should be perma-banned? After all, Forums don't post, people do.
Agreed, and I think most users would much prefer stronger enforcement of the rules to a ban on the topics that most often cause issues.
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:The problem threads (from my prespective) fall into one of 2 categories.
1: ... Please note that there have been many fruitful religious and political discussions, but the ones that go bad tend to either start that way or get turned into a trollfest in the first handful of posts..
I don't know, the actual percentage of religious threads that survive the lock have to be incredibly low. I would guess in the single digit low. There have been many religious threads that will go on for dozens of pages, when all of a sudden someone(usually under 100 posts count) will come out of nowhere and start trolling and obviously not reading the entire thread or even remotely aware of the community that has grown around discussing such things.
A couple of month ago a user was asking about what his first bible should be to buy.
Over a dozen members were rolling through a very informative (and fast) discussion regarding the pros and cons of different types, and even the history of their writings/editings to put their historical context and language issues accross.
Then some tool posted the a pic of the necromonicon.
I deleted the pic, PMed the poster, put a warning in the thread to keep trolling out of the thread (something Frazzled has had to do in the Tournament discussion forum today) and the discussion rolled onto its conclusion.
Had I not been active in the thread at the time, several dozen posts would have been made, flamefests ensued and the thread derailed beyond repair.
There are always going to be the tools who love to ruin it for everyone, but I remember a time before I became a moderator wher the longerstanding dakka members took it on themselves to act accordingly.
That doesn't mean to have no personality.
It means to treat a resource which you inevitably devote a goodly portion of your time and energy into with the respect it deserves. To do so make you a better poster, the forum lifts as a whole and everyone wins.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Albatross wrote:
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:Currently I'm in the camp that thinks it should stay, but due to the stupidity of several users, that has not always been the case.
Then surely the OT should stay and the problem users should be perma-banned? After all, Forums don't post, people do.
Definitely not.
There is a formalised moderator guideline for warnings, punishments, suspensions and bannings.
It escalates to (fairly) set standards.
Minor infringements get more leeway, and usually a warning/PM. Serious infractions get hit with a hammer. However if a poster racks up a heap of minor infractions and then does something bad, their history does not put them in good standing when action is taken.
I honestly cannot recall anyone being banned on a first post, except for spam-bots.
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:
There are always going to be the tools who love to ruin it for everyone, but I remember a time before I became a moderator wher the longerstanding dakka members took it on themselves to act accordingly.
That doesn't mean to have no personality.
It means to treat a resource which you inevitably devote a goodly portion of your time and energy into with the respect it deserves. To do so make you a better poster, the forum lifts as a whole and everyone wins.
Hey Nightwatch, I've been around the whole time and I still support keeping P&R in the OT and the OT more generally as a bastion of community life here at Dakka. That point has been made especially well by both Malfred and Albatross earlier in this thread. I think it's a shame that loving OT and the sense of community that it fosters (NOT at all fostered by many other parts of this site) are derided, even by Mods as it turns out.
Frazzled, insaniak, and W_G: I know that my original post must seem somewhat humorous to you Mods after the last seven pages or so but the thread is some proof--as other users have already noted--that P&R are not at all the source of the problems in OT. The source of the problems in OT, as these same users have explained time and again, is the same as the source of the problems in YMDC, in P&M, in every other part of Dakka. A ban on P&R topics would do nothing whatsoever to end the problems.
The only result would be a hobbled OT (actually, a truly worthless OT) that would take even more time to moderate because any mention or accusation of mentioning P&R (you can bet often motivated by the same emotions that cause flamewars) will result in a report that will have to be investigated just the same as now. I have often tried to burst the bubble that what is needed is more moderation because that is not strictly true either.
I think what needs to be explained--and maybe only Yakface himself can do this--is why P&R in OT is a subject now. What has changed?
Manchu wrote:Hey Nightwatch, I've been around the whole time and I still support keeping P&R in the OT and the OT more generally as a bastion of community life here at Dakka. That point has been made especially well by both Malfred and Albatross earlier in this thread. I think it's a shame that loving OT and the sense of community that it fosters (NOT at all fostered by many other parts of this site) are derided, even by Mods as it turns out.
Frazzled, insaniak, and W_G: I know that my original post must seem somewhat humorous to you Mods after the last seven pages or so but the thread is some proof--as other users have already noted--that P&R are not at all the source of the problems in OT. The source of the problems in OT, as these same users have explained time and again, is the same as the source of the problems in YMDC, in P&M, in every other part of Dakka. A ban on P&R topics would do nothing whatsoever to end the problems.
The only result would be a hobbled OT (actually, a truly worthless OT) that would take even more time to moderate because any mention or accusation of mentioning P&R (you can bet often motivated by the same emotions that cause flamewars) will result in a report that will have to be investigated just the same as now. I have often tried to burst the bubble that what is needed is more moderation because that is not strictly true either.
I think what needs to be explained--and maybe only Yakface himself can do this--is why P&R in OT is a subject now. What has changed?
Just a possibility, but perhaps Yakface has had it on his mind for quite a while now, from a long time ago, and is just now getting around to having it taken care of. However, so far in the last few days I've seen quite a few threads, none of which are locked thanks to rational discussion. Perhaps if he's in debate about their usefulness, this will help change his mind.
Manchu wrote:I think it's a shame that loving OT and the sense of community that it fosters (NOT at all fostered by many other parts of this site) are derided, even by Mods as it turns out.
Which mods have been deriding people for loving OT?
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:The thing to remember is that dakka is a wargaming site that has an OT forum, not an OT forum that has a wargaming site. If people ONLY come for the OT, they really, really need to get a move on in life.
I would say that you and I are good examples of how people with differing theological viewpoints can not only treat each other in a cival manner,but actually get along quite well.
Much of my opinions concerning the OT & P&R topics have already been expressed here buy Manchu,Albatross & several others,so the only thing I can add is that I too would hate to see a ban on P&R topics.
Having said that,I will add that in those P&R threads...a little respect will certianly go a long way.
My opinion is, that if you want to talk about Star Trek go to a Star Trek site. If you want to bitch about Politics find any of the appropriate sites to do so in. If you want to talk mini wargaming you come to Dakka.
FITZZ wrote:people with differing theological viewpoints can not only treat each other in a cival manner,but actually get along quite well.
This is more common, at least in my personal experience, than it is made out to be. Or maybe it is more common in my experience than it is in other people's experience. Either way, allowing P&R discussion in OT is not what causes trouble.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
NecronLord3 wrote:If you want to bitch about Politics find any of the appropriate sites to do so in. If you want to talk mini wargaming you come to Dakka.
How about "if you don't want to bitch about Politics, don't bother with OT." I myself don't want to bitch about 40k rules and so keep my nose out of YMDC.
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:The thing to remember is that dakka is a wargaming site that has an OT forum, not an OT forum that has a wargaming site. If people ONLY come for the OT, they really, really need to get a move on in life.
This seems derisive to me.
But honestly, it's true. I'd say that if you have no interest in the wargaming aspect...there's no real reasoning to come here just for the off topic section.
Kanluwen wrote:But honestly, it's true. I'd say that if you have no interest in the wargaming aspect...there's no real reasoning to come here just for the off topic section.
Well, many people came here for 40k. And then stayed and continue staying for OT. The truth is that most people drift in and out of this expensive and time-consuming hobby. But the users who become friends (as much as possible on the internet, which is a pretty fair degree I think) still want to be together and chat. OT allows them to do that. So they stick with Dakka even when they're between wargaming kicks. And when they find the time/money/will to get back into wargaming, they are still right in the midst of things with their pals.
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:The thing to remember is that dakka is a wargaming site that has an OT forum, not an OT forum that has a wargaming site. If people ONLY come for the OT, they really, really need to get a move on in life.
This seems derisive to me.
But honestly, it's true. I'd say that if you have no interest in the wargaming aspect...there's no real reasoning to come here just for the off topic section.
Honestly,I belive that most of us that post in OT,even those that do most of our posting in OT,do make use of the other forums (I recall having a few discusions with you concerning Lost & the Damned as well as GW business practices well away from the OT forum),it's just that OT is a bit more relaxed...sort of a place to get to know the person "behind the gamer".
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:The thing to remember is that dakka is a wargaming site that has an OT forum, not an OT forum that has a wargaming site. If people ONLY come for the OT, they really, really need to get a move on in life.
This seems derisive to me.
If you want to talk ONLY about OT discussions there is a whole world of people out there waiting to hear you speak. There are even internet forums specifically designed to cater to your every OT desire. There are ones that cover everything, and ones that will discuss the changes in the mating habits of the simpson's python through its lifespan.
To come to a wargaming site, ONLY post in the OT forum, ONLY go to the OT forum and then try and wear that as a badge of honor, well, I guess, I guess I don't know what to think. But I'm sure it involves facepalming and the slow shaking of heads.
We are miniature wargamers (primarily 40k) who have the opportunity to discuss OT subjects in a sub forum.
And like I said, I am currently FOR the OT forum. I'm not arguing for it to be torn down. I'm arguing that there is a very small subsect within the dakka community that really need to get out more, and well, get involved in the dakka community.
I do MOST of my posting in the DCM Mosh Pit, where I am free of the restraints of good taste, and (with a very limited number of exceptions) the regular posting rules. It is like OT on steroids, and a hell of alot more enjoyable, especially as the smaller crowd means for more articulated and open conversation.
Currently in the top 5 threads in the forum we are discussing:
Username pronounciations
Swap shop moderation (raised by a DCM, not a moderator)
Hot chicks (A particularly long running thread)
80's man flicks
Getting a new job
If I wasn't a mod would I ONLY post there?
Of course not, I come here (It will be 10 years in under 2 weeks), through my love of the hobby.
OT & the DCM Mosh Pit is a bonus, not the sole reason for my dakka experience..
Well, I came here for the modelling forums for ideas, and while they keep me busy for a bit, the OT is usually where I end my visits. Would I leave if it was gone? No. I beleive in the "Grow a pair or GTFO" mentality. There is really only one person I almost constantly disagree with (and I think he does it on purpose, but hey, thats a topic for another time), but me and Shuma had a good discusion/heated debate/ whatever he wants to call it on American values a while back. I dont begrudge him for anything he has said (as of yet), because its a forum, your going to get people who disagree and think their word is right when its really wrong ( ).
As for the censorship, all I can say is this: Usually, if you start censoring one thing, it leads to another quickly. I'm a huge gamer, and have been to many video gaming forums, and most times mods start getting..... corrupt? and "trigger happy". Not saying that would happen here, just that it might, I dont think I have been around here long enough to accurately depict the mood swings of the mods on here.
As an amusing side story: I was once on a forum where the mods were mostly women, and if you said the wrong thing at the wrong time of the month..... I went through like 4 accounts on that forums.....
Waaagh_Gonads wrote:The thing to remember is that dakka is a wargaming site that has an OT forum, not an OT forum that has a wargaming site. If people ONLY come for the OT, they really, really need to get a move on in life.
This seems derisive to me.
But honestly, it's true. I'd say that if you have no interest in the wargaming aspect...there's no real reasoning to come here just for the off topic section.
Honestly,I belive that most of us that post in OT,even those that do most of our posting in OT,do make use of the other forums (I recall having a few discusions with you concerning Lost & the Damned as well as GW business practices well away from the OT forum),it's just that OT is a bit more relaxed...sort of a place to get to know the person "behind the gamer".
I came for painting and modeling, and it's still my favourite part. But I do enjoy participating in OT discussions, particularly those involving religion or politics.
OT is a bonus, W_G, as I affirm in this thread's OP. I also do not think that most (any?) posters here who have made it known that they consider OT one of the most important parts of Dakka for them ONLY visit OT. Most of them say things like "I will read other sections and sometimes post, but I like to post here most of all." I hope you will keep what I am saying in perspective. It isn't that people who value OT are social rejects who never see other people and need to "get a move on in life." Rather it's that people who only know each other through the internet can still value even that connection as part of their lives at large and OT is the setting of much of that connection on a site where most everything else is SERIOUS BUSINESS (x2), to channel K_K.
NecronLord3 wrote:My opinion is, that if you want to talk about Star Trek go to a Star Trek site. If you want to bitch about Politics find any of the appropriate sites to do so in. If you want to talk mini wargaming you come to Dakka.
We are better off without OT forums.
There are like twelve 40k centric wargaming forums. Purism isn't a particularly good method of generating a community, nor does the application of bleach maintain one well.
NecronLord3 wrote:My opinion is, that if you want to talk about Star Trek go to a Star Trek site. If you want to bitch about Politics find any of the appropriate sites to do so in. If you want to talk mini wargaming you come to Dakka.
We are better off without OT forums.
There are like twelve 40k centric wargaming forums. Purism isn't a particularly good method of generating a community, nor does the application of bleach maintain one well.
As I recall, the shirts they sold were never white! We don't want our Dakka to fade now, do we?
Dakka is certainly unique, when you compare it to ATT and the such. I find it to be much more inclusive of all of a person's interests, united by wargaming as a common link.
If you want to talk ONLY about OT discussions there is a whole world of people out there waiting to hear you speak. There are even internet forums specifically designed to cater to your every OT desire. There are ones that cover everything, and ones that will discuss the changes in the mating habits of the simpson's python through its lifespan.
To come to a wargaming site, ONLY post in the OT forum, ONLY go to the OT forum and then try and wear that as a badge of honor, well, I guess, I guess I don't know what to think. But I'm sure it involves facepalming and the slow shaking of heads.
We are miniature wargamers (primarily 40k) who have the opportunity to discuss OT subjects in a sub forum.
And like I said, I am currently FOR the OT forum. I'm not arguing for it to be torn down. I'm arguing that there is a very small subsect within the dakka community that really need to get out more, and well, get involved in the dakka community.
Actually by post volume it's the fourth largest topic section on this forum, and the race for second third and fourth are incredibly close. So I wouldn't say it's a very small subsect. That just doesn't bear out mathematically.
Alpharius wrote:I think your stats might be getting skewed by something or other though...
I was just reading the little thing on the far right that lists the number of posts within a forum subsection. There's probably some accounting for the age of the forum section to be done there, but most of what its competing against has been around as long or longer.
It's not really going to be statistically accurate to compare OT (or: everything on the planet that's not wargaming) to any single subsection of a wargaming board...
insaniak wrote:It's not really going to be statistically accurate to compare OT (or: everything on the planet that's not wargaming) to any single subsection of a wargaming board...
On a forum specifically dedicated to modeling? I think it compares quite well. Besides, it's not everything, it's not modeling since thats covered, it's not videogames since thats covered, and it's not general gaming since thats covered. It's true that it's an omnitopic thats meant to encompass quite a bit, but the stats should show you at the very least that there is considerable interest in it as is, even with it's problems. If it's capable of competing so readily with forums that are so much more central to the entire point of dakka itself I think it says something.
ShumaGorath wrote:On a forum specifically dedicated to modeling? I think it compares quite well. Besides, it's not everything, it's not modeling since thats covered, it's not videogames since thats covered, and it's not general gaming since thats covered.
I think you missed the point, somewhat. But never mind.
It's true that it's an omnitopic thats meant to encompass quite a bit, but the stats should show you at the very least that there is considerable interest in it as is, even with it's problems.
All the post number shows is how many posts are in there. It doesn't show how many people actually go in there, or how many people were involved in making those posts.
So yes, you could argue that the stats show that discussing everything on the planet except wargaming generates more interest that discussing AT43. Or you could argue that 3 posters and a hamster between them post more comments in OT than are posted in the aforementioned AT43 board.
Neither one can be proven just by looking at the post counts on the sidebar.
There are lots of posts in OT. Either a lot of people post a little bit, in which case OT has more people posting in it than other threads, or a few people post a lot, in which case OT posters are more devoted to it than people who post predominately in other threads are to them. In either case, OT is valuable.
ShumaGorath wrote:On a forum specifically dedicated to modeling? I think it compares quite well. Besides, it's not everything, it's not modeling since thats covered, it's not videogames since thats covered, and it's not general gaming since thats covered.
I think you missed the point, somewhat. But never mind.
It's true that it's an omnitopic thats meant to encompass quite a bit, but the stats should show you at the very least that there is considerable interest in it as is, even with it's problems.
All the post number shows is how many posts are in there. It doesn't show how many people actually go in there, or how many people were involved in making those posts.
So yes, you could argue that the stats show that discussing everything on the planet except wargaming generates more interest that discussing AT43. Or you could argue that 3 posters and a hamster between them post more comments in OT than are posted in the aforementioned AT43 board.
Neither one can be proven just by looking at the post counts on the sidebar.
It certainly could mean that. Do you have statistics to back that up though? Did yak design the site to track that?
I have a pact with myself, W_G. If I stay on Dakka til this June I will become a DCM. Until then I'm working with what I have available to me. And, to be perfectly frank, even if/when I do become a DCM I doubt many of the people I "hang out with" on this forum will, too. So OT will still be important to me then.
It's sad too, because there's a good meaningful thread about this that could be had. If only the mods would actually do something about the trolls in this section!
This is insane, A thread that was originally meant to save the OT is presenting the same problems that's killing the OT.
Bickering between 2 people start early on in the thread, which build anger somehow in another poster,
which in turn feels the need to show the other poster, the apparent error of there ways. The group may
fight amongst one another for the duration of the thread, or bring in more posters, that try to stop the bickering or get caught up in
the tornado of internet argument.
In the end a thread in the OT originally having good intentions, would end up being locked, due to the mess that is left from the internet
bickering between different peoples different opinions. Rooting back to its source could be a single poster making a comment
of there own opinion, which in some matter offends a fellow poster, that resorts to commenting on that persons post. Thus possibly beginning a war.
I don't particularly care one way or the other.
It's his board, his choice.
Besides, I don't have opinions on the politics of other countries (I care little enough about the politics in my own) and my own religious disbeliefs I try not to foist upon others.
I want to clarify my own position on the whole "leaving Dakka in the event of this ban" issue and I invite others to do the same.
If OT became a place predominately for comparing taste in music or LiveJournaling about teen angst (i.e., no more P&R threads allowed), I would probably not use OT anymore. I doubt I would leave Dakka altogether. The 40k Background threads are sometimes worthwhile. (See Nurglitch's thread on Grammaticus.) I am also involved in KK's En Garde! PBEM and the odd game of Genestealer!, not to mention K_K's mighty "Ask the Space Emperor" thread over in games. The PRG threads are too slow, despite Alpharius, Balance, and I trying as hard as we possibly can. But I can see myself gradually slipping away longer and longer between bouts of 40k mania. It would be a lot harder to get to know people (after playing for this long in KK's game, I still don't know those users at all!) and that means--for me at least--less of a need/desire to support the community as a DCM. That's where I stand at least.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The autocorrect of T E H to T H E is really, really annoying.
Manchu wrote:I have a pact with myself, W_G. If I stay on Dakka til this June I will become a DCM. Until then I'm working with what I have available to me. And, to be perfectly frank, even if/when I do become a DCM I doubt many of the people I "hang out with" on this forum will, too. So OT will still be important to me then.
Trust me the DCM forum is worth it. The OT forum pales in comparison(though the DCM forum itself pales in comparison to the actual Wasteland). Going into the DCM forum is like graduating from the high school that is the OT Forum.
I use the rest of the forums, i read the army lists and tactics almost daily, and i always check out you make da call too so i can keep learning more about the game, but as a bit of a noob i foot feel i contribute much, so 95% of my posting is in here. I LIKE the heated debates, i dont see whats not to enjoy about it. Some of the back and forths between people make me laugh out loud, and i disagree with religious types and lefty chaps on almost every issue, but i still like reading what they have to say, and having a back and forth with them. As i said, i dont see the issue. If you dont like discussing politics or religion, dont click the linky. Its your mouse!
" behind what they type.
in your sig.
