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

Fellow OT posters:

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.

Thanks for reading.

I must say, the political rage threads won't be missed from me at least same deal for religion.

I'm with you on this Manchu, but only because without OT I can't discuss Black Metal and non war-gaming stuff I like.

You have my axe, friend.

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.

Yea, but isn't the plan to take the whole OT away? Or am I missing something here. -scratches head-

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?

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.

Agreed Manchu.

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?

Manchu:

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.

I agree with Nurglitch. Just kill off the OT forum, and Dakka will be a friendlier place.

Cheese Elemental wrote:I agree with Nurglitch. Just kill off the OT forum, and Dakka will be a friendlier place.

And what do you suppose they do about YMDC?

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.

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.

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.

insaniak wrote:

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.

LunaHound wrote:

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.

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.

ShumaGorath wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

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.

Which, mods simply dont have the time to do.

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.

Manchu wrote:

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.

Kanluwen wrote:

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.